Another new Brexit thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
Possibly, but possibly not. I did say the haulier was probably a plant. The rest of the comments are standard fayre from those still unhappy about 2016. Nothing of substance
Click to expand...
Yes I’m sure you weren’t in any way being “funny “ when you said the few hauliers were a plant. You’re right though a lot of the comments are standard fayre from those who hate the EU at all costs
 
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
I've had another read, and it seems you are confusing things you think are not true and things you just don't like? The way he wrote it certainly assumes (incorrectly) that Miller acted with devious motivation, but the description of what she did seems fair. Maybe a case of unintended consequences on her part, which maybe explains my initial question re her apparent silence now.
Click to expand...

You believe what you want, fella.
 
Media raging about London being lockdown would be a great time to slip out a no deal announcement.
 
mat said:
Media raging about London being lockdown would be a great time to slip out a no deal announcement.
Click to expand...
As I’ve said previously, a No Deal might be best in the long run because it will be such a clusterfuck that the government will be forced into doing a much more acceptable deal in the short term. If we get a shit deal now the fuck up at the start of next year will be tolerable and we’ll get used to it and be stuck with it for a long time. Of course I might be wrong and next year might be great but I think there’s more chance of the bears deciding to stop shitting in the woods.
 
mat said:
Media raging about London being lockdown would be a great time to slip out a no deal announcement.
Click to expand...
I'm starting to think it'll be no deal now to keep the ERG happy and leave everyone saying they stuck to their guns, followed by immediate (new) trade talks beginning in 2021 which may then quietly find the sensible compromises without all the toxic stuff from extremists on either side. Obviously, I must caveat this with an apology for any implied aspersion that the EU or remain supporters are anything but reasonable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mat
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
I'm starting to think it'll be no deal now to keep the ERG happy and leave everyone saying they stuck to their guns, followed by immediate (new) trade talks beginning in 2021 which may then quietly find the sensible compromises without all the toxic stuff from extremists on either side. Obviously, I must caveat this with an apology for any implied aspersion that the EU or remain supporters are anything but reasonable.
Click to expand...

Sure, while we are in the midst of a pandemic lockdown over Christmas with some highly infectious strain doing the rounds, the solution is to obviously knacker our supply chains and throttle the Dover/Calais supply route on the 1st Jan to keep a band of nutters in the ERG happy.
 
BobKowalski said:
Sure, while we are in the midst of a pandemic lockdown over Christmas with some highly infectious strain doing the rounds, the solution is to obviously knacker our supply chains and throttle the Dover/Calais supply route on the 1st Jan to keep a band of nutters in the ERG happy.
Click to expand...

And he has got to ask himself are the ERG nutters worth more than the CRG nutters or the NRG nutters coz they all have reason to be gunning for him.
 
Ban-jani said:
Moaning about having to get a stamp to go away or to queue in a separate queue does reek of privilege.

I couldn’t give two shits about that. I care about the economy collapsing, which it might if the tossers don’t pull their fingers out and get a deal.

I don’t think sneering at someone who thinks it’s a privilege to go on holiday is a good thing and if that person was a remainer and Labour voter you’d be calling the government a disgrace for inequality.

I just think there needs to be consistency.
Click to expand...
I'm perfectly consistent. I always call this government a disgrace for inequality.
 
Vic said:
I'm perfectly consistent. I always call this government a disgrace for inequality.
Click to expand...
Well that’s the point, don’t attack the government for inequality and then also have a pop at those who aren’t well off, trying to tell them otherwise.

Not that you personally were doing the latter, this is a more general point.

With some people, it seems all consistency and principle disappears when someone has the nerve to disagree with them.
 
Chris in London said:
Your options here are essentially to carry on believing this uninformed horseshit you’ve written or you can actually look into why what the government was doing on both occasions was illegal and was declared to be so by the highest court in the land.

I suspect I know which one you’ll choose.
Click to expand...
Not really. A lot has been written about both cases, and I'm pretty clear on them.
I'm not saying that she did something wrong or that the decisions in the courts were wrong, but I just don't think she would have been the one pushing it if she believed that Brexit was a good idea. If she's a mad Brexiter but an absolute stickler for Parliamentary procedure then I take it all back.
And will expect a challenge to the legality of any deal put forward now because its going to be really long and they won't have time to read it properly.
 
GH64 said:
Not really. A lot has been written about both cases, and I'm pretty clear on them.
I'm not saying that she did something wrong or that the decisions in the courts were wrong, but I just don't think she would have been the one pushing it if she believed that Brexit was a good idea. If she's a mad Brexiter but an absolute stickler for Parliamentary procedure then I take it all back.
And will expect a challenge to the legality of any deal put forward now because its going to be really long and they won't have time to read it properly.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t matter what her views on Brexit were/are, it was the law and the right thing that Parliament had its say. Parliament is sovereign and whatever your view, the proper procedure and law of the land should be paramount.

If we’re not for that then what are we for?
 
Ban-jani said:
It doesn’t matter what her views on Brexit were/are, it was the law and the right thing that Parliament had its say. Parliament is sovereign and whatever your view, the proper procedure and law of the land should be paramount.

If we’re not for that then what are we for?
Click to expand...
I agree, sort of.
If the result of the referendum had been remain and Parliament had chosen to exercise Article 50 anyway and leave the EU, I wouldn't have agreed with that.
Even though it was the law, and the procedures had been followed, it wouldn't sit right.

As for Gina Miller - read about her. She said before the case it was all about process, and after the case, when Parliament followed the result, wrote to Corbyn (Nov 18) saying what a disaster Brexit was and pushing for a people's vote. It is a long ish letter but worth reading, but what I liked best was the last line - "You have the power to both ensure an option to remain is included in the parliamentary meaningful vote, and if this vote results in an impasse, ensure there is a public vote, so the people of the United Kingdom can throw parliament a democratic lifeline to end this chaos." . Clever lady, fighting for her views, legally, and nothing wrong with that. But not an impartial advocate of Parliamentary sovereignty.
 
GH64 said:
I agree, sort of.
If the result of the referendum had been remain and Parliament had chosen to exercise Article 50 anyway and leave the EU, I wouldn't have agreed with that.
Even though it was the law, and the procedures had been followed, it wouldn't sit right.

As for Gina Miller - read about her. She said before the case it was all about process, and after the case, when Parliament followed the result, wrote to Corbyn (Nov 18) saying what a disaster Brexit was and pushing for a people's vote. It is a long ish letter but worth reading, but what I liked best was the last line - "You have the power to both ensure an option to remain is included in the parliamentary meaningful vote, and if this vote results in an impasse, ensure there is a public vote, so the people of the United Kingdom can throw parliament a democratic lifeline to end this chaos." . Clever lady, fighting for her views, legally, and nothing wrong with that. But not an impartial advocate of Parliamentary sovereignty.
Click to expand...
I’d argue that the first action to give parliament the vote was a different scenario to the latter.

She was clearly a remainer but her first action was completely justified. If you think the latter wasn’t, it doesn’t take away from what she did to ensure parliamentary sovereignty in the first instance.

She’s not a martyr or a leader or someone people are deeply connected to on an emotional level, I don’t care what she does with the rest of her career, I am just saying she was right to do that.
 
GH64 said:
I agree, sort of.
If the result of the referendum had been remain and Parliament had chosen to exercise Article 50 anyway and leave the EU, I wouldn't have agreed with that.
Even though it was the law, and the procedures had been followed, it wouldn't sit right.

As for Gina Miller - read about her. She said before the case it was all about process, and after the case, when Parliament followed the result, wrote to Corbyn (Nov 18) saying what a disaster Brexit was and pushing for a people's vote. It is a long ish letter but worth reading, but what I liked best was the last line - "You have the power to both ensure an option to remain is included in the parliamentary meaningful vote, and if this vote results in an impasse, ensure there is a public vote, so the people of the United Kingdom can throw parliament a democratic lifeline to end this chaos." . Clever lady, fighting for her views, legally, and nothing wrong with that. But not an impartial advocate of Parliamentary sovereignty.
Click to expand...
History though will, or at least should, recognise that she was responsible for stopping May using executive powers to push through a deal that would have been far worse than membership

God bless her I say

And Grieve

And Soubry

And Bercow

etc.

Oh - the sweet irony of how things turned out - if not for their efforts......
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top