Politics, politics, politics

[Gutter Boy]

I understand, and even agree in theory - but disagree in this instance.

This isnt a turn around. The vote wasnt last week, and we are just re-running it to get a more favourable result.

The vote was made over 2 years ago, we have been through the process, learned a lot along the way and are at an impasse in how to proceed. A second vote seems a pretty sensible option to break the deadlock.

Particularly as the original vote was so unspecific it meant all things to all people. Many may have voted leave and still feel at this point their vote has been failed.

The fundamental issue, for me, was just how open to interpretation to original vote was.

Europhobes have never been handed over power. Europhiles had 40 years at the wheel to screw up the country with their federalist vision. 2 more years of Europhile delays in handing over doesn't equal a turnover.

 

[r-u-s-x]

Their core vote is Shire England. Land of village fetes, warm beer and apple crumble. Maidstone say. Their political outlook hasn't changed since the 1910s - its massively protectionist.

Torys want state controlled businesses and a stop to capitalism, even you can't believe this

 

[Gutter Boy]

Torys want state controlled businesses and a stop to capitalism, even you can't believe this

Tory voters - yes. Most of them are over 60 YO and remember the 1950s and 1960s fondly

 

[scaramanga]

The EU would never let the UK have free trade with it, while being able to have different terms. The whole premise for EU laws is to ensure companies can all compete fairly across the EU. Pipe dream and we wouldn’t accept the reverse - say France being able to trade with us while undercutting UK firms and doing independent trade deals. Nevergoningtohappen.


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app

http://bfy.tw/Logn

 

[r-u-s-x]

Tory voters - yes. Most of them are over 60 YO and remember the 1950s and 1960s fondly

You're wrong

 

[scaramanga]

You think the current tory party is Keynesian? wow.

Can you show any policy that wants less global trade and more State intervention in business in the Tory party?

Minimum wage is the latter and causes the former.

 

[r-u-s-x]

Minimum wage is the latter and causes the former.

State owned industry I should have said as apparently this is a key goal for the over 60 year old tory voters

 

[StephenH]

The new Age UK party could win quite a few seats in parliament in the next general election after their success in the in the last Brexit vote.

 

[Grays_1890]

Reece Mogg makes a very good point in that the Brexit Bill being passed by Parliament which means the UKs withdrawal from the EU is now set into Law, I did not know that. Not sure how true that is because he is obviously churning one side of the argument.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

I personally believe that the Norway model represents little more than a tactical stepping stone towards the ultimate goal of remain to many of its proponents. Are we really expected to believe, for example, that the likes of Stephen Kinnock have fully accepted that brexit must happen?

I can understand it as a stepping stone to full exit as GB says, if that were the plan t would make some sense.

As a "lets covertly remain" ploy, its nonsense. We are catgorically worse off than simply remaining, and I think if you presented that as "leave" or simply remain, most sensible minded folk would say "fudge off"

I kind of agree ha. And yet I still think it's about the best path forward from where we are today because of this:

The fundamental issue, for me, was just how open to interpretation to original vote was.

Well theres the interesting thing. May has just taken an interpretation and stuck to it. As others have with other views.

Surely, instead of taking a flimflam deal, it would make a bit of sense to clarify? Rather than just being myopic about something as intangible as it was?

Norway is not the best path forward, never was or will be.

It is only the best path forward if one insists on handicapping themselves with a made up remit.

Europhobes have never been handed over power. Europhiles had 40 years at the wheel to screw up the country with their federalist vision. 2 more years of Europhile delays in handing over doesn't equal a turnover.

The point being, and I thought it was clear, the vote was vague, the process has proven worse, its not a turnover to suggest people take a proper look just before the point of no return.

People may have legitimately changed their mind, it isnt some sort of coersion to get a desired result.

Unless you see the complete incompetence of our government as coersion.

 

[the dza]

Reece Mogg makes a very good point in that the Brexit Bill being passed by Parliament which means the UKs withdrawal from the EU is now set into Law, I did not know that. Not sure how true that is because he is obviously churning one side of the argument.

It is. But a Tory MP was saying earlier today how they can legislate their way around that and enshrine something else into law. Political will is the issue.

 

[the dza]

I can understand it as a stepping stone to full exit as GB says, if that were the plan t would make some sense.

As a "lets covertly remain" ploy, its nonsense. We are catgorically worse off than simply remaining, and I think if you presented that as "leave" or simply remain, most sensible minded folk would say "fudge off"




Well theres the interesting thing. May has just taken an interpretation and stuck to it. As others have with other views.

Surely, instead of taking a flimflam deal, it would make a bit of sense to clarify? Rather than just being myopic about something as intangible as it was?

Norway is not the best path forward, never was or will be.

It is only the best path forward if one insists on handicapping themselves with a made up remit.



The point being, and I thought it was clear, the vote was vague, the process has proven worse, its not a turnover to suggest people take a proper look just before the point of no return.

People may have legitimately changed their mind, it isnt some sort of coersion to get a desired result.

Unless you see the complete incompetence of our government as coersion.

You have to start with the Parliamentary arithmetic though. You can come up with whatever plan you want, but if MPs won't go for it, it's not going to happen. A soft Brexit is the only thing that will get through currently, maybe there will be a shift to a 2nd referendum if it looks like there's no other way of avoiding no-deal. In the event of a 2nd referendum, then they will battle over what the question should be, which is another sh1tshow.

 

[SpurMeUp]

Loads of negatives to being in the EU, its just that as we have been in for so long they are new viewed as negatives in the same way as its a better the devil you know view.

Leave was like any vote for me, I voted for it and its down to politicians to see that through and work how that looks not me the same as when I vote in the generals, I don't then want to run the NHS or the police force.

Interesting. And I agree to an extent. The issue is, what was promised was an easy negotiation with the EU, with the UK getting everything it wants with no downsides. Clearly those promises have not been fullfilled. The best we could get was what May has tabled. You're happy with that as a Brexit outcome?

 

[markysimmo]

Isnt hard Brexit in the plan? I have a friend who is a civil servant and they are planning for it, got systems being set up for it. .

My company (private sector) has spent millions setting up for a hard brexit

 

[SpurMeUp]

I voted to leave the EU because I ultimately felt that we no longer needed to have a large part of our interests controlled by pen pushers at the EU. I think there are a large number of opportunities to leaving.

I feel that the EU has served is purpose for us, like anything there is a time when you move on, our time in the EU is only a small stitch on the tapestry that makes up our history.

We are the 5th largest economy in the world which for me is an opportunity to trade more freely with the world considering 94% of our business is not trading in Europe. You go around the world and countries outside the EU who are huge customers or potential customers believe in independant Britian. Australis is a tiny economy and they managed to negotiate huge deals globally in just over a year.

Only five per cent of GDP is involved in cross-border trade in goods with EU countries and only 12 per cent overall if you include services. The majority of our trade is with the rest of the world.

Although the bus slogan was seen as a lie I didnt see it as a promise more of a point of view, I took it as "We send money abroad lets spend that here" and I do as horrible and selfish as that sounds believe in that side of coin.

Is the EU a success? I don't think it is an economic success story, a union of red tape and taxation which I think its time to move on from. The EUs growth rate is lower than our and unemployment rates amoungst its members is horendous.

Thats where I stand and why I wanted out, feel free to pick the bones out of it but ultimately I believed and still believe our long term future is out the EU.

What are the large number of opportuniities exactly? Because after 3 years, I can't see them. If they are really there, then we must be able to outline them?

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

You have to start with the Parliamentary arithmetic though. You can come up with whatever plan you want, but if MPs won't go for it, it's not going to happen. A soft Brexit is the only thing that will get through currently, maybe there will be a shift to a 2nd referendum if it looks like there's no other way of avoiding no-deal. In the event of a 2nd referendum, then they will battle over what the question should be, which is another sh1tshow.

All of which should have happened the first time.

As it didnt, the government is essentially making it up as they go along.

They have no actual, definitive remit as the referendum was so poorly put together.

Now they are at a stage of very definite consequence - they really should have that remit clarified.

To go with a Soft Brexit is the worst of all worlds and satisfies no one.

IMHO its either all in our all out, not a bastardised half way stop.


Incidentally, just reading on the BBC.

Corbyns vote is tonight. If there is a vote of no confidence we have 14 days for 'a' government to win a vote of confidence. (I would guess this to be most likely unsuccessful). We then have 25 working days (minimum) until an election can be held.

By my maths that puts us somewhere around 6th March. What then is going to happen in the following 3 weeks before we exit?

IF, in the running for a GE, revoking A50 is on the manifesto, an incoming government can act quickly.

Otherwise we are begging for time from a position of ultimate weakness. And given how the EU have conducted themselves to date you have to wonder what it will cost us.

 

[SpurMeUp]

In the real world, lets look back over every general election and look at what was voted for, the result and the manifesto and see if there are three green lights to match, its rare.

Like I said earlier I voted for Brexit like any election, you take parts from all over and you make an informed decision but do I wantto be a part of the mechanics and making that work or do I want to be a politician to make it work, no I dont, no more than when I vote for a government based on making the NHS work, don't baffle me with science, do the work your public has voted for you to do.

Serious question, what if what you voted for doesn't work? That whatever the configeration, it doesn't bring the benifits that were promised? What then?

 

[SpurMeUp]

Reece Mogg makes a very good point in that the Brexit Bill being passed by Parliament which means the UKs withdrawal from the EU is now set into Law, I did not know that. Not sure how true that is because he is obviously churning one side of the argument.

Yes its true. In the coming weeks, other MPs will try to pass new laws to mean we don't leave - off the cliff - in March. Or May may extend A50.

 

[Parklaner81]

I can understand it as a stepping stone to full exit as GB says, if that were the plan t would make some sense.

As a "lets covertly remain" ploy, its nonsense. We are catgorically worse off than simply remaining, and I think if you presented that as "leave" or simply remain, most sensible minded folk would say "fudge off"

I entirely agree. What I was suggesting - my original post possibly didn't make this clear - isn't that proponents of a Norway deal actually believe in it because it closely resembles remain, rather that they see it as the best way of eventually ending up at actual, full-on remain. Because, as you so rightly point out, of its own merits it is THE worst of all worlds deal. And once it gets to front and centre of the debate, most people will realise that. I believe that this is the goal of Kinnock et al., because it's the shortest of steps from there to simply cancelling the entire thing - and with widespread consent. And that's what they really want.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Gotcha, yeah - cant argue. Wouldnt surprise me in the least to see it as a "threat" to get a remain vote.

Ive been convinced for a while the government will find one way or another to just end up with the status quo. Assumed a referendum but that could work.