Forum menu
If MPs cant get their heads round it (basic facts), why are we having them decide?
1) We tried not letting them decide in June last year, it didn't go too well
and
2) Notwithstanding (1), we've never let this be an issue before.
Irony, zokes, irony
An argument raised above for ignoring the result of the democratic process was that those we disagree with (the majority of voters) were [s]too thick[/s] incapable of making an informed decision and therefore we should leave it to MPs. I am simple extended the same (flawed) argument (in an ironic manner).
On 2 - true
The difference with MPs vs the general public is that the former have access to the vast and (mostly) talented civil service to provide accurate guidance. Unfortunately MPs are also spectacularly bad at utilising said advice.
There's none so blind as those who choose not to see, and all that...
An argument raised above for ignoring the result of the democratic process was that those we disagree with
lol your dogged determination that this is legally binding THM 😉
The next step is MP's to vote, not happy not voting yes. This isn't the US dictatorship is it.
The difference with MPs vs the general public is that the former have access to the vast and (mostly) talented civil service to provide accurate guidance. Unfortunately MPs are also spectacularly bad at utilising said advice.
Very true - staggeringly bad. As dismissive as I am of "government" (in its widest sense) I am always amazed at the quality of much of the published materials on many topics. Its a pity MPS dont read this stuff too! The one explaining our options post Brexit (posted twice before) is very good.
lol your dogged determination that this is legally binding THM
Find one occassion
The next step is MP's to vote, not happy not voting yes. This isn't the US dictatorship is it.
No which is why I am happy to accept the vote of the people despite the fact that I am on the losing side.
Urrm, the court ruled the government doesn't have to seek approval from Scotland, NI and Wales.
or to be precise
Relations with the EU and other foreign affairs matters are reserved to UK Government and parliament, not to the devolved institutions.
Apologies, that you think MP's should roll over give TM all the power with no control.
No which is why I am happy to accept the vote of the people despite the fact that I am on the losing side.
Unless it will be seriously detrimental to the UK. If the choice is break up of the Union, recession and none of the promises delivered what are they going forward with.
Will of the people is all well and good in a good majority verdict. This one was borderline and it is the duty of MP's to put safeguards in place before we start. I know you don't agree with that but it TM can't act in accordance with the will of Parliament then she shouldn't be allowed to proceed.
Relations with the EU and other foreign affairs matters are reserved to UK Government and parliament, not to the devolved institutions.
FFS really, just because that is how it is written doesn't mean it is how it should be. The UK has devolved power, it will have significant impacts on those regions especially NI, it is right and proper that they are represented.
Anyway at what point would a sane person trust TM, Bojo, DD and the other one to negotiate anything. Which one actually has a track record in delivering anything?
Not sure whether this has already been discussed in this thread, but does anyone else get the feeling that the whole UK-EU referendum, European migrant crisis and election of Trump is the result of an organised strategy by Russia?
If so, you have to hand it to Putin - he's completely out manoeuvred the people and politicians in the West - and he's done it on the cheap! So, while UK politicians, press and public are looking inward and discussing the details of the nuts and bolts of Brexit etc., Putin is free to construct his new world order.
Looking at it from his strategic point of view, getting the UK out of the EU will not only destabilise the EU (& probably weaken NATO), it'll also probably mean that Scotland will leave the U.K., and then what happens to the RN/NATO submarine bases in Scotland?
I might be wrong, but didn't Nigel Farage and UKIP pop up on the scene at the same time that a group of former Eastern Bloc countries like Poland and the Czech Republic joined NATO? Eh, now that'd be a coincidence huh?!
I can't see it happening, but I wish some of the dozy press and politicians in the West would wake up and realise that we're all being played.
or to be preciseRelations with the EU and other foreign affairs matters are reserved to UK Government and parliament, not to the devolved institutions.
But does the EU actually come under 'foreign affairs' when so much domestic legislation is derived from it?
70 debates in the HOC on the referndum since the vote
Its not like MPs have anything better to do
the brexit black hole sucking in everything!
No apologies required, I dont.
Not sure whether this has already been discussed in this thread, but does anyone else get the feeling that the whole UK-EU referendum, European migrant crisis and election of Trump is the result of an organised strategy by Russia?
yes 😉
Kimbers, hence why businesses are frustrated.
FFS lets get on with it. This debate is meaningless apart from establishing correct legal process (in itself a good thing). The devil is in the detail and that is what matters to the economy/business etc. The detail comes from negotiation, which requires A50....etc
Kimbers, hence why businesses are frustrated.FFS lets get on with it. This debate is meaningless apart from establishing correct legal process (in itself a good thing). The devil is in the detail and that is what matters to the economy/business etc. The detail comes from negotiation, which requires A50....etc
if only the breiters had any sort of a plan rather than feelings of superiority and fantasies about making britain great again....
They do.
What is missing are the details. Why? Because its a........(you know the rest, or should do 😉 )
Some things are some things are in the hands of the UK.
Simply walking off a cliff isn't what we call a plan. What model do we want, what are we not willing to give up? We will be decent and honorable and legislate that we will not use the people who came to the UK in good faith as bargaining chips.
Will the UK put unity ahead of destructive ideology?
Will they commit to invest in the areas that are underfunded?
Will they make life better for all of the people who wrongly blamed the EU?
Will Borris put £350 million a week in to the NHS?
Will the UK pursue to removing the rights of workers?
Will they protect the farmers from deals with places like the US?
Maintain food standards
None of that is part of the negotiation.
You seem (1) to be confusing lots of issues and (2) ignoring the announcements made so far, Mike. Apart from that....
A plan with no details... hahaha!
I guess some people's definition of plan is not entirely aligned with what a plan actually is.
announcements mean shit, unless it's on the bill it means nothing.
Confusing issues? No I am setting out what I would hope that Corbyn, Lib Dems and the SNP along with a number of tories should be proposing as minimum safeguards before handing the keys over.
As part of the "timetable" A50 end of march 17, Sign off deal March 2019, that leaves TM (is she survives) 13 months and a [s]Chuck out your dead[/s] great repeal bill to push through whatever she wants. Personally I'd like some safe guards in there.
The details are what we negotiate, we do not set them in stone.
Ok, here's a question
What model has TM said she wants? (an easy starter for ten)
What model has TM said she wants? (an easy starter for ten)
Name me something that she has successfully delivered?
Now, now...no dodging the question. It was a very easy one...
[I will answer your supplementary one later]
Well for your patronising school teacher voice it's a hard brexit, no customs union, no movement, no nice trading etc. It's a fairly shit one really but still got to appease UKIP.
In the end of the day that could be her one successful policy implementation, leave it to BoJo and he will piss people off enough that the UK gets nothing. Though there is the outside chance that if he is involved we will end up back where we started but with no rebate and members of the Euro
Ok it's (2) enough said. Despite you not answering my question I will answer yours
Not sure I can without googling. I was not a TM fan. I have said so many times. Hence my surprise that she is doing much better on this issue than I would have managed....so far.
Blimey David Davis' favourite tie is worse than Corbyn's
ignoring the announcements made so far
You'll forgive me for taking these with a pinch of salt, surely?
I wasn't going to list her 12 point plan... it's rather empty of useful information after leave, leave and leave the things I listed.
Explain how she is doing well? Seriously? She took the country to court and lost twice. She has been off begging to the US then got shat on when she landed in Turkey, went begging to Turkey which was on the Vote Leave be scared of list. Has managed to with a straight face say Brexit means Brexit which is red white and blue. She is only looking slightly competent by surrounding herself with the 3 who don't agree and having a weekly put down of JC.
For sure, and forgive me for discounting comments made on that basis. We can debate what IS happening or what we might want to PRETEND is happening. Doesn't matter either way, this is the Internet
The Bill will be passed this week. Progress....
Your red lines, objectives and priorities matter going into a negotiation.
No point pretending that they don't.
Yes, May has made announcements, and all about limiting our future relationship with the EU because of her own red lines, objective and priorities… that have never been put to a public vote of any kind.
No need mike. Answer the easy question. The answer has been reported in many places.
And they're off.
Here's the bill
1. Power to notify withdrawal from the EU
(1) The Prime Minister may notify, under Article 50(2) of the Treaty on European Union, the United Kingdom’s intention to withdraw from the EU.
(2) This section has effect despite any provision made by or under the European Communities Act 1972 or any other enactment.
David Davis indicates that the bill will also withdraw the UK from Euratom.
limiting our future relationship with the EU because of [b]her own[/b] red lines, objective and prioritie
Exactly.
If we're so into direct democracy now, how about asking the people what our collective red lines are?
Oh, and Labour are giving May a green light to May's path if they pass her the power to trigger A50 without any insistence on democratic oversight of both/either her negotiating position and/or the end result of the negotiations.
[i][ I think we should have both, I expect our MPs won't insist on either ][/i]
SNP amendment
That this House declines to give a second reading to the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill as the government has set out no provision for effective consultation with the devolved administrations on implementing Article 50, has yet to publish a White Paper detailing the government's policy proposals, has refused to give a guarantee on the position of EU nationals in the UK, has left unanswered a range of detailed questions covering many policy areas about the full implications of withdrawal from the single market and has provided no assurance that a future parliamentary vote will be anything other than irrelevant, as withdrawal from the European Union followed two years after the invoking of Article 50 if agreement is not reached in the forthcoming negotiations, unless they are prolonged by unanimity.
Kelvin, we know what they are and where this leaves us - between the CU and a bespoke FTA. The result will depend on how red the red ink is (mild pink IMO) and what the other side thinks.
This was put to the vote. If Jo public cant be arsed to understand the issues then that's their fault. We don't have questions to determine whether you can vote or not - a relief for some
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/18/theresa-may-brexit-plan-disastrous-gaps-labour
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2017/jan/17/theresa-may-brexit-speech-pound-steadies-ahead-of-theresa-mays-brexit-speech-politics-live
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/16/theresa-may-set-12-point-plan-brexit-vows-clean-break-does-not/
http://www.businessinsider.com.au/theresa-may-single-market-customs-union-hard-brexit-speech-2017-1?r=UK&IR=T
Trust me I've read it, listened to her empty speeches and you know what I'm neither impressed or convinced. It will result in giving away a lot (well we knew it would being the weaker party) delivering pain and restricting the UK in so many new and interesting ways. It will lead to slower trade deals with the ROW, worse ones with the EU and leave the UK open to taking pressured deals for political reasons - there will need to be something come May 2020.
Still not found something that she has been successful at doing? How about BoJo or Dr Fox on his little jaunts around the world.
The limited range of possible relationships she has chosen HAS NEVER been put to a vote.
Your pink-line idea is all your own… nothing May has said has suggested her red-lines are anything other than firm.
As much as I think Brexit is wrong, it is going to happen whatever.
Save your energy for what you want out of it.
This was put to the vote
The options for CU, SM, WTO etc were absolutely not on my ballot paper.
Save your energy for what you want out of it.
That's what I want - consultation and debate.
Indeed, because it's a negoti.....oh forget it
Kelvin, we know what they are and where this leaves us - between the CU and a bespoke FTA
Try as I might, I can't make the acronyms CU and FTA spell out either "rock and a hard place" or "up shit creek without a paddle"
Sigh - May has ruled out loads of options before negotiations have begun, with her own personal red lines, which she has no mandate for.
REPEAT
Of course not, they are the how not the what. We voted on the latter.
Zokes easy solution to that conundrum
Democracy - marginal win in a referendum to give all the power to the PM...
I admire your conviction to get straight into the shit THM, others have a bit more restraint. As said many times before running flat out down the one way street is not a plan, it's trying to do something before common sense kicks in.
SNP amendments look solid, like that of somebody holding the government to account.
Zokes THM forgot option 3 which is WTO (which the UK would have to join) that is the low point that realistically could happen.
This SNP one is very good
has provided no assurance that a future parliamentary vote will be anything other than irrelevant, as withdrawal from the European Union followed two years after the invoking of Article 50 if agreement is not reached in the forthcoming negotiations,
It highlights that what is being proposed to allow a vote on accepting the deal is a waste of time - it will be accept this deal or move to WTO/Nothing/Hard Borders & British pensioners deported. It's a bit of sparkle added to the shit before it's put on the plate.
Zokes easy solution to that conundrum
I can make them spell FACT, but then I have a left over U, or was it FU...T with a left over A?
EDIT: I have no idea what to do with those three letters, Mike. In any case, I already have a T.
New game: what's the best word you can come up with from the letters FTACUWTO. Humour me here, as it's about as constructive as either the debate in here or in the HoC.
Indeed, good job that this isn't the plan.
Phew...
When you list your concerns (many of which I share) it just shows you what a crap job we all did before the referendum. Given its so obvious, we must have been bloody awful for the majority of voters to ignore us.
We should blame ourselves not the process. We did a bad job. We lost.
Its still a long way from being a done deal and I am proud of the SNP ( who I have never voted for) actually attempting to reflect the position of their voters and holding some principles. Lotts more to come from them yet.
I despise the MPs who personally are against leaving but will not vote against - and thats the vast majority of MPs. ONly 100 or so Mps are in favour of leaving.
No mike, WTO is option 4. TM has done a good job so far at steering us away from that. But if we are honest, that was the basis of the vote. Anything else is an improvement.
Keep at it girl....
We should blame ourselves not the process. We did a bad job. We lost.
Well you gave in, others have not.
TM has done a good job so far at steering us away from that
Wow really? She has her lines, the EU has the cards and the UK needs something. remind me again (as this seems to be the game) rather than the UK having a vote of any meaning on the deal (The UK does not) it's up to the 27 remaining nations to come up with a qualified majority (from memory it equates to about 20 countries) that means we can drop 6 from the Christmas card list and still keep the deal - remember bullseye.
We should blame ourselves not the process. We did a bad job. We lost
nope we should blame the tories, whove stoked and pandered to xenophobia for years .....
Not just the Tories.
Well you gave in, others have not.
No I simply respect the democratic process, other do not.
I dont understand your second para - but seems like you are (finally) recognising that this is a negotia....... 😉
pleased to say my MP will be defying labour's whip. 8)
nope we should blame the tories, whove stoked and pandered to xenophobia for years .....
I thought the Tory government were arguing for us to remain?
But again, if we cant accept responsibility and prefer to merely moan in hindsight, then we have only ourselves to blame.
My Mp will be voting against. In line with their constituents wishes, party policy and the wishes of the majority of their country.
and the wishes of the majority of their country.
...and a minority of the UK population. But good for zee. Conviction....
No I simply respect[b] [one aspect of] [/b]the democratic process, other do not [b][agree that one vote trumps all others, and blocks any future votes][/b].
yes some parts are....
It's also one where we hold very little power
Simple explanation (bullseye was a tv show where you played darts to win prizes - it was on ITV, I guess that wasn't allowed in your house - they always gambled on some wild promise of an amazing prize like a speed boat screwed up and walked away with nothing)
Other parts - Promising the UK Parliament a vote on the result of any negotiation is pointless the deal is already done.
The EU can reject any deal bu not voting fully for that - it needs a qualified majority
From 1 November 2014 a new procedure for qualified majority voting applies in the Council. Under this procedure, when the Council votes on a proposal by the Commission or the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, a qualified majority is reached if two conditions are met:55% of member states vote in favour - in practice this means 16 out of 28
the proposal is supported by member states representing at least 65% of the total EU population
Slightly lower figures but still a huge risk.
We all know parts of this are a negotiation, we actually get that you don't need to keep repeating yourself. The point you are trying so very hard to miss is that the Parliament (that thing people were fighting to make sovereign and bring back from the dead) can impose conditions and clauses on the government in order to allow them to trigger A50. This is also a negotiation where the government could do some simple things to satisfy the 60%+ who didn't vote leave and to try and work out what those that did actually want along with what is best for the country.
No I simply respect the democratic process, other do not.
Only when you decided you wanted to, and only then to your very unique personal definition of doing so. I'll give you your due that you have stuck with your new position since you came to it, but it was rather later in the proceedings when you did so. As such, it's a little rich you trying to claim the higher ground over anyone else here.
Listen to Ken Clarke - despite being from your side of the house, he's about the only one in there making any sense whatsoever.
As before - democracy requires a well informned electorate. On leaving the EU the majority of the country were not well informed. Its also a wafer thin majority and if the referendum were held now would probably go the other way and once it becomes obvious how appalling the outcome will be almost certainly the other way
compare to the scottish referendum where the electorate were well informed because of the length of the campaign and the mass engagement in the process
I'm white, middle classed ,male, don't drive anywhere and my mortgage is paid off.
Brexit was designed to benefit me. I hate it but shall laugh at you brexi ****s once you see how much your mortgage will go up,how much it will cost to fill your car.
I'm alright jack,**** you it's the brexit way.
Listen to Ken Clarke - despite being from your side of the house, he's about the only one in there making any sense whatsoever.
He adds that "hardcore Eurosceptics" would not have abandoned their beliefs if the vote had gone the other way.
He describes those "Eurosceptics'" hopes of future trade deals thus: "You go down a rabbit hole and you emerge in a wonderland."
Excellent stuff.
.
Incorrect zokes. My position hasn't changed - other than at the very outset when explained why I thought the vote was absurd - since we are voting on something that by design cannot continue to exist in its current form. After that, I was consistently in favour of remain. After the vote, I have been in favour if triggering A50 quickly so that we (businesses) can get back to some form of normality. The "may"hem so far has been bad for me professionally.
I do not agree with Ken Clarke's views on Europe (eg, €) nor on his arguments based on representative government in this case. His government made a clear commitment to execute the result of the referendum, in black and white. This is what they are now doing. He, like many others, don't like the result and are trying their best to override it. That is a very low horse to be on indeed - a see horse perhaps?
"I'm white, middle classed ,male, don't drive anywhere and my mortgage is paid off.
Brexit was designed to benefit me."
How will you benefit?
Wow - IDS - how much uninformed shit can one person spout?!?
Lots of good contributions for and against the bill otherwise, from MPs on all sides.
Listen to Ken Clarke - despite being from your side of the house, he's about the only one in there making any sense whatsoever.
One of the only Tories I have any time for. Too late to be Prime Minister?
As he said on a show at weekend, when Labour won the election he didn't have to concede and become a Labout MP.
compare to the scottish referendum where the electorate were well informed
I see now why people are worried about democracy not working since people are so badly informed or dont understand what is going on.
The difference between the Book of Dreams (that some believed) and the Leave Campaign (ditto) was merely that the latter did not require 670 pages of BS. It was only 5 core lies.
Wow - IDS - how much uninformed shit can one person spout?!?
Judging by the posters on here, a quite extraordinary amount.
😀
'enemies of the people' IDS is the idiot's idiot, we should expect nothing less
[i]announcements mean shit, unless it's on the bill it means nothing.[/I]
and which is why she's saved her speeches for OUTSIDE parliament...
How will you benefit?
I have no idea but the tories don't seem to care about anyone but people like me.
David Davis indicates that the bill will also withdraw the UK from Euratom.
I don't remember that being a question on the ballot paper I was given???
Still more brilliant contributions from MPs, including those voting for the bill.
HoC has some great people serving in it, from all parties, on all sides of this debate.
[i][ My comment about the words spouting from the mouth of IDS still stands.][/i]
I'm white, middle classed ,male, don't drive anywhere and my mortgage is paid off.Brexit was designed to benefit me.
How will you benefit?
I have no idea
Thanks for your contribution.
Labour's Kate Hoey currently claiming debating it in parliament is a waste of time 👿
Actually "I have no idea" is a perfectly valid and honest response. It's v difficult to determine. The base case has already gone so we have nothing to compare with e.g. £ already 20% weaker and inflationary expectations already higher
But of course this isn't simply an economic issue is it? It's about having a say/more control over our future - remember that argument? 😉
By George, Starmer gets it
Yes, technically the referendum is not legally binding but the result was not technical - it was deeply political. And politically the notion that the referendum was merely a consultation exercise to inform parliament holds no water.