EU referendum/Brexit discussion - Part 2

[gadgetman]

I think what Lee is getting at is had remain won, as we now know, there was a government petition and legal challenges all lined up by vote leave & UKIP.

But when those on the remain side complain they're 'Remoaners'.

As time goes on I simply see sore winners who want what they want at any cost. The Express seems to be championing Brexit at any cost.

[Scribbler]

Any deal negotiated would not have been ratified by Parliament UNTIL this case was judged upon.

We would have ended up with whatever deal May came back with.

Or is that what you wanted?

 

I could offer you the same question. Any deal that's thrashed out prior to article 50 negotiation with parliamentary consent will have no baring in reality and will give the EU a head start in defending their own protections and will basically harm the UK's chances of getting a deal. Is that what you want?

 

To be clear if i believed that our elected officials could debate the plan and agree on a consensus behind closed doors without the EU getting wind of the plan then i would be all for it. However surely you must realise the massive advantage this hands to the EU and we will get none of what's requested. They will know our 'red lines' and 'nice to haves' so basically whatever is decided upon in parliament and voted through will be completely irrelevant. You also have to question the legitimacy of Labour exercising the whip and getting influencing the plan on brexit. Ok they represent the views of their constituency or supposed to in reality they represent the view of the unions but they don't represent the view of the majority of british people. The conservatives have a majority and should decide the plan on brexit. Labour should hold them to account if they make a hash of it but that should be retrospectively not proactively.

[gadgetman]

I could offer you the same question. Any deal that's thrashed out prior to article 50 negotiation with parliamentary consent will have no baring in reality and will give the EU a head start in defending their own protections and will basically harm the UK's chances of getting a deal. Is that what you want?

To be clear if i believed that our elected officials could debate the plan and agree on a consensus behind closed doors without the EU getting wind of the plan then i would be all for it. However surely you must realise the massive advantage this hands to the EU and we will get none of what's requested. They will know our 'red lines' and 'nice to haves' so basically whatever is decided upon in parliament and voted through will be completely irrelevant. You also have to question the legitimacy of Labour exercising the whip and getting influencing the plan on brexit. Ok they represent the views of their constituency or supposed to in reality they represent the view of the unions but they don't represent the view of the majority of british people. The conservatives have a majority and should decide the plan on brexit. Labour should hold them to account if they make a hash of it but that should be retrospectively not proactively.

But what would be discussed which EU negotiators don't already know we want thanks to all the statements made by both sides during campaigning?

What bombshell would be revealed discussing brexit in parliament? That May had her eye on Merkel's carriage clock, or bagging a few paintings from the Louvre on the way out?

They're well aware of what we want. No free movement, British laws and continued single market/customs access.

How are the EU not already prepared to fight against this? They already know what we want!

Leavers seem permanently ready with reasons why brexit will fail because they know when it happens there will need to be a great deal of compromise with reality and what voters thought/think brexit will bring.

I can see the only viable option being something similar to Norway but tweaked slightly. Which then, if that's what we get, will have Norway & Switzerland both pretty p***ed.

Brexit will derail not because of sour Remoaners, but because it was never deliverable as sold. Leavers are getting their excuses and fingers of blame ready before the inevitable happens....

[Scribbler]

But what would be discussed which EU negotiators don't already know we want thanks to all the statements made by both sides during campaigning?

What bombshell would be revealed discussing brexit in parliament? That May had her eye on Merkel's carriage clock, or bagging a few paintings from the Louvre on the way out?

They're well aware of what we want. No free movement, British laws and continued single market/customs access.

How are the EU not already prepared to fight against this? They already know what we want!

Leavers seem permanently ready with reasons why brexit will fail because they know when it happens there will need to be a great deal of compromise with reality and what voters thought/think brexit will bring.

I can see the only viable option being something similar to Norway but tweaked slightly. Which then, if that's what we get, will have Norway & Switzerland both pretty p***ed.

Brexit will derail not because of sour Remoaners, but because it was never deliverable as sold. Leavers are getting their excuses and fingers of blame ready before the inevitable happens....

 

The polar opposite view can equally be argued that the leavers who are fighting to make a success of this are now being held back by the remainers who want this to fail so they can say i told you so. Thats the only legitimate reason i can see for tying the governments hands behind their backs and leading them out to the firing squad. Also you have just disarmed your previous arguement, if its right what you say that they (EU) Know what we want and we know what they want then why does it need debate in parliament. You have just outlined what was requested by the majority end to uncontrolled free movement and porous borders British Courts Primacy and no tarrif restrictions on goods and services bilaterally. So if thats accepted why are we not fighting for them and instead putting road blocks in the way and generally making it harder to achieve?

Edited 6 November, 2016 by Scribbler

[gadgetman]

The polar opposite view can equally be argued that the leavers who are fighting to make a success of this are now being held back by the remainers who want this to fail so they can say i told you so. Thats the only legitimate reason i can see for tying the governments hands behind their backs and leading them out to the firing squad. Also you have just disarmed your previous arguement, if its right what you say that they (EU) Know what we want and we know what they want then why does it need debate in parliament. You have just outlined what was requested by the majority end to uncontrolled free movement and porous borders British Courts Primacy and no tarrif restrictions on goods and services bilaterally. So if thats accepted why are we not fighting for them and instead putting road blocks in the way and generally making it harder to achieve?

Because although that's general consensus, that might not be what May is actually going for. No body knows what it is they're actually aiming for.

It could simply be an end to free movement and everything else remaining the same. If could be an end to free movement, leaving the customs union & everything else remaining the same. No one but May knows.

Thats why it must be scrutinised by Parliament to ensure what the public want or are expecting is fought for and as much of it delivered as possible.

Or are you wanting another Cameron EU negotiation balls up?

As I say EU negotiators know what we want, but haven't yet got a clue what upper hand we have or what we will ultimately trade off or what are the 'red lines' of any deal.

For all you or I know Free movement might not actually be a red line for our negotiations, but losing single market access is.

As I say the case is more about how far executive power can go, and ultimately to prevent May accepting a deal with the EU without a parliamentary vote on what is acceptable for us all in 2 years time. But many can't yet see that and are fixated on brexit being reversed which no one is advocating.

[trundlenut]

The polar opposite view can equally be argued that the leavers who are fighting to make a success of this are now being held back by the remainers who want this to fail so they can say i told you so. Thats the only legitimate reason i can see for tying the governments hands behind their backs and leading them out to the firing squad. Also you have just disarmed your previous arguement, if its right what you say that they (EU) Know what we want and we know what they want then why does it need debate in parliament. You have just outlined what was requested by the majority end to uncontrolled free movement and porous borders British Courts Primacy and no tarrif restrictions on goods and services bilaterally. So if thats accepted why are we not fighting for them and instead putting road blocks in the way and generally making it harder to achieve?

So it's better that Brexit is decided by a handful of people in no 10 is it?

If they decide going down the Norwegian route is right you will accept that?

Or maybe we go full Free Marketeer and accept TTIP with the US get rid of all incoming tariffs and wind down the manufacturing sector and get rid of the NHS and other government restrictions?

If we are holding back those brave Brexiteers why aren't they front and centre telling us how we can do it? The Express and Mail would trumpet it from the rooftops. Instead they are obsessed with all of the evil remainers trying to subvert the will of the people and stop is taking back control and restoring the sovereignty of Parliament from the evil Junker and his cronies.

The Leave campaign has had a long time to come up with a plan where we reach the promised land but mainly seem to run away or talk *******s when anyone asks them. That is obviously excepting those who want an extreme hard Brexit regardless of the impact.

[Ootohere]

In the end someone must decide something, and in the UK that is not supposed to be the Sovereign Monarch. ie Her Madge.

Or the un elected Peers, Privy Council, Law Lords or Church Leaders / Lords.

 

So it is the Elected Members, and the Party in Power, ie the Sovereign Monarch's Government lead by the Leader that party chose.

The Leader of the Queens Government as the Queen gave the powers to.

 

The UK is different in many ways from other EU Countries in that there is a Ruling Royal Family.

A second house, a Commonwealth of Nations, Dependencies and a whole load of hangers on and those that never stood for office or were elected by the General Public to do or decide anything.

 

So Rule Britannia, Britannia Rules the waves and let the Money People decide what the population can or can not have regardless of being a Democracy.

[trundlenut]

In the end someone must decide something, and in the UK that is not supposed to be the Sovereign Monarch. ie Her Madge.

Or the un elected Peers, Privy Council, Law Lords or Church Leaders / Lords.

So it is the Elected Members, and the Party in Power, ie the Sovereign Monarch's Government lead by the Leader that party chose.

The Leader of the Queens Government as the Queen gave the powers to.

The UK is different in many ways from other EU Countries in that there is a Ruling Royal Family.

A second house, a Commonwealth of Nations, Dependencies and a whole load of hangers on and those that never stood for office or were elected by the General Public to do or decide anything.

So Rule Britannia, Britannia Rules the waves and let the Money People decide what the population can or can not have regardless of being a Democracy.

George is there anything you aren't against? From your posts you seem to be anti Brexit and anti remain as well as anti politics, anti anyone who says anything about politics, anti rich, anti business, anti government and generally anti.

[Ootohere]

I am not against anything, i am in a discussion and debate.

I do get peeded off by those that have only 'I am alright jack positions on governing the country.

 

Greedy snouters are the issue really,

there are those that just get to chose something by a vote and the majority decision, then those that are able to have that just ignored.

 

As far as being Anti Brexit or Anti Remain that is not me, 

I never voted and do not care which happens as long as it happens as those that voted for wanted, so that is BREXIT.

Edited 6 November, 2016 by Offski

[lol-lol]

will you stop posting this info, it serves no useful purpose to anyone

Markets round the world slumped last week, not due to brexit but due to fear of a Trump win

On the contrary it can serve the purpose by spreading the knowledge of what to do with ones own finances when one follows these matters closely. The BREXIT vote caused a worldwide dip in GDP outlook etc but especially significant in the UK as is the possibility of a Trump victory as i mentioned above. It can directly affect if people choose to put addional thousands in their pension and in what format ie bonds or stock equity etc. Very important IMHO. Edited 6 November, 2016 by lol-lol

[trundlenut]

I am not against anything, i am in a discussion and debate.

I do get peeded off by those that have only 'I am alright jack positions on governing the country.

Greedy snouters are the issue really,

there are those that just get to chose something by a vote and the majority decision, then those that are able to have that just ignored.

As far as being Anti Brexit or Anti Remain that is not me,

I never voted and do not care which happens as long as it happens as those that voted for wanted, so that is BREXIT.

My comments were just based on what I could decipher from your posts.

[Ootohere]

You are not in the same league as Derren Brown it would appear then.

Maybe you should decipher less and just say where you stand. Personally i have not a clue from what you are posting.

I never bother to think that much what others political views or believes are.  I just read what they are posting and its clear only if they say what they are.

Edited 6 November, 2016 by Offski

[Eddie-NL]

On the contrary it can serve the purpose by spreading the knowledge of what to do with ones own finances when one follows these matters closely. The BREXIT vote caused a worldwide dip in GDP outlook etc but especially significant in the UK as is the possibility of a Trump victory as i mentioned above. It can directly affect if people choose to put addional thousands in their pension and in what format ie bonds or stock equity etc. Very important IMHO.

Strangely I agree with you, I read these articles myself and know that they change their direction in a short period of time

 

In the morning they are singing the praises of a particular company and in the afternoon are saying you should sell your holding

 

Financial advice is fine, but to blame everything on brexit is short sighted, Market turbulence is nothing new and for some people will be benefit from it 

 

Brexit as such is still is in the early stages and what happens in the next few months, years will determine if it is successful.

[lol-lol]

Strangely I agree with you, I read these articles myself and know that they change their direction in a short period of time

In the morning they are singing the praises of a particular company and in the afternoon are saying you should sell your holding.

Financial advice is fine, but to blame everything on brexit is short sighted, Market turbulence is nothing new and for some people will be benefit from it 

Brexit as such is still is in the early stages and what happens in the next few months, years will determine if it is successful.

Free Trade Agreements take between 4 and 9 years to setup. We already have the UK currency down 20% in value for the rates of exchange used for import taxes since the june vote.

The fallout of the BREXIT vote and the US election dictates who much and where i invest my pension and any surplus cash each month based on the outlook for the UK, USA etc. The BREXIT vote and US election have brought massive uncertainty and therefore a flight to safe investments ie bonds gilts etc.

Sad thing appears to be, speaking as an ex frontier officier, the economy has been put at risk and still no details of how to reintroduce frontier controls ie resources staff etc and most recent immigrants have not been from the EU anyways plus how will the UK NHS run when half their staff are non UK?

[trundlenut]

You are not in the same league as Derren Brown it would appear then.

Maybe you should decipher less and just say where you stand. Personally i have not a clue from what you are posting.

I never bother to think that much what others political views or believes are.  I just read what they are posting and its clear only if they say what they are.

 

Steering a steady course then.

[SkodaVRS1963]

I'm well aware of how numbers work.

 

The graphic was intended to demonstrate that what leavers call a majority isn't a majority at all.

 

I guess that went over your head.

 

So 52 isn't greater than 48?

 

Here's a hint that will stand you in good stead: when in a hole, stop digging.

 

You lost.  End of.  As Nige said today, "which bit of leave don't you understand?"

[@Lee]

So 52 isn't greater than 48?

 

Here's a hint that will stand you in good stead: when in a hole, stop digging.

 

You lost.  End of.  As Nige said today, "which bit of leave don't you understand?"

Nige said a lot of things that turned out to be false didn't he?

What bit of Sovereignty do you leavers not understand? Oh, and on the same show he finally admitted the referendum wasn't binding (whilst not wearing a poppy the anti- British b'stard)

As mentioned above the graphic was to demonstrate a point.

Lost? To the tune of 5K? Not me

[moley]

 (whilst not wearing a poppy the anti- British b'stard)

I thought he was wearing and enamel 'badge' type poppy this morning.

[@Lee]

I thought he was wearing and enamel 'badge' type poppy this morning.

 

If he was then it wasn't a red one but a white enamal one on a black backgound which is supposed to signify peace.

Whilst urging Brexiters to 'get even', not condemning The Mail etc for their inflammatory headlines and warning 'there would be disturbances on the streets if parliament attempted to thwart Brexit. –the likes of which none of us in our lifetimes have ever witnessed”.

That then makes him a hypocritical b'stard.

Pretty hateful man IMO.

 

[moley]

That then makes him a hypocritical b'stard.

Pretty hateful man IMO.

 

...or was he wearing the Somme 1916 poppy pin? 

[gadgetman]

...or was he wearing the Somme 1916 poppy pin?

This is what he was wearing this morning

[domhnall]

This sums up the legalities as to why the judges arrived at their decision based on our own laws:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37873493

This has questions and answers as to if, as many claim, brexit will be reversed by Parliament

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37864983

 

 

now here's a funny thing. Under English constitutional law Parliament is sovereign over everyone. You lot had a civil war to establish this principle.  Now the majority of English people voted Brexit and are upset about what they now find English law says.

 

Under Scots constitutional law the people are sovereign rather than Parliament, which is probably why no case has been brought here unlike in England and Northern Ireland. Inconveniently though 62% of Scots voted for the EU. 

 

It's a funny old world.

[moley]

The EU want to know what the UK government has promised Nissan.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37893849

 

I was interested in the part of the article 'However, the agreement has raised fears that the government might have breached EU rules preventing unfair state aid to companies.' 

Seeing that the French government have bailed out their car industry why can't the UK do the same?

[Ootohere]

They will be looking at Hungary as well then, and quite a few other EU Countries.

[moley]

They will be looking at Hungary as well then, and quite a few other EU Countries.

The problem is that I doubt that they will.