|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Tue 20 Nov 05:56
I thought it might be interesting to conduct a Brexit survey among dotnet's finest to see if opinions have changed since June 2016.
Of course, we represent only a tiny drop in the Scottish ocean, never mind the UK one. You will remember that a clear majority of the Scottish electorate (62%) voted to remain in the EU. That counted for nothing as the Leave majorities in England and Wales more than wiped this out.
If you don't mind sharing your personal preferences and you'd like to participate, the questions are as follows:-
1. How did you vote in 2016?
2. How would you vote now?
For question 1, please state how you would have voted if you did not use your vote then, or were unable to vote for any reason. Thank you for taking part.
I'll kick off.
1. Remain (It's the lesser of two evils.)
2. Remain (Even more convinced that the British electorate arrived at the wrong decision and will pay the price for many years to come.)
Not your average Sunday League player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parsweep
Date: Tue 20 Nov 06:48
1 Leave
2 Leave
Bobvo
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Mario
Date: Tue 20 Nov 06:49
It wasn’t 62% of the electorate, it was 42%. Scotland’s turnout of only 67% was the lowest, 33% of the electorate couldn’t even be bothered. Just being pedantic but still, the level of apathy for a nation supposedly so Europhile...
And every vote counted, you’re blethering.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: kelty_par
Date: Tue 20 Nov 07:34
1. Remain - I've always thought that one say I'd love to live and/or work in Italy so freedom of movement was always important to me; I also thought that we should be closer to Europe in order to try and drive change, rather than being in the back seat not really having an impact.
2. Remain - if anything it's even clearer that the Brexiteers had no plan, other than to leave the EU and make themselves a shittonne of money in the process.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Tue 20 Nov 09:13
Quote:
Mario, Tue 20 Nov 06:49
It wasn’t 62% of the electorate, it was 42%. Scotland’s turnout of only 67% was the lowest, 33% of the electorate couldn’t even be bothered. Just being pedantic but still, the level of apathy for a nation supposedly so Europhile...
And every vote counted, you’re blethering.
Not the first time I've been caught talking through a hole in my balaclava, Mario. ☹
I should have said 62% of those who voted, voted Remain, of course. Apologies. I'm tempted to say I wasn't fully awake in my previous post, but I don't want to compound my error by trying to lie my way out of it. I'll leave those sort of tactics to the politicians.
I hadn't realised 1 in 3 Scots didn't even bother to vote. How much was down to genuine apathy and how much was down to the cop out of "My vote's not going to make any difference"? With regard to every vote counting, I was referring to the Scottish majority being rendered insignificant by the much larger number of votes in England and Wales - but you knew that, of course.....
Not your average Sunday League player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Tue 20 Nov 09:18
1. Leave - mainly as a protest vote, rather than a determination to be out
2. LEAVE! - My stance hardened quite dramatically. The sheer bawbaggery of the EU during 'negotiations' shows exactly what kind of a self-serving 'club' it is - not something I want to be part of.
(and yes, it means I would be moving home)
There was never an honest negotiation from EITHER side.
UK represented by a PM and civil servants who don't actually want to leave
EU represented by an idealism to PUNISH the UK, rather than negotiate in good faith.
I think I mentioned this previously...
My daughter was at a European School - with children of the diplomats and EU commissioners - in the inter EU school debating competition, the motion to be debated was
(and I quote)
"Should the EU push for the hardest possible terms on the UK in order to dissuade other member countries from also leaving?"
This was NEVER about giving us a fair crack - it's ALL about protecting the INSTITUTION (yes, the unelected institution) of the EU.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Tue 20 Nov 11:31
This punishment stuff has to stop it's just daft.
We went and asked continually for things we were never going to get because they infringed on the fundamental principles of the EU.
It was a combination of stupidity and arrogance on our part that we somehow thought we were more important trading partners to the EU than them preserving the stability of the block.
The EU view any Member as having the best deal possible as that's the point in the Union. Anything outside of that won't be as good a deal as the one that we have as Member but our politicians continually told us we would get something bespoke on our terms. The only way we would have got something on our terms would have been if what we wanted jived with what the EU offer on terms like regulation and the 4 freedoms etc:
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/files/2018/10/brexit.jpg
It's our red lines that have taken us to this deal. We could have any permutation of the above that we wanted but we didn't want any of the above. We wanted to the EU to change for us because we're so special. Then when we found out they weren't going to tear down their own framework to accommodate us we've just sat and chucked names and accusations of bullying at them rather than facing the harsh truth that we're making a complete Noel Hunt of this.
What the Leave team claimed was never on the cards and what the Remainers leading Leave have managed to get is some guff halfway house nobody wants.
Not the EUs fault no matter how many names you call them.
Post Edited (Tue 20 Nov 11:32)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bertiesback
Date: Tue 20 Nov 11:53
1. Leave.
Mostly because I could not correlate voting remain in the EU and voting out of the UK. I see many of the same traits of bullying and lack of real democracy.
2. Leave.
More so than ever we now see the real face of the EU.
Little real compromise and a attempt at punitive negotiation. By the way I expect ALL the same tactics from rUK if we vote to leave the Union because the minute the independence vote is cast, all the neighbourly "we are all part of this little island community" will go out the window to be replaced by vindictive and punitive negotiations. So anyone voting for Scotland's independence better have a brave heart and a strong mind.
I totally agree with Lux.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Tue 20 Nov 11:55
Right then lads can one of you break it down as to how we're getting punished here because I can't see it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parsweep
Date: Tue 20 Nov 12:58
I'd say they want to make it as tough for us to exit their clique as possible . Knowing that if they agreed to give us a half way decent deal there would be a mad rush for the exit .
Self preservation at work
Bobvo
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Tue 20 Nov 13:42
What then constitutes a "good deal"? As I've said above the EU view Membership as the best deal anyone can have. If you don't want Membership then you have to accept you aren't going to have access to certain things.
The Union exists to protect its own Members. The block was founded to increase trade and create an artificially large economy so the smaller economies won't be steam rollered by big economies such as the US. When it comes to us leaving although we're going to remain close allies we're going to be in even greater competition for jobs and investment with the Members of the EU. We're going to get nothing for free from the block that gives us an advantage over them. Nor will we from the US or China or India etc when it comes to negotiating deals with them.
Post Edited (Tue 20 Nov 13:42)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Tue 20 Nov 14:24
''I'd say they want to make it as tough for us to exit their clique as possible . Knowing that if they agreed to give us a half way decent deal there would be a mad rush for the exit .
Self preservation at work''
I'd say you're spot on, Parsweep. Some of the right wing elements in Italy's Government and that of a few other EU countries are already rattling their sabres and threatening to leave the EU unless Brussels agrees to their requests.
Still haven't figured out why we didn't need a referendum to find out if we wanted to join the EU but needed one to see if we wanted out. The UK has done far less well out of the EU than many other, poorer countries, but it's still a better option to be in than out, when everything is taken into consideration, imo.
For those of you too young to remember, the founder members of the Common Market, in 1956, were Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands and West Germany. The Benelux countries already had a close trading arrangement. The addition of the three larger countries was seen as a way of securing peace in Europe and reducing the risk of another major war, in spite of what Bertie may believe.
Not your average Sunday League player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Tue 20 Nov 14:48
"The UK has done far less well out of the EU than many other, poorer countries"
I know it sometimes feels like that but this chart shows how our GDP per capita has increased since we joined the EU and we have out performed Germany that everyone thinks is the best performing EU nation.
https://www.inet.ox.ac.uk/news/Brexit
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bertiesback
Date: Tue 20 Nov 14:55
And the sad thing in all that is just what a ***** heap the UK is despite all that "supposed" prosperity.
A picture of lost opportunities and incompetent management of resources.
How much of this figures are down to oil and casino financial dealings I wonder. I would certainly have the German or USA economy before the UK's
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Tue 20 Nov 15:37
I completely agree but that's our f@ck up.
We voted in a Tory Government that essentially asset stripped the country and then voted in a New Labour Government that was a slightly less harsh version of them and then put the Tories back in charge who implemented a faux austerity program that took away public services rather than borrowing money to support and invest in the economy as they'd borrowed too much bailing out banks.
You're also correct that it was oil that allowed the country to be run the way it was run. Too few of the benefits of the wealth we've generated have reached the majority of the population.
It's understandable that folk are p!ssed but leaving the EU is never going to fix those problems. If anything handing the Tories unfettered powers to revoke things like the Working Time Directive are only going to make matters worse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bertiesback
Date: Tue 20 Nov 15:42
"Bruno Le Maire, France’s finance minister, and his German counterpart Olaf Scholz told reporters plans were “moving in the right direction” to see a common eurozone budget, which they hope to pass by 2021.
Le Maire and Scholz hope the a joint budget for all 19 eurozone countries would help stabilise the currency and allow it to more easily absorb economic shocks.
However the budget would have to be signed off by all EU countries, some of whom are putting up resistance to the Franco-German alliance."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Tue 20 Nov 15:47
To be fair there's pros and cons to those proposals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Tue 20 Nov 16:57
1. Did not vote.
2. Would not vote (although would vote No to a Hard Brexit)
Hardly an inspiring voting record, but probably representative of the average UK voter’s general ambivalence towards the EU. A mixture of geography and history has meant that, for better or worse, we are lukewarm Europeans. We are a monolingual people living on an island at the edge of Europe, have never suffered in recent times the indignity of being invaded, and despite fifty years of metrication in our schools still talk and drink imperial measures before driving off home on the left side of the road. Failure to integrate, the thing we often criticise in the UK Muslim population, is something of a badge of honour in respect of our attitude to the EU.
The EU was from the outset a businessman’s project, aimed at developing European capital in a secure trading block. This corporate elite, one which only paid lip service to trade unions, has now been exposed as failing to protect poorer workers from cheap imported labour, hence the backlash across the continent. The benefits of EU membership are less than alluring to those visiting their local foodbank. Countries such as Greece and Portugal which have tried to tackle this problem have been informed that their elected governments are too left-wing and their policies not acceptable to the EU. So much for trying to reform the EU from within and make it more democratic; more like the EU is trying to reform the governments of its member states. Jeremy Corbyn is, naturally, well aware of all this. The EU never protected UK shipbuilding, the UK car industry, UK fishing fleets, UK steelworks or UK coalmining.
Of course the UK government never protected any of these things either, so I can hardly get excited at the idea of ‘taking back control’ and handing it from an elite of EU ministers to some inbred elite headed by Jacob Rees-Mogg. Listen to Dick Gaughan’s song ‘Handful of Earth’ to be reminded of what sovereignty means for the average UK citizen. The problem with this whole debate has been that neither the EU nor its opponents has made a positive case that could inspire the individual citizen, one that could allow you look at your children and grandchildren and feel you were making the right decision. Hence the understandable response expressed by GG Riva, that staying in the EU is probably the least worse option. Maybe that’s as good as it gets, for the time being at least.
sammer
Post Edited (Tue 20 Nov 18:29)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DRFC_no1
Date: Tue 20 Nov 18:46
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Tue 20 Nov 19:27
remain. 3 reasons:
- right to live/work across the EU is important to me, for me and my family
- i want to be part of the EU, for me it's part of my identity. never liked the fact that it always felt we (the UK) we're a reluctant partner as i never was
- i actually was hoping it would build into something more. imagine the day when it doesn't really matter if you said you were from scotland or britain, spain or catalan, northern ireland or ireland because the primary identifier was the flag with the stars
remain. brexit is nothing more than a shitshow
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: kelty_par
Date: Tue 20 Nov 20:18
I'm the same londonparsfan, I can't see how the UK is being punished at all. We're asking to have a land border with the EU but no customs checks despite being in two different trading areas. We're asking that UK nationals can continue to live and work (and of course retire and own property) in the EU but we don't want to allow EU nationals reciprocal arrangements. We're asking to renege on agreed budgets that have already been accounted for. We're asking to leave an organisation but still keep some of the benefits of that organisation, or to have a say in how things work without being inside. We are literally asking for things that nobody in their right mind would accept. The EU are saying that we need to pay up the agreed fees, that they don't like the fact there's a land border without customs, they think that EU nationals should continue to have the same freedom of movement that they've had for decades and they - quite rightly - want to make sure that their organisation isnt weakened too much by losing a member. Quite how some people can spin this as being vindictive or a punishment is beyond me. I've yet to hear A coherent argument that can explain why anyone would feel that. Even in this thread, people have had the chance to explain but there's been nothing forthcoming.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Tue 20 Nov 20:49
keltypar/londonparsfan,
The claim that the EU has been unreasonable is indeed preposterous. It has simply defended its interests the same as the UK has attempted to do, except that it easier to do this as part of 27 countries.
Best summed up maybe by the old Scottish joke about a mother attending her son's army passing out parade: 'They're all out of step except our Jock.'
sammer
Post Edited (Tue 20 Nov 20:50)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: red-star-par
Date: Tue 20 Nov 20:58
I voted remain then, I was swithering but decided remain was the best option. Now I wouldn't think twice. It would have to be remain. I don't have kids myself, but some people have voted their children's future away. When I visit other countries I am always amazed at how much better the facilities, roads, and standard of life in general is. We are told the UK is the fifth richest country in the world, but I really dont see much evidence of that. Doesn't really correlate to the damning insight into poverty in the UK by the UN inspector
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: donj
Date: Tue 20 Nov 22:52
1. Missed vote as on holiday but would have been remain.Glad I bought Lira day before though.
2. Remain
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Tue 20 Nov 23:35
Kelty - lets have a look at your claims...
We're asking to have a land border with the EU but no customs checks despite being in two different trading areas.
a land border and free movement area that pre-dates the EU and as far as I am aware, has never been repealed...
We're asking that UK nationals can continue to live and work (and of course retire and own property) in the EU but we don't want to allow EU nationals reciprocal arrangements.
Already stated by UK that EU citizens attained the right to stay, and requested that the EU reciprocate -you have it the wrong way round AND false
We're asking to renege on agreed budgets that have already been accounted for.
ohhh - so the 39bn wasn't for the already agreed budgets? What was it for? Just a free handout?
We're asking to leave an organisation but still keep some of the benefits of that organisation, or to have a say in how things work without being inside.
some of the benefits? Do you mean like the satellite system we paid a huge chunk of, but are denied access or reimbursement? - nobody in the UK has demanded any say in running the EU post-Brexit, wtf are you on about?
We are literally asking for things that nobody in their right mind would accept.
such as? Specifics mind - none of your blase generalisations like above.
The EU are saying that we need to pay up the agreed fees,
already agreed
that they don't like the fact there's a land border without customs,
UK are not imposing customs on the NI/ROI border - but the EU are demanding that WE find a solution to THEIR demands to secure THEIR border
they think that EU nationals should continue to have the same freedom of movement that they've had for decades
but we are not going to be "in the club" so how can THEY expect to have <some of the benefits> of us being in the EU, but not allow us to have them?
and they - quite rightly - want to make sure that their organisation isnt weakened too much by losing a member.
not at all - they want to set out a warning to anyone else thinking about leaving
Quite how some people can spin this as being vindictive or a punishment is beyond me.
spin? no punishment? do you honestly think the EU has been even close to reasonable? In these 'negotiations' - tell me where there has been any fairness or equitable discussions? So far, the EU have given up the square root of f**k all, but every time Theresa May (who I am absolutely no fan of) gives way and concedes ground, they add something else. - wait for the last minute push on fishing rights, Gibraltar sovereignty and extra cash payments.
I've yet to hear A coherent argument that can explain why anyone would feel that. Even in this thread, people have had the chance to explain but there's been nothing forthcoming.
if you take your blinkers off, you might notice some
Also - I quoted you from a motion to be debated between EU Schools, this is exactly the viewpoint taken
Read and digest:
<Should the EU push for the hardest possible terms on the UK in order to dissuade other member countries from also leaving?>
Nothing at all about fairness in negotiations, or treating a long standing and LONG PAYING member with any respect - it's a straight case of <let's screw them really really hard as a warning to anyone else thinking of escaping the Hotel California
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: kelty_par
Date: Wed 21 Nov 14:16
"a land border and free movement area that pre-dates the EU and as far as I am aware, has never been repealed..."
So what, we're expecting Ireland to leave the customs union they are in because we have a prior agreement? And of course there wasn't free movement of people and goods between Ireland and Northern Ireland during the Troubles. Of course, part of the Good Friday Agreement is that there shouldn't be a physical border - so unless we agree to having the same trade rules as Ireland there's going to have to be something there.
"Already stated by UK that EU citizens attained the right to stay, and requested that the EU reciprocate -you have it the wrong way round AND false"
So I imagined the bit where EU nationals who are currently living and working here have to apply (and pay, by the way) to stay in the EU and the comments from the Prime Minister that "EU nationals will no longer jump the queue"? As far as I'm aware, UK nationals haven't been asked to apply and pay for residential status yet, and the UK has been silent on the right to work abroad (the EU have said that there would have to be some sort of Visa system in the event of a No-deal, but then that is exactly what the UK will have in the same event).
"ohhh - so the 39bn wasn't for the already agreed budgets? What was it for? Just a free handout?"
No, it is - but as you know prominent Brexiteers are demanding that we don't pay any "divorce paynent".
"some of the benefits? Do you mean like the satellite system we paid a huge chunk of, but are denied access or reimbursement?"
No, I.mean access to the financial markets of the EU (passporting), access to a shared electricity market, the abuility to travel, work and live FREELY in the EU, etc. - as far the Gallileo project, it is an EU institution for use by EU citizens; are we in or are we out or are we partway out? As Brexiteers keep saying, Leave means Leave! As for money spent so far, what do you think happens when a company invests in a project then no longer uses it? Does it say it wants it's money back or does it do something about it? The UK of course has already announced that they will be developing their own rival to Gallileo and GPS.
"nobody in the UK has demanded any say in running the EU post-Brexit, wtf are you on about?"
So in the above scenario with Gallileo, the UK would be happy to pay into and use the system with no say whatsoever in its running? The UK would be happy to continue to be part of the EU financial market with no say in how that would be regulated? The UK would be happy to accept EU regulations on air travel and insurance without a say in how they are set? And Nadine Dorres was actually bizarrely complaining that May's deal would leave us with no commissioners or MEPs!
"such as? Specifics mind - none of your blase generalisations like above."
Specific enough for you? Or do we need more? How about the UK wanting the power to vet any EU laws (not UK laws) during the transition period? Or ignoring any new EU laws during the transition period (which is meant to be a period where the UK adheres to EU laws)? How about wanting to treat EU citizens currently in the UK differently to those who would be entering enduring the transition period? Or asking that if we do break any EU laws in the transition period that we can't be sanctioned?
"already agreed"
As above, the ERG etc. aren't happy with that.
"UK are not imposing customs on the NI/ROI border - but the EU are demanding that WE find a solution to THEIR demands to secure THEIR border"
The UK ARE the ones imposing customs if we have to go to WTO rules on trade - there is no way round the fact that goods coming into the UK would have to have customs checks if we go to a WTO based agreement, and even if we don't then having two different rules on either side of the border isn't workable and the idea of a border down the Irish Sea is a no-Go for the people in Northern Ireland (and many in Scotland). Given there is a common travel area and Ireland isn't in the Schengen Area, there is nothing in this that relates to securing the EU border. Even if there was, a land border breaks the Good Friday Agreement. This is the fault of the UK for wanting to Leave in general and with no solution to this problem in particular. To think that it's somehow the fault of the EU is bizarre to say the least.
"but we are not going to be "in the club" so how can THEY expect to have <some of the benefits> of us being in the EU, but not allow us to have them?"
Because as part of the negotiations they'd like to keep free movement. If we don't want to allow that then fine, as long as there is a similar agreement for Brita abroad. I've not yet seen anything regarding UK nationals currently living in the EU having to pay for the right to stay. Maybe I've missed it. But we have had people saying that it would be ridiculous if they aren't allowed to go to their property in the EU, despite the possibility of only being allowed to visit the Schengen Area for 6 months at a time and with a 6 month period between visits. To me either you should be for free movement or not. Even Brexiteers can't agree. Although they can't agree on much.
"not at all - they want to set out a warning to anyone else thinking about leaving"
They don't want countries to leave, so why would they be wanting to make it as easy as possible to do so? Why would they want to give in to all of the UKs demands while getting not a lot in return? If you were to get divorced, would you give your wife the house, full rights over the kids, all the money in the bank? Or would you fight your corner and get the best for yourself? If a player wants to leave the Pars, do we just say "Aye, no bother pal, on you go." Or do we ask for a fee from his new club in order to help ourselves? Of course you can't force someone to stay against their will but you can get as much benefit for yourself or your company etc. As long as you aren't vindictive about it, which IMO the EU aren't being.
"spin? no punishment? do you honestly think the EU has been even close to reasonable? In these 'negotiations' - tell me where there has been any fairness or equitable discussions? So far, the EU have given up the square root of f**k all, but every time Theresa May (who I am absolutely no fan of) gives way and concedes ground, they add something else. - wait for the last minute push on fishing rights, Gibraltar sovereignty and extra cash payments."
The UK is asking to leave, so it's up the UK to try and agree a way to do that as seamlessly as possible. The EU was happy for the UK to stay in the common market as a whole but the UK only wanted that for the financial sector. The EU has said that it wants to remain as close as possible but the UK have said that they don't want to allow freedom of movement and services. The EU was very clear from the outset that the Irish border would be an issue and successive Brexit secretaries have kicked it down the line hoping that something would appear from nowhere to fix the problem. The UK could have delayed triggering Article 50 to allow more time for pre-negotiations but the UK had no set position going into them and triggered it as soon as possible. David Davis when he was Brexit secretary held only FOUR HOURS of talks with Michel Barnier in a YEAR! The EU have consistently said that they are willing to move on some areas and not others - the primacy of the ECHR was one - but for all this ground May had conceded (which is what exactly? I can't see a single thing that has been agreed which has been "Given up" and I notice that after saying I was vague you've done the very same thing), she has consistently tried to change the EUs position on their red lines which is a waste of time.
"if you take your blinkers off, you might notice some"
Or maybe if they were actually coherent and made an argument that there has been actual punishment then I would. Other than saying that the EU are making life difficult (Quite rightly) and that they are unwilling to bend their own red lines (Quite rightly) then there's nothing to see here.
"Also - I quoted you from a motion to be debated between EU Schools"
Guess what, our schools often have debates about the Death Penalty, Assisted Suicide, Gay Rights, Legalising Drugs... it doesn't mean it's official policy or that people's minds are made up (you know, since that's how a debate is meant to work?).
Anyway, I hope you're right about the Hotel California analogy. Since leaving would be a disaster for the UK, I hope we do stay in. Not that I can see it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parsweep
Date: Wed 21 Nov 16:17
We voted in our millions to leave , not to ask to leave .
I voted independance and lost , fair enough .
I voted to leave EU and won , but it looks more and more likely the majority are going to be overruled this time .
Don't you just love democracy .
Welcome to the United States of Europe (boak)
Bobvo
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: dave67
Date: Wed 21 Nov 17:38
Remain Don't trust wasteminster
Remain Same reason
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Wed 21 Nov 23:18
'We voted in our millions to leave , not to ask to leave .' Actually you did ask to leave, so you must have voted under a misapprehension: the vote was advisory, not binding upon the government.
It has spent the last two years trying to kick what it sees as a protest vote into the long grass. If the Brexit movement had been able to come up with a credible argument for leaving in these last two years then Theresa May would no longer be PM and we would be out of the EU.
The case for the EU has been equally weak, but is likely to salvage something due to the weakness of the opposing viewpoint.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parsweep
Date: Thu 22 Nov 07:54
Ah well . That's different .
I stand corrected .
Democracy isn't a thing of the past after all .
Bobvo
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: OzPar
Date: Thu 22 Nov 09:17
I would like to know why Boris Johnson crapped out of making a leadership challenge when the Brexit vote was secured. From an outsider's point of view, it seemed the strangest decision. Inexplicable really.
We can but wonder how different things would have turned out if Johnson had been PM and Rees-Mogg had been leading the negotiations. JRM would have been a far more formidable negotiator in Brussels than anyone else the Tories have or could put forward.
However, I have a feeling that for both of them their moment to shine may be gone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Captain Desmond Fancey
Date: Thu 22 Nov 09:46
Was an active leave campaigner last time round and nothing at all has changed since then.
Sadly I think the establishment are going to rule - yet again - and Brexit is not going to happen despite what May told McVey in Parliament yesterday.
Shame so many people have chosen to be influenced by the Project Fear that has unfolded in the last 2 and a half years really.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Thu 22 Nov 23:47
Johnson, Rees-Mogg and Gove all realised the impossibility of securing a Brexit deal that would benefit Britain. There isn't one, in the short term at least.
So they stayed on the sidelines. Their commitment to the working people of the UK is approximately zero, so far better to let someone else like Theresa May screw up an impossible task than them. The Gibraltar and Northern Ireland problems are ones that simply cannot be solved, so they have run away.
History may not be kind to May, but she will at least be seen as a PM who tried to make the best of a rotten hand of cards. Cameron, Farage, Rees-Mogg and Gove may find them selves in Blairsville or Gorbachovland before long. Politicians highly regarded b the media but unable to walk the streets of their own land.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Fri 23 Nov 08:02
Quote:
OzPar, Thu 22 Nov 09:17
I would like to know why Boris Johnson crapped out of making a leadership challenge when the Brexit vote was secured. From an outsider's point of view, it seemed the strangest decision. Inexplicable really.
We can but wonder how different things would have turned out if Johnson had been PM and Rees-Mogg had been leading the negotiations. JRM would have been a far more formidable negotiator in Brussels than anyone else the Tories have or could put forward.
However, I have a feeling that for both of them their moment to shine may be gone.
It's not rocket science, Oz. Boris was all set for No. 10 until his wee pal, Michael Gove, threw his hat into the ring, making a considerable dent in the number of votes Boris was likely to garner in the leadership contest. He then withdrew, citing that he'd come to the realisation that he didn't have the necessary attributes to lead the UK.
What's the betting that he'll decide he does have these qualities after all, if Theresa May is forced out by a no confidence vote? Of course, if no one is willing to put themselves forward at this delicate point, May will get her party's full backing to continue the Brexit negotiations.
Not your average Sunday League player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bertiesback
Date: Fri 23 Nov 11:27
"She told the event, titled ‘Parliamentarianism Between Globalisation and National Sovereignty’: "In this day nation states must today - should today, I say - be ready to give up sovereignty.
Mrs Merkel said that countries who think “they can solve everything on their own” are simply nationalistic and not patriotic because they “only think about themselves.”
She said: "Either you are one of those who believe they can solve everything on their own and only have to think about themselves. That is nationalism in its purest form.
“This is not patriotism. Because patriotism is if you include others in the German interest and accept win-win situations."
She seems to think, like May that there is only Black - or - White. And that is the problem with these people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: OzPar
Date: Fri 23 Nov 14:58
<<History may not be kind to May, but she will at least be seen as a PM who tried to make the best of a rotten hand of cards. >>
Like you, sammer, I am viewing this from afar, but I would take a different stance and argue that it wasn't so much a rotten hand of cards as a rotten set of negotiators on the British side. I don't think anyone thought the British Government would be so inept at arguing its case.
The challenges of negotiating an alternative to a single market were recognised well ahead of the referendum. Border issues like Ulster and Gibraltar didn't suddenly appear when the negotiations started.
The problem has been that doing Brexit, even with a strong government that was united, with a mandate, that knew what it wanted the end game to be; even then, it would be difficult as the Europeans obviously have their own strategic goals. But it was made doubly difficult by not having Brexiteers running the government after the referendum.
There was no "head of steam" and the resulting plan is evidence of this. I don't recall remainers or leavers ever saying there would be a divorce bill of 40 billion pounds.
Whether the tide is now flowing towards remain is another question. There is a real danger in that.
If the government is now going to tell the British people - who for the first time in living memory won a vote that was truly against the establishment - that they would have to vote again, then the backlash to that could be quite huge.
There may well be an economic price to pay for Brexit, but there will be an even bigger democratic price to pay if they make the British people vote again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 23 Nov 15:52
We seem to have moved from ''No deal is better than a bad deal'' to ''Any deal is better than no deal''.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Sun 25 Nov 23:47
Quote:
Luxembourg Par, Tue 20 Nov 23:35
<<but every time Theresa May (who I am absolutely no fan of) gives way and concedes ground, they add something else. - wait for the last minute push on fishing rights, Gibraltar sovereignty and extra cash payments.>>
Two out of three already, and they haven't even passed the deal yet...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: AdamAntsParsStripe
Date: Mon 26 Nov 05:21
Only Labour can save May's deal now.
Zwei Pints Bier und ein Päckchen Chips bitte
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Rastapari
Date: Mon 26 Nov 07:05
Quote:
AdamAntsParsStripe, Mon 26 Nov 05:21
Only Labour can save May's deal now.
Oh and they will,they like a good abstaining to prop up their other cheek.
|
|
|
|
|
|
