Another new Brexit thread

[joe123]

Just catching up on our Kiwi friend's post last night. It's a perfectly understandable stance. Given that we know (knew) Brexit doesn't mean half of the shite that was promised, what is undemocratic about saying we've arrived at a point where we now what leaving the EU looks like, shall we go ahead? I was considering switching LibDem or Green in the next GE, but genuinely think Labour's stance is the best/most democratic solution. If we want the shitty deal, we take it. If we don't we can move on. The hard leave politicians can get to work putting together a plan for the future and bring it back at some point when they've actually put some thought into it rather than the perfidious albion shite we've had to put up with for however long it's been.

 

[hgblue]

Yipeeee.

I'd love it if we were like Singapore, wouldn't you?

I go there fairly regularly and the lifestyle of the people there seems pretty damned good. They have a much better health service than we do, for example

CB, I’m amazed you’re a Remainer, I really am. We’ve hitched our wagon to the high tax, high regulation EU model, that accounts for 15% of global trade, and can only exist behind the wall of protection offered to inefficient business practices by a protectionist Custom Union, that is the very opposite of Conservative principles of low tax, low regulation, wealth creation which benefits everyone in society as the economy grows and we have more money to invest in public services. Brexit is about opening up to the vibrant and growing economies around the world, removing obstacles to trading with these economies and becoming a truly global country with no restrictions on those who have a product or service to sell and are willing to offer the same opportunities to our businesses, sounds a little bit like Singapore does it not?

 

[Neville Kneville]

To summarise......

The post(s) prove that you were fabricating what you said

That you were incoherently rambling as you were fabricating - and your own posts were used to provide that proof

Frankly you were simply ranting bullshit and were outed for it

All good as far as I am concerned - we can leave it there. I only replied to prove the above because you were getting all bombastic with your tone and capitals etc.

It was you who quoted my post, failed to understand it & have gone on some kind of mentalist crusade, to try & interpret it wrongly, which led to capital letters as I've never previously encountered someone, with such a lack of simple understanding.

You are unique.

 

[Metal Biker]

Yeah great. I look forward to living in a country that has licence to limit opposition parties, lock up people without trial and restrict freedom of the press. On second thoughts no. I’d like to be a European type country with a European type democracy, freedom of the press and reasonably regulated.

We already were, and we didn't need to be politically joined to Europe in order to achieve that.

 

[BobKowalski]

It is disingenuous to pretend that a sizeable amount of MP's have not from the first second done all they can to stop brexit and not to facilitate it.

They all voted to trigger A50 to start the Brexit process. That they had different visions of what Brexit meant or its end state is entirely a problem of Brexiteers making. This is obvious when you consider Brexiteer MPs voted against the treaty which would have delivered Brexit. Leave campaigns should have outlined the vision of Brexit that they wanted from the beginning. They didn’t.

What you cannot argue is that the referendum has been ignored. It hasn’t. Not ignoring the referendum has led to the demise of two PM’s and likely a third. Not ignoring it has led to constitutional crisis and damaged relations with our nearest neighbours. Struggling with how to process Brexit is not the same as ignoring it.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Been off this thread for a while so forgive me if this has been discussed...

But I am considering the possible "what happens next" scenario. Something I had not really paid much attention to is, if as seems very likely, we end up seeking a further A50 extension, the EU are not obliged to grant one.

Is it possible that they may refuse? At first glance, you'd assume not, since in the main, they do not want us leaving without a deal. But that's not necessarily the view of all the member states and all of them need to agree to an extension.

Moreover, what would happen if they DID refuse? We'd then be looking at leaving on October 31st without a deal. So what would parliament do? It could either accept that and say hey ho we're going to leave then. Or it could pass a motion to revoke A50 and cancel Brexit. As far as I can tell those would be the only two options, and I find it inconceivable - bearing in mind the law just passed to prevent us leaving without a deal - that we'd simply drift out without a deal. Our only option would be to cancel Brexit.

It wouldn't take rocket scientists on the EU side to work this out. If they refuse to allow a further extension, then in all likelihood (imo) Brexit is cancelled. Which of course is the outcome they want most of all.

So are we heading for no extension, no referendum and cancellation of Brexit before the end of October? We might be.

 

[Metal Biker]

Just catching up on our Kiwi friend's post last night. It's a perfectly understandable stance. Given that we know (knew) Brexit doesn't mean half of the shite that was promised, what is undemocratic about saying we've arrived at a point where we now what leaving the EU looks like, shall we go ahead? I was considering switching LibDem or Green in the next GE, but genuinely think Labour's stance is the best/most democratic solution. If we want the shitty deal, we take it. If we don't we can move on. The hard leave politicians can get to work putting together a plan for the future and bring it back at some point when they've actually put some thought into it rather than the perfidious albion shite we've had to put up with for however long it's been.

Because there are many of us who still do not wish to be politically connected to Europe and merely wish to trade freely, which is all we ever really wanted from our relationship with Europe. Many don't care that much about FoM, especially if it means ending that trade. Many don't care about accepting EU rules on trade, especially if it means ending that trade.

Both the hard leavers and the remainers are the cause of the delay. The majority of us "compromisers", know that democracy and the electorate must be respected, and our economy and rights protected. Leaving the EU with a trade deal is the only way forward to put this mess behind us. Ignore those who voted leave by "just remaining" and the issue will drag on and on for many years to come, with growing resentment amongst the populous.

 

[joe123]

They all voted to trigger A50 to start the Brexit process. That they had different visions of what Brexit meant or its end state is entirely a problem of Brexiteers making. This is obvious when you consider Brexiteer MPs voted against the treaty which would have delivered Brexit. Leave campaigns should have outlined the vision of Brexit that they wanted from the beginning. They didn’t.

What you cannot argue is that the referendum has been ignored. It hasn’t. Not ignoring the referendum has led to the demise of two PM’s and likely a third. Not ignoring it has led to constitutional crisis and damaged relations with our nearest neighbours. Struggling with how to process Brexit is not the same as ignoring it.

100%. This is about ineptitude or inability, not ignorance.

 

[hgblue]

Been off this thread for a while so forgive me if this has been discussed...

But I am considering the possible "what happens next" scenario. Something I had not really paid much attention to is, if as seems very likely, we end up seeking a further A50 extension, the EU are not obliged to grant one.

Is it is possible that they may refuse? At first glance, you'd assume not, since in the main, they do not want us leaving without a deal. But that's not necessarily the view of all the member states and all of them need to agree to an extension.

Moreover, what would happen if they DID refuse? We'd then be looking at leaving on October 31st without a deal. So what would parliament do? It could either accept that and say hey ho we're going to leave then. Or it could pass a motion to revoke A50 and cancel Brexit. As far as I can tell those would be the only two options, and I find it inconceivable - bearing in mind the law just passed to prevent us leaving without a deal, that we'd simply drift out without a deal. Our only option would be to cancel Brexit.

It wouldn't take rocket scientists on the EU side to work this out. If they refuse to allow a further extension, then in all likelihood (imo) Brexit is cancelled. Which of course is the outcome they want most of all.

So are we heading for no extension, no referendum and cancellation of Brexit before the end of October? We might be.

They will not refuse an extension, not a chance.

 

[Metal Biker]

They all voted to trigger A50 to start the Brexit process. That they had different visions of what Brexit meant or its end state is entirely a problem of Brexiteers making. This is obvious when you consider Brexiteer MPs voted against the treaty which would have delivered Brexit. Leave campaigns should have outlined the vision of Brexit that they wanted from the beginning. They didn’t.

What you cannot argue is that the referendum has been ignored. It hasn’t. Not ignoring the referendum has led to the demise of two PM’s and likely a third. Not ignoring it has led to constitutional crisis and damaged relations with our nearest neighbours. Struggling with how to process Brexit is not the same as ignoring it.

The result has been ignored. MP's have said "no", in contrast to every proposal put forward, to leaving the EU since that day.

Why ask the electorate a question if they didn't intend to carry it out? If the result was remain, and the Government still went ahead with leaving the EU, would you be outraged or would you say "well, the referendum result hasn't been ignored"?

 

[blueinsa]

They all voted to trigger A50 to start the Brexit process.

No, not all and at least the SNP have been consistent on the issue the hypocritical cunts.

Others have since suddenly changed their minds and when challenged on them triggering A50 try their best to ignore the fact.

The promise was to let the people decide via a ref and to implement the result and until that happens, it is being ignored.

 

[FlemishDuck]

Both the hard leavers and the remainers are the cause of the delay. The majority of us "compromisers", know that democracy and the electorate must be respected, and our economy and rights protected. Leaving the EU with a trade deal is the only way forward to put this mess behind us. Ignore those who voted leave by "just remaining" and the issue will drag on and on for many years to come, with growing resentment amongst the populous.

Interresting position you take MB. I can respect it.

 

[Metal Biker]

100%. This is about ineptitude or inability, not ignorance.

The EU presented May with several ways on how to leave the EU amicably and May rejected them on HER red lines.

It's more about arrogance than anything else. MP's arrogance to assume they act in spite of us.

 

[joe123]

Because there are many of us who still do not wish to be politically connected to Europe and merely wish to trade freely, which is all we ever really wanted from our relationship with Europe. Many don't care that much about FoM, especially if it means ending that trade. Many don't care about accepting EU rules on trade, especially if it means ending that trade.

Both the hard leavers and the remainers are the cause of the delay. The majority of us "compromisers", know that democracy and the electorate must be respected, and our economy and rights protected. Leaving the EU with a trade deal is the only way forward to put this mess behind us. Ignore those who voted leave by "just remaining" and the issue will drag on and on for many years to come, with growing resentment amongst the populous.

I agree that remaining isn't going to resolve the matter at all. But what needs to be put to the people, or parliament (though they all seem to operate on a scale of varying degrees of incompetence), are credible, thought-through plans to leave. I'm a remainer, I like being in the EU, but if we get behind a coherent vision for life outside the EU, then fair fucks. Leave MPs have been unable to either articulate or acquiesce on this, but I also agree remain MPs haven't made the process any easier. I think, presumably most of us do, that dismissing them from the outset, was a massive mistake by May.

 

[Metal Biker]

Interresting position you take MB. I can respect it.

It's the one i've had since day one of this whole mess. The wishes of both the 52% and the 48% as well as those who didn't vote at all plus the rights of EU citizens living in the UK must ALL be taken into account and considered.

 

[blueinsa]

The result has been ignored. MP's have said "no", in contrast to every proposal put forward, to leaving the EU since that day.

Why ask the electorate a question if they didn't intend to carry it out? If the result was remain, and the Government still went ahead with leaving the EU, would you be outraged or would you say "well, the referendum result hasn't been ignored"?

Of course he would be outraged.

They all would be.

As would I as a democrat.

 

[Blue Hefner]

Been off this thread for a while so forgive me if this has been discussed...

But I am considering the possible "what happens next" scenario. Something I had not really paid much attention to is, if as seems very likely, we end up seeking a further A50 extension, the EU are not obliged to grant one.

Is it is possible that they may refuse? At first glance, you'd assume not, since in the main, they do not want us leaving without a deal. But that's not necessarily the view of all the member states and all of them need to agree to an extension.

Moreover, what would happen if they DID refuse? We'd then be looking at leaving on October 31st without a deal. So what would parliament do? It could either accept that and say hey ho we're going to leave then. Or it could pass a motion to revoke A50 and cancel Brexit. As far as I can tell those would be the only two options, and I find it inconceivable - bearing in mind the law just passed to prevent us leaving without a deal, that we'd simply drift out without a deal. Our only option would be to cancel Brexit.

It wouldn't take rocket scientists on the EU side to work this out. If they refuse to allow a further extension, then in all likelihood (imo) Brexit is cancelled. Which of course is the outcome they want most of all.

So are we heading for no extension, no referendum and cancellation of Brexit before the end of October? We might be.

They may refuse but from what I have heard on radio, podcasts etc they are always going to grant an extension as they would not want to be seen as kicking a member out. I'm not sure anyone could accurately predict what happens next but the best and least harmful way forward would be an extension followed by a General Election

 

[TheRemainsOfTheDave]

Been off this thread for a while so forgive me if this has been discussed...

But I am considering the possible "what happens next" scenario. Something I had not really paid much attention to is, if as seems very likely, we end up seeking a further A50 extension, the EU are not obliged to grant one.

Is it is possible that they may refuse? At first glance, you'd assume not, since in the main, they do not want us leaving without a deal. But that's not necessarily the view of all the member states and all of them need to agree to an extension.

Moreover, what would happen if they DID refuse? We'd then be looking at leaving on October 31st without a deal. So what would parliament do? It could either accept that and say hey ho we're going to leave then. Or it could pass a motion to revoke A50 and cancel Brexit. As far as I can tell those would be the only two options, and I find it inconceivable - bearing in mind the law just passed to prevent us leaving without a deal, that we'd simply drift out without a deal. Our only option would be to cancel Brexit.

It wouldn't take rocket scientists on the EU side to work this out. If they refuse to allow a further extension, then in all likelihood (imo) Brexit is cancelled. Which of course is the outcome they want most of all.

So are we heading for no extension, no referendum and cancellation of Brexit before the end of October? We might be.

I could see the possibility of the UK government challenging the rejection of a short extension (in order to hold an election) through the European courts. Would that create an extension by default until the courts can sit and pass judgement? However, as @Blue Hefner says, they are unlikely to reject, in my opinion.

 

[Metal Biker]

I agree that remaining isn't going to resolve the matter at all. But what needs to be put to the people, or parliament (though they all seem to operate on a scale of varying degrees of incompetence), are credible, thought-through plans to leave. I'm a remainer, I like being in the EU, but if we get behind a coherent vision for life outside the EU, then fair fucks. Leave MPs have been unable to either articulate or acquiesce on this, but I also agree remain MPs haven't made the process any easier. I think, presumably most of us do, that dismissing them from the outset, was a massive mistake by May.

You see the problem there is if it does return a result of 53% to 47% to remain this time, for example, remainers will now see that as the END of the issue.

But then what's stopping ANY leave voter saying "well, we "won" the last one and we didn't leave. Why should we "remain" because your side "won" this one?" Voting on whether we remain or not should not be the focus. We have to leave the EU and then, if others wish, campaign to rejoin if that is what people want. I would be furious if we stayed in the EU by a referendum to overturn the result of the 2016 referendum, as it never reached conclusion. I would be accepting if we had a referendum to rejoin and that won.

 

[aguerrrroooooooooooo]

Yipeeee.

I'd love it if we were like Singapore, wouldn't you?

I go there fairly regularly and the lifestyle of the people there seems pretty damned good. They have a much better health service than we do, for example

Absolutely not.
The class divide is worse there than it is here and is filed with low tax benefiting the elites due to its low regulation.
If you've got loads of money then sure I guess that might be nice

Edits: Changed corruption to low tax as corruption is not really the right word