Are we sleep-walking out of Europe ?

Resurrection posted:
dave marshall posted:

 

The inescapable conclusion, therefore, is that the EU are determined to make these negotiations as difficult as possible, regardless of the solutions staring them in the face, which exist elsewhere.

Hear! Hear!

And sadly, it is the British public who will pay dearly for the pleasure, and for many years to come.

dave marshall posted:

 

The reality is that the concept of a "frictionless border" works perfectly well in the case of Switzerland, which is not a member of the single market, Customs Union, or even the European Economic Area, and has massively more cross border trade than would ever be the case in Ireland.

That's a lovely way of looking at things for those with a pro-Brexit attitude (see Resurrection's endorsement).

Unfortunately it's completely inaccurate.  The Swiss border isn't frictionless.  

Yes, you can enter Switzerland without passport checks.  That's because Switzerland is part of the Schengen area - not something Brexit ultras will accept.  Switzerland also has some of its rules essentially dictated by the EU because it maintains 'full alignment' with EU rules on goods.  That means it is effectively in the EU customs union regardless of its nominal status - not something Brexit ultras will accept.  And there's a hard border for some things because of differing tax arrangements - unclear how that would work with the UK, but potentially it'd imperil the GFA.

There's a FT article from December which explains this.  I can't post a link to it, but it's really easy to find.  Just google 'Switzerland customs EU' and it should be near the top of the results.  It's entitled Brexit: Watch the Swiss border for a warning on trade.

I think I've read somewhere that the British government have assembled a commission of mathematicians which is going to devise a border between EU and UK which at the same time does not separate NI from Ireland. I think the head of the commission is a certain Professor Moebius and the solution is based on non orientable surfaces.

The irony is that the U.K. don’t want to be part of the Customs Union because they see it as seeding control to the EU.  However the two proposals essentially suggest the EU seed Customs Control to U.K. “on trust” ... seeding control to a third country who don’t want to be bound to the ECJ who rule in such things.  Cloud cuckoo land!

Another story which shows the arrogance of the U.K.’s negotiation position came about last week.  The U.K. want the EU to continue to protect the U.K.’s PGI and PDO (protected food designations) in the EU, yet won’t promise to do the same for the EU27’s PGI, PDO and TSG foods.  So (for example) under the proposal the U.K. want EU to protect Scotch Whisky (to stop Japan, Slovakia and India selling spirits branded Scotch) but refuse to prevent USA and Australia selling Champagne.  Double cloud cuckoo land!

jfritzen posted:

I think I've read somewhere that the British government have assembled a commission of mathematicians which is going to devise a border between EU and UK which at the same time does not separate NI from Ireland. I think the head of the commission is a certain Professor Moebius and the solution is based on non orientable surfaces.

The Möbius Proposal.  It's got a nice ring to it, like The Odessa File or The Stanford Prison Experiment.  Or The Lucifer Effect.

Eloise posted:

The irony is that the U.K. don’t want to be part of the Customs Union because they see it as seeding control to the EU.  However the two proposals essentially suggest the EU seed Customs Control to U.K. “on trust” ... seeding control to a third country who don’t want to be bound to the ECJ who rule in such things.  Cloud cuckoo land!!

BTW, and this not meaning to be critical, nor to divert the thread, but the word is cede not seed.

Hard-line Brexiteers clearly getting worried. Rees-Mogg describing the PM's idea of a Customs Partnership  as "completely cretinous".  Nice example of party loyalty there.  Does he think that May will now lurch further right on hearing such constructive comments from a prominent Tory back-bencher ?! My take is Rees-Mogg is aware of the parliamentary arithmetic and fears May will be pragmatic.  Thing is, Rees-Mogg's position doesn't change that arithmetic.  

MDS posted:

Hard-line Brexiteers clearly getting worried. Rees-Mogg describing the PM's idea of a Customs Partnership  as "completely cretinous".  Nice example of party loyalty there.  Does he think that May will now lurch further right on hearing such constructive comments from a prominent Tory back-bencher ?! My take is Rees-Mogg is aware of the parliamentary arithmetic and fears May will be pragmatic.  Thing is, Rees-Mogg's position doesn't change that arithmetic.  

In my experience, if hard-line Brexiters feel in the ascendant, their language becomes bombastic and patronising - "we won, suck it up" being their most common leitmotif in the period immediately after the referendum. Indeed, the very term "Remoaner" is a good example. However, if the wheels come of the Brexit bus, as they are threatening to in fairly short order now, their language is likely to become much more aggressive - Rees-Mogg's terminology as quoted by MDS being slightly musty but unmistakably pugnacious.

I can't put a weblink here but there's a good article in the Indy on JMR quoting  him as saying, in reference to the Lords rejection of the Brexit legislation, "I think their lordships are playing with fire and it would be a shame to burn down a historic house.” Very thinly veiled threat there. 

The problem for Brexiters is that their adventure makes no sense whatsoever intellectually unless the UK burns its boats lock stock and barrel, to mix metaphors. Being out of the EU but in a customs union makes extremely good sense pragmatically, IF we are to be "out" of Europe. To hard-line Brexiters, however, being out of the EU but in a customs union and therefore bound by the ECJ (and not being able to agree trade pacts independently in perpetuity) is having all of the disadvantages of being out of the EU, with few of the advantages. Brexiters are waking up to the realisation that they will struggle to justify their xenophobic vanity project when the UK public wake up and realise they've been sold a pup... 

MDS posted:

Hard-line Brexiteers clearly getting worried. Rees-Mogg describing the PM's idea of a Customs Partnership  as "completely cretinous".  Nice example of party loyalty there.  Does he think that May will now lurch further right on hearing such constructive comments from a prominent Tory back-bencher ?! My take is Rees-Mogg is aware of the parliamentary arithmetic and fears May will be pragmatic.  Thing is, Rees-Mogg's position doesn't change that arithmetic.  

At some point with people continually sticking their heads over parapets to hurrel insults, make gross accusations and threats, someone, no matter how innocent they may perceive themselves to be, is going to get their head blown off. The intransigence of Remainers to recognise and accept the validity of a Referendum and 17.4 million people is shaping up to end very badly.

We all know that Parliament is stuffed with  Remainers who have blithely convinced themselves that their entitlement trumps the will of the electorate. With Corbyn and May as leaders of the main parties our whole Parliamentary system is in disarray with neither of them representing anything like the needs or wishes of the majority of the population of the UK. While May appeases, Corbyn makes mischief and the irony is that May is an arch-Remainer and Corbyn is an arch-Leaver. 

You might call it Parliamentary arithmetic, I call it blatant treachery by arrogant political pygmies. 

Duncan Mann posted:
MDS posted:

Hard-line Brexiteers clearly getting worried. Rees-Mogg describing the PM's idea of a Customs Partnership  as "completely cretinous".  Nice example of party loyalty there.  Does he think that May will now lurch further right on hearing such constructive comments from a prominent Tory back-bencher ?! My take is Rees-Mogg is aware of the parliamentary arithmetic and fears May will be pragmatic.  Thing is, Rees-Mogg's position doesn't change that arithmetic.  

In my experience, if hard-line Brexiters feel in the ascendant, their language becomes bombastic and patronising - "we won, suck it up" being their most common leitmotif in the period immediately after the referendum. Indeed, the very term "Remoaner" is a good example. However, if the wheels come of the Brexit bus, as they are threatening to in fairly short order now, their language is likely to become much more aggressive - Rees-Mogg's terminology as quoted by MDS being slightly musty but unmistakably pugnacious.

I can't put a weblink here but there's a good article in the Indy on JMR quoting  him as saying, in reference to the Lords rejection of the Brexit legislation, "I think their lordships are playing with fire and it would be a shame to burn down a historic house.” Very thinly veiled threat there. 

The problem for Brexiters is that their adventure makes no sense whatsoever intellectually unless the UK burns its boats lock stock and barrel, to mix metaphors. Being out of the EU but in a customs union makes extremely good sense pragmatically, IF we are to be "out" of Europe. To hard-line Brexiters, however, being out of the EU but in a customs union and therefore bound by the ECJ (and not being able to agree trade pacts independently in perpetuity) is having all of the disadvantages of being out of the EU, with few of the advantages. Brexiters are waking up to the realisation that they will struggle to justify their xenophobic vanity project when the UK public wake up and realise they've been sold a pup... 

As a hard line Brexiter, I was and still am fully aware of all the so called 'disadvantages' you Remainers continually lecture us with. We knew that we did not want to be tied to the ECJ; we knew we did notwant a customs union, no matter how much you Remainers keep telling us we did; we have not the slightest interest in the complications of the border with Northern Ireland - that will resolve itself with surprising ease. Stop using the xenophobic card, you just disgrace yourself and stop trying to make out that two very undemocratic institutions, the Lords and the EU, with their very undemocratic practices are some forms of paragons of virtue saving us from ourselves.

As you hate me and others saying, we won, you lost, now implement our Brexit and try again some time in the future to get yourself democratically back in the EU if you think the country will have an appetite for it. I can also assure you that there is nothing transient or partial about the 'adventure' we voted for. I certainly believe the country will never have the appetite for rejoining such a malignant institution. Oh, and I see that the call for an abolition of The House of Lords got over 100,000 signatures in no time at all, although I did not personally sign.

The position “we won, you lost”, displaying a curious and simplistic state of mind that aapears to consider it to have been a competition or war as opposed to consideration of a country’s future, is a meaningless dogma that focuses on a referendum based on highly flawed and misleading information from both sides of the argument, and is trotted out again and again by those afraid of having a confirmatory referendum now much more is known.

As I have said many times before, you have nothing to fear about the result of a confirmatory referendum if it is true, as you suggest, that the majority want Brexit: Stop living in the past, repeatedly citing a referendum nearly three years ago, and instead join the call for confirmation of what the people want, which, if contrary to what the politicians you criticise want, will be powerful in silencing them - while shutting up once and for all those that Brexiteers often delight in branding ‘remoaners’. 

As for re-joining the EU once out of it, that would be a very different question, not least because Britain’s position if it were to happen would be far less influential in the EU than ever before (as indeed Britain’s position is likely to be in the world after leaving the EU).

Resurrection posted:
MDS posted:

Hard-line Brexiteers clearly getting worried. Rees-Mogg describing the PM's idea of a Customs Partnership  as "completely cretinous".  Nice example of party loyalty there.  Does he think that May will now lurch further right on hearing such constructive comments from a prominent Tory back-bencher ?! My take is Rees-Mogg is aware of the parliamentary arithmetic and fears May will be pragmatic.  Thing is, Rees-Mogg's position doesn't change that arithmetic.  

At some point with people continually sticking their heads over parapets to hurrel insults, make gross accusations and threats, someone, no matter how innocent they may perceive themselves to be, is going to get their head blown off. The intransigence of Remainers to recognise and accept the validity of a Referendum and 17.4 million people is shaping up to end very badly.

We all know that Parliament is stuffed with  Remainers who have blithely convinced themselves that their entitlement trumps the will of the electorate. With Corbyn and May as leaders of the main parties our whole Parliamentary system is in disarray with neither of them representing anything like the needs or wishes of the majority of the population of the UK. While May appeases, Corbyn makes mischief and the irony is that May is an arch-Remainer and Corbyn is an arch-Leaver. 

You might call it Parliamentary arithmetic, I call it blatant treachery by arrogant political pygmies. 

Resurrection - while I acknowledge that you voted exit in the light of a pretty good understanding of the issues and are clear on what you mean by 'exit', I strongly suspect that very many who voted exit didn't had anything like that understanding. I'd hazard a guess that more than half wouldn't have had any idea what a 'customs union' was, let alone an understanding of it's benefits and downsides.  If we do exit the EU while still remaining in the/a customs union, the politicians will present it as a victory.  While there will be some e.g. hard Brexiteers, who with say it is treachery, most won't because (a) they didn't have a defined idea of what exit meant and (b) don't understand or want to understand the pros & cons of the issues involved.    

The Campaign for Real Ale recently asked its members to decide whether it should expand its remit to cover lager and cider. In order to make such a momentous change, at least 75% of members would have had to vote for it. Very sensibly, they didn’t. Yet we can totally change the UK’s direction on a simple majority. Weird. 

MDS posted:

Resurrection - while I acknowledge that you voted exit in the light of a pretty good understanding of the issues and are clear on what you mean by 'exit', I strongly suspect that very many who voted exit didn't had anything like that understanding. I'd hazard a guess that more than half wouldn't have had any idea what a 'customs union' was, let alone an understanding of it's benefits and downsides.  If we do exit the EU while still remaining in the/a customs union, the politicians will present it as a victory.  While there will be some e.g. hard Brexiteers, who with say it is treachery, most won't because (a) they didn't have a defined idea of what exit meant and (b) don't understand or want to understand the pros & cons of the issues involved.    

I would add to that MDS ... that even if Leave thinking voters knew what the customs union was, they were told by several of the leading campaigners that even if the UK voted to leave the EU, that the Customs Union and even the Single Market were good things and that the UK could remain part of them.

Resurrection posted:

At some point with people continually sticking their heads over parapets to hurrel insults, make gross accusations and threats, someone, no matter how innocent they may perceive themselves to be, is going to get their head blown off. The intransigence of Remainers to recognise and accept the validity of a Referendum and 17.4 million people is shaping up to end very badly.

We all know that Parliament is stuffed with  Remainers who have blithely convinced themselves that their entitlement trumps the will of the electorate. With Corbyn and May as leaders of the main parties our whole Parliamentary system is in disarray with neither of them representing anything like the needs or wishes of the majority of the population of the UK. While May appeases, Corbyn makes mischief and the irony is that May is an arch-Remainer and Corbyn is an arch-Leaver. 

You might call it Parliamentary arithmetic, I call it blatant treachery by arrogant political pygmies. 

 
Leaving completely to one side the basis of people’s votes in the referendum and whether the outcome would have been the same if everyone had gone into with full and accurate knowledge, it is very curious that you seem argue that the will of 17.4 million people expressed in 2015 should be followed, and indeed followed blindly, regardless of any realities that may come to light, seemingly considering the referendum to have been a sufficiently sound democratic process to have created a path from which nothing must be allowed to cause any diversion or deviation - yet you seem to reject the democratic process that the same British public used nearly a year later to elect a parliament with the power to decide what is right for the country to do, the members of which will all have in their heads the knowledge of the referendum and its outcome.

You might argue that parliamentary democracy is flawed - but that would beg the question as to whether the referendum was unflawed, and in what way the views of 17.4 million people at a moment in time may be more valid than the views any particular proportion of people three years later.

Resurrection posted:
 
...

We all know that Parliament is stuffed with  Remainers who have blithely convinced themselves that their entitlement trumps the will of the electorate. With Corbyn and May as leaders of the main parties our whole Parliamentary system is in disarray with neither of them representing anything like the needs or wishes of the majority of the population of the UK. While May appeases, Corbyn makes mischief and the irony is that May is an arch-Remainer and Corbyn is an arch-Leaver. 

You might call it Parliamentary arithmetic, I call it blatant treachery by arrogant political pygmies. 

We don't have a democracy, we have a representative democracy; so yes parliament does have that entitlement.

Eloise posted:
MDS posted:

Resurrection - while I acknowledge that you voted exit in the light of a pretty good understanding of the issues and are clear on what you mean by 'exit', I strongly suspect that very many who voted exit didn't had anything like that understanding. I'd hazard a guess that more than half wouldn't have had any idea what a 'customs union' was, let alone an understanding of it's benefits and downsides.  If we do exit the EU while still remaining in the/a customs union, the politicians will present it as a victory.  While there will be some e.g. hard Brexiteers, who with say it is treachery, most won't because (a) they didn't have a defined idea of what exit meant and (b) don't understand or want to understand the pros & cons of the issues involved.    

I would add to that MDS ... that even if Leave thinking voters knew what the customs union was, they were told by several of the leading campaigners that even if the UK voted to leave the EU, that the Customs Union and even the Single Market were good things and that the UK could remain part of them.

You see, that is what I love about Remainers, they not only know their own minds they also know the wishes and intentions of Leavers as well, usually with a healthy dose of condescension. 

Innocent Bystander posted:
Resurrection posted:

At some point with people continually sticking their heads over parapets to hurrel insults, make gross accusations and threats, someone, no matter how innocent they may perceive themselves to be, is going to get their head blown off. The intransigence of Remainers to recognise and accept the validity of a Referendum and 17.4 million people is shaping up to end very badly.

We all know that Parliament is stuffed with  Remainers who have blithely convinced themselves that their entitlement trumps the will of the electorate. With Corbyn and May as leaders of the main parties our whole Parliamentary system is in disarray with neither of them representing anything like the needs or wishes of the majority of the population of the UK. While May appeases, Corbyn makes mischief and the irony is that May is an arch-Remainer and Corbyn is an arch-Leaver. 

You might call it Parliamentary arithmetic, I call it blatant treachery by arrogant political pygmies. 

 
Leaving completely to one side the basis of people’s votes in the referendum and whether the outcome would have been the same if everyone had gone into with full and accurate knowledge, it is very curious that you seem argue that the will of 17.4 million people expressed in 2015 should be followed, and indeed followed blindly, regardless of any realities that may come to light, seemingly considering the referendum to have been a sufficiently sound democratic process to have created a path from which nothing must be allowed to cause any diversion or deviation - yet you seem to reject the democratic process that the same British public used nearly a year later to elect a parliament with the power to decide what is right for the country to do, the members of which will all have in their heads the knowledge of the referendum and its outcome.

You might argue that parliamentary democracy is flawed - but that would beg the question as to whether the referendum was unflawed, and in what way the views of 17.4 million people at a moment in time may be more valid than the views any particular proportion of people three years later.

I am not arguing at all. The preconditions were hammered home to us by Cameron et al, primarily as a scaremongering tactic by the Leave side and we still voted to Leave, and Leave we will.

Huge posted:
Resurrection posted:
 
...

We all know that Parliament is stuffed with  Remainers who have blithely convinced themselves that their entitlement trumps the will of the electorate. With Corbyn and May as leaders of the main parties our whole Parliamentary system is in disarray with neither of them representing anything like the needs or wishes of the majority of the population of the UK. While May appeases, Corbyn makes mischief and the irony is that May is an arch-Remainer and Corbyn is an arch-Leaver. 

You might call it Parliamentary arithmetic, I call it blatant treachery by arrogant political pygmies. 

We don't have a democracy, we have a representative democracy; so yes parliament does have that entitlement.

You are of course correct, but we are still leaving the EU, despite what you and Anna Soubry might think.

Hungryhalibut posted:

The Campaign for Real Ale recently asked its members to decide whether it should expand its remit to cover lager and cider. In order to make such a momentous change, at least 75% of members would have had to vote for it. Very sensibly, they didn’t. Yet we can totally change the UK’s direction on a simple majority. Weird. 

A fact never argued pre-Referendum.

Resurrection posted:
Huge posted:
Resurrection posted:
 
...

We all know that Parliament is stuffed with  Remainers who have blithely convinced themselves that their entitlement trumps the will of the electorate. With Corbyn and May as leaders of the main parties our whole Parliamentary system is in disarray with neither of them representing anything like the needs or wishes of the majority of the population of the UK. While May appeases, Corbyn makes mischief and the irony is that May is an arch-Remainer and Corbyn is an arch-Leaver. 

You might call it Parliamentary arithmetic, I call it blatant treachery by arrogant political pygmies. 

We don't have a democracy, we have a representative democracy; so yes parliament does have that entitlement.

You are of course correct, but we are still leaving the EU, despite what you and Anna Soubry might think.

Not if parliament collectively think we shouldn't, and then correctly discharge their responsibility to the country!  

Huge posted:
Not if parliament collectively think we shouldn't, and then correctly discharge their responsibility to the country!  

Um - but parliament is stuffed with politicians, so two problems there. 'Think' and 'correctly discharge their responsibility'.  I suppose it could happen but...

Indeed, the very term "Remoaner" is a good example.

If the shoe fits. Given that you remainiacs wont let it go. I am not surrpised that people who voted to leave (the majority lest we forget) are getting a bit fed up with the pitiful delaying tactics. Frankly I am amazed that you are still banging on about it. I suspect as March 29th 2019 approaches the hysteria will become unbearable.

ltaylor posted:

Indeed, the very term "Remoaner" is a good example.

If the shoe fits. Given that you remainiacs wont let it go. I am not surrpised that people who voted to leave (the majority lest we forget) are getting a bit fed up with the pitiful delaying tactics. Frankly I am amazed that you are still banging on about it. I suspect as March 29th 2019 approaches the hysteria will become unbearable.

Is that hysteria you predict from the Brexiteers who didn’t want what leave actually entails for the country, or from the three quarters of the adult population that didn’t vote for Brexit, or all of these combined?

Huge posted:
Resurrection posted:
Huge posted:
Resurrection posted:
 
...

We all know that Parliament is stuffed with  Remainers who have blithely convinced themselves that their entitlement trumps the will of the electorate. With Corbyn and May as leaders of the main parties our whole Parliamentary system is in disarray with neither of them representing anything like the needs or wishes of the majority of the population of the UK. While May appeases, Corbyn makes mischief and the irony is that May is an arch-Remainer and Corbyn is an arch-Leaver. 

You might call it Parliamentary arithmetic, I call it blatant treachery by arrogant political pygmies. 

We don't have a democracy, we have a representative democracy; so yes parliament does have that entitlement.

You are of course correct, but we are still leaving the EU, despite what you and Anna Soubry might think.

Not if parliament collectively think we shouldn't, and then correctly discharge their responsibility to the country!  

Yep. +1 from me. I suspect that the more politically aware Hard-line Brexiters are very conscious of the fact that the deeply flawed referendum in 2016 represented the very peak of euroscepticism, fuelled over decades by the right wing press, and stoked in the run up to the vote by social media that persuaded many with little actual knowledge of the workings of the EU that it is a universally malign force.

We all know now about the workings of Cambridge Analytica and the breaking of electoral rules around finance by pro-Brexit groups. We all know now that the mythical £350m additional funding for the NHS (which no doubt was swallowed hook line and sinker by many less politically-savvy voters) was a blatant lie. We all know (because TM has confirmed this in early March) that there is no foreseeable scenario where the UK will be economically better off as a result of Brexit, and indeed it is widely accepted we will be considerably worse off to the tune of hundreds of millions of £'s a week. What is less quantifiable is the effect on our manufacturing and service industries, much of which has been vainly trying to gain clarification about this government's intentions since the Summer of 2016 - but it doesn't look good. We all know that the people leading our negotiations with the EU are a bunch of clowns - witness the farce of the Brexit impact assessments we were assured in Parliament existed - then, oops, they didn't. No wonder the EU negotiating team is able to run rings round them with the greatest of ease, leading to TM backing down on virtually all of her so-called red lines. This has been an object lesson in realpolitik - the UK, long touted as a country punching above its weight, is now exposed as a minor player on the world stage, without the influence or economic might to forge its own path unless we accept a radically different paradigm for our standing in the world and our prosperity. Liam Fox's assurances that the rest of the world is just queuing up to do trade deals with us are now seen as being a mixture of bluster and blind optimism.

As a result of all the above, and as the dust has settled on the referendum, post-referendum polls which showed a clear affirmation of the result until around May 2017, have since shown a clear majority of people who think the vote to leave the EU was "wrong". Google Wikipedia for "Opinion polling for the United Kingdom European Union membership referendum" for this. Peak euroscepticism has passed, and buyer's remorse is I believe coming into play. No wonder arch Brexiters are so anxious about hurrying the process along and want to shut down debate by adopting a belligerent tone, with implicit threats of violence if they don't get their way:

At some point with people continually sticking their heads over parapets to hurrel insults, make gross accusations and threats, someone, no matter how innocent they may perceive themselves to be, is going to get their head blown off. The intransigence of Remainers to recognise and accept the validity of a Referendum and 17.4 million people is shaping up to end very badly.

So, Resurrection, whilst you may think in your omniscient way that you can predict the future for this process with absolute certainty, I wouldn't be so sure. There's plenty of water to flow under the bridge yet, and as others have commented, Parliament has a responsibility for making decisions about the UK and its future in the round, not just on the one issue of Brexit. I suspect that TM will ultimately be forced to back down on the customs union, though we will be out of the EU in name. As Brexiters are known to be heavily weighted towards the older end of the UK demographic, I also think that future generations will come to see Brexit as a dying spasm of the British empire, and will vote for closer European political ties once again. As has been said on this thread before, we live in interesting times...!   

 

 

 

Duncan Mann posted:
Huge posted:
Resurrection posted:
Huge posted:
Resurrection posted:
 
...

We all know that Parliament is stuffed with  Remainers who have blithely convinced themselves that their entitlement trumps the will of the electorate. With Corbyn and May as leaders of the main parties our whole Parliamentary system is in disarray with neither of them representing anything like the needs or wishes of the majority of the population of the UK. While May appeases, Corbyn makes mischief and the irony is that May is an arch-Remainer and Corbyn is an arch-Leaver. 

You might call it Parliamentary arithmetic, I call it blatant treachery by arrogant political pygmies. 

We don't have a democracy, we have a representative democracy; so yes parliament does have that entitlement.

You are of course correct, but we are still leaving the EU, despite what you and Anna Soubry might think.

Not if parliament collectively think we shouldn't, and then correctly discharge their responsibility to the country!  

Yep. +1 from me. I suspect that the more politically aware Hard-line Brexiters are very conscious of the fact that the deeply flawed referendum in 2016 represented the very peak of euroscepticism, fuelled over decades by the right wing press, and stoked in the run up to the vote by social media that persuaded many with little actual knowledge of the workings of the EU that it is a universally malign force.

We all know now about the workings of Cambridge Analytica and the breaking of electoral rules around finance by pro-Brexit groups. We all know now that the mythical £350m additional funding for the NHS (which no doubt was swallowed hook line and sinker by many less politically-savvy voters) was a blatant lie. We all know (because TM has confirmed this in early March) that there is no foreseeable scenario where the UK will be economically better off as a result of Brexit, and indeed it is widely accepted we will be considerably worse off to the tune of hundreds of millions of £'s a week. What is less quantifiable is the effect on our manufacturing and service industries, much of which has been vainly trying to gain clarification about this government's intentions since the Summer of 2016 - but it doesn't look good. We all know that the people leading our negotiations with the EU are a bunch of clowns - witness the farce of the Brexit impact assessments we were assured in Parliament existed - then, oops, they didn't. No wonder the EU negotiating team is able to run rings round them with the greatest of ease, leading to TM backing down on virtually all of her so-called red lines. This has been an object lesson in realpolitik - the UK, long touted as a country punching above its weight, is now exposed as a minor player on the world stage, without the influence or economic might to forge its own path unless we accept a radically different paradigm for our standing in the world and our prosperity. Liam Fox's assurances that the rest of the world is just queuing up to do trade deals with us are now seen as being a mixture of bluster and blind optimism.

As a result of all the above, and as the dust has settled on the referendum, post-referendum polls which showed a clear affirmation of the result until around May 2017, have since shown a clear majority of people who think the vote to leave the EU was "wrong". Google Wikipedia for "Opinion polling for the United Kingdom European Union membership referendum" for this. Peak euroscepticism has passed, and buyer's remorse is I believe coming into play. No wonder arch Brexiters are so anxious about hurrying the process along and want to shut down debate by adopting a belligerent tone, with implicit threats of violence if they don't get their way:

At some point with people continually sticking their heads over parapets to hurrel insults, make gross accusations and threats, someone, no matter how innocent they may perceive themselves to be, is going to get their head blown off. The intransigence of Remainers to recognise and accept the validity of a Referendum and 17.4 million people is shaping up to end very badly.

ur comment. So, Resurrection, whilst you may think in your omniscient way that you can predict the future for this process with absolute certainty, I wouldn't be so sure. There's plenty of water to flow under the bridge yet, and as others have commented, Parliament has a responsibility for making decisions about the UK and its future in the round, not just on the one issue of Brexit. I suspect that TM will ultimately be forced to back down on the customs union, though we will be out of the EU in name. As Brexiters are known to be heavily weighted towards the older end of the UK demographic, I also think that future generations will come to see Brexit as a dying spasm of the British empire, and will vote for closer European political ties once again. As has been said on this thread before, we live in interesting times...!   

 

 

 

What a complete boring waste of words! Once again a Remoaner spews masses of bilge in an attempt to justify to himself and all other Remoaners how perfect they were in formulating their pre-Referendum strategy and how the Leavers hijacked  this with all sorts of nonsense and dirty tricks hoodwinking 17.4 million people into making the wrong decision. Who was it that spent £9 million of public money on a piece of propaganda to attempt to scare us into voting Remain? Oh yes, David Remoaner Cameron!

 Do not come out with any more weasel words to justify a Parliament stuffed with Remainers attempting to worm their way out of Brexit or to impose some aberrant half way nonsense unless they have obtained a future mandate from the British public to hold a further Referendum on an EU of which we will no longer be members.

As I have said, I have absolutely no fear of a second Referendum after the first one has been completely implemented and if you are so confident in us clamouring to rejoin the EU maybe we should insist on a 66% majority being needed to be successful - again one of your complaints about the first Referendum

Resurrection posted:

As I have said, I have absolutely no fear of a second Referendum after the first one has been completely implemented and if you are so confident in us clamouring to rejoin the EU maybe we should insist on a 66% majority being needed to be successful - again one of your complaints about the first Referendum

Other than reliance on incessant repeation of the fact that 17.4 million voted for Brexit in the 2015 referendum, I don’t recall you advancing any argument as to why confirmation would not be a good idea.

You may not be afraid of a second referendum after Britain has Brexited, when it will be a different situation altogether, But very clearly you ARE afraid - terrified even - of a confirmatory referendum before Brexit is finalised

I wonder why......?

Resurrection posted:
You see, that is what I love about Remainers, they not only know their own minds they also know the wishes and intentions of Leavers as well, usually with a healthy dose of condescension. 

You see that’s what I love about *****s.  They don’t read what people right then go off on one.  I was clearly not talking at all about what anyone might think.  I was talking about statements that campaigners for the Leave side SAID (or wrote in some cases).

Innocent Bystander posted:
Resurrection posted:

As I have said, I have absolutely no fear of a second Referendum after the first one has been completely implemented and if you are so confident in us clamouring to rejoin the EU maybe we should insist on a 66% majority being needed to be successful - again one of your complaints about the first Referendum

Other than reliance on incessant repeation of the fact that 17.4 million voted for Brexit in the 2015 referendum, I don’t recall you advancing any argument as to why confirmation would not be a good idea.

You may not be afraid of a second referendum after Britain has Brexited, when it will be a different situation altogether, But very clearly you ARE afraid - terrified even - of a confirmatory referendum before Brexit is finalised

I wonder why......?

Hilarious! The die was cast and you lost but we seem to have the incessant, incoherent rerun in the minds of Remainers even before implementation. Cameron and the Remaining team were absolutely insistent that a vote to Leave meant us out of the EU in its entirety - the ECJ, the customs union, the border control etc etc. I, and my 17.4 million friends, had absolute clarity of thought and desire as what we wished, and were happy that Cameron expressed it in detail, but the fog of understanding only seemed to dissipate from Remainers' eyes once the horror of their own self inflicted wounds became apparent. Since when, the Remoaning has been of Herculean proportions. 

No second chances from me, IB, and you are exceedingly fortunate that I am happy to indulge your specious arguments. 

Eloise posted:
Resurrection posted:
You see, that is what I love about Remainers, they not only know their own minds they also know the wishes and intentions of Leavers as well, usually with a healthy dose of condescension. 

You see that’s what I love about *****s.  They don’t read what people right then go off on one.  I was clearly not talking at all about what anyone might think.  I was talking about statements that campaigners for the Leave side SAID (or wrote in some cases).

Ah, that is what endears me to Remainers, Eloise, selective memory. I don't care who said what, I made my own mind up and I hope you did too, or did you get too close to the foghorn of propaganda emanating from Berlaymont?

Resurrection posted:

Hilarious! The die was cast and you lost but we seem to have the incessant, incoherent rerun in the minds of Remainers even before implementation. Cameron and the Remaining team were absolutely insistent that a vote to Leave meant us out of the EU in its entirety - the ECJ, the customs union, the border control etc etc. I, and my 17.4 million friends, had absolute clarity of thought and desire as what we wished, and were happy that Cameron expressed it in detail, but the fog of understanding only seemed to dissipate from Remainers' eyes once the horror of their own self inflicted wounds became apparent. Since when, the Remoaning has been of Herculean proportions. 

No second chances from me, IB, and you are exceedingly fortunate that I am happy to indulge your specious arguments. 

No. There was an absolute lack of clarity about what being out of the EU actually meant - one of the (many) fundamental flaws of the referendum. It clearly meant something in your mind, but I very much doubt that your 17.4 million "friends" shared the same world view - for many it was a protest vote against austerity and neoliberalism.

I'm assuming that your last paragraph was tongue in cheek and not intended to be patronising and arrogant in equal measure? 

As for the suggestion that I "do not come out with any more weasel words", have you suddenly become a moderator of this forum? I will continue to argue in a reasoned and balanced way for what I believe in, and obviously you're welcome to do the same. At least this forum is capable of offering different shades of opinion, unlike the comments section of the Daily Mail, and whilst you've made it very clear that your stance on Brexit is utterly fixed, there are others on here who may have a more open mind on the matter, and they can no doubt draw their own conclusions on the debate from the arguments evinced. If there's one thing I am sure of, it's that Britain is an utterly divided nation as a result of the referendum, and the ONLY way forward for us as a nation is to reach a modicum of political consensus through debate.

Resurrection posted:
Innocent Bystander posted:
Resurrection posted:

As I have said, I have absolutely no fear of a second Referendum after the first one has been completely implemented and if you are so confident in us clamouring to rejoin the EU maybe we should insist on a 66% majority being needed to be successful - again one of your complaints about the first Referendum

Other than reliance on incessant repeation of the fact that 17.4 million voted for Brexit in the 2015 referendum, I don’t recall you advancing any argument as to why confirmation would not be a good idea.

You may not be afraid of a second referendum after Britain has Brexited, when it will be a different situation altogether, But very clearly you ARE afraid - terrified even - of a confirmatory referendum before Brexit is finalised

I wonder why......?

Hilarious! The die was cast and you lost but we seem to have the incessant, incoherent rerun in the minds of Remainers even before implementation. Cameron and the Remaining team were absolutely insistent that a vote to Leave meant us out of the EU in its entirety - the ECJ, the customs union, the border control etc etc. I, and my 17.4 million friends, had absolute clarity of thought and desire as what we wished, and were happy that Cameron expressed it in detail, but the fog of understanding only seemed to dissipate from Remainers' eyes once the horror of their own self inflicted wounds became apparent. Since when, the Remoaning has been of Herculean proportions. 

No second chances from me, IB, and you are exceedingly fortunate that I am happy to indulge your specious arguments. 

All you have done in this response is dig yourself deeper into your hole by yet again reiterating your apparent belief in the power of a number, yet scared stiff of the country being asked to confirm its desire.

Oh, and in what way do you indulge my “arguments”, regardless of whether you consider them specious? And how does that make me fortunate, exceedingly or otherwise?

 

17,410,742 voted to leave.
16,141,241 voted to remain.
12,922,659 chose to delegate their vote to their elected representative (by dint of not voting).

Therefore, if Parliament decides that it's best for the country to leave, the majority is 30,333,401 to 16,141,241 in favour of leaving.

However, if Parliament decides that it's best for the country to remain, the majority is 29,063,900 to 17,410,742 in favour of remaining.

Huge posted:

17,410,742 voted to leave.
16,141,241 voted to remain.
12,922,659 chose to delegate their vote to their elected representative (by dint of not voting).

Therefore, if Parliament decides that it's best for the country to leave, the majority is 30,333,401 to 16,141,241 in favour of leaving.

However, if Parliament decides that it's best for the country to remain, the majority is 29,063,900 to 17,410,742 in favour of remaining.

A novel way of looking at it !

My “mole” suggests that we intent to remain part of EASA ( the European Aviation Safety Agency). I am not entirely convinced !

I am not clear how much £££ we will contribute to EASA or whether we will continue to have a big say in the development of new rules etc.

As I type, the 6 O’clock News has just announced that the EU is denying U.K. firms access to Galileo and the U.K. Gov is seeking legal advice as to whether we can reclaim our £1.2bn contribution to the project. Perhaps Reserection can inform us all exactly what the Brexit Team said about this before the referendum. I don’t seem to recall it being mentioned.

I’m unsighted with respect to EGNOS.........anybody ? Reserection ?

Huge posted:

17,410,742 voted to leave.
16,141,241 voted to remain.
12,922,659 chose to delegate their vote to their elected representative (by dint of not voting).

Therefore, if Parliament decides that it's best for the country to leave, the majority is 30,333,401 to 16,141,241 in favour of leaving.

However, if Parliament decides that it's best for the country to remain, the majority is 29,063,900 to 17,410,742 in favour of remaining.

Droll! Very droll, but pretty desperate stuff at the same time. 🤓🤓🤓

Don Atkinson posted:

My “mole” suggests that we intent to remain part of EASA ( the European Aviation Safety Agency). I am not entirely convinced !

I am not clear how much £££ we will contribute to EASA or whether we will continue to have a big say in the development of new rules etc.

As I type, the 6 O’clock News has just announced that the EU is denying U.K. firms access to Galileo and the U.K. Gov is seeking legal advice as to whether we can reclaim our £1.2bn contribution to the project. Perhaps Reserection can inform us all exactly what the Brexit Team said about this before the referendum. I don’t seem to recall it being mentioned.

I’m unsighted with respect to EGNOS.........anybody ? Reserection ?

Don’t know, don’t really care. We have been used as a major contributor to anything and everything EU. If they can do better and cheaper without us then they can crack on!

Part of my reasoning for voting to Leave has been the incontinent use of my taxes for toutes les grandes folies of the EU eg the monthly mass movement to Strasbourg. If the EU is already putting up unnecessary barriers then it just hardens Resurrection’s Resolution! 

Part of the attraction for many member states of the EU is a he fact that they are bet recipients of its largesse. With the Brexit of a major contributor and less bunce to keep them inside, I think you will see their enthusiasm wain, and fast. 

Add Reply

Likes (4)
ResurrectionjprJockymacwanderer
×
×
×
×