Forum menu
Going to lay out for us how you’d solve the postBrexit NI issue Mefty? You’ve had five years.
lot the obnoxious and unpleasant stuff, but most of the rest is ill informed drivel
Ho ho, that's "obnoxious", "unpleasant" and "uniformed drivel". 🙂 And entirely in character from one of the Oxford "elite" who gave us Brexit.
Genius, Mefty!
Here's frurther evidence that your claims that Brexit won't unduly hurt the city are "bollocks":
As one of the few posters who posted on the old thread in its early days and is still occasionally posting, this is complete bollocks.
when I looked back it was seemed to be a lot of Jambalaya regurgitating Vote Leave stuff & THM calling him out for lying
wonder what they both think now?
Shame THM's 'grown-ups' never showed up, isn't it?
Going to lay out for us how you’d solve the postBrexit NI issue Mefty? You’ve had five years.
Plenty of solutions, just they require a degree of pragmatism, and that requires a counterparty who actually values the GFA.
EFTA, EEA and single market. There we go, the only sensible solution.
Plenty of solutions, just they require a degree of pragmatism, and that requires a counterparty who actually values the GFA.
You're talking in riddles again, Mefty. Which "counterparty" to which party? And "pragmatism with regards to which issues? Posting just one or two solutions would be helpful.
You won’t get any Ed.
“of course I have a solution … it goes to another school”
There are lots of measures we are, and can, put in place to fudge the issue, but they will always full far short of what is really needed… all of UK and all of Ireland being in the/a Single Market and Customs Union.
all of UK and all of Ireland being in the Single Market and Customs Union.
The first step is a credible political party with that in its manifesto. It goes a step further than Norway which is in the single market but not the customs union. As a European I'd find that entirely acceptable, with the UK making financial contributions to the EU equivalent to Norway in terms of GDP.
Article 16
all of UK and all of Ireland being in the/a Single Market and Customs Union.
and we are off with the fairies
"If nothing else, look at the company you are in"
Once upon a time about half a million people used to vote for the NF or the BNP. Margaret Thatcher wasn't racist enough for them. Neither was Ian Duncan Smith or Michael Howard.
Im listening Mefty, what are your specific solutions? Not broad strokes stuff, specifics.
But even actually actively voting to change anything is most likely a bad idea if you haven’t got the first idea about it.
Of course it is.
But if you don't have the first idea about something then "this is shit, let's try something different" is a compelling argument, and indeed was another driving factor. All you need for that tactic to work is to silence, dismiss or denigrate anyone who is trying to tell people otherwise.
Project fear, we've had enough of experts, easiest deal in history, cake and unicorns.
There is ample evidence that cementing your head into a microwave is a bad idea.
Devil's advocate: Is there though? It's readily apparent to anyone with a modicum of sense but demonstrably not everyone is so equipped. Do you have the peer-reviewed double-blind cement-head-microwave experimental trial results to hand? Maybe that roaster* thought he was a pioneer** in his field of research?
(* - no oven pun intended)
(** - Panasonic, Kenwood...)
And if your attitude to voting on important issues is based on the toss of a coin then you have no business voting on those issues.
Weeeeeeeeeeeeell as much as I'd love to agree with this, means-testing voters leads to the "why do you hate democracy?" argument. No-one outside of the people who we democratically voted in as our representatives had any business voting on these issues.
It wasn’t a masterstroke. Quite the opposite. The remain camp was damn foolish for assuming that people would use their head.
Sure it was. You misunderstand me perhaps.
"Project Fear" was never a Remain campaign, it was an artificial Leave construct to dismiss the opposition. And it was monumentally effective.
Dannyh makes a good point, if you’re agreeing with Farage and Mogg then you’ve generally taken a very wrong turn somewhere.
As one of the few posters who posted on the old thread in its early days and is still occasionally posting, this is complete bollocks.
I think you might be the only one of the original guard still remaining. Ironically.
Plenty of solutions,
Describe one.
The leave campaign never considered NI, like so many other things they were able to dismiss it as 'project fear' and ignore it
Its why neither they (nor Mefty) can come up with any idea how to make it work post brexit , CU & SM were fundamental facilitators of the GFA
Good interview with Vote Leave staffer here explaining how little they new /cared about it
Surely if you just fill in the forms in all CAPS ENGLISH, that would work, yes?
We got this
Surely if you just fill in the forms in all CAPS ENGLISH, that would work, yes?
It may help to type more S-L-O-W-L-Y as well.
The leave campaign never considered NI, like so many other things they were able to dismiss it as ‘project fear’ and ignore it
Tbh they figured out early on there was more was no point in engaging discussion at a reality level and selling unicorns was a better proposition.
Cue the new Britannic trading empire but no road maps to how it’s achieved.
(One of the leave groups did actually have a document with more meat on the bone on how to Brexit but it was subsequently dropped)
IMHO It’s still an ongoing unicorn selling operation, five years behind it and and plenty more ahead of it.
It’s a political McGuffin.
The NI issue was well known. I assume the remain campaign decided not to make an issue of it because they thought it wouldn't help. They may have been right, the level of knowledge of and care about Irish issues in the rouk is not great.
But the problem with that came later after Vote Leave won. The issue was not taken seriously enough early enough, and there was the disastrous decision to send the s. 50 letter early which closed the window of opportunity, when UK held some cards and could attempt to deal with it bilaterally.
I assume the remain campaign decided not to make an issue of it because they thought it wouldn’t help.
This isn’t what happened. Just one example… a former Conservative PM and a former Labour PM appeared together in Derry in order to grab headlines specifically about the damage a Leave vote would do to the Good Friday agreement.
IMHO you couldn’t/shouldn’t really have offered Brexit as an option because of the NI issue.
Zero F’s are given once the bombing of high St shops stopped and it all ‘mysteriously’ went away and the ‘problems’ isn’t a word you hear nowadays.
Boris wasn’t holidaying at Brighton or at home when they redecorated no 10’s garden and he forgets politics is not always harsh prose.
It’s in the past thou and the past isn’t the now so we’ll have to see how well this plays out 🙁
@Kelvin yes, it was known and many people made the point, but the Remain campaign did not make a major issue of it in their publicity etc.
https://digital.library.lse.ac.uk/collections/brexit/2016
It may be mentioned in that lot but it was not prominent.
https://twitter.com/spittingcat/status/1360901302771994625?s=21
https://twitter.com/simon4ndorset/status/1360876933685407747?s=21
It may be mentioned in that lot but it was not prominent.
Please don’t do that. The Irish question was raised again and again during the campaign. It never went away. It just never cut through with the public as it was dismissed as “project fear” and “a lack of imagination”… it was SEP for the Leave campaigners, and the voters, especially English voters, were happy to see it that way.
I don't understand the "please don't do that" kelvin.
The Remain campaign, in its actual campaigning stuff, did not make a big issue of it and I am sure they thought hard about whether to to so or not. Individuals on the remain side obviously said what they thought, there were many voices just like there were many leave voices, and quite a few of the remain voices banged on about the Ireland issue. But the campaign didn't, it was barely on the bus let alone emblazoned across the side of it.
ETA I was always talking about the official campaign, not "people who campaigned for remain during the campaigning period", you may have interpreted my original post more broadly than I intended.
The NI issue was well known. I assume the remain campaign decided not to make an issue of it because they thought it wouldn’t help.
It was also a conceptually complex thing to explain to England in a soundbite - if you vote leave, then we'll have to work out what to do with the Irish border, we'll quite probably need restrictions on the border, any restrictions will be in breach of the GFA, the GFA is what ended the Troubles, a possible return to the Troubles would be bad...
The Remain campaign failed because a population struggling with austerity and brimming with resentment as a result was offered technical, logical arguments in favour of remaining, whereas Leave had the emotional heft of change, any change. The status quo is always harder to defend against some illusory unicorn-land in these circumstances - why would people vote for more of the same?
It’s in the past thou and the past isn’t the now so we’ll have to see how well this plays out 🙁
What worries me is that it's all very quiet in terms of marches, protests etc around the NI border right now. Every time that happened in the 70's and 80's it meant something was being planned like a bomb. IIRC the weeks and months before the Omagh bomb was eerily quiet generally and people were starting to think things were progressing politically only for the afternoon to show that it was definitely not the case. I know we're nowhere near that level of tension right now but it does worry me somewhat.
The big tensions will come when/if the protocol is dropped, and borders are moved from the Irish Sea to the land border. And there are lots of ways that can happen, and plenty of political forces that have only temporarily accepted the current situation to “get Brexit done”. Instability in future years is pretty much guaranteed, I’m afraid.
We discussed the issue of the GFA early on in the original Brexit, I got slated by someone for saying that Brexit effectively tore up the GFA. It was always an issue simmering in the background. Three years ago we did DUP Conservative Coalition Thread and I posted this:
Edukator
Free MemberKelly from Sinn Fein was on Sky a few minutes ago. Balanced, reasonable objectives outlined – a special status for NI post Brexit which avoids a hard border. A suggestion that May read the Good Friday agreement. Highly skeptical about the DUP gaining any advantage from an alliance with the Tories. I hope they’re all as restrained as him.
Posted 3 years ago
History proves some people right, in this case Kelly.
I think the EU is so determined to avoid a hard border and support the GFA that if the UK unilaterally breaks the withdrawal agreement conditions for NI (effective sea border) they'd throw sanctions at the UK. Ireland is a member state and its well being will always take precedence over rUK. Biden would be having words too and probably join in with sanctions.
Yet more Brexiteer cobblers from Dominic Raab
Raab shrugs off Brexit troubles, urging people to take ‘10-year view’
Potential losses in UK trade with the EU because of Brexit will be more than made up by more opportunities in developing markets, Dominic Raab has claimed, saying people should take a “10-year view” of the current troubles faced by companies.
I’m sure that people who’s businesses are about to go bust due to all the new restrictions to trade will be thankful for Patrick Bateman advice to simply take a ten-year view
Oops wrong thread
Potential losses in UK trade with the EU because of Brexit will be more than made up by more opportunities in developing markets, Dominic Raab has claimed, saying people should take a “10-year view” of the current troubles faced by companies.
Increased trade in the Single Market AND increased trade with developing markets was always the default situation… there was no never any need to choose between them… it was, and still is, a false proposition.
And before Daz gets his “calling leavers stupid” erection again
It's the easiest thing in the world to dismiss those you disagree with as stupid or ignorant. Looked at from a different angle you could easily argue that voting for the status quo of a system that is deeply flawed and doesn't serve the interests of 99% of the population is stupid or illogical. They may not have had any great insight or understanding into the pros and cons of EU membership, but I think many (if we ignore the racists) who voted for brexit instinctively know that they are being f***** over by our system of government, and came to the conclusion that voting for any type of change was preferable to keeping it the same. Instead of calling those people stupid, maybe we'd be better served by following that train of thought to it's logical conclusion?
I’ve asked for my account to be deleted anyway
I've considered deleting my account many times. It's always uncomfortable being the one who doesn't conform, but don't let yourself be bullied into leaving. It's just an internet forum at the end of the day, and serves no purpose other than a mild distraction to real life so staying or going makes very little difference in the grand scheme of things.
TBH may as well go the full hog and build a Transatlantic Tunnel (Hurrah)
Over 4,000 miles in length, intended to sustain a pressure of 1,000 atmospheres while accommodating cargo and passengers traveling in excess of 1,000 miles per hour, the Transatlantic Tunnel is the greatest engineering feat in the history of the British Empire, a project worthy of Her Majesty's Empire in this the eighth decade of the twentieth century.
(It’s a Harry Harrison book, but I feel it would fit in nowadays.)
but I think many (if we ignore the racists) who voted for brexit instinctively know that they are being f***** over by our system of government
Has our “system of government” been improved?
What Raab is forgetting is that we may well be doing better in 10 years time compared to say 2018 but we will have thrown away any growth or opportunities we could have grabbed in those intervening 10 years. Basically to get back to where we should have been will mean 10 years of stagnation, 10 years we will never get back and lots of failed companies, livelihoods and personal prospects. I don't think that's a price worth paying really.
The big tensions will come when/if the protocol is dropped, and borders are moved from the Irish Sea to the land border. And there are lots of ways that can happen, and plenty of political forces that have only temporarily accepted the current situation to “get Brexit done”. Instability in future years is pretty much guaranteed, I’m afraid.
That's what I fear. I grew up near two army bases so my class in school had lots of military kids go through it, sadly a few lost parents that did tours in NI and the day that I was in school and an officer interrupted our afternoon science class to take two kids out and tell them they had both lost their dads in an attack (Land Rover was shot up while just driving back to base) was horrible. We all knew what an officer visiting meant and going home and seeing the TV news reports mean the next day was tough on everyone. If we end up going anywhere near to that kind of situation then anyone involved in causing the issues that NI currently is experiencing has, indirectly or directly, blood on their hands.
TBH has Brexit changed anything(unless you’ve been forced out of business by regulatory changes)for the majority of people?
Now the good old toilet paper shortage of 2020 🙂
Has our “system of government” been improved?
We don’t know yet. The only thing that we can ever know is what results by keeping things the same.
keeping things the same
Again, another deceit. Things always change. What we have now is a rolling back of devolution, fewer checks and balances on the Westminster executive, more opportunity for government to get in the way of people and business, more cronyism for friends of politicians being helped out at our expense, more corruption (dressed up as “that’s just how things are done now”), more expensive red tape causing economic and social friction, reduced opportunities for the young and even less listening to their needs by government… the changes that are being rubber stamped in the name of the 2016 vote can’t really be seen as a positive change to our “system of government”… and “wait and see”, is just what Raab is saying… we’ll be accepting “teething troubles” for years, and the politicians know that the can get most people to accept them as the new normal once they have been around for long enough.
They wanted change so they just keep voting tory 😂😂
They wanted change so they just keep voting tory 😂😂
Ahh but it a ‘Boris’flavour of Tory as opposed a to a May or Cameron.
In reality a Shite sandwich always tastes shite regardless of its label.
voting for the status quo of a system that is deeply flawed and doesn’t serve the interests of 99% of the population is stupid or illogical.
If the system you're talking about is the EU, fact is it did serve the interests of 99% of the population. As they're finding out now.
Just because the house I live in is flawed I don't burn it down. Despite its flaws it keeps me warm, dry and safe from bears.
If the system you’re talking about is the EU, fact is it did serve the interests of 99% of the population. As they’re finding out now.
Just because the house I live in is flawed I don’t burn it down. Despite its flaws it keeps me warm, dry and safe from bears.
+1
Silly Leave voters got the true enemy wrong. By 180 degrees. True to form.
Its not like stuff like this would be reversed even if we rejoined the EU in a few years 😒
If the system you’re talking about is the EU
You know I'm not. I'm talking about the system of which the EU is a critical component and trumpet blower. I agree that brexit does little to change neo-liberalism, that's why I personally voted to remain, but it says quite a lot that so many people would vote to change something even though the benefits of it were unclear. It almost gives me a little bit of hope, because it shows that when given a real opportunity, people will support fundamental changes to the way we are governed, and that's exactly what we need, because the whole system, not just the EU, isn't fit for purpose.
They wanted change so they just keep voting tory
Voting tory or labour doesn't change the way the system works, quite the opposite in fact given both parties are quite happy with the status quo. Brexit did though, even if only a bit, and I can only wonder what would result if either main party were to follow it up with more ambitious structural reform.
It almost gives me a little bit of hope, because it shows that when given a real opportunity, people will support fundamental changes to the way we are governed…
So, because the public voted for the Westminster government to have more control, and for individuals, communities and devolved institutions to have less say, this gives you hope that they’ll support the opposite at some point? Because that’s what the Brexit vote was… it wasn’t a vote for “fundamental changes to the way we were governed”, it was a vote to centralise power in Westminster. It was a vote to say that national government is what really matters. It was a vote to put all our faith in the UK national government, to strengthen its grip on all the rules and controls we live under, not to reform it or relish its control as regards people’s lives.
It’s the easiest thing in the world to dismiss those you disagree with as stupid or ignorant. Looked at from a different angle you could easily argue that voting for the status quo of a system that is deeply flawed and doesn’t serve the interests of 99% of the population is stupid or illogical. They may not have had any great insight or understanding into the pros and cons of EU membership, but I think many (if we ignore the racists) who voted for brexit instinctively know that they are being f***** over by our system of government, and came to the conclusion that voting for any type of change was preferable to keeping it the same. Instead of calling those people stupid, maybe we’d be better served by following that train of thought to it’s logical conclusion?
That argument sounds superficially convincing but it ignores that fact that the negative consequences of brexit were loudly proclaimed and it was pretty clear that it wouldn't bring positive change. So either people didn't educate themselves about the consequences of their vote and just voted regardless, or they did educate themselves and decided to do it anyway. In the same way that shooting oneself in the foot is a 'stupid' decision, so was voting for brexit, and I don't think there is anyway around that.
I'm not saying it's productive to tell people they've made a stupid decision at this point if you want them to change their minds, but it's pretty clear they did make a stupid decision (something we all do from time to time, but this one had quite large consequences).
not to reform it or relish its control as regards people’s lives
I meant relinquish.
🍔
That argument sounds superficially convincing but it ignores that fact that the negative consequences of brexit were loudly proclaimed and it was pretty clear that it wouldn’t bring positive change.
There is in point calling people stupid, you just have to ask them questions about what they expected from Brexit, who they trusted to deliver that for them, and whether they still think their expectations will be met… and if not… has this changed who they now trust…? Sadly the response is often that they still trust those who have utterly failed to deliver for them.
"It almost gives me a little bit of hope, because it shows that when given a real opportunity, people will support fundamental changes to the way we are governed…"
That's a fair point dazh. I think we're stuck with the Tories for a few years but the generation that was motivated by Corbynism and a more 'enlightened' (woke) view of society will have matured and their pespective will be in the ascendency, plus a lot of blue rinse brexiters will no longer be on the electoral roll.
The idea of retaining the status quo will seem absurd once the medium / long term effects of Brexit have become evident, the desire for change will be greater than it was during the referendum. Brexit was driven by a generation who for a large part were no longer economically active and had little stake in the future because they haven't got much of a future left themselves.
In a decades' time, the enlightened (woke) generation will be settling down with mortgages and kids and will be aghast at the inheritance their forebears gave them. They may be more prepared to tear up the rule book than we think.
it was a vote to centralise power in Westminster. It was a vote to say that national government is what really matters. It was a vote to put all our faith in the UK national government
It was all of them, and the problem with that is? I'd like power to be much more devolved, but you can't give power back to people until you take it back from higher levels of government, and that's exactly what the EU was. Much as I distrust the tories with that power, it doesn't mean the UK govt shouldn't have it. The solution to that problem is to vote in a govt who can be trusted, not to give power to higher, more disconnected institutions.
To the point that people will vote for fundemebtal change when given the choice, they were given the choice to vote for fundemebtal change under Corbyn. But they didn't want that type of change, which probably would have been more in the interests of a lot of leave voters, instead they voted for the type of change that involves having less foreigners around.
Leave voters got the true enemy wrong. By 180 degrees. True to form.
The EU has long been a scapegoat for UK governments - of all flavours - to blame for their own failures. And will be for some time to come, I fear.
they were given the choice to vote for fundemebtal change under Corbyn
No they weren't. Corbyn was offering more humane and generous material policies, but wasn't proposing any real changes to how democracy, the government or the economy works. That's the annoying thing about the whole Corbyn thing, everyone drank the kool aid served up by the media and his parliamentary colleagues that he would turn us into the soviet union when in reality all he was planning to do was to redistribute a bit more money from the rich to the non-rich.
Much as I distrust the tories with that power, it doesn’t mean the UK govt shouldn’t have it.
But the power hasn’t been taken from the EU, it has been removed from individuals, companies and the devolved institutions. That is the point. National control means less autonomy, freedom, power, control for everyone not “in with” the current national government. It is about withdrawing freedoms, cooperation and redistribution. It is a centralising action… it is about making everyone (who hasn’t bought an opt out from the Westminster executive) more beholden to the whims of a central controlling national power. It is not the first step towards more devolved power, more local decision making, more freedoms from state interference and bureaucracy, it is the opposite.
I still maintain (based upon family brexit folks) that the vast majority of people that voted brexit dont give a * about any of the endless issues detailed above.
The Tory Party understands their core is literally dieing, the new Tory voter sits in the Red Walls and to be frank provided their economic position does not deteriorate significantly (which it cant as they are pretty much at the bottom) and Rishi hands out furlough and eat out to die out, they will vote for them again.
Those of us on here who are growling on have literally two choices.. the first is to carry on regardless or tell them to go * themselves and just tickover paying as little tax as possible and not investing a penny in this shit show (my preference,,)
We (most folks on here) are in the wilderness for probably the rest of our lives.
I was a strong supporter of Starmer, however he is not attacking the economic shit show because he wants the red walls back - got news for the fella they are not coming back. I did believe there was a slim chance for Labour at the next election but not now. The SNP will get an independence vote soon, they will win and at that point Labour may well be history.
Dominic Cummins gave the Tories the "grift" they will continue to use it.
Everyone I know who voted for Brexit was either stupid or racist or often both
I still maintain (based upon family brexit folks) that the vast majority of people that voted brexit dont give a **** about any of the endless issues detailed above.
I concur.
I agree TJ and there are a lot more of them than us...
And that is the problem.
You can split it down socio-economic-education at that level with a knife.
Get brexit done (not really)
Leveling up (odd train line up North)
Opportunities for all (minimum wage and rights all round)
We all have to do our share (Austerity/tax burden)
Its for the greater good (not your good)
No country for poor people.....
Want some advice, look for ways to profit from the great unwashed. Surrender any morals you have and exploit the poor sods because if you dont some other **** will. Thrre is no room for people like me anymore,no room for social responsibility, no room for empathy its gone.
Much as I distrust the tories with that power, it doesn’t mean the UK govt shouldn’t have it.
Some things are beyond national governments though. Any national government is going to be self-interested, because it needs its country to be economically competitive, and it needs to remain attractive to the electorate which means low taxes and optionally high public spending on visible things. But things like improving worker's rights and protecting the environment are actually anti-competitive in economic terms, at least in the short term. So we cannot trust national government to do these things. The point about the EU is that their regs apply to ALL of the members - and because of the single market, the members are likely to be each others' biggest trading partners. So basically, everyone has to play by the same rules that can then be set for the benefit of everyone. There's no race to the bottom.
You cannot rely on national governments to do the right thing. You certainly can't expect the electorate to suddenly become responsible and progressive. See the USA for an example.
You cannot rely on national governments to do the right thing.
You can't rely on any government to do the right thing. The only thing you can do is hold them to account, make their actions visible to voters, and enable voters to give them a mandate. Those things are not helped by ever higher levels and abstractions of power, quite the opposite in fact, and the EU is a great example of how an opaque administration lacks legitimacy in the eyes of voters. Instead of giving power to larger, less accountable bureacracies and political structures, we need to be doing the opposite.
The only thing you can do is hold them to account, make their actions visible to voters, and enable voters to give them a mandate.
Are you in favour of international human rights and courts? Do you think that national governments should be allowed to do anything they want to their citizens, no matter how inhuman, as long as they have been elected?
And I have never had an MP to represent me in the UK parliament, based on my vote. Not once in my life time. The idea that the UK government has ever represented me, or indeed on most occasions more than half the population, is a joke. And they are less accountable for their actions than ever before. Checks and balances can, and should, be far more robust and continuous than the occasional election where most votes simply never count. Legal redress, and constraint, as regards national governments empowers their citizens. Some of that can be done in national courts, but then that can be done away with as well, as this government have often threatened to do. There absolutely is the case to make that people should have agency and protection beyond their national borders. History tells us why,
Those things are not helped by ever higher levels and abstractions of power, quite the opposite in fact,
And yet its the Tories freed of these oppressive EU bureaucracies who now get to reduce workers rights, reduce food standards, fishing, farming jobs being thrown under the bus etc etc
And yet its the Tories freed of these oppressive EU bureaucracies
True, and that was probably the best reason to remain, but they won't always be in power. The answer to the tories exercising their worst instincts isn't the EU, it's much closer to home.
Do you think that national governments should be allowed to do anything they want to their citizens, no matter how inhuman, as long as they have been elected?
That's a ridiculous straw man and you know it. You can have international law between nations without being in a political and economic union with them.
Do you think that national governments should be allowed to do anything they want to their citizens, no matter how inhuman, as long as they have been elected?
That’s a ridiculous straw man and you know it. You can have international law between nations without being in a political and economic union with them.
Dash - that’s the difference between international and supranational isn’t it.
International is between nations, it doesn’t stop a nation doing things to its own citizens.
Supranational does and that’s one of the reasons that local democracy in a supranational framework is a good thing while national sovereignty (if such a thing truly exists) isn’t.
Or have I misunderstood what you are advocating?
PS
EU is a great example of how an opaque administration lacks legitimacy in the eyes of voters
Well I’m a voter, and the EU looks more legitimate than the current minority vote super majority Westminster shower.
Britain voted remain in 2019 and got leave. Not legitimate.
Or have I misunderstood what you are advocating?
I'm not advocating anything more than power being closer to the people, and politicians being more accountable. That's the primary method by which people can protect themselves from nefarious governments, not looking to other countries or supra-national bodies to do it for us.
How are our UK politicians now more accountable? Or is that step 2? Which didn’t actually require step 1? When does it happen?
And, now, we have no elected representatives in the European Parliament, despite living in Europe. Power to the people!
As you are so against the EU council/parliament/commision could yu give us some examples of EU legislation you disagree with, Dazh? You are leftward learning and accuse the EU of unfettered liberalism. The parliament has always been to the left of British politics and the UK legislation derived from EU legislation has sually recieved criticism in the UK not because it is too liberal but because it imposes good practice on business which business finds restrictive.
Find me some legislation that offends your socialist sensibilities, I'l give you some topics to help you:
Working conditions, hours, pay, safety, health... .
Pollution from industry, housing and automobiles
Industrial and agricultural chemical use, pesticides
Infrastructure
Freedom of movement for individuals
Measures to limit global heating and climate change
Individual rights, to religious and sexual freedom, to favour political freedom whilst limiting dangerous extremism
Rigorous food standards
Cooperation on health issues
Favouring and financing health initiatives
Managing a stable currency, and protecting countries from living Argentinian or Venezuelan type situations (or Germany in the early 20s)
And that's off the top of my head in the time it took to type it, there are many more. Looks a hell of a lot more socialist than any UK government manifesto since the 60s.
That argument sounds superficially convincing but it ignores that fact that the negative consequences of brexit were loudly proclaimed and it was pretty clear that it wouldn’t bring positive change. So either people didn’t educate themselves about the consequences of their vote and just voted regardless, or they did educate themselves and decided to do it anyway. In the same way that shooting oneself in the foot is a ‘stupid’ decision, so was voting for brexit, and I don’t think there is anyway around that.
A pal of mine before the 2016 vote said when I queried him saying he was voting to Leave, "what's the worse that could happen".
So I gave him a list. "Project Fear!" was the response.
Oh, and he's also went pro-Trump and then anti-lockdown and the last I saw he was anti-vax.
I’m not advocating anything more than power being closer to the people, and politicians being more accountable. That’s the primary method by which people can protect themselves from nefarious governments, not looking to other countries or supra-national bodies to do it for us.
I’m not convinced by that assertion. Parish councils aren’t known for representing their parish very well.
Managing a stable currency, and protecting countries from living Argentinian or Venezuelan type situations (or Germany in the early 20s)
Ed much of that list you spent a long time writing unnecessarily is not exclusive to being part of a supranational union. You're taking things that happen in the EU and crediting their existence to the EU, when that's evidently not the case.
I'll take issue with the one about currencies though, because it's clearly wrong. Or did you miss what happened in Greece and is bubbling under the surface in Italy and Spain? The euro has been a disaster for almost everyone apart from Germany. The single currency doesn't protect countries from devaluations or inflation, it leaves them exposed because individual countries can no longer use monetary policy to combat them.
Parish councils aren’t known for representing their parish very well.
I'm pretty sure if we went to the effort of reforming democracy Parish councils would be abolished without a second's thought. Although I suppose creating a pointless talking shop to keep the local busybodies away from everyone else is as good a tactic as any other.
My local Parish Council is significantly more useful than my local council...
Your parish council can't ensure you can sell to anywhere beyond the village hall...
https://www.ft.com/content/0dd14877-93a3-43aa-83b5-822abadeff33
"It's been absolute murder," said Alan Powell of the British Distillers Alliance, which represents independent & craft distillers. "We are not in a good place at the moment."
Oh... big surprise...
Powell blamed a shortage of customs agents for the delays.
The only thing you can do is hold them to account, make their actions visible to voters, and enable voters to give them a mandate.
You seem to have this idea that voters always know what's best. Where'd you get that idea?
That’s the primary method by which people can protect themselves from nefarious governments
The nefarious government we have is here precisely because people voted for it. So we've removed a layer of government - how is that going to make our remaining layer better? It's not.