How do we resolve the Brexit mess?

well for a start get some serious politicians in top roles. Just wracking my brains and I can't recall a PM winning a GE and running for a full 5 year term as a Majority leader since John Major. Blair was ever the opportunist and won 3 times but each time never did a full 5 year term. Brown took over mid term so didn't do even 4 years before he lost. Arguably Cameron was the last to do 5 years in his first term but even then it was only in a coalition. He won & then lost his silly referendum so May took over, ran to the polls very early, lost Cameron's Majority and was soon ousted. When Johnson took over he didn't last the 5 years, least said about his successors 49 days in office the better so Sunak took over and did a couple of years and ran to the polls. Now its highly likely Labour will join the Party and replace Starmer.

So if you consider all that how can a serious debate have ever been had about Brexit by a country that hasn't had a stable PM in post for about 3 decades. Then consider FPTP is held up as the democratic way to get stable Govt or end up like Italian politics. TBH I'd say we are doing a pretty good tribute act of them at the moment.
 
37% down ....... thing is most of that has gone for decades - if an EU user of tomato's abandons the IoW glass house produced tomato's turns to a Spanish provider and that works then even going back in as long as Farage and all the other cunts hang around like a bad smell we cannot be seen as a reliable partner even if we get better access as long as our commitment can be questioned why revive old contracts?

Of course there are many external issues that come into play like the war in Ukraine, inflation and Trump tariffs but it was sold ( and bought by the idiots ) that when we left nothing would change. The only plus point for farmers I can see is if the trend continues many of them won't have to pay any IHT because their farms will be almost worthless.

www.theguardian.com

Post-Brexit sales of British farm products to EU fall by 37%

NFU warn it could take years to restore Brexit losses despite efforts to smooth negotiations on farming and other elements of UK-EU reset
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 
bluethrunthru said:
well for a start get some serious politicians in top roles. Just wracking my brains and I can't recall a PM winning a GE and running for a full 5 year term as a Majority leader since John Major. Blair was ever the opportunist and won 3 times but each time never did a full 5 year term. Brown took over mid term so didn't do even 4 years before he lost. Arguably Cameron was the last to do 5 years in his first term but even then it was only in a coalition. He won & then lost his silly referendum so May took over, ran to the polls very early, lost Cameron's Majority and was soon ousted. When Johnson took over he didn't last the 5 years, least said about his successors 49 days in office the better so Sunak took over and did a couple of years and ran to the polls. Now its highly likely Labour will join the Party and replace Starmer.

So if you consider all that how can a serious debate have ever been had about Brexit by a country that hasn't had a stable PM in post for about 3 decades. Then consider FPTP is held up as the democratic way to get stable Govt or end up like Italian politics. TBH I'd say we are doing a pretty good tribute act of them at the moment.
Click to expand...
On that basis, other than Major we haven't had a stable PM since the Marquess of Salisbury in the 19th century (apart from Lloyd George and Churchill in wartime with elections suspended - and Churchill hadn't been elected).
 
Last edited:
bluethrunthru said:
37% down ....... thing is most of that has gone for decades - if an EU user of tomato's abandons the IoW glass house produced tomato's turns to a Spanish provider and that works then even going back in as long as Farage and all the other cunts hang around like a bad smell we cannot be seen as a reliable partner even if we get better access as long as our commitment can be questioned why revive old contracts?

Of course there are many external issues that come into play like the war in Ukraine, inflation and Trump tariffs but it was sold ( and bought by the idiots ) that when we left nothing would change. The only plus point for farmers I can see is if the trend continues many of them won't have to pay any IHT because their farms will be almost worthless.

www.theguardian.com

Post-Brexit sales of British farm products to EU fall by 37%

NFU warn it could take years to restore Brexit losses despite efforts to smooth negotiations on farming and other elements of UK-EU reset
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...
The NFU could have come off its fence and told farmers Brexit was a bad idea.

And any farmer disgruntled with Labour's policies isn't really being honest with themselves about what The Tories and Farage have done to farming.
 
Last edited:
Vic said:
The NFU could have come off its fence and told farmers Brexit was a bad idea.

And any farmer disgruntled with Labour's policies isn't really being honest with themselves about what The Tories and Farage have done to farming.
Click to expand...


The NFU is a mutual company owned by its shareholders who all thought that they would benefit from Brexit. It doesn't have an ''independent voice''
 
Ifwecouldjust....... said:
The NFU is a mutual company owned by its shareholders who all thought that they would benefit from Brexit. It doesn't have an ''independent voice''
Click to expand...
Are you thinking of NFU Mutual, the insurance company?

Here's Minette Batters on the NFU's stance (my "bolding"):

MB: There is a lot of talk that says farmers voted unanimously Leave, but I don’t think they were any different to anyone else at all. I think they were clearly split though. We recognised how split they were, but all sides were united in that they had a complete thirst for information. We knew that we had to be able to inform our members of facts. We also knew that campaigning on either side, for a membership organisation, would be really counter-productive. But do bear in mind that a precedent had already been set. My predecessor, Lord Henry Plumb, had taken a position when we entered the Common Market in 1973. He had said, on behalf of the NFU, that it was in farming’s best interests to join the Common Market.

So, for us to have stayed on the fence without a position would have, I think, looked quite extraordinary. We decided that in order to be compliant with the Electoral Commission rules, which of course had limited spending for unregistered bodies to £10,000, that we would need to take a position to comply with those rules.

We had an extraordinary meeting of our council, which is our sovereign body, made up of two representatives, effectively, from every county across England and Wales. And we established some principles of what we were looking for, going forward, whether it was Leave or Remain. Those principles would guide the discussion.

So, we had a very good discussion at NFU Council in April 2016. Actually, Lord Plumb joined the discussion and Sir David Naish joined that discussion, as well as other previous Presidents. And the decision was taken, by NFU Council, the sovereign body of the NFU, that ‘on the information available’ it was in British agriculture’s best ‘economic’ interest to remain. But given the issues at hand went well beyond the economics argument, into issues such as immigration and sovereignty, it was also decided that the NFU would not campaign for Remain, nor would we advise our members how to vote. We did still have the practical issue though to register as either Remain or Leave with the Electoral Commission so as not to fall foul of the impending spending limits on our activity.

It’s really key, though, to say ‘on the information available’, to remain in the EU. It’s worth pointing out that, at that time, there was not even one side of policy on A4 of what leaving the EU would look like. It was ideology based on three principles: A bonfire of regulation, the easiest trade deal in history, and more money for UK priorities, because we wouldn’t be paying it into the EU.

So, that was really compelling. What was not to like?
ukandeu.ac.uk

Brexit Witness Archive - Minette Batters

Minette Batters on the National Farming Union’s stance in the EU referendum, the impacts of Brexit on the agricultural sector, and food and animal welfare standards after Brexit.
ukandeu.ac.uk ukandeu.ac.uk
 
Article about part of Durham that has been in decline since the pits closed
www.bbc.co.uk

Inside Horden, the County Durham town failed by politics

In Horden, County Durham, Westminster slogans have long been left unmet as the population has plummeted.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk

They, along with many other communities that prospered due to their industry, and have fallen by the wayside for over 30 years, with not much hope of finding replacement employment+money for the reason they were there in the 1st place, sadly. "Surviving" on money put in, hoping that some magic wand or change of direction will fix the problems.

The part of this article that caught my eye was:
1771436239819.png
I've also seen this played out across many deprived areas - with signs saying approx 'Regeneration sponsored by the EU'...

Voting to slash your own barely surviving money by 50% is not a healthy plan.

The article then goes on to mention that those same people are now flocking to Reform, as another hoped for magic wand, after the 1st one (brexit) failed to delivery the riches 'promised' by UKIP aka Reform.

It's unbeliveably sad that people are willing to let a leopard eat their face for a 2nd time.
They are blaming 'Labour' for not waving a magic wand to create impossible jobs, understandably, and ignoring the past modern performance of Conservative/UKIP/Reform policies that for decades just don't give a crap about them.

A very hard position for them, but repeating the same thing again (brexit, reform), is never the way forward. :-(
 
Gorton_Tubster said:
It's quite a guilty pleasure seeing those that voted for Brexit now reaping what they were warned about. Stupid lemmings
Click to expand...
Weren't all of the warnings called "project fear", well most turned out to be project reality. My sympathy for them evaporated after about 5 years when it was clear and obvious it wasn't going to deliver anything that was remotely of any benefit to the UK. Since then anyone who consider it anything other than a disaster for the UK and our economy I just consider thick c*nts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top