Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2019 11:21:00 GMT
Question. Why is Corbyn (and Labour) saying they won’t take part in talks unless they rule out a no deal exit? I am guessing that the majority of Labour voters voted out. When they voted there was no mention of this ‘deal’ so they, like everyone else who voted out, voted for an exit without any made up conditions. For me this idiotic stance from Corbyn has put the final nail in the so called Labour party coffin. It will be interesting to see whether we see the formation of a new party soon or maybe a completely new democratic system which is more robust from....well let’s just say...external agendas. What genuinely puzzles me about Labour's stance is that they want a deal where we remain in the Custom's Union and Single Market (both of which I believe the EU have ruled out if we leave because we can't have those without all the other rules......cake and eat it scenario) and yet Labour are also insisting on ruling out a No Deal Brexit beforehand. How do you negotiate a deal where you have already, publicly, ruled out one of the only two strong cards (the other being the £39 billion) that you have in your hand? Have these politicians no idea about strengths and weaknesses in a negotiation? Roger Well this is the interesting thing. So back in the 70s (after not being accepted at first) we are finally accepted into the Europian common market. Over time, the common market became much more than that, a Europian State, without the public having much say. Finally the public get a say in whether we should stay in or not, but the EU state control freaks hold us to ransom by telling us that we will effectively be thrown out of the common market if we leave. So do we really want to be ruled by control freaks who won’t negotiate and hold a country to ransom? The EU State is not democratic and has little accountability. Why on earth would anyone want to be part of it?
|
|
|
Post by kris on Jan 17, 2019 11:25:40 GMT
Yes, they had the chance to vote in the referendum. If they where that concerned then that's what they would have done. Yes but usually there would be something written in which requires a minimum level of -electorate- percentage in order for it to be valid. Rather than a proportion of turnout. There are some people arguing from a technical point of view (not a remain/leave point of view) that the referendum was fundamentally flawed. An example of the argument is here eu-rope.ideasoneurope.eu/2018/03/23/eu-referendum-flawed/I doubt there is anybody writing from an independant position, but anyway yes I understand what your saying and if parliment had set a minimum turnout when they set out the terms of the referendum then what your saying would make sense. No minimum turnout threshold was set, so the result of the referendum is legally binding. If you didn't bother to vote and are now not happy with the result, tough this is how democracy works. It seems to me all a second referendum will do is prolong the uncertainty and cause more devision in the country. Better to just get on with it now. I don't believe that business will come to a standstill, corporations always find the way to keep making money.
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Jan 17, 2019 11:37:36 GMT
When will the clique of rabid quitting tories on here realise that another referendum is democratic, as democratic as the last opinion poll. It can even be made mandatory this time. People would be voting on facts, not quitter battle bus lies or Nige's dog whistle shite about all of Romania coming here etc etc. Its necessary because, while Remainers are united as one, quitters are an indecisive rabble, each shouting "mine is the one true way", a risible sight to behold, no leadership. If this rabble want to quit they can vote for it in another democratic referendum. A question not answered yet by any of the pitchfork and noose faction here, it's simple, yes or no: in a democracy are people able to change their minds, especially when they see the facts laid out before them? I'll answer with my pitchfork. if there were to be another vote. what actual facts have we had to make a more reasoned vote than the first vote? so if you would like to lay out those actual facts that wpuld be great.
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Jan 17, 2019 11:44:02 GMT
Unlimited and pointless mass immigration of unskilled “workers” from poor countries and the strain put on local services was one of the main reasons (if not the prime reason) that the electorate voted to leave the EU.
Turns out this was actually not a valid reason for voting to Leave, remember the Prime Minister repeatedly assured Andrew Marr several times in an interview that the public are mistaken and that we do In fact control our borders”.
Since the EU referendum in 2016 a +6% increase in EU immigration nationally.
+48% increase in EU immigration East Anglia.
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Jan 17, 2019 11:58:20 GMT
There was never going to be a deal from the EU – just punative action. I don’t agree that nobody could have done better. I could have done better. Margaret Thatcher could certainly have done better.
We had all the cards and played them appallingly. We had them by the balls as the second biggest contributor to the EU budget. The Germans were shitting themselves! May fucked up big time and got what she deserved last night. That deal was BRINO (Brexit in name only) and everybody knew it.
“NO DEAL IS BETTER THAN A BAD DEAL” Remind me who said that?..
NO DEAL is what is needed now. And another thing – I’m sick and tired of being told that nobody knew what Brexit meant or that we didn’t know what we were voting for.
I knew what I was voting for : – end to free movement and uncontrolled immigration – end of jurisdiction of the European Court – end of having our laws set by the EU – ability to trade with the world on our terms not EU terms
Being locked into the Customs Union means we can’t make trade deals or set our own tariffs. That’s an economic straitjacket.
And we give them £39billion for fuck all with another £10billion a year for the transition period.
Fuck that. Let’s spend the £59billion on ourselves…
|
|
|
Post by patty on Jan 17, 2019 11:59:43 GMT
Interesting views expressed. In or out..no point in arguing now cos we voted out..as Rog says to go against that will undermine what Parliament stands for Therefor we have to make he best deal to leave.... JC is behaving(as i see it) like a spoilt child and throwing a tantrum...'if I cannot have what I want I'm not going'...jeepers Ive heard those words oft enough
They all need to sit down STOP SHOUTING and work for what can be achieved for the collective good of the UK and what will be acceptable to the EU..... None of us can have all the goodies in the sweet shop....
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Jan 17, 2019 12:12:43 GMT
When will the clique of rabid quitting tories on here realise that another referendum is democratic, as democratic as the last opinion poll. It can even be made mandatory this time. People would be voting on facts, not quitter battle bus lies or Nige's dog whistle shite about all of Romania coming here etc etc. Its necessary because, while Remainers are united as one, quitters are an indecisive rabble, each shouting "mine is the one true way", a risible sight to behold, no leadership. If this rabble want to quit they can vote for it in another democratic referendum. A question not answered yet by any of the pitchfork and noose faction here, it's simple, yes or no: in a democracy are people able to change their minds, especially when they see the facts laid out before them? If there were to be another vote, what actual facts have we had to make a more reasoned vote than the first vote? Fact 1. Treesa has stylish kitten shoes. Fact 2. Treesa can dance like a spaz. Fact 3. Corbyn is the most dreariest and disappointing Labour leader ever. What a wet blanket. Surrounded by benefit-scrounging SJWs.
|
|
|
Post by Albion on Jan 17, 2019 12:31:42 GMT
What genuinely puzzles me about Labour's stance is that they want a deal where we remain in the Custom's Union and Single Market (both of which I believe the EU have ruled out if we leave because we can't have those without all the other rules......cake and eat it scenario) and yet Labour are also insisting on ruling out a No Deal Brexit beforehand. How do you negotiate a deal where you have already, publicly, ruled out one of the only two strong cards (the other being the £39 billion) that you have in your hand? Have these politicians no idea about strengths and weaknesses in a negotiation? Roger Well this is the interesting thing. So back in the 70s (after not being accepted at first) we are finally accepted into the Europian common market. Over time, the common market became much more than that, a Europian State, without the public having much say. Finally the public get a say in whether we should stay in or not, but the EU state control freaks hold us to ransom by telling us that we will effectively be thrown out of the common market if we leave. So do we really want to be ruled by control freaks who won’t negotiate and hold a country to ransom? The EU State is not democratic and has little accountability. Why on earth would anyone want to be part of it? Most of our politicians apparently as there is a clear majority in Parliament who are adamantly opposed to a No Deal exit (despite it being one of our strong cards in our negotiations) and many of them that now have decided that they aren't so keen on leaving despite having voted 498 to 114 to enact Article 50. Unbelievable, gutless and swing with the slightest breeze to suit themselves. Roger
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Jan 17, 2019 12:34:56 GMT
When will the clique of rabid quitting tories on here realise that another referendum is democratic, as democratic as the last opinion poll. It can even be made mandatory this time. People would be voting on facts, not quitter battle bus lies or Nige's dog whistle shite about all of Romania coming here etc etc. Its necessary because, while Remainers are united as one, quitters are an indecisive rabble, each shouting "mine is the one true way", a risible sight to behold, no leadership. If this rabble want to quit they can vote for it in another democratic referendum. A question not answered yet by any of the pitchfork and noose faction here, it's simple, yes or no: in a democracy are people able to change their minds, especially when they see the facts laid out before them? I'll answer with my pitchfork. if there were to be another vote. what actual facts have we had to make a more reasoned vote than the first vote? so if you would like to lay out those actual facts that wpuld be great. Oh sorry I forgot the main facts, 350 million a day to the NHS, 20 million Romanians are coming and what does Brexit actually mean, Ah! BREXIT! such clarity. The facts of the deal aren't clear yet because you quitters can't get your act together and come to some agreement as to what you actually want between you all. When you have you can ask if everyone agrees, democratic style. The deal (when it's been agreed😂😂😂😂) no deal (unless that's taken off the agenda) or remain. Simple. As for the round of "consultation" it's May's intransigence, holding a threat of no deal over us all as a weapon, that is causing the problem. Jeremy is simply asking for no guns in the room. The other party leaders have said the same. He is doing it for the good of the nation, as May wants.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2019 12:43:02 GMT
Sorry, but the vote was out!
No riders, no excuses, no qualifications, just out.
Parliament agreed article 50 being enacted ... with no riders, no excuses and no qualifications.
On the 29 March the UK leaves the EU.
To start back tracking, making excuses or delaying is not what the vote was about.
If politicians would stop jockeying for position, and seeking to further their own causes, there is still time to leave with a workable solution.
But we have to be honest, it isn't going to happen is it.
Rog
|
|
|
Post by Albion on Jan 17, 2019 12:43:03 GMT
I'll answer with my pitchfork. if there were to be another vote. what actual facts have we had to make a more reasoned vote than the first vote? so if you would like to lay out those actual facts that wpuld be great. Oh sorry I forgot the main facts, 350 million a day to the NHS, 20 million Romanians are coming and what does Brexit actually mean, Ah! BREXIT! such clarity. The facts of the deal aren't clear yet because you quitters can't get your act together and come to some agreement as to what you actually want between you all. When you have you can ask if everyone agrees, democratic style. The deal (when it's been agreed😂😂😂😂) no deal (unless that's taken off the agenda) or remain. Simple.As for the round of "consultation" it's May's intransigence, holding a threat of no deal over us all as a weapon, that is causing the problem. Jeremy is simply asking for no guns in the room. The other party leaders have said the same. He is doing it for the good of the nation, as May wants. That's simple from your stance but to have a second referendum, cough, people's vote with the three options that you outline (two leave options, but only one remain option) is designed purely to split any leave vote to allow a remain vote to win. Simple, but an obviously devious tactic. Roger
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Jan 17, 2019 12:44:57 GMT
It can even be made mandatory this time. You mean you are obliged to turn up at the polling station or be fined? That would make sense. Close to 100% turnout would make it a more interesting and meaningful result obviously. No, the last opinion poll was advisory, not mandatory like a proper referendum.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Jan 17, 2019 12:47:32 GMT
Oh sorry I forgot the main facts, 350 million a day to the NHS, 20 million Romanians are coming and what does Brexit actually mean, Ah! BREXIT! such clarity. The facts of the deal aren't clear yet because you quitters can't get your act together and come to some agreement as to what you actually want between you all. When you have you can ask if everyone agrees, democratic style. The deal (when it's been agreed😂😂😂😂) no deal (unless that's taken off the agenda) or remain. Simple.As for the round of "consultation" it's May's intransigence, holding a threat of no deal over us all as a weapon, that is causing the problem. Jeremy is simply asking for no guns in the room. The other party leaders have said the same. He is doing it for the good of the nation, as May wants. That's simple from your stance but to have a second referendum, cough, people's vote with the three options that you outline (two leave options, but only one remain option) is designed purely to split any leave vote to allow a remain vote to win. Simple, but an obviously devious tactic. Roger So which faction doesn't get a say on what they want? Deal or no deal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2019 12:50:57 GMT
I'll answer with my pitchfork. if there were to be another vote. what actual facts have we had to make a more reasoned vote than the first vote? so if you would like to lay out those actual facts that wpuld be great. Oh sorry I forgot the main facts, 350 million a day to the NHS, 20 million Romanians are coming and what does Brexit actually mean, Ah! BREXIT! such clarity. The facts of the deal aren't clear yet because you quitters can't get your act together and come to some agreement as to what you actually want between you all. When you have you can ask if everyone agrees, democratic style. The deal (when it's been agreed😂😂😂😂) no deal (unless that's taken off the agenda) or remain. Simple. As for the round of "consultation" it's May's intransigence, holding a threat of no deal over us all as a weapon, that is causing the problem. Jeremy is simply asking for no guns in the room. The other party leaders have said the same. He is doing it for the good of the nation, as May wants. The vote was for out. It was a demonstration of democracy. Out won. What bit are you struggling with? Live with it. It's only idiots like yourself who are trying to avoid out by causing all the silly commotion. Corbyn has no chance of being elected, in fact I suspect any respect he did garner is gone, in fact I believe he will also be gone before summer. He simply has no balls, nor the intelligence to govern. Still, all you lefty pussies can still shout eh 😂
|
|
|
Post by Albion on Jan 17, 2019 13:02:13 GMT
That's simple from your stance but to have a second referendum, cough, people's vote with the three options that you outline (two leave options, but only one remain option) is designed purely to split any leave vote to allow a remain vote to win. Simple, but an obviously devious tactic. Roger So which faction doesn't get a say on what they want? Deal or no deal. Neither. I am against having a re-run of something with a democratic result that hasn't been enacted yet but, the way to do it if it were to happen, is to make it a two part vote. 1. Remain or leave? 2. Only if you voted leave, then deal or no deal? Anyone's vote that ticked the Remain box but also ticked a box in the second choice would be classed as a spoilt vote. That would prevent any Remainers from trying to influence the leave result in any way. Roger
|
|