BREXIT

[Raja Clavata]

1 minute ago, Rewulf said:

If we have a GE then at least the various parties positions can be given some credence , if the electorate dont like a Brexit stance, then then can boot that MP out.

That at least legitimises their position, so how does that not help the situation~?
What you actually mean Grant , is that a GE will not help labours / the remain situation, because you KNOW exactly whats going to happen, they will lose seats by the bucket load.

I'm in favour of a GE regardless of the outcome and whether or not each side on Brexit can do a deal with eachother. We need clarity and need to try to get it.

[Rewulf]

Just now, Raja Clavata said:

I'm in favour of a GE regardless of the outcome and whether or not each side on Brexit can do a deal with eachother. We need clarity and need to try to get it.

Tell that to the opposition.

[Raja Clavata]

1 minute ago, Rewulf said:

Thats rubbish.

The GE option wasnt taken because they feared it , end of.

 

Well I could justifiably counter that your position is rubbish but that would solve nothing.

1 minute ago, Rewulf said:

Tell that to the opposition.

Constant rubbishing of polls then quote an average of polls, lol. 

[oowee]

A GE will result in more fragmentation of parliament with no mandate for action. Rather like now. Then what do we do. Some sort of agreement would need to be reached? Just like now. 

[Rewulf]

5 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

right now the priority should be avoiding crashing out with no deal at the end of next month. Ideally parliament would not have blocked no deal but their hand was forced by a PM and government with zero integrity, same reason that the GE option was not taken.

Read it back to yourself.
The government has no integrity ? Why ?
And thats why the GE option wasnt taken, NOTHING to do with the fact that labour would get decimated ?
They could easily have passed a motion for the election date to have been written into law.
Thats why its rubbish, and you know it.

3 minutes ago, oowee said:

A GE will result in more fragmentation of parliament with no mandate for action. Rather like now. Then what do we do. Some sort of agreement would need to be reached? Just like now. 

I thought you approved of more fragmentation ?

Pity they dont want to find out eh ?

[Raja Clavata]

1 minute ago, Rewulf said:

Read it back to yourself.
The government has no integrity ? Why ?
And thats why the GE option wasnt taken, NOTHING to do with the fact that labour would get decimated ?
They could easily have passed a motion for the election date to have been written into law.
Thats why its rubbish, and you know it.

The answer to your question on govt integrity is NOT because parliament have zero integrity - quite the opposite.

4 minutes ago, oowee said:

A GE will result in more fragmentation of parliament with no mandate for action. Rather like now. Then what do we do. Some sort of agreement would need to be reached? Just like now. 

What next then? I agree it could drive fragmentation but hopefully clarity on those parties in favour of Brexit at all costs and those opposed to it. Still problematic but at least a refinement from the chaos we currently face based on abstract options.

[Rewulf]

1 minute ago, Raja Clavata said:

The answer to your question on govt integrity is NOT because parliament have zero integrity - quite the opposite.

Thats not what I asked , why has Boris and his government got no integrity ?
Because Corbyn and the opposition say so ?

The most unpopular opposition leader ever ?

9 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

Constant rubbishing of polls then quote an average of polls, lol. 

Take it you dont like that poll then ? 

[Raja Clavata]

1 minute ago, Rewulf said:

Thats not what I asked , why has Boris and his government got no integrity ?
Because Corbyn and the opposition say so ?

The most unpopular opposition leader ever ?

Err, because he appears to be a bare faced liar. Something we have been warned about for many years. Leopard and spots and all that.

And I'm in no way supporting Labour or Corbyn by the way.

[oowee]

Borris is clearly a liar. Corbyn an irrelavance. 

Maybe the no deal alliance can come up with something. 

[Rewulf]

1 minute ago, Raja Clavata said:

Err, because he appears to be a bare faced liar. Something we have been warned about for many years. Leopard and spots and all that.

And I'm in no way supporting Labour or Corbyn by the way.

 

1 minute ago, oowee said:

Borris is clearly a liar. Corbyn an irrelavance. 

Maybe the no deal alliance can come up with something. 

ALL politicians are liars.
Especially the ones that said during the 2017 election, that they would 'honour' the Brexit vote, then didnt.
Their idea of honour I believe, relates to the memory of it , after they buried it.

Bring on an election, their time is short, and you two saying it wont 'solve' anything are being very obviously disingenuous 

[Raja Clavata]

2 hours ago, Rewulf said:

 

ALL politicians are liars.
 

Bring on an election, their time is short, and you two saying it wont 'solve' anything are being very obviously disingenuous 

Broad brush comment, talking of which...

Err, I advocated a GE, strange comment.

[Rewulf]

36 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

Broad brush comment, talking of which...

Err, I advocated a GE, strange comment.

No, you called Boris a liar, like he's the only one? So call it a broad brush stroke if you like, doesn't really make your accusation right. 

You didn't disagree with a GE, but you also advocated another referendum, like THATS going to sort everything out? 

It's not. 

[Scully]

16 hours ago, Raja Clavata said:

But certain Brexiteers constantly liken what has happened over Brexit to ignoring the result of a GE, although I’ve not seen anyone explain how that could actually happen.

Not that reality appears to be a priority to certain Brexiteers.

I think what is intended by this inference is that the referendum result was arrived at by the same democratic means that a GE is, and why do some find it acceptable to ignore that democratic referendum result, when the GE result isn't ignored, despite however unpalatable that result may be.

It may not be unlawful to ignore the referendum result, but it is certainly an affront to democracy and all those who voted to leave. I am genuinely stunned that anyone can find that acceptable.  Didn't all parties campaign with intent to honour that result? It's not rocket science.

Again, please explain what this 'reality' consists which remainers are obviously privy to and brexiteers not? 

3 hours ago, KB1 said:

Thank goodness someone's trying to hold parliament to account👍

Enjoyed that immensely! At last someone whom doesn't send the audience to sleep when he speaks!

I wonder if that dark fellah in the background has realised he's in the wrong room yet? After all, you know what racists us leavers are. 🤔

[Raja Clavata]

4 hours ago, Rewulf said:

No, you called Boris a liar, like he's the only one? So call it a broad brush stroke if you like, doesn't really make your accusation right. 

You didn't disagree with a GE, but you also advocated another referendum, like THATS going to sort everything out? 

It's not. 

So you don’t accept that Boris is a liar? You are implying my accusation was incorrect after stating that all politicians are liars. That’s weird. Something from the Gordon Bennett school of reasoning perhaps?

To be clear, I am advocating the need to get clarity in what the majority of the UK public actually want nearly three and a half years after the referendum. Polls on the Brexit threads of PW don’t really wash it for me in terms of a definitive statement representing the UK electorate.

To be even clearer i am not disagreeing with a GE, I am advocating it, strongly in favour as a way of trying to gain up to date clarity on what is the current democratic will of the United Kingdom.

Something has to change in order for us to make progress one way or the other.

[Raja Clavata]

4 hours ago, Scully said:

I think what is intended by this inference is that the referendum result was arrived at by the same democratic means that a GE is, and why do some find it acceptable to ignore that democratic referendum result, when the GE result isn't ignored, despite however unpalatable that result may be.

It may not be unlawful to ignore the referendum result, but it is certainly an affront to democracy and all those who voted to leave. I am genuinely stunned that anyone can find that acceptable.  Didn't all parties campaign with intent to honour that result? It's not rocket science.

Again, please explain what this 'reality' consists which remainers are obviously privy to and brexiteers not? 

And that’s part of the problem, a GE is for 5 years max. Leaving the EU is likely to be for all intents and purposes forever. We’ll never get a deal as good as the one we currently have.

Its not about ignoring, it’s about delivering an acceptable version of Brexit.

Yes all parties campaigned to honour the vote on the basis of an acceptable version of Brexit.

I have explained the key reality: Brexit does not appear to be possible in the manner it was originally sold to the people who bought into leave in the referendum.

If Brexiteers are so cock sure of the current will of the people what is it that they are so scared of regarding the formality of a second vote on the details?

I’d suggest if the answer is fear of splitting the leave vote then it really does question the validity of the claim that all votes for leave were a vote for no deal.

Never mind rocket science, it’s simple logic.

[Raja Clavata]

By the way, what on earth are Labour “on”, amidst all that is going on they have a faction trying to remove the post of deputy of the party!?

Even after everything that has happened since 2016, you really couldn’t make it up.

If only we had a credible opposition, we might actually have a credible government for them to oppose...

[KB1]

34 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

Polls on the Brexit threads of PW don’t really wash it for me in terms of a definitive statement representing the UK electorate.

Why not…..?  Doesn't look like any of the people on here have changed their minds about what BrExit meant 3 years ago😳  I haven't met a LEAVE voter that's changed their mind, despite all the fear mongering.

You're not one of those people who think that 17+ million of the population are thick and racist are you?🤔

If we go out without a deal, you can bet your bottom dollar there'll be plenty of clever 'Europeans' queuing up to do trade deals with the UK………. business will always find a way.

[Gordon R]

Quote

I have explained the key reality: Brexit does not appear to be possible in the manner it was originally sold to the people who bought into leave in the referendum.

It is entirely possible - we just leave, if no acceptable deal is agreed. Before you explain key reality, I think you need to find some reality, as you seem to have lost your grip on it.

[Retsdon]

5 hours ago, Scully said:

Didn't all parties campaign with intent to honour that result? It's not rocket science.

The hiccup is that having the intent is not the same thing as having the means.

The biggest issue all along has been an imperfect understanding on the part of the overwhelming majority of British politicians, media and public of how the European Single Market actually works. This has resulted in an illusion -across virtually the whole political spectrum -that Britain can leave the regulatory system on which  the Single Market is based but somehow maintain selective free access to it via ad hoc trade or mutual standards agreements, cherry picked off the top. 

This illusion was one of the main pillars of the leave campaign and it's still going strong today. There's this notion that if only the EU would be more reasonable we could resolve all the difficulties, find some sort of happy halfway ground, and all would be grand. Handshakes and on our way. But what allows a bicycle manufacturer in Germany or sheep farmer in Wales to buy each others products across borders without checks or hold-ups is not common tarriffs or cross border agreements but that all 28 countries are operating within a single regulatory system.This regulatory framework underpins the whole EEA, so the moment Britain chose to unsubscribe from it (Mays Lancaster House speech), was the moment Brexit became impossible to achieve without massive disruption to all kinds of businesses and industries.

And it's fear of that disruption (a very well-founded fear in my book) that's paralyzed the process of leaving. Of course, massive incompetence and political perspectives that are totally bounded by domestic inter-party rivalries haven't helped either. 

 

[KB1]

53 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

Brexit became impossible to achieve without massive disruption to all kinds of businesses and industries.

Too much emphasis there……  When push comes to shove, business both sides of the fence will quickly find solutions as we aren't the only ones that will suffer.

[Raja Clavata]

1 hour ago, KB1 said:

Why not…..?  Doesn't look like any of the people on here have changed their minds about what BrExit meant 3 years ago😳  I haven't met a LEAVE voter that's changed their mind, despite all the fear mongering.

You're not one of those people who think that 17+ million of the population are thick and racist are you?🤔

If we go out without a deal, you can bet your bottom dollar there'll be plenty of clever 'Europeans' queuing up to do trade deals with the UK………. business will always find a way.

First paragraph beggars belief frankly.

Regarding your second point, I have no idea what proportion of the population are both thick and racist, it could be less than 17 million and could equally be more. Not sure what this has to do with Brexit by the way...

By clever Europeans, do you mean those who are able to see the benefits of staying in the bloc outnumber the disadvantages?

[Dave-G]

2 hours ago, Retsdon said:

This has resulted in an illusion -across virtually the whole political spectrum -that Britain can leave the regulatory system on which  the Single Market is based but somehow maintain selective free access to it via ad hoc trade or mutual standards agreements, cherry picked off the top. 

 

 

The common market we voted for didn't have all the regulatory straitjackets tied with it.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

5 hours ago, Dave-G said:

The common market we voted for didn't have all the regulatory straitjackets tied with it.

It was a TRADE deal without the secret building of the 4th Reich that became apparent later!

6 hours ago, Raja Clavata said:

First paragraph beggars belief frankly.

Regarding your second point, I have no idea what proportion of the population are both thick and racist, it could be less than 17 million and could equally be more. Not sure what this has to do with Brexit by the way...

By clever Europeans, do you mean those who are able to see the benefits of staying in the bloc outnumber the disadvantages?

When we leave, others may well follow, the advantages of being a member are far higher for the eastern european members than the original group.

[Retsdon]

5 hours ago, KB1 said:

Too much emphasis there……  When push comes to shove, business both sides of the fence will quickly find solutions as we aren't the only ones that will suffer.

I'd agree - but only to a point. There's that old saying in sales that people sell to people, and you're doubtless correct that those businesses and people that have long-standing relationships built up over time, and whose businesses are significantly reliant on that relationship, will be prepared to jump through hoops to maintain what they have. On the other hand, it stands to reason that over time as those relationships decay - as inevitably happens -  and new relationships need to be formed, that these new relationships will be sought out in markets and with people and businesses free of the hassle and costs of the hoop routine. The damage won't come in the short term, but gradually over time.

 

5 hours ago, Dave-G said:

The common market we voted for didn't have all the regulatory straitjackets tied with it.

When I was a child of 11 years old I used to walk down the road behind our house to the lane at the corner carrying a .410 shotgun over my arm. Nobody in the passing cars batted an eye. There was also a typhoid outbreak in Aberdeen caused by tainted corned beef a few years earlier that necessitated mass quarantining. Some laws and customs change for the worse, some for the better. But change they do and that's just how it works.

Incidentally, most of the regulatory straitjacket stuff is global. The EU just codifies it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_technical_standard_organisations

[Raja Clavata]

1 hour ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

When we leave, others may well follow, the advantages of being a member are far higher for the eastern european members than the original group.

If we leave and are able to demonstrate tangible benefits of doing so then others may we’ll try.

Do you think what has happened in the UK over the last 3.5 years provides a good template for others to follow.

You talk about advantages but we are a ~£2 trillion economy with a net contribution to the EU of ~£12 billion. That’s analogous to a David Lloyd gym membership taking my overall household income into account.

It would take a graduate from the Diane Abbott school of mathematics with an honorary degree from the Gordon Bennett school of reality to come up with a model that predicts we’re going to be better off overall....