Forum menu
So ok, save the obvious general increase of xenophobia 🙁 what will that change lets say for an ex -EU immigrant that want to go back to the UK to see his friend?
Just asking for a mate you know.
Thing about Bank of England is.... the financial crash.
At the centre of what should have been one of the most integrated financial and political information gathering systems in the world and it (effectively) blind-sided them.
And Mervyn King, Governor of the BoE at the time, doesn't get ejected into orbit, he becomes a Baron.
So, how much better is the BofE now and how much more "aware" is Carney?
Just sayin', like.
There's going to be a debate 😀
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46386737
But Corbyn wants it to be on ITV, because...
Mr Corbyn claimed he preferred ITV's bid out of "respect" for viewers who wanted to watch the I'm A Celebrity... Get Me Out Of Here! final on ITV the same evening - 9 December.
You couldn't make it up 😂😂
Out of respect. L.O.L.
(To be fair I have more interest in I'm a Celebrity than the cluster$%*& that Brexit has become).
All Carney can do is manage what ever shit storm he is given, he is not in charge of the process.
I dont know why he bothers, probably just to get his own back for all the shite the swivel eyed give him.
I would dread to think of the BOE with a David Davies at the helm.
Said it before this is the biggest long con in history and many Tories know this, if they get a hard Brexit its a right wing financial wet dream - the ultimate uber extension of Thatchers vision.
At the centre of what should have been one of the most integrated financial and political information gathering systems in the world and it (effectively) blind-sided them.
They weren't though, they were originally but Gordon Brown took away their regulatory role which removed a key source of information.
However, the analysis they have done has largely been taken out of context, the scenario everyone is focussing on is a highly unlikely worst case scenario which was requested by MPs, the chances of it coming to pass, even in the event of No deal are tiny. Carney said as much on the wireless this morning. As always the Brexit debate is dominated by heat not light.
What the **** is the point of a televised debate??? The public aren't going to be voting on the deal. The debate serves no point.
<div class="bbp-reply-author">raybanwomble
<div class="bbp-author-role">
<div class="">Member</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="bbp-reply-content">
I think the game plan is to try and sell this deal, if no deal Brexit happens and the economy tanks – they will then blame Labour and remainers for the damage to the economy. I think quite a few on the fence voters would actually buy that.
Giving her too much credit. Less than a week ago she said it was her deal or "back to square one", then she went to Scotland and pretended that actually it's her deal or no deal brexit, she can;t maintain her "plan" to the end of a paragraph.
</div>
The public aren’t going to be voting on the deal.
There's a decent chance of it.
Has anyone noticed how much Jo Johnson sounds like David Millar?
What the **** is the point of a televised debate??? The public aren’t going to be voting on the deal. The debate serves no point.
She needs to convince mps the public. Support the idea of her deal. Unless a remain voice is there it is however a pointless exercise of your shit smells worse than my shit.
That bloke at the end of the vid… hard not to agree with him as regards Scotland, sadly.
A day trip to Glasgow now isn't going to make up for May putting Scotland at the bottom of her priorities. And parliament mostly let her do this. When the original referendum legislation went through, an amendment was tabled saying that all four countries would need to vote >50% to Leave for it to happen… this was dismissed by saying that as the vote was purely advisory, the government could take into account how each country voted before deciding what to do. After the vote, the Tories (and Corbyn) just pushed full steam ahead with A50 and ignored both the impact on, and the will of, people North of the border.
She needs to convince mps the public. Support the idea of her deal. Unless a remain voice is there it is however a pointless exercise of your shit smells worse than my shit.
People have already decided.
All this debate will be is tons of hot air. Neither side will give solid answers, much will depend on the knowledge & the ability of whoever chairs the debate to not have their answers brushed off.
Well if the chair.can at leat pull her up on how she is going to find the money for the nhs while the brexit bills currently exceed our payments etc. Some solid fact checking given straight back to them would help any wavering on the just get in with it/nothing will really change
What the **** is the point of a televised debate??? The public aren’t going to be voting on the deal. The debate serves no point.
Of course it does for some of us it will be a public airing of how much complete bollocks two people can talk Holst not giving a flying **** about the public
.......who will mostly be watching reruns of I'm a ****ing nobody get me out of here.
It was joked int workshop that Noel only went in their so he didn't have to do a brexit special of deal or no deal with mark carney as the banker...
<span style="font-size: 0.8rem;">Pick a box......</span>
Corbyn wants to do what he does at PMQ’s every week and ignore Brexit and ask about rural bus timetables or something else essential to the upcoming socialist republic.
May will repeat sound bites like a malfunctioning droid.
its a complete waste of time. It’d be better, and more entertaining if they had it out in a different fashion...
Corbyn wants to do what he does at PMQ’s every week and ignore Brexit and ask about rural bus timetables or something else essential to the upcoming socialist republic.
So you don't rate Corbyn then, please tell us all about it...
May will repeat sound bites
Who does she remind me of? Hmm.
Corbyn wants to do what he does at PMQ’s every week and ignore Brexit and ask about rural bus timetables or something else essential to the upcoming socialist republic.
Lying serves only to confirm your prejudice.
Well May has been very clear..
We know this because she says she's being very clear at the end of every sentence.
And quite often at the start of a sentence too.
It's really very clear.
Well may has been very clear..
Well I can see straight through her.
Just a shame the voting public can't see straight through her 🙁
any brexit to save face
Actually, they died to prevent a Fascist dictatorship invading and ruling over an island of British subjects who, to say the least, weren’t overjoyed at the prospect...
Anyways. I heard little Liam Foxwit on R4 this morning saying that members of cabinet who didn’t back “the plan” would no longer be members of cabinet, so that answers the earlier question of what Leadsome was “offered” - back me or walk the plank.
Parliament however, may be a tad more difficult to cajole.
I'm becoming (irrationally) angry about this touring of the country / TV debates to 'get the people onside' and thus convince MP's to vote the deal through because it's what 'we' want.
Why should they do that now when a large proportion of MP's didn't represent what their constituencies wanted when it came to previous votes on this matter.
What's Guy Fawkes doing nowadays? Could he be persuaded out of retirement?
One hundred!
Interesting site showing how MP's voted on various issues in parliament
Lets start with Rees Mogg, the savour of the leavers
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24926/jacob_rees-mogg/north_east_somerset/votes
The blokes an utter **nt
The blokes an utter **nt
tory?
I keep reading that No Deal has no chance.
I can believe the gammons are voting against so they can stay in the EU.
There again I can't believe that any e would want a No Deal with all the repurcusions.
May's bluff of "no brexit" seems to have fallen flat so she's trying the threat of "no deal" instead. There is a chance that some MPs will be frightened into submission...but that can't work on the frothing gammons who actually prefer it.
An excellent point:
That video scotroutes put up is interesting, and reflects how I am increasingly feeling.
its a complete waste of time. It’d be better, and more entertaining if they had it out in a different fashion…
^ This sums things up. Westminster politics seems to be about battering each other, arguing, falling out, self promotion, ignoring who you don't 'need'.
Scotland and Wales have fallen into the 'ignore, I don't 'need' category.
Look at our Parliament layout -
Commons and Lords are both facing, opposing physical layouts, governed by stuffy old rules and unspoken old boys club.
Wales has a circular layout and , Scotland a semi-circle facing each other. Both have a presiding officer. We are (more) collaborative and practical in many ways in how our Minister of Scottish Parliament and Assembly Members work.
This shows more and more the difference in what is happening in the Brexit process.
May has got a deal - but her team and party have just not taken on board the asks and feedback, they have strode out in 'strong and stable' but forgotten about 'collaborative and agreement. Now is too late to whizz round the country and try and put a figurative arm around a few others in Wales, Scotland and NI (as well as England). Heck, even those closest to her in her own party are not feeling part of this.
Is it me as well, or are the pro-Brexit / hard brexiteers wilting away as we get closer? The big characters are now less and less speaking up, leaving it to a few more on the edges? Rees Mogg, Johnson, Gove all seem to have shot their ammunition and now are not actually debating things, just making a few odd statements here and there?
Anyway, here is a proper Scottish take on the situation... (warning, LOTS of sweary content, NSFW)
Gammons vote against cos they want no deal. Remainers vote against cos they want to remain.
We are (more) collaborative and practical in many ways in how our Minister of Scottish Parliament and Assembly Members work.
This is one reason PR is good, because it forces this.
There again I can’t believe that any e would want a No Deal with all the repurcusions.
Then you'd be very naive. The 'gammons' as you call them, as in white working or non-working class people living outside the South East who have neither cash or property and who eke out an existence from a combination of benefits, poorly paid insecure jobs and whatever other means they have at their disposal, have the view that they don't have a lot to lose.
And they're right, they don't. And they don't care if they bring the whole thing crashing down because the people who will suffer most in their eyes are the rich chattering classes in the south east who they despise. Of course they may be wrong in that assessment, but unfortunately the very people telling them that are the people who they think will lose most, so why would they believe them?
The ‘gammons’ as you call them, as in white working or non-working class people living outside the South East who have neither cash or property and who eke out an existence from a combination of benefits, poorly paid insecure jobs and whatever other means they have at their disposal, have the view that they don’t have a lot to lose.
Whilst the people you describe may form a subset of the Gammon population, their socio-economic status is not its definition. They can just as easily be middle-class, property owners or the landed gentry.
The ‘gammons’ as you call them, as in white working or non-working class people living outside the South East who have neither cash or property and who eke out an existence from a combination of benefits, poorly paid insecure jobs and whatever other means they have at their disposal
That's not what gammon means. It means older white males, usually right wing with the associated sense of entitlement who will shout invective and indignation at anyone with whom they disagree, based on spurious emotive reasoning.
And they don’t care if they bring the whole thing crashing down because the people who will suffer most in their eyes are the rich chattering classes in the south east who they despise. Of course they may be wrong in that assessment
There is no may be wrong they are wrong! It is those with little to lose who will lose it and suffer, the rich will just carry on as normal manipulating the lower classes for their own end.
I'm referring to gammon mps.
That’s not what gammon means.
Whatever. The point is that the people who voted for brexit don't see themselves as having much to lose so don't care about the impacts.
There is no may be wrong they are wrong!
I agree. But if you tell them that they won't believe you. I'm not trying to justify their views as I completely disagree with them, I'm just trying to explain why they have them. Whether we think they're justified or not, the 'gammons' are pissed off and hungry for revenge. Until something changes to address these concerns then they'll only become more vocal, and perhaps even more physical. It's often been said that if brexit is overturned it will result in civil unrest. I think there's a high probability of that.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/nov/30/brexit-britain-crisis-uk
Seven decades of prosperity have lulled the UK into thinking we’re special – that disasters only happen to other people
Very good article, that wonderfully articulates what I've been trying to say - the gammons and chavs don't realise how good they have got it.
The point is that the people who voted for brexit don’t see themselves as having much to lose so don’t care about the impacts.
I think a lot of them don't expect to lose anything themselves, and don't care about the affects on others. It has been the right wing tactic for at least 40 years to convince the majority that it will be someone else who suffers and that they deserve it, to salami slice off sections of the population and throw them on the scrap heap and to carry the blame for right wing doctrines.
agree. But if you tell them that they won’t believe you. I’m not trying to justify their views as I completely disagree with them, I’m just trying to explain why they have them. Whether we think they’re justified or not, the ‘gammons’ are pissed off and hungry for revenge. Until something changes to address these concerns then they’ll only become more vocal, and perhaps even more physical. It’s often been said that if brexit is overturned it will result in civil unrest. I think there’s a high probability of that.
I disagree, I think for a lot of them - brexit was a half arsed protest vote by people who feel overwhelmed by the complexity of the world. It's Brexiters who now show apathy, not remainers.
On the day we decide to stay in the EU, there will be nothing more than a timid little whimper from the Brexiters. If however, we leave and people end up not being able to afford food, then there will be riots.
The point is that the people who voted for brexit don’t see themselves as having much to lose so don’t care about the impacts.
I think that's just one faction. There are many reasons for voting leave, just as there are many reasons for voting remain.
who will shout invective and indignation at anyone with whom they disagree, based on spurious emotive reasoning.
I think if you are trying achieve a consensus, continuing to call Remainers gammons is not the way to go about it.
As for protests we might get that **** on you tube trying to set fire to the eu flag again.
Anything else that involves turning the telly off is just too much trouble.
Brilliant stuff as usual from James, albeit the title of the video is disingenuous, but to hear the gammon slowly digging himself into a hole
That is step same way it goes whenever I discuss anything with a Brexiter. If you take away the foreigners element by using some facts they really don't have anything else. This very thread is over 1300 pages and I don't think I have ever seen a sensible reason from anyone who wants to leave.
Blue passports. Oh, wait. You said sensible reason. Sorry, as you were.
This very thread is over 1300 pages and I don’t think I have ever seen a sensible reason from anyone who wants to leave.
Ah sensible reason would be that (in theory) leaving frees Britain to negotiate its own trade deals with whatever countries it likes, with terms that suit us rather than the other EU member states.
Not a reason I believe in, as I think we’ll be negotiating those deals from a far weaker and more desperate position, but I do follow the logic.
This very thread is over 1300 pages and I don’t think I have ever seen a sensible reason from anyone who wants to leave.
That's because STW is by and large an echo chamber, some that were pro-Brexit on here were trolls, others were shouted down till they left the thread.
I believe Brexit is a disaster for 99% of working age people in this country but I'm also aware that I spend most of my friends, STW, and the Guardian the opinions are very different.
I only know one person who is openly pro-brexit, even the dyed in the wool Unionists around me, and there's plenty of them, see it as utter stupidity.
Surely the dictionary definition of 'Gammon' is this....
http://media.zenfs.com/en/homerun/feed_manager_auto_publish_494/d0fcc06513b7bb2a92850e6adb528ce c" alt="" />
That’s because STW is my enlarge an echo chamber, some that were pro-Brexit on here were trolls, others were shouted down till they left the thread.
I know the demands to provide evidence or facts that backed up their claims was always too much.
Still none of them came up with any really decent reasons that stacked up did they. Unless you know of any good ones?
The sensible reasons people voted to brexit were - bespoke trade arrangements, border controls, a desire for fewer politicians and exasperation at the bureaucratic nature of the post-Maastricht EU
there were also a lot of protest votes, racist and zenophobic views and also belief that 350m would actually go to the NHS.
ignoring the second category, I agree with the last two points in the first sentence but they aren't good enough reasons to leave and the trade agreements and border controls are pie in the sky.
Ed, I've been hoping for something succinct like that to help me understand - thank you
This is a gammon:
The sensible reasons people voted to brexit were – bespoke trade arrangements, border controls, a desire for fewer politicians and exasperation at the bureaucratic nature of the post-Maastricht EU
The other key one is that the EU prevents a certain level of state aid to businesses, which may prevent or at least inhibit some things that socialist governments want to do. That's why the hardcore left don't like it.
Which did lead into the slight stumbling block of how they planned to deliver that and the consequences of it.
I know the demands to provide evidence or facts that backed up their claims was always too much
Neither side has any facts or evidence, it is about the future and all you can do is make judgments, it is pretty silly to expect anything else.
mefty - sorry but no.
The FACTS are that we are woefully underprepared. I know you think you will get unicorns and love the moggster but please try to attend an EU Exit briefing and TRY to listen with an open mind.
I know leavers get all up tight about being called thick but ffs GIVE US SOME SOLUTIONS!
Neither side has any facts or evidence, it is about the future and all you can do is make judgments, it is pretty silly to expect anything else.
No we can't know the future, we do now the here and now and we can model the results.
We know how external EU borders function, be it Switzerland, Norway, Ukraine, Turkey. We can then realistically model those borders applied to Dover. We know that Dover will not cope with any known border model outside the current one. We also know that any change to mitigate the impact will take a lot longer than the time we have. Before you suggest well we're the UK we're special they do us a deal, sorry it isn't happening. It is what taking back control means.
Neither side has any facts or evidence, it is about the future and all you can do is make judgments, it is pretty silly to expect anything else.
How much money will we have to spare after leaving the EU - Factually Incorrect
Where the EU "stopped" the UK doing stuff, - massively overstated
etc. etc. plenty of stuff that was just pure BS and wild ideas, couple of these now form part of TM's pitch to voters
It's also overly simplistic to dismiss anything in the future as unknowable, we know they are forecasts but that doesn't make them wrong. It doesn't undermine the facts that support them - if you want to knock them go after the underlying data and assumptions. Come up with a better model or forecast based on what is known.
Neither side has any facts or evidence, it is about the future and all you can do is make judgments, it is pretty silly to expect anything else.
The remain argument has loads of facts. We are already in the EU so know to a high level what the future would be like if we stayed in. However, leaving is all about judgements and guesses.
I've just been on LinkedIn and there is a post 'Airbus is one of the great Welsh manufacturing success stories of the age' from Welsh Trade and Investment. First reply:
Richard Debenham 3rd degree connection3rd
Senior Managing Director at LEVEL ELEVATORS
Let’s bring this great manufacturing heritage back to the UK.
We don’t need the EU to help us.
Perhaps this person is a gammon but it's still odd that someone with that title could fail to see what problems Brexit will cause Airbus!
Plenty of people in all walks of life have plenty to lose. Some of them might not think they are likely to lose (or at least not lose much), but that's another matter entirely.
It’s often been said that if brexit is overturned it will result in civil unrest. I think there’s a high probability of that.
I think there's a high probability of civil unrest by about six people. The shouty racists aren't representative of most leave voters, they're just the loudest.
I think if you are trying achieve a consensus, continuing to call Remainers gammons is not the way to go about it.
Remainers aren't all gammons. Just the gammony ones. And whatever name you give those swivel-eyed cretins, it's not going to sway their opinions one iota.
The sensible reasons people voted to brexit were – bespoke trade arrangements, border controls, a desire for fewer politicians and exasperation at the bureaucratic nature of the post-Maastricht EU
Bespoke trade agreements which will surely be worse than the ones we already have. Reckon Brian's Mini-Mart gets a more favourable deal with it's distributors than Tesco does? Which is cheaper to shop at? And in any case, who are we so desperate to strike up trade deals with that we don't already have an agreement with? Cambodia?
Border controls that we already have and choose not to use. Plus something something foreigners.
Fewer politicians and less bureaucracy? That's hilarious, the EU is a well-oiled machine compared to our own parliament. There are 750 MEPs covering 28 countries, our House of Commons has 650 members just for a couple of rainy little islands, and that's before you look at the HoL which is another few hundred.
What else have you got? These are all reasons which are superficially "sensible" if someone believes in them, but have no bearing in reality. You might as well vote to leave because of a fear of a zombie invasion, totally sensible if France was full of zombies, which it isn't.
Remainers are gammons. Eh? Did I miss something?
Which did lead into the slight stumbling block of how they planned to deliver that and the consequences of it.
And the fact that they can't aid companies when they have no money because the economy's tanked.
The FACTS are that we are woefully underprepared. I know you think you will get unicorns and love the moggster but please try to attend an EU Exit briefing and TRY to listen with an open mind.
You shouldn't make assumptions, I've never advocated leaving with no deal, and voted remain. I just think very few people look at the arguments in a balance manner and resort to silly language like unicorns.
mr mo - ditto
How much money will we have to spare after leaving the EU – Factually Incorrect
There has never been an dispute about the figures, the Leave campaign explained their rationale for using a gross figure. Although rather ironically, by the time we leave the net number will be much closer to £350 million than the net figure used by the remain campaign.
Also there are plenty of facts about how much we use EU institutions to run our country.
The sensible reasons people voted to brexit were – bespoke trade arrangements, border controls, a desire for fewer politicians and exasperation at the bureaucratic nature of the post-Maastricht EU
Unfortunately at least one of those problems could have been solved at any point by the British government while in the EU
the Leave campaign explained their rationale for using a gross figure
Was it "it's bigger therefore scarier and hopefully no-one will realise until it's too late?" Because if it wasn't then that's another lie we can add to the list.
The sensible reasons people voted to brexit were – bespoke trade arrangements, border controls, a desire for fewer politicians and exasperation at the bureaucratic nature of the post-Maastricht EU
Pretty much all of which are either in our control, or have been shown subsequently to not be achievable or downright false.
It's like if I said to my wife 'shall we go to that new restaurant' and then when we get there and look at the menu there's nothing we like, it's overpriced and the chef's visible in the kitchen scratching his arse.
But we said we're going and therefore we're going - even if it's obvious we're going to be served up stuff we don't like, worse off as a result and highly likely to spend the next week in bed shitting violently from both ends.
Was it “it’s bigger therefore scarier and hopefully no-one will realise until it’s too late?”
No, it was, "if we use a bullshit figure, the opposition will focus on the fact that the figure is wrong, drawing more attention to the costs of membership, rather than focusing on the benefits, and it will work in our favour." Dominic Cummings was a cunning bastard.
In the event of a second referendum.
Im going with a win for leave!
How much money will we have to spare after leaving the EU – Factually Incorrect
There has never been an dispute about the figures, the Leave campaign explained their rationale for using a gross figure. Although rather ironically, by the time we leave the net number will be much closer to £350 million than the net figure used by the remain campaign.
So you dislike forecasts for their lack of facts etc. but miss the obvious...
We have to pay the EU to leave, this is a figure currently around 4-5 years worth of contributions.
We need to fund further bodies and infrastructure to support out new status
We have currently spent more on Brexit that EU membership costs.
Where is the money coming from? Or are you planting the magic money tree too?
We have to pay the EU to leave, this is a figure currently around 4-5 years worth of contributions.
That's not true. We don't have to pay to leave at all, that's a Leave lie (I know, who'd have thought it, I was shocked too). The so-called "divorce bill" is our outstanding payments for projects we've committed to invest in. It's money we'll have to pay - money we'd already agreed and promised before the referendum to pay - regardless of whether we leave or not.
The so-called “divorce bill” is our outstanding payments for projects we’ve committed to invest in
Correct. And because we're leaving we won't see the benefits of our investment. Doh!