[Politics] Brexit

[Hampster Gull]

[tweet]1083283376667312128[/tweet]

Remainer: It's going to be awful
Rees Mogg: it might be but let’s look again in 50 years time if the gamble has paid off

 

[Baldseagull]

Jezza Hunt: “Cancelling Brexit would be very bad for Britain's reputation abroad”

Appointing Boris Johnson and then Jeremy Hunt as Foreign Secretary has been very bad for Britain’s reputation abroad

I wouldn't worry, we have been looking like twats for 30 months now. The only saving grace is that the Yanks elected a moron to President, and he is distracting the rest of the worlds eyes a little from the bellendery going on here.

 

[Lincoln Imp]

I’m confused - are you saying it’s impossible? We know they’re talking about extending it...?

Also, to confirm, I’m just publishing an article. These views are not my own.

I understood we could revoke Article 50 but not extend it without EU agreement. Happy to be told I'm wrong.

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

It's not going to happen though is it, and it never was.
The only opportunity for any kind of dividend from Brexit would be that we would collect and keep 100% of tariffs applied to imports, as opposed to the 20% we retain now. But on the other hand you have maniacs like Rees-Mogg proposing that we scrap all tariffs.

In yesterday's Commons debate John Redwood (a man who I find it hard to warm to) said that Brexit was an opportunity to save 'air miles' on food imports. I'm not sure he realises that Europe is a bit nearer than most other places from which we might source our grub. Of course he could mean that we'll all be so impoverished by Brexit that we won't be able to afford such imports. As a generalisation as soon as Brexiteers start talking economics any layers of credibility are quickly shed.

 

[Dave the OAP]

Any leavers vote for this?

[tweet]1083374262533177345[/tweet]

Fake news....countries are queuing up to sign all sorts of deals with us. It's all project fear and the establishment are trying to scare us into submission. They are snowflakes.

We are about to get our country back nad it will be party time in the streets.

£350 million for busses ...I can't wait.

 

[Da Man Clay]

I understood we could revoke Article 50 but not extend it without EU agreement. Happy to be told I'm wrong.

You are entirely correct. Extension requires agreement from all of the remaining EU27.

What we could conceivably do is withdraw A50 and then re-invoke it. Not sure how that would go down!

 

[vegster]

In yesterday's Commons debate John Redwood (a man who I find it hard to warm to) said that Brexit was an opportunity to save 'air miles' on food imports. I'm not sure he realises that Europe is a bit nearer than most other places from which we might source our grub. Of course he could mean that we'll all be so impoverished by Brexit that we won't be able to afford such imports. As a generalisation as soon as Brexiteers start talking economics any layers of credibility are quickly shed.

I'd love to see Sir John Redwood doing his bit for the British economy and doing an 8 hour shift cutting Cauliflower heads in the depths of Lincolnshire in January for minimum wage.

 

[Seagull1989]

Last night on Question Time, James Cleverly said that he was certain that if it was May’s deal on the paper in the referendum in 2016, he was sure the public would have voted for it.

If he’s that sure, why not ask the public now ?

 

[portslade seagull]

I'd love to see Sir John Redwood doing his bit for the British economy and doing an 8 hour shift cutting Cauliflower heads in the depths of Lincolnshire in January for minimum wage.

Let's extend that to all MP's. Might make some of them wake up.

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

I'd love to see Sir John Redwood doing his bit for the British economy and doing an 8 hour shift cutting Cauliflower heads in the depths of Lincolnshire in January for minimum wage.

I once had the misfortune of attending a small event (relatively informal) at which JR was slated to speak. He made a total knob of himself by showing disrespect to one of the other speakers. Would happily follow your steer and send him to the cauliflower field.

 

[pastafarian]

My MP doesn't represent her constituency which is 52% Remain, and is a member of the ERG, which is the extreme opposite. I realise we have First past the post, but there is no accountability to her constituents for her voting record. Hopefully she will be kicked out at the next election.

There was no constituency voting in the referendum. It was a UK wide vote.Its a bit rich you wanting an MP voted out because she backs the democratic decision of the country, a UK wide national vote and counting threshold that was enforced via an Act of Parliament. But if you really want to break it down

There were 399 voting areas.
67.66% Leave and 32.33% Remain , but this in itself is irrelevant too as it was a UK wide vote.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36616028


If you split the vote into the 12 UK regions (9-3)
Leave 75% -Remain 25%, but this is irrelevant too as it was a UK wide singular vote.
https://www.electoralcommission.org...u-referendum/electorate-and-count-information


Results were not counted by constituency (except NI) and apart from the 20% of constituencies where the votes are known after some councils counted via freedom of information the constituency votes remain estimates. But if you insist on breaking it down into constituencies the estimates say
64% of MP seats Leave -36% of MP seats Remain
75% of 2017 election result Tory seats voted to Leave- 25% Tory seats Remain
61% of labour seats voted to Leave- 39% Labour seats Remain
But again this is irrelevant as the referendum vote was a UK wide vote not a constituency one.
https://fullfact.org/europe/did-maj...bour-constituencies-vote-leave-eu-referendum/

Whichever way you look at it and especially if you insist on the vote broken down to constituency representation then Parliament has a common moral duty, through majority, to deliver on that UK wide vote and have us Leave the EU (not remain).

 

[pastafarian]

In yesterday's Commons debate John Redwood (a man who I find it hard to warm to) said that Brexit was an opportunity to save 'air miles' on food imports. I'm not sure he realises that Europe is a bit nearer than most other places from which we might source our grub. Of course he could mean that we'll all be so impoverished by Brexit that we won't be able to afford such imports. As a generalisation as soon as Brexiteers start talking economics any layers of credibility are quickly shed.

He said “food miles” not “air miles”, and he does have a point. He was hoping that the way we organise our import tariffs post brexit could be done in a way that increases the amount of food we produce to sell domestically since our domestic share has dropped since being in the EU. This generally has broad public support too. Shoppers are becoming increasingly aware of the food miles of products and in product areas where we can do something about it we should at least be trying to.

Last night on Question Time, James Cleverly said that he was certain that if it was May’s deal on the paper in the referendum in 2016, he was sure the public would have voted for it.

If he’s that sure, why not ask the public now ?

Good idea.

The decision has been made to Leave the European Union.
In a follow up Referendum let the public decide how we should Leave (parliament is proving useless.)
Put your cross in one of the two boxes.

A/ Leave with the negotiated withdrawal agreement
Or
B/ Leave with No Deal

 

[JC Footy Genius]

I think it would be sensible to start preparing for a no deal Brexit now by stockpiling luxury items.

Weeks of chaos is looking likely, people will panic.

It is possible we will lose drinking water too for a time, so it would also be sensible to fill some containers.

It's ok we have a Psychic among us ( [MENTION=396]WATFORD zero[/MENTION] ) who has always said 100% it isn't going to happen. If only all the governments (plus businesses) across Europe would listen and stop spending billions/millions on preparing for it plus of course you might also wonder why so many Westminster Remainer MP's are desperately trying to block something that definitely isn't going to happen.

Probably best to make some preparations, just to be on the safe side ...

 

[JC Footy Genius]

There was no constituency voting in the referendum. It was a UK wide vote.Its a bit rich you wanting an MP voted out because she backs the democratic decision of the country, a UK wide national vote and counting threshold that was enforced via an Act of Parliament. But if you really want to break it down

There were 399 voting areas.
67.66% Leave and 32.33% Remain , but this in itself is irrelevant too as it was a UK wide vote.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36616028


If you split the vote into the 12 UK regions (9-3)
Leave 75% -Remain 25%, but this is irrelevant too as it was a UK wide singular vote.
https://www.electoralcommission.org...u-referendum/electorate-and-count-information


Results were not counted by constituency (except NI) and apart from the 20% of constituencies where the votes are known after some councils counted via freedom of information the constituency votes remain estimates. But if you insist on breaking it down into constituencies the estimates say
64% of MP seats Leave -36% of MP seats Remain
75% of 2017 election result Tory seats voted to Leave- 25% Tory seats Remain
61% of labour seats voted to Leave- 39% Labour seats Remain
But again this is irrelevant as the referendum vote was a UK wide vote not a constituency one.
https://fullfact.org/europe/did-maj...bour-constituencies-vote-leave-eu-referendum/

Whichever way you look at it and especially if you insist on the vote broken down to constituency representation then Parliament has a common moral duty, through majority, to deliver on that UK wide vote and have us Leave the EU (not remain).

Indeed .. plus of course the manifesto commitments of both major political parties at the 2017 GE to enact the referendum result.

 

[pastafarian]

Remainers have previously championed Soames as one of their own,snippets from him today


In my speech to this House on 6 December I made plain, and I do so again, that I was a staunch remainer, and I believe that our wonderful country has made an historically bad decision. I also believe very strongly that the decision that was made in the referendum of 2016 to leave the European Union must be honoured…………………………

I believe it would be quite wrong to postpone the article 50 deadline, and that the House must be prepared to earn the undying contempt of the country if it simply does not have the collective will, discipline and sense of duty to come to an agreement……………………


In my judgment, the outcome is plain and clear and staring us in the face, whatever might be our favourite solution. If the House votes against the one compromise proposal on the table, it will with absolute certainty be voting for chaos, with the outcome very likely to be the precise opposite of what it intended. I remind the House that this compromise is the only agreement on offer, and to try to reopen it risks losing even that………………


I conclude by saying again that I am deeply and genuinely sad that our extraordinary country has reached this sorry pass. I feel very strongly that we must not reject this agreement and thus descend into constitutional and, I am afraid, administrative chaos. I am very strongly against what would be a divisive, poisonous and hateful second referendum campaign, and I believe Parliament must do its duty here and now, and come to an agreement
Let us agree among ourselves. This country is not an island on its own; it is a proud nation, whose success has always been derived from the wider world. Our history and geography have given us great advantages. Our language is the way the world communicates. Our capital is one of the greatest cities in the world, and people in every other international and domestic forum listen to the views of this country because of our great experience and expertise. We really should have the confidence to press on, to cease this appalling and pointless arguing, much of it on the head of a pin, and to preserve and enhance the cohesion, unity and stability of our country. We are a humane, liberal-minded, tolerant, moderate nation, so let us now push on with the task at hand and show our electors and the world the kind of spirit and judgment they rightly expect from us.


Full speech




And Gove quoting Gardiner, saying the Labour brexit plan is bollox

 

[Lincoln Imp]

I'd love to see Sir John Redwood doing his bit for the British economy and doing an 8 hour shift cutting Cauliflower heads in the depths of Lincolnshire in January for minimum wage.

Oh please not. I'll be in those depths myself shortly.

 

[fanseagull]

Remainers have previously championed Soames as one of their own,snippets from him today


In my speech to this House on 6 December I made plain, and I do so again, that I was a staunch remainer, and I believe that our wonderful country has made an historically bad decision. I also believe very strongly that the decision that was made in the referendum of 2016 to leave the European Union must be honoured…………………………

I believe it would be quite wrong to postpone the article 50 deadline, and that the House must be prepared to earn the undying contempt of the country if it simply does not have the collective will, discipline and sense of duty to come to an agreement……………………


In my judgment, the outcome is plain and clear and staring us in the face, whatever might be our favourite solution. If the House votes against the one compromise proposal on the table, it will with absolute certainty be voting for chaos, with the outcome very likely to be the precise opposite of what it intended. I remind the House that this compromise is the only agreement on offer, and to try to reopen it risks losing even that………………


I conclude by saying again that I am deeply and genuinely sad that our extraordinary country has reached this sorry pass. I feel very strongly that we must not reject this agreement and thus descend into constitutional and, I am afraid, administrative chaos. I am very strongly against what would be a divisive, poisonous and hateful second referendum campaign, and I believe Parliament must do its duty here and now, and come to an agreement
Let us agree among ourselves. This country is not an island on its own; it is a proud nation, whose success has always been derived from the wider world. Our history and geography have given us great advantages. Our language is the way the world communicates. Our capital is one of the greatest cities in the world, and people in every other international and domestic forum listen to the views of this country because of our great experience and expertise. We really should have the confidence to press on, to cease this appalling and pointless arguing, much of it on the head of a pin, and to preserve and enhance the cohesion, unity and stability of our country. We are a humane, liberal-minded, tolerant, moderate nation, so let us now push on with the task at hand and show our electors and the world the kind of spirit and judgment they rightly expect from us.


Full speech




And Gove quoting Gardiner, saying the Labour brexit plan is bollox

...not so much pure triumphalism from the Brexiters now; for me, in recent days that has been the most poisonous, divisive aspect of the whole matter. We had our fair share on here, didn't we?

But this is his dilemma in a nutshell:
'I believe that our wonderful country has made an historically bad decision. I also believe very strongly that the decision that was made in the referendum of 2016 to leave the European Union must be honoured…………………………'

the paradox laid out clearly......

'historically bad decision' ...... presumably, in his view with monumentally bad outcomes; yet somehow Soames feels he must comply with that 'historically bad decision' in spite of its consequences for so many. Others agree with the first part of his comment but are fighting to prevent the inferred fallout which 'honouring the referendum' could bring.

 

[Baker lite]

He said “food miles” not “air miles”, and he does have a point. He was hoping that the way we organise our import tariffs post brexit could be done in a way that increases the amount of food we produce to sell domestically since our domestic share has dropped since being in the EU. This generally has broad public support too. Shoppers are becoming increasingly aware of the food miles of products and in product areas where we can do something about it we should at least be trying to.




Good idea.

The decision has been made to Leave the European Union.
In a follow up Referendum let the public decide how we should Leave (parliament is proving useless.)
Put your cross in one of the two boxes.

A/ Leave with the negotiated withdrawal agreement
Or
B/ Leave with No Deal

Legally I assume this can be the only two options on any future referendum.
This was discussed on Radio 4 before Christmas and several legal experts seemed to think this is the only way that a third referendum could be worded.
On our way.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[pastafarian]

...not so much pure triumphalism from the Brexiters now; for me, in recent days that has been the most poisonous, divisive aspect of the whole matter. We had our fair share on here, didn't we?

But this is his dilemma in a nutshell:
'I believe that our wonderful country has made an historically bad decision. I also believe very strongly that the decision that was made in the referendum of 2016 to leave the European Union must be honoured…………………………'

the paradox laid out clearly......

'historically bad decision' ...... presumably, in his view with monumentally bad outcomes; yet somehow Soames feels he must comply with that 'historically bad decision' in spite of its consequences for so many. Others agree with the first part of his comment but are fighting to prevent the inferred fallout which 'honouring the referendum' could bring.

Doesnt come across as someone who is struggling with a dilemma at all, he comes across as quite clear and perfectly reasoned as to what is the correct thing to do, in fact he has been quite consistent on this matter and even says he feels “very strongly” about it.. He obviously recognises the importance of respecting a democratic vote even when he personally doesn’t agree with it. Not surprised people like you are struggling to understand this most basic of concepts.

 

[fanseagull]

Doesnt come across as someone who is struggling with a dilemma at all, he comes across as quite clear and perfectly reasoned as to what is the correct thing to do, in fact he has been quite consistent on this matter and even says he feels “very strongly” about it.. He obviously recognises the importance of respecting a democratic vote even when he personally doesn’t agree with it. Not surprised people like you are struggling to understand this most basic of concepts.

Shame.
Another sneering comment at the end of your post; it does nothing to enhance your reputation or move debate forward.
Whatever brings the country together is in my opinion desperately needed now - not stupid, pointless insults.

Soames clearly thinks 'honouring the referendum' (itself an emotive term) is the way to take us forward together. It may be, but I doubt it.

He thinks this, not because he believes Brexit to be a good idea - but because of the menace underlying the alternative.

You call it democracy; I call it populism.