[Politics] Brexit

[BigGully]

It's for everyone, including a huge amount of Business leaders, who seem to think leaving the single market, as is the governments want (though not voted for in the referendum), is a very damaging move, to do.

Wow, that;s a terrible sentence, gramatically.

Never a good idea to allow the views of Business leaders to circumvent democracy, especially when you are cherry picking the validity of them based on their position of Leave or Remain.

 

[nicko31]

Yeah, let's just let Theresa May and her merry band of wankers steamroll through any policy she wants because 'Brexit means Brexit' after all.

May was not elected as PM, she has tiny minority and what she is trying to do was not in the Tory manifesto. The commons has a rightful role of scrutiny to what the government are doing.

The Tories have allowed UKIP onto the bridge of the ship and we're sailing towards the rocks. So much for the EU being undemocratic

 

[pastafarian]

It's for everyone, including a huge amount of Business leaders, who seem to think leaving the single market, as is the governments want (though not voted for in the referendum), is a very damaging move, to do.

Wow, that;s a terrible sentence, gramatically.

The European leaders are making it perfectly clear at the moment they will not allow us preferential access to the single market when we leave the EU.(but lets see what happens during the negotiations.)
Whats the best plan of attack here? Isnt it best to plan ahead trade wise with this in mind and pursue a course that doesnt include preferential access?

Cant help but feel if they did pursue a sole trade course that the EU would allow us preferential access and when we leave then found out when negotiations ended we didnt have that access and didnt have any other plans in place, you would all be screaming blue bloody murder and saying but we told you so.

How much would we have to beg to be in their trade club when we leave? will it make any difference if they continue to say no?


.

 

[Mo Gosfield]

All of this is irrelevant NOW

I was one of the BIGGEST PRO REMAIN and still am

However, I am even BIGGER on standing by the Democratic Procedures of the VOTE.

We voted to leave and we have to stick with that, good or bad so we just need to swallow what we have planted and grown. Lets just get on with it now and try and build a better economy, although the Leave Campaigners didn't really have any alternative policies lined up they need to start finding them now

...and did any of the Remain campaigners even contemplate what would happen when the EU collapses, which every student of history knows is inevitable.

 

[El Presidente]

...and did any of the Remain campaigners even contemplate what would happen when the EU collapses, which every student of history knows is inevitable.

[MENTION=451]BensGrandad[/MENTION] will claim that there could be some bargain signings from the Polish second division?

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Massive tourist boost for the non-Euro non-terrorist-target countries coming up next Summer. That'll be Croatia then. Any others?

 

[pb21]

...and did any of the Remain campaigners even contemplate what would happen when the EU collapses, which every student of history knows is inevitable.

The collapse of the EU, whilst inevitable, is not tangible, it might be in 1, 10 or a 100 years, it might happen over 1, 10 or a 100 years, it could happen for a myriad of reasons; as such it is very hard/impossible/pointless to even contemplate.

On the other hand if we voted for Brexit it was (and is) pretty clear what would need to happen and when. These things were not contemplated, only some made up, stupid, never going to happen in a million years ideas to get the masses on side.

 

[Mo Gosfield]

You start off well and I'm in complete agreement with you on Cameron however, you swiftly descend into a load of old hyperbole based on a very selective use of facts.

Let's try and paint a more accurate picture by looking at the voting in more detail (probably using the same reference website as you). Since 1999 Britain has voted No 56 times, Abstain 70 times and Yes 2466 times on EU Laws. In other words Britain has "won" 95% of the time, abstained 3% of the time and been on the losing side 2% of the time.

You use the phrase "we have been outvoted" but it's really not that clear cut. Britain is represented by both government ministers in the council and by directly elected MEPs. It's relatively common for a government minister to vote No to a measure that many British MEPs support. On several occasions a UK minister has voted No to a measure supported by a majority of British MEPs, including those from the minister's own party. In addition, there have been occasions when the UK government has opposed an EU law supported by the administrations in Edinburgh, Cardiff & Belfast. So who is "we"?

Perhaps you would be more plausible if you illustrated your point with one or two UK government defeats in the EU parliament that have materially impacted your daily life. Perhaps one that has curtailed your freedom, or made you poorer, or shortened your life or made you less safe. You know, something worth really getting steamed up about.

Whether a decision is made in Brussels or Westminster is of little consequence to the ordinary person and will have minimal affect on them. Someone once said "voting is the opiate of the masses". I'd go further; democracy is better than most other religions at maintaining civil order but assuming that exercising your democratic right will materially affect your life is a delusion actively encouraged by those individuals and corporations who really wield power. "Regaining control", "Sovereignty", "Brussels bureaucrats", "EU technocrats", "Independence" are rallying-cry buzzwords ardently echoed by those expecting Brexit to invoke some sort of radical change to their daily lives. They will be disappointed.

Your concluding sentence is at best grandiloquently emotive twaddle and at worst, Good Grief!

If I have at least got it right about Cameron's ' red card ' deal and the implications of that, then the many millions who want nothing to do with being part of an agenda to create a European superstate, will be highly delighted.

 

[Diego Napier]

I would disagree with this on every level.
Its incredibly important. It’s the main reason for leaving this institution.
It strikes at the whole concept of self governance.

And what direct benefit will you derive from 100% Westminster as opposed to, being generous, say 95% Westminster and 5% Brussels?

 

[Diego Napier]

If I have at least got it right about Cameron's ' red card ' deal and the implications of that, then the many millions who want nothing to do with being part of an agenda to create a European superstate, will be highly delighted.

I imagine that millions of people who voted Remain want nothing to do with being part of an agenda to create a European superstate.

 

[pb21]

And what direct benefit will you derive from 100% Westminster as opposed to, being generous, say 95% Westminster and 5% Brussels?

I suspect this is linked to your point about democracy being an opiate of the masses.

The idea of democracy alleviates some kind of existential angst, the closer the power appears to be, the closer you believe you are to being in control.

Of course that’s not really the case in this instance, but I suspect that’s what some people are inclined to feel. They will receive a dose of methadone whilst expecting the poppy.

 

[Diego Napier]

I suspect this is linked to your point about democracy being an opiate of the masses.

The idea of democracy alleviates some kind of existential angst, the closer the power appears to be, the closer you believe you are to being in control.

Of course that’s not really the case in this instance, but I suspect that’s what some people are inclined to feel. They will receive a dose of methadone whilst expecting the poppy.

I like your analogy although the administration of a sugar coated placebo feels closer to the truth.

 

[larus]

I imagine that millions of people who voted Remain want nothing to do with being part of an agenda to create a European superstate.

And that's the problem, Europe is on the way to a superstate. Did you miss the announcement of plans for a European Army which conveniently appeared after the referendum, although this was denied during the campaign.

Europe has moved so far from what we first entered in 1975, and the elites want to ignore the will of the people There is a lot of dissatisfaction across swathes of Europe, and I ignore what the elite class say (i.e. Holland, Merkel, Junker etc.) as they want to cement control into un-elected institutions and not be accountable.

Look at the times they have made countries vote again in referendums (as they made the wrong choice), and then they want to penalise us for having the audacity to want to determine our own laws. They are on the run as they know that the 'glory days' of the west are over and they are getting ever more inward looking and protectionism. The social model is unaffordable, and some countries are doomed to eventual failure (Italy, Greece).

I feel we will be well out of this, and I accept that there will be short-term problems, however, the amount of bleating going on on here because of the market reaction to May saying we will be triggering Article 50 by March 2017 is truly pathetic. Markets react and they aren't sensible. The fundamentals of the UK economy are strong as has been PROVED by the raft of recent statistics, yet sterling has taken a hammering because of an event about 30 months away. This will be forgotten about by next month when the reality of the new President of the US sinks in.

 

[BigGully]

I imagine that millions of people who voted Remain want nothing to do with being part of an agenda to create a European superstate.

Where you been .............

1 January 1973: Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom;
1 January 1981: Greece;
1 January 1986: Spain and Portugal;
1 January 1995: Austria, Finland and Sweden;
1 May 2004: Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia;
1 January 2007: Bulgaria and Romania (completing the fifth wave of enlargement that started in May 2004); and
1 July 2013: Croatia.

 

[pastafarian]

And what direct benefit will you derive from 100% Westminster as opposed to, being generous, say 95% Westminster and 5% Brussels?

I see no benefit in removing law making powers from westminster and placing these in Brussels.
13% of Acts and Statutory Instruments are influenced from EU. This influence rises to 62% when you include EU regulations.
I wouldnt even find your alleged 5% acceptable.

If i wanted one of these laws changed or i ran a protest group to repeal one of these laws who do i lobby? Who has the influence to initiate change?

 

[London Irish]

Sterling taking a dive again, if anyone's interested. Full on foreign exchange crisis approaching, from "the party of economic competence"

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

Sterling taking a dive again, if anyone's interested. Full on foreign exchange crisis approaching, from "the party of economic competence"

At least we got our country back. We can control our borders from the muslims and we can tell the EU we want bendy bananas.

 

[Diego Napier]

And that's the problem, Europe is on the way to a superstate. Did you miss the announcement of plans for a European Army which conveniently appeared after the referendum, although this was denied during the campaign.

Europe has moved so far from what we first entered in 1975, and the elites want to ignore the will of the people There is a lot of dissatisfaction across swathes of Europe, and I ignore what the elite class say (i.e. Holland, Merkel, Junker etc.) as they want to cement control into un-elected institutions and not be accountable.

Look at the times they have made countries vote again in referendums (as they made the wrong choice), and then they want to penalise us for having the audacity to want to determine our own laws. They are on the run as they know that the 'glory days' of the west are over and they are getting ever more inward looking and protectionism. The social model is unaffordable, and some countries are doomed to eventual failure (Italy, Greece).

I feel we will be well out of this, and I accept that there will be short-term problems, however, the amount of bleating going on on here because of the market reaction to May saying we will be triggering Article 50 by March 2017 is truly pathetic. Markets react and they aren't sensible. The fundamentals of the UK economy are strong as has been PROVED by the raft of recent statistics, yet sterling has taken a hammering because of an event about 30 months away. This will be forgotten about by next month when the reality of the new President of the US sinks in.

Although your tone has more than a shade of McCarthy, your assumptions & generalisations sweeping and your eschewal of the benefits of closer European ties as the world inexorably metamorphs from tribal community into the global estate particularly Ludditesque, nevertheless the overall silliness of your post holds a peculiar albeit fleeting charm.

 

[Diego Napier]

I see no benefit in removing law making powers from westminster and placing these in Brussels.
13% of Acts and Statutory Instruments are influenced from EU. This influence rises to 62% when you include EU regulations.
I wouldnt even find your alleged 5% acceptable.

If i wanted one of these laws changed or i ran a protest group to repeal one of these laws who do i lobby? Who has the influence to initiate change?

See #406

 

[Behind Enemy Lines]

Luton, Gatwick and Stanstead now offering less than 1 Euro for £1 pound. Going well then..