Brexit is off ?

My only beef with this judgement is that the parties who brought the action showed no interest in standing up for the sovereignty  of Parliament when it was being signed away over the past decades. The minute we try to regain it they are outraged. I dont recall them whining about Maastricht. None of them were put out by the frankly shameful way Gordon Brown sneaked in after everyone else  to sign up to Lisbon. It smacks of rank hypocrisy.

Now we see the likes of losers like Clegg and Farron claiming they will make life as difficult as they can. I hope the Supreme Court sees sense and overthrows this judgement and if not hopefully May will put it to no confidence vote. Turkeys don't normally vote for Christmas, so I doubt Labour will be foolish enough to vote against it. Despite the claims of the remainiacs the sky hasn't fallen and the country hasn't collapsed. The idea that a second referendum would succeed where the first one failed are in my view delusional. A lot of project fear has been shown to be utter nonsense. If there was a rerun of the referendum my view is a lot more votes would be cast for leave.

Huge posted:

andarkian posted:

...
We did get a majority and We did win the Referendum so please do not denigrate us as if 17.5 million people were any more deluded than you losers.
...

Should you wish people whose views you consistently insult and rubbish to not denigrate those who voted the other way then perhaps you might consider giving them some respect instead of denigrating them.  As you sow so shall you reap.

Which from the extreme right wing view of things of course only applies to other people not to yourself; and history tells us where that attitude leads be it from the extreme right or the extreme left.  If you had argued your case with factual information instead of insults, you may have got a better response.

You are obfuscating again, Huge. You lost, get over it and give me my Article 50.

As to logical debate, I have yet to hear a single meretricious argument from the Remain side, particularly yourself, that justifies us staying on the sinking EUTitanic for one second more. It is the dismissive attitude of the Establishment that have led us to the situation where our borders are porous, a fact, that we are perilously over populated, a fact; that the great multicultural experiment is not really working so well, a fact recently evidenced in Rotherham, Oxford, Croydon, Bristol and many other places, a fact; that our welfare, schooling, housing and Health Service have been sorely abused through all of the above, all facts.

Remaining in the EU perpetuates all of the above through legal restrictions imposed on us from Brussels and which we cannot legally change. Not only do I want my Article 50, I want my borders back and my own legal system resident inside the UK. 

Cdb posted:

Peter Green? I think you mean Sir Philip Green, who infamously sold BHS for £1, simultaneously selling his staff down the river.

Oooops... of cours you're right... having brain difficulties!  

andarkian posted:

Don Atkinson posted:

PeterJ posted:

Don Atkinson posted:

 

More accurately..... "We, who by a very slight majority of those who voted, based on lies and deceit , voted to......"

We, are the same people who now want to stiffle open debate and discussion, especially in Parliament, where we (note, not the same we as in red) rely upon our elected representatives to look after the nation's best interests.

Who do you mean by we kimosabe?

We, were defined by Andarkian.

we, is the population of the UK.

You are going to hurt my feelings  ! To be fair, I did start some of this fascinating debate assuming that a lot of you were just rich Naim owners, but of course you are also very musically oriented and I will assume that means there will be a healthy sprinkling of left wing Socialits among you, and that is not a criticism, it just explains the polarisation of the debate.

I am of course extremely right wing and make absolutely no apologies. Strange to say, being right wing can be a lot less destructive than left wing, am thinking here of Stalin, Mao Tse Tung, Pol Pot and the great National Socialist himself whose name we will not use. 

We did get a majority and We did win the Referendum so please do not denigrate us as if 17.5 million people were any more deluded than you losers. We had our own rationale and voted accordingly, many as a protest against the overbearing and dismissive Establishment and hopefully even more who believe that the EU is an undemocratic aberration carrying out a failed Social experiment on the whole of Europe.

Whatever the reasons, I reiterate that we won and insist that the prize of Article 50 invocation be carried out forthwith.

OK, as someone with the clearest certainty on this thread that Brexit is a good thing, let's fast forward past the invocation of Article 50 (which I agree is inevitable now).

What do you foresee the UK being able to do in this brave new world that it couldn't do whilst part of the EU? I don't believe we'll have any more power over our borders than we do now. If we want to trade with the EU without punitive trade taxes then they'll be absolutely determined to ensure free movement of people is part of any negotations, don't you think?

The problem with existing in an interconnected world is that compromise is required if you wish to trade. The days of gunboat diplomacy have long gone for the UK (no matter how gung-ho or far right you are). Now I agree that in a world with an ever-expanding population then some control over our borders is required - and this COULD be an advantage we gain from leaving, but it is not guaranteed.

We could negotiate separate deals with the rest of the world, but what are we offering them? Not an English language based unfettered access to the rest of Europe that's for sure. So what else?

I'm genuinely interested in knowing what you think we can do now, that we couldn't before? Don't include spending saved money elsewhere, as I don't think we will have any spare money to go around once we leave following the devaluation of the pound post-referendum.

 

 

You are going to hurt my feelings  ! To be fair, I did start some of this fascinating debate assuming that a lot of you were just rich Naim owners, but of course you are also very musically oriented and I will assume that means there will be a healthy sprinkling of left wing Socialits among you, and that is not a criticism, it just explains the polarisation of the debate.

I am of course extremely right wing and make absolutely no apologies. Strange to say, being right wing can be a lot less destructive than left wing, am thinking here of Stalin, Mao Tse Tung, Pol Pot and the great National Socialist himself whose name we will not use. 

We did get a majority and We did win the Referendum so please do not denigrate us as if 17.5 million people were any more deluded than you losers. We had our own rationale and voted accordingly, many as a protest against the overbearing and dismissive Establishment and hopefully even more who believe that the EU is an undemocratic aberration carrying out a failed Social experiment on the whole of Europe.

Whatever the reasons, I reiterate that we won and insist that the prize of Article 50 invocation be carried out forthwith.

I am a right winger (actually a rational libertarian) and a proud Leave voter with no regrets.

Please, can we keep this debate friendly and polite.

I have made various posts above about my beliefs and interpretations of the situation.

This does not seem to be entirely a debate of left versus right. It is about some fundamental issues on where we are going and how we are governed. IMHO the referendum result said that we need to change course. Again IMHO the referendum result was because of many people being unhappy about the way we are governed, about the failure of the EU negotiations and about the way in which the Remain campaign was conducted.

I have mentioned before about the need for change (the only way to avoid change is to be dead). IMHO the changes that are going to hit EU along with the changes driven by AI ant IOT are going to have to be dealt with.

Penarth Blues posted:

 

OK, as someone with the clearest certainty on this thread that Brexit is a good thing, let's fast forward past the invocation of Article 50 (which I agree is inevitable now).

What do you foresee the UK being able to do in this brave new world that it couldn't do whilst part of the EU? I don't believe we'll have any more power over our borders than we do now. If we want to trade with the EU without punitive trade taxes then they'll be absolutely determined to ensure free movement of people is part of any negotations, don't you think?

The problem with existing in an interconnected world is that compromise is required if you wish to trade. The days of gunboat diplomacy have long gone for the UK (no matter how gung-ho or far right you are). Now I agree that in a world with an ever-expanding population then some control over our borders is required - and this COULD be an advantage we gain from leaving, but it is not guaranteed.

We could negotiate separate deals with the rest of the world, but what are we offering them? Not an English language based unfettered access to the rest of Europe that's for sure. So what else?

I'm genuinely interested in knowing what you think we can do now, that we couldn't before? Don't include spending saved money elsewhere, as I don't think we will have any spare money to go around once we leave following the devaluation of the pound post-referendum.

All agreed but...

• We have a trade deficit with the rest of EU which will help negotiations
• We can conduct trade negotiations faster with other nations as we do not have to accommodate the needs of 27 countries
• We can benefit from lower food prices as we will not have to impose the EU import tariffs

All of this of course depends upon the competence of our Government to make this a success. At this time I need to listen to some music. Suggestions please.

andarkian posted:

Huge posted:

andarkian posted:

...
We did get a majority and We did win the Referendum so please do not denigrate us as if 17.5 million people were any more deluded than you losers.
...

Should you wish people whose views you consistently insult and rubbish to not denigrate those who voted the other way then perhaps you might consider giving them some respect instead of denigrating them.  As you sow so shall you reap.

Which from the extreme right wing view of things of course only applies to other people not to yourself; and history tells us where that attitude leads be it from the extreme right or the extreme left.  If you had argued your case with factual information instead of insults, you may have got a better response.

You are obfuscating again, Huge. You lost, get over it and give me my Article 50.

As to logical debate, I have yet to hear a single meretricious argument from the Remain side, particularly yourself, that justifies us staying on the sinking EUTitanic for one second more. It is the dismissive attitude of the Establishment that have led us to the situation where our borders are porous, a fact, that we are perilously over populated, a fact; that the great multicultural experiment is not really working so well, a fact recently evidenced in Rotherham, Oxford, Croydon, Bristol and many other places, a fact; that our welfare, schooling, housing and Health Service have been sorely abused through all of the above, all facts.

Remaining in the EU perpetuates all of the above through legal restrictions imposed on us from Brussels and which we cannot legally change. Not only do I want my Article 50, I want my borders back and my own legal system resident inside the UK. 

Yet again you resort to nothing more than invective, irrelevance and insult.

It's not surprising that people respond badly to you - You ask for respect from those you insult, and then you tell them how they must now think (i.e. that they must now fit in with your unbalanced extreme right wing opinion).  This unfortunately is a totalitarian attitude to other people.

You'll get your article 50 in due course.  You cannot simply dictate the timescale to the rest of the population based on nothing more than your opinion - the timescale was NOT part of the referendum.

andarkian posted:

Whatever the reasons, I reiterate that we won and insist that the prize of Article 50 invocation be carried out forthwith.

PeterJ posted:

Penarth Blues posted:

 

OK, as someone with the clearest certainty on this thread that Brexit is a good thing, let's fast forward past the invocation of Article 50 (which I agree is inevitable now).

What do you foresee the UK being able to do in this brave new world that it couldn't do whilst part of the EU? I don't believe we'll have any more power over our borders than we do now. If we want to trade with the EU without punitive trade taxes then they'll be absolutely determined to ensure free movement of people is part of any negotations, don't you think?

The problem with existing in an interconnected world is that compromise is required if you wish to trade. The days of gunboat diplomacy have long gone for the UK (no matter how gung-ho or far right you are). Now I agree that in a world with an ever-expanding population then some control over our borders is required - and this COULD be an advantage we gain from leaving, but it is not guaranteed.

We could negotiate separate deals with the rest of the world, but what are we offering them? Not an English language based unfettered access to the rest of Europe that's for sure. So what else?

I'm genuinely interested in knowing what you think we can do now, that we couldn't before? Don't include spending saved money elsewhere, as I don't think we will have any spare money to go around once we leave following the devaluation of the pound post-referendum.

All agreed but...

• We have a trade deficit with the rest of EU which will help negotiations
• We can conduct trade negotiations faster with other nations as we do not have to accommodate the needs of 27 countries
• We can benefit from lower food prices as we will not have to impose the EU import tariffs

All of this of course depends upon the competence of our Government to make this a success. At this time I need to listen to some music. Suggestions please.

I suggest some gentle Passenger to accompany you on the lifeboat!

Huge posted:

andarkian posted:

Huge posted:

andarkian posted:

...
We did get a majority and We did win the Referendum so please do not denigrate us as if 17.5 million people were any more deluded than you losers.
...

Should you wish people whose views you consistently insult and rubbish to not denigrate those who voted the other way then perhaps you might consider giving them some respect instead of denigrating them.  As you sow so shall you reap.

Which from the extreme right wing view of things of course only applies to other people not to yourself; and history tells us where that attitude leads be it from the extreme right or the extreme left.  If you had argued your case with factual information instead of insults, you may have got a better response.

You are obfuscating again, Huge. You lost, get over it and give me my Article 50.

As to logical debate, I have yet to hear a single meretricious argument from the Remain side, particularly yourself, that justifies us staying on the sinking EUTitanic for one second more. It is the dismissive attitude of the Establishment that have led us to the situation where our borders are porous, a fact, that we are perilously over populated, a fact; that the great multicultural experiment is not really working so well, a fact recently evidenced in Rotherham, Oxford, Croydon, Bristol and many other places, a fact; that our welfare, schooling, housing and Health Service have been sorely abused through all of the above, all facts.

Remaining in the EU perpetuates all of the above through legal restrictions imposed on us from Brussels and which we cannot legally change. Not only do I want my Article 50, I want my borders back and my own legal system resident inside the UK. 

Yet again you resort to nothing more than invective, irrelevance and insult.

It's not surprising that people respond badly to you - You ask for respect from those you insult, and then you tell them how they must now think (i.e. that they must now fit in with your unbalanced extreme right wing opinion).  This unfortunately is a totalitarian attitude to other people.

You'll get your article 50 in due course.  You cannot simply dictate the timescale to the rest of the population based on nothing more than your opinion - the timescale was NOT part of the referendum.

Strangely, I find your own unjustifiable hubris a little grating. You asked for facts, I gave you facts. Other than personal objection to myself, is there any other justifiable reason you can give to delay Article 50? I also do not demand or want either recognition or respect from anyone I disagree with, I simply want to win the argument. Am far too old to be agreeable, or to worry about anyone's opinion but my own. 

Unfortunately the vast majority of what was said by both sides of the Brexit campain was purely speculation, and in some cases downright misleading, appealing to the hopes and fears of gullible or less knowledgeable people. That makes any result - in  either direction - seriously flawed (my own impression is that the worst offenders were in the 'leave' camp, but I can't say whether that is factually correct). Add to that the fact that nobody among those campaining to leave had any clue whatsoever as to what to do if they won would make it laughable if it wasn't such a serious subject - in my personal view the people responsible at best were clearly imbeciles. Meanwhile a significant number of people are known to have voted 'leave' as some sort of protest, never expecting it to go that way, but wanting to convey a message that a lot of people were unhappy with the way the EU is going.

To my mind the only sensible thing in the circumstances would be another referendum - and if it says 'leave' again it really will, mean it, with no-one being able to argue otherwise. But either way, it is only right that the people's democratically elected represantatives in Parliament - all of them - decide what to do and when to do it.

But whichever way anyone feels about this, there is no justification  for denigrating other members of the public/electorate personally, though perhaps the leaders of the campaigns who gave misleading information (in either direction) are worthy of the strongest criticism. 

PeterJ posted:

Penarth Blues posted:

 

OK, as someone with the clearest certainty on this thread that Brexit is a good thing, let's fast forward past the invocation of Article 50 (which I agree is inevitable now).

What do you foresee the UK being able to do in this brave new world that it couldn't do whilst part of the EU? I don't believe we'll have any more power over our borders than we do now. If we want to trade with the EU without punitive trade taxes then they'll be absolutely determined to ensure free movement of people is part of any negotations, don't you think?

The problem with existing in an interconnected world is that compromise is required if you wish to trade. The days of gunboat diplomacy have long gone for the UK (no matter how gung-ho or far right you are). Now I agree that in a world with an ever-expanding population then some control over our borders is required - and this COULD be an advantage we gain from leaving, but it is not guaranteed.

We could negotiate separate deals with the rest of the world, but what are we offering them? Not an English language based unfettered access to the rest of Europe that's for sure. So what else?

I'm genuinely interested in knowing what you think we can do now, that we couldn't before? Don't include spending saved money elsewhere, as I don't think we will have any spare money to go around once we leave following the devaluation of the pound post-referendum.

All agreed but...

• We have a trade deficit with the rest of EU which will help negotiations
• We can conduct trade negotiations faster with other nations as we do not have to accommodate the needs of 27 countries
• We can benefit from lower food prices as we will not have to impose the EU import tariffs

All of this of course depends upon the competence of our Government to make this a success. At this time I need to listen to some music. Suggestions please.

Thanks for the quick and clear response.

So we import more than we sell, and the pound is worth less than it was - so we're now living even more above our means. The options going forward are that we are just sold less goods while paying more for what we buy, or that those member states who currently sell us goods simply sell their goods to richer countries. It does mean that stuff we make here should sell better, provided the price of the imported raw materials does not wipe out any advantage.

We can conduct negotiations faster I agree, it doesn't mean we'll get any better a deal, probably the opposite as we are not offering the volume of purchase that the EU can.

Not sure how the last point works to be honest but take you word for it - this would be a good outcome if true.

andarkian posted:

 

...

Yet again you resort to nothing more than invective, irrelevance and insult.

It's not surprising that people respond badly to you - You ask for respect from those you insult, and then you tell them how they must now think (i.e. that they must now fit in with your unbalanced extreme right wing opinion).  This unfortunately is a totalitarian attitude to other people.

You'll get your article 50 in due course.  You cannot simply dictate the timescale to the rest of the population based on nothing more than your opinion - the timescale was NOT part of the referendum.

Strangely, I find your own unjustifiable hubris a little grating. You asked for facts, I gave you facts. Other than personal objection to myself, is there any other justifiable reason you can give to delay Article 50? I also do not demand or want either recognition or respect from anyone I disagree with, I simply want to win the argument. Am far too old to be agreeable, or to worry about anyone's opinion but my own. 

More insults, this time personal.

You give your opinions expressed as fact and expect those who have done the actual research to blindly accept this.

A50 should be triggered at the appropriate time whatever that may be - based on facts and the EU negotiations, and not just based your personal opinion.  The timescale was NOT part of the referendum.

"Am far too old to be agreeable, or to worry about anyone's opinion but my own." and you clearly have no respect for anyone else either - I wonder why that might be?

All of this of course depends upon the competence of our Government to make this a success. At this time I need to listen to some music. Suggestions please.

PeterJ posted:

Don Atkinson posted:

Peter, with equal respect, I am not.

The referendum is informative, not legally binding.

The High Court is making it clear that in their opinion May is wrong in the way she is planning to invoke A50. May intends to seek the ruling of the Supreme Court. We shall all have to accept that ruling when it comes.

 

Actually, as far as I understand, referenda have absolutely no place in our constitution. You are correct that, in theory, this is informative only. However, the Government said that is will abide by the decision and parliament voted for the referendum.

As I said earlier, this is the first time that a referendum has not delivered the result that Parliament and Government desired. That is why we are in uncharted constitutional territory.

I also pointed out that The High Court ruled against the Government using Royal Prerogative to invoke A50 on what seems to be pretty good logic. I do not think that The Supreme Court will reverse that decision.

We are in a buggers muddle due to the incompetence of our Government but I would argue this is mostly down to Cameron rather than May.

Peter,

Regardless of who got us into this mess, it's up to Parliament to take advice, and get us out of it. I refer to both the legal processes and whatever the best advice is regarding Remaining in the EU or Leaving the EU (whether that be "Hard" or "Soft" or whatever)

It's not down to May to form a silent clique and at the end of whatever happens, simply declare that the result is all that she believes is best for the UK.

Negotiating with the EU is only one small part of the effort that will be needed when (if ?) we leave. Nobody should underestimate the required wider global effort and associated risk. I have been involved in providing advice as to how the aviation industry might benefit by leaving and what the risks might be. The risks of a "Hard" Brexit (in the Aviation world) are enormous IMHO. The benefits are frankly, illusionary. A "Soft" exit, whereby we remain part of the EU EASA, along with Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and Lichtenstein, might limit the damage. If similar discussion is taking place in other industry, great. At least matters are under discussion. But I am yet to be convinced that Parliament is going to be briefed and allowed to make decisions as our elected representatives on whether we should abandon the Leave decision, or in what form we should continue with Brexit.

Huge posted:

A50 should be triggered at the appropriate time whatever that may be - based on facts and the EU negotiations, and not just based your personal opinion.  The timescale was NOT part of the referendum.

 

Do we actually need to trigger article 50 at all.

It’s part of a treaty and treaties can be changed. If it becomes apparent to the UK and the decision makers in the EU that there’s a better way forward for everybody, surely the treaty would be changed.

fatcat posted:

Huge posted:

A50 should be triggered at the appropriate time whatever that may be - based on facts and the EU negotiations, and not just based your personal opinion.  The timescale was NOT part of the referendum.

 

Do we actually need to trigger article 50 at all.

It’s part of a treaty and treaties can be changed. If it becomes apparent to the UK and the decision makers in the EU that there’s a better way forward for everybody, surely the treaty would be changed.

FatCat, good call, if a better way to leave the EU can be found.

However I'd be surprised if the EU Commission AND EU Council of Ministers would acquiesce to any favourable change as they are paranoid about the possibility that other states may declare an intent to leave.

Huge posted:

However I'd be surprised if the EU Commission AND EU Council of Ministers would acquiesce to any favourable change as they are paranoid about the possibility that other states may declare an intent to leave.

That’s true and rational, but with the unpredictability of politics at the moment anything could happen.

If the EU are expecting a number of members to leave, they might decide to offer a soft and structured method of withdrawal, rather than spend years negotiating a hard exit with each country individually.

ltaylor posted:

My only beef with this judgement is that the parties who brought the action showed no interest in standing up for the sovereignty  of Parliament when it was being signed away over the past decades. The minute we try to regain it they are outraged. I dont recall them whining about Maastricht. None of them were put out by the frankly shameful way Gordon Brown sneaked in after everyone else  to sign up to Lisbon. It smacks of rank hypocrisy.

Not sure if anyone has replied to this comment ... but you are wrong on the point about Maastricht and Lisbon treaties.  Both were subject to acts of parliament and therefore the parliamentary process which Teressa May is attempting to bypass in the case of Brexit.  Following the passing of the amendments to the European Communities Act 1972; which ratified the Lisbon treaty; there WAS a case brought before the High Court by one Stuart Wheeler (former UKIP treasurer) to try to hold the UK Gov (then lead by Gordon Brown) to a commitment to hold a referendum on the Lisbon treaty - this was defeated as having no basis in constitutional law; as were subsequent appeals.

You also say "no interest in standing up for the sovereignty  of Parliament when it was being signed away over the past decades. The minute we try to regain it they are outraged" but in saying that you (like the right wing press) miss the point of the action.  The arguments put to the court are NOT trying to overturn the referendum decision (though that may ultimately be the aim) but they are trying to ensure that sovereignty is returned to the right people - that is PARLIAMENT - not given to the prime minister.  The decision actually goes far beyond the current Brexit crisis as any ruling now would (afaik) set as a precedent so any similar decision the prime minister didn't want to debate in parliament could be bypassed using the Royal Prerogative...

Now we see the likes of losers like Clegg and Farron claiming they will make life as difficult as they can. I hope the Supreme Court sees sense and overthrows this judgement and if not hopefully May will put it to no confidence vote. Turkeys don't normally vote for Christmas, so I doubt Labour will be foolish enough to vote against it.

I'm not sure what you are suggesting May puts to a no confidence vote - a decision by the supreme court?  All May has to do to comply with the ruling is to bring triggering Article 50 to parliament.  The court hasn't said she cannot trigger Article 50; they have just said she cannot do it using the Royal Prerogative which bypasses Parliament's Sovereignty.

As for Clegg and Farron - well if the estimated from University of East Anglia's Chris Hanretty are to be believed (created by taking the results by local authority and estimating results for constituencies based on demographics and estimates of voting by demographics) - Nick Clegg can be confident the constituents of Sheffield Hallam constituency voted to remain in the EU; and Tim Farron's Westmoreland & Lonsdale constituency probably voted to remain.

Despite the claims of the remainiacs the sky hasn't fallen and the country hasn't collapsed. The idea that a second referendum would succeed where the first one failed are in my view delusional. A lot of project fear has been shown to be utter nonsense. If there was a rerun of the referendum my view is a lot more votes would be cast for leave.

The "leave" vote has lead to a period of economic uncertainty.  No the sky hasn't fallen in but there was only a few unwise pronouncements that it WOULD fall in immediately (the emergency budget suggestion was the main one which was questioned by many in the remain campaign).  As you may have noticed nothing has actually changed yet - we are still (and will still be for around 2 years after the declaration of Article 50) full members of the EU.

But despite "votes of confidence" such as Nissan's promise of continued investment - that had to be secured with letters of assurances the UK Gov have so far not been willing to share - there IS uncertainty.  The pound is at its lowest for 10 years (admittedly some people argue that it needed to be devalued but there was very little of that talk prior to the referendum).  There is no plan forthcoming from Downing Street; no idea what level of access to the Single Market, the Customs Union and the Banking Passport is desired by the May Government.  

It looks clear from the first major foray into International free trade deals - Mrs May's trip to India - that one of the first demands of the 'other side' will be the assurance of free movement/relaxed visas for their nationals.

So the Leavers have voted to allow even more migration to this country! :-)

Salmon Dave posted:

It looks clear from the first major foray into International free trade deals - Mrs May's trip to India - that one of the first demands of the 'other side' will be the assurance of free movement/relaxed visas for their nationals.

So the Leavers have voted to allow even more migration to this country! :-)

No more so than before, and hopefully a lot less. Since many of the bogus colleges have been closed that has reduced the 'students' significantly, nothing to do with Brexit, but hopefully even more will now be cut. I saw the Cobra guy on Daily Politics whinging about students having to leave as soon as they complete their courses and how Chinese visitors could have  two year multiple indefinite visas. Indians did not offer me any of that when visiting the place on either business or vacation, so what's their problem

Time to cut the one sided deals and aid, particularly to those who have the money to undertake space and nuclear projects. But none of this really has much to do with Brexit other than allowing our own politicians to make their own mess instead of delegating that to Juncker. 

naim_nymph posted:

 

The Will of the People strongly remains to stay within the EU. Far more people of the UK did not vote to Leave.

Debs

I wonder if the result had finished 52% remain, 48% leave and the rest abstained would there still be all these demands for a repeat vote. After all if 52% it's not a sufficient majority to leave then it would not be a sufficient majority to remain either would it!

Southweststokie posted:

naim_nymph posted:

 

The Will of the People strongly remains to stay within the EU. Far more people of the UK did not vote to Leave.

Debs

I wonder if the result had finished 52% remain, 48% leave and the rest abstained would there still be all these demands for a repeat vote. After all if 52% it's not a sufficient majority to leave then it would not be a sufficient majority to remain either would it!

It would appear that we can just make our own decision on what those who abstained think.  I have decided that they are in fact all in favour of us all becoming Welsh, after all far fewer people voted for us to remain in the EU therefore all those who didn't must want us to be Welsh.  Of course the fact that they didn't care enough to be bothered to vote may undermine this theory and the logic makes not sense but never mind I really want us all to be Welsh so it will do.

What I find unbelievable is this oft repeated ongoing view that the majority did not vote to leave, as you say, counting the "no shows" as somehow being aligned with the remoaners.

Yet, using the same logic, and counting the non voters in with the Brexiteers, means that contrary to the above, far fewer people voted to remain.

Makes I larf.  

Grauniad Readers and BBC Believers will never say die to their beloved EU.

Democracy? Pah, they spit upon democracy, far too many people involved!