Another new Brexit thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ancient Citizen said:
No, there was consensus in the house for a vote.
Nobody, on the voting day, to my knowledge, was complaining about the straight in/out questions.
There were clear and concise statements made that leaving would be enacted, with or without a 'deal.'
This was even confirmed by those arch remainers, Grieve, Cameron and Hammond, who have since tried to assert that nobody did.
All that happened was, and is, a refusal to accept the result.
Click to expand...
All that post serves to achieve is confirm the veracity of the first part of the statement it was replying to - and demonstrates a perception (at the very least) of a failure to engage with reality.

The irony is, that had the broad mechanism been in place, and the outcome of the vote been the same, we'd have 'got on with it' and left by now and you'd be significantly less frustrated.
 
west didsblue said:
Problem is the nearest thing to a manifesto on the official Vote Leave website makes commitments that we have absolutely no chance of keeping. Here's a few highlights:
  • Europe yes, EU no. We have a new UK-EU Treaty based on free trade and friendly cooperation. There is a European free trade zone from Iceland to the Russian border and we will be part of it. We will take back the power to negotiate our own trade deals.
  • We will build a new European institutional architecture that enables all countries, whether in or out of the EU or euro, to trade freely and cooperate in a friendly way.
  • We will negotiate a new UK-EU Treaty and end the legal supremacy of EU law and the European Court before the 2020 election.
http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_newdeal.html
Where does No Deal fit into those commitments?
In fact, where does May's deal fit?
Click to expand...
Your statement that we have absolutely no chance of keeping, is just an opinion.
eg; the third highlighted one.
Remain had plenty of committed statements that have since proved to be nonsense, which definitely
isn't opinion.
 
Ancient Citizen said:
Your statement that we have absolutely no chance of keeping, is just an opinion.
eg; the third highlighted one.
Remain had plenty of committed statements that have since proved to be nonsense, which definitely
isn't opinion.
Click to expand...
What were the nonsense Remain commitments? Just one will do.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
All that post serves to achieve is confirm the veracity of the first part of the statement it was replying to - and demonstrates a perception (at the very least) of a failure to engage with reality.

The irony is, that had the broad mechanism been in place, and the outcome of the vote been the same, we'd have 'got on with it' and left by now and you'd be significantly less frustrated.
Click to expand...
Did you, prior to voting, talk about mechanisms that must be in place before the vote took place?
Did anyone?
Because I don't recall any in depth discussion made by any politician, or anyone actually, leave or remain, about how to phrase a ballot
paper, because the result was a foregone conclusion, was it not?
 
hgblue said:
I have to say the one thing that has genuinely shocked me is that many Remainers have failed to accept the result and seek to stop Brexit despite the matter having been effectively decided in what we were told was a once in a generation exercise in democracy the result of which was going to be implemented regardless of which side won.
Click to expand...
This.
 
Ancient Citizen said:
I appreciate your point, but disagree, I was most certainly for a referendum, and judging by the turnout, so
were millions more. As for parliamentary process, when that same parliament starts attempting to overturn it,
and that same parliament previously had no problem whatsoever with holding one until subsequent events rocked it
to the core, then problems arise.
Click to expand...
We have a representative model - unfortunately those elected have mostly not felt genuinely representing their constituents wishes to be a priority for a very long time
 
Ancient Citizen said:
Did you, prior to voting, talk about mechanisms that must be in place before the vote took place?
Did anyone?
Because I don't recall any in depth discussion made by any politician, or anyone actually, leave or remain, about how to phrase a ballot
paper, because the result was a foregone conclusion, was it not?
Click to expand...
I did actually, but I don't believe others should be held accountable for not being as bright or as prescient as me :-)
 
hgblue said:
I have to disagree, the decision to Leave/Remain is a decision of such magnitude a referendum was needed to authorise either course of action, a government taking us out having obtained a majority in the HoC with say 40% of the vote, which is perfectly possible under our system, would have lacked a popular mandate to do so imo. There's also the issue that in a GE people vote for particular parties for many different reasons, and it needed to be clear that the decision to Leave was not clouded by other considerations. I have to say the one thing that has genuinely shocked me is that many Remainers have failed to accept the result and seek to stop Brexit despite the matter having been effectively decided in what we were told was a once in a generation exercise in democracy the result of which was going to be implemented regardless of which side won. So I tend to agree with you that for the referendum result to be fully implemented a Leave majority in Parliament is required and I'm confident that's coming in the GE which I presume is not too far away.
Click to expand...

The difference being Parliament is sovereign and by lending that sovereignty to the people the referendum should have had more forethought. The result didn't produce anything definitive, it was proclaimed from the beginning to be advisory and the same rule applies to the 40% of the vote a winning party in a GE might receive. But that has precedent and is accepted, rightly or wrongly, as the mechanism of forming a Government.

The referendum had no mechanisms attached to it. It lacked the forethought and planning due to the arrogance of Cameron and Osborne thinking they would win easily and save the Tory party from destruction. A simple mechanism that stated 50% plus 1 vote of the overall electorate would have given a resounding mandate and could not be questioned. That lack of planning always left it open to question from whoever lost the vote, whether that be leave or remain. Remain would have no grounds to challenge the outcome under a mechanism such as that, neither would leave. whoever had lost it was plain and simple. As it stands there are questions that remain, whoever thought it was a good idea to say it was advisory was a fool, whoever did not think of the consequences of such a close result was an idiot. As I stated previously I was against a referendum from the start as I believe they are poor politics and it is probably the only thing in my life I have agreed with Thatcher on.

The situation we are now in is roughly the same as if we have in Parliament in that a minority of the electorate has the say, that is not democracy in my eyes but as we accept that is the way we form a government then the best way we could leave is through the established convention that is already in place. The referendum allowed BREXIT to become the overarching issue of the day but it did in a way that bypassed our sovereign parliament, which to me is ridiculous. If in a GE your strongly held beliefs were to leave or to remain then voting for a candidate who shares those beliefs and then translates those beliefs to Parliament would have been the sure fire way of leaving or remaining and as we have hundreds of years of Parliamentary precedent to back up MPs then whatever was decided could not have been quibbled, it could have been debated of course but then it is down to your MP to deliver on the promises made.

It all comes down to the inexcusable stupidity of Cameron and Osborne coupled with their arrogant contempt for the electorate, it is there clusterfuck and those who have picked up the baton face a real uphill challenge to deliver anything that satisfies anybody. That from a democratic standpoint is worrying because it dilutes trust in our sovereign parliament and it has allowed extremism on both leave and remain sides to become normalised. Our nation is more polarised than at any time in history and whatever the outcome the damage is done and it will take decades to heal. Surely whatever side you are on, you never wanted that.
 
Vic said:
Missed the point there - it was about how easily people with limited "intelligent reasoning" were manipulated by the media. Take away the Sun and balanced judgment is much better. If eveybody had boycotted the Sun, Remain would have won.
Click to expand...
Don't think I did miss the point - interesting to see Remainers setting scousers as the benchmark for intelligent reasoning to compare themselves against

Also - if everybody had boycotted the Guardian - then the Leave majority would have much larger

There are two sides to most coins
 
Last edited:
hgblue said:
I have to say the one thing that has genuinely shocked me is that many Remainers have failed to accept the result and seek to stop Brexit despite the matter having been effectively decided in what we were told was a once in a generation exercise in democracy the result of which was going to be implemented regardless of which side won.
Click to expand...

Why are you shocked? Did you imagine reversing 40 years of trade and foreign policy and plunging ourselves into negotiations with 27 other countries, all of whom would be keen to ensure that they were unaffected by the vote, was going to be straightforward? Did you think removing our rights as EU citizens would not be resisted or that people concerned for their livelihoods would not be vocal in opposing actions that threatened those livelihoods?

People have a right to protest, oppose and block policies proposed by a Govt that wins an election so I fail to see why the same wouldn’t happen on an advisory referendum that secured a narrow win and on the back of promises that three years later proved to be false.
 
mcfc1632 said:
Don't think I did miss the point - interesting to see Remainers setting scousers as the benchmark for intelligent reasoning to compare themselves against

Also - if everybody had boycotted the Guardian - then the Leave majority would have much larger

There are two sides to most coins
Click to expand...
You've got to laugh, a tweet holding up the bindippers as a benchmark is beyond parody.
I'm sure someone will attempt it though ;)
 
BobKowalski said:
Why are you shocked? Did you imagine reversing 40 years of trade and foreign policy and plunging ourselves into negotiations with 27 other countries, all of whom would be keen to ensure that they were unaffected by the vote, was going to be straightforward? Did you think removing our rights as EU citizens would not be resisted or that people concerned for their livelihoods would not be vocal in opposing actions that threatened those livelihoods?

People have a right to protest, oppose and block policies proposed by a Govt that wins an election so I fail to see why the same wouldn’t happen on an advisory referendum that secured a narrow win and on the back of promises that three years later proved to be false.
Click to expand...

Of course he did - that was the lie he bought off Fox - easiest negotiations ever - remember?
 
Ancient Citizen said:
Did you, prior to voting, talk about mechanisms that must be in place before the vote took place?
Did anyone?
Because I don't recall any in depth discussion made by any politician, or anyone actually, leave or remain, about how to phrase a ballot
paper, because the result was a foregone conclusion, was it not?
Click to expand...
Another one who doesn't recall....

The Leave campaign got the question changed. The original was "Should the Uk remain a member of the European Union? Yes or no."

"On a narrow and strict reading of the (final) question, it meant there was a small but clear majority for the whole of the UK to leave the EU, at some point, by some means, with the country also leaving or not leaving the single market, the customs union or Euratom, and with some kind of relationship with the EU to follow, or not." Then May (to satisfy whom? - not Remainers) added red lines about the UK taking control of its money, laws and borders, which meant that the UK could not be a member of the single market, the customs union, or Euratom, in effect making a nonsense of all the Vote Leave promises cited above.

Give Remainers what was promised, and it would probably have sailed through. It is Tory hardliners to blame for this - for the referendum, for the post-vote red lines, and for Remainers now trying to stop the whole farce.
 
From removing the backstop as a precondition to talks to ok we’ll talk about changes to the backstop

‘PM's official spokeswoman says Govt seeking "changes to the backstop". He wanted it dead and buried before.‘

In other news Farage and the Brexit Party are announcing candidates for the next GE and accusing Johnson of backsliding and demanding that the entire WA be scrapped. So seems they are going for a no deal Brexit as their Brexit of choice.
 
mcfc1632 said:
Don't think I did miss the point - interesting to see Remainers setting scousers as the benchmark for intelligent reasoning to compare themselves against

Also - if everybody had boycotted the Guardian - then the Leave majority would have much larger

There are two sides to most coins
Click to expand...
Still missing the point. Deliberately I presume.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top