theocb – Member
You what? Somebody tell erm.. somebody. We actually voted remain? Shit the bed the Bobby Ewing story wasn’t quite so silly after all.

YOU voted leave, the result is how YOU voted, that’s how these things work. You do understand that little bit of info, Right?? There is no quarter of this and quarter of that after the result

You are as responsible as the next man (and perhaps ‘even more so’ if you think you are more intelligent than them)

We gained a huge amount of info from the vote, if you have a read of the thread you will see that some of the greatest minds in the world (self proclaimed of course) were shocked by the result, which perhaps shows a problem with our education system

Has chewkw got a new log in?

YOU voted leave, the result is how YOU voted, that’s how these things work. You do understand that little bit of info, Right?? There is no quarter of this and quarter of that after the result

no i didn’t vote leave, i do understand what you are suggesting, but in a general election do the opposition just sit back and accept the result or do they oppose the winner?

When there is a vote with such a margin, that offers no benefits. I will oppose it. Remember this is a one way vote, in five years there won’t be a rematch.

And yes there is an issue, but 40 years of DM, Express et al, arguing against is it a shock?

The question you have to ask is where is the money? Who gains from leaving?

As for moving forward, IF the leaks of a hard brexit of implementing a “singapore” on the UK are to believed then the population of the UK is f**ked, maybe that is for the best.

I will just do what the Irish always have done, move on for a better life.

Has chewkw got a new log in?

better English if he has…. I guess someone reprogrammed the Bot.

looks like it . 😆

So much for an overwhelming mandate!

Any advisory referendum only requires an absolute majority, not an “overwhelming” one. Any binding referendum requires additional requirements to be carried… with a greater than 50% threshold vote and/or a % of voting age population to agree with the change from the status quo. We’ve been through this already… Conservatives have been acting as if it was a binding referendum (on both sides of the debate) for the sake of their party. The referendum bill would either have never been passed by parliament, or would have had the normal extra provisions required of a binding referendum placed upon it, if it was to be binding. The vote was not binding, it is for parliament now to decide on the course of action, knowing the result of the vote.

Simple. Clear. Legal. Absolute. True.

Our MPs are letting us down. And I don’t just mean those who happen to make up the current, and previous, governments.

The vote was not decisive enough to make the changes now proposed.

If only we had some way to trigger a general election (rather than leaving that to MPs).

Keep up, if the referendum campaign had been just about our trading arrangements, it would never have gone the same way, those running the Leave campaign have said so (read back in this thread for quotes and full sources).

I think you will find I posted some of those links, I think in reality, rather than the hyperbole, it is about very little else.

If you think British politics has never been prone to extremes how do you explain the post-war creation of the welfare state, initially unique outside the Soviet Union? No other Western country had anything remotely similar.

And how do you explain the election of a neo-liberal government in 1979, at the time quite unique outside Latin American dictatorships?

Clem Attlee and Margaret Thatcher not extremists? Yeah right

In both cases the consensus changed, but we as a people were led. Compared to other European nations, we are very dull – there has been no revolution. You may question the merit of the change in consensus and in the case of Margaret Thatcher no doubt you do, but in the overall scheme of things it was achieved though boring electoral process.

Mefty, we both agree on what Brexsit should be about, but the hyperbole took over a long time ago.

I think where we disagree is that you want to manage the downside risk, which is typically the position I would take, but there is a logical consistency to hard brexit that I can understand and don’t think should be dismissed.

I reckon we might see £1 worth less than €1 this week 😕

If only we had some way to trigger a general election (rather than leaving that to MPs).

As long as May panders to the most right wing mouth foamers there’s really no chance of a GE.

Toothless Jeremy with his “i feel your pain” Facebook posts on a range of mamby Pamby issues

Lib Dems nowhere

UKIP hovering dangerously

Nothing else out there.

The only thing you can hope for is a Tory revolt

I don’t see the logical consistency in any qualification of Brexshit mefty. May is correct that Brexshit means Brexshit. Any qualifications are logically inconsistent.

But you are correct, I am seeking to limit the downside risk.

😀
Responsibility is hard to accept, I can agree with that. You don’t need to look far on here to see many many others struggling with that.

No offence meant 8) but NO, you voted leave.. you need to say it, believe it and accept it! That is how it works.

Calling people idiots when perhaps you are more responsible than them, seems very short sighted to me.

With Trump wanting a quick and fair deal with the Uk , say goodbye to any workers right .

Watching the news, I am left with the appalling vision of Trump and Gove together. Nightmares guaranteed tonight.

I think you will find I posted some of those links, I think in reality, rather than the hyperbole, it is about very little else.

So being in the EU (and other European institutions) is about nothing other than trade?
Leaving them will only effect our trading arrangements?
That is all that will change?

> blinks <

one quarter didn’t vote which usually suggests happy with status quo

I would suggest that really means happy with whatever is decided, not happy with the status quo…

@igm prior immigrants are always most at risk from new immigrants as it’s their jobs and lifetsyle which face challenge. That’s a true-ism. Been picked up in various TV pieces inc today’s Sky interviews and the piece with Jess Phillips and Rees-Mogg.

@kelvin that’s not how the Scottish Indy Ref and accompanying Edinburgh agreement worked. A 50.1 / 49.9 vote for an Independent Scotland would have been legally binding. It would have been greated with a huge celebration of “people’s democracy” by Salmond and the SNP. Dancing in the streets etc. The SNP would kill for 52/48

Hammond is just mirroring the “tough talking” the EU has been doing and why not ? All this nonsense repeated here too about the negotiation being somehow one sided against the UK.

say goodbye to any workers right

Erm, okay BS Bill.. whatever you say. 🙄 (No offence, just wanted to get in there before all the ‘fact based debaters’ picked your post apart)

With Trump working with the UK you can say goodbye to pudding!

With Trump wanting a quick and fair deal with the Uk , say goodbye to any workers right .

The Great Repeal Bill will enshrine all existing UK workers rights in law and May has committed to keep them as long as she is PM. Nothing in TTIP was going to change workers rights.

The Great Repeal Bill will enshrine all existing UK workers rights in law and May has committed to keep them as long as she is PM. Nothing in TTIP was going to change workers rights.

Are you prepared to stake your reputation on this?

The Great Repeal Bill will enshrine all existing UK workers rights in law and May has committed to keep them as long as she is PM.

But the point is that currently they are beyond the tampering of our politicians.

Are you prepared to stake your reputation on this?
[/quote]
Genuine LOL

I reckon we might see £1 worth less than €1 this week

It will change on ce all those European banks are in trouble…

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/nov/19/big-short-financial-crash-steve-eisman-italy-banks-risk

Another genuine LOL.

How many NHS services will be provided by American companies?

that’s not how the Scottish Indy Ref and accompanying Edinburgh agreement worked

Agreed. And? Parliament made the EU referendum advisory, and would not have passed it as binding without additional checks and requirements. That Cameron and May both claimed it as anything but advisory is irrelevant to the truth of the matter, and goes against what parliament voted for. Parliament should insist on doing its job, even if court action is required. Current MPs are clearly not up for it, in the main.

The Great Repeal Bill will enshrine all existing UK workers rights in law and May has committed to keep them as long as she is PM. Nothing in TTIP was going to change workers rights

The problem is that amendments to the laws being incorporated could be changed by secondary legislation without parliamentary oversight. While arguably necessary in some cases where the effects are unlikely to meaningfuly alter lives and just due to the numbers of laws needing integrating there is nothing to stop adjustment of other laws that would materially damage or remove existing rights.

I don’t trust any politician with that degree of power, and certainly not the flavour of Tories we have at the moment.

So being in the EU (and other European institutions) is about nothing other than trade?
Leaving them will only effect our trading arrangements?
That is all that will change?

Yep, because an awful lot else is up to us, if we decide to change things we will. If not, we won’t.

mefty – Member

In both cases the consensus changed

That’s actually untrue. Although the Tories would rather people thought otherwise there was strong opposition to Clem Attlee and Nye Bevan, there was no consensus. Even the Guardian newspaper opposed the the creation of the NHS, something which was considered to be extreme left-wing and hadn’t occurred anywhere outside the Soviet Union.

It wasn’t initially embraced by the Tories at all. There was a clear alternative – the Tories. And yet the people still voted in favour of it.

Likewise when in 1979 Margaret Thatcher introduced privatisation and neo-liberal economic policies which had only been previously applied in Latin American military dictatorships she did not share the same goals as the Labour Party, or indeed LibDems, the British people had a very clear alternative to her policies. It wasn’t until 1997 that the Labour Party fully embraced privatisation and neo-liberalism, and the LibDems even later.

Both in Attlee and Thatcher would in their day have been considered to be extremists. And there are other examples in history such as William Wilberforce an anti-slavery extremist who went against conventional wisdom and was a highly successful politician.

Your claim that “British politics has never been prone to extremes” and that change only occurs under conditions of consensus is false imo.

Yep, because an awful lot else is up to us, if we decide to change

An awful lot requires supra-national coordination and oversight to be maintained.
Otherwise, business just moves to areas without protection (for workers rights, environment etc) or with low taxation.
Harmonisation, and improvement of, such things, is why so many hate the EU and other European bodies, and their “interfering”.

An awful lot requires supra-national coordination and oversight to be maintained.

Why?

Harmonisation, and improvement of, such things, is why so many hate the EU and other European bodies, and their “interfering”

Did you just make that up? Harmonisation of workers rights and improvement of the environment is why people hate the EU??

Perhaps we needed you on the red bus committee. No bugger would have believed that!

Are you prepared to stake your reputation on this?

Indeed, soooo much to lose 🙂

Your claim that “British politics has never been prone to extremes” and that change only occurs under conditions of consensus is false imo.

To be fair, he said ‘prone to extremes’. So whilst you list a few examples of extremists, that doesn’t imply that extremists are likely, which is what prone to means.

Mefty – if it’s all about trade then presumably everyone will be happy to keep freedom of movement of people? And the European court?

Igm don’t be silly it’s about getting ride of the courts and freedom of movement. The eu will just trade on whatever terms we tell them. Drake Nelson and Wellington are just getting their stuff ready to remind them who runs the world these days.

Bit of a coup for Gove and embarrassing for May to have a backbencher meet Trump b4 she did and discuss Brexshit and trade deals etc!
Likewise Johnson, I’ll bet it made the old knife wound in his back itch.
I wonder if Murdoch may be turning against May.

Did you just make that up? Harmonisation of workers rights and improvement of the environment is why people hate the EU??

Perhaps we needed you on the red bus committee. No bugger would have believed that!

You missed Boris banging on about vacuum cleaners in front of that red bus?

I didn’t say these were the things that swayed the extra people needed to vote Leave, I’m saying that those that hate the EU, and campaigned for decades to leave, rather than on balance decided we’re better off out, do indeed cite the regulation and laws that restrict environment damage, protect human rights, give workers minimum conditions, etc as the reasons why.

Pound taking a bit of a battering this morning.

Pound taking a bit of a battering this morning.

Apparently this is good and part of the long term, yet still unknown (by anyone) plan.
Relax. Everything will/could/might be better.

May has been very wise as regards the pound though.
Teasing slowly helps price In the drop, rather than have too big a shock drop in one go.
Still further down to go yet… but it could have mostly occurred in 2016, at least she’s been buying time for people to get used to the idea.

Question: are Boris and Gove more powerful when Journalists or Ministers?

Michael Gove on R4 right now wetting himself with excitement.

I’m sure a deal involving the UK bending over and taking it can be done quickly….