Brexit Discussion Thread.

[jammie82uk]

15 hours ago, Watson said:

 

If they do that they might just find themselves in the same situation as the Scottish arm of the party come the next election 

[Steven]

Show this chart to anyone who says Brexit is the 'will of the British people'

https://www.indy100.com/article/brexit-leave-remain-52-48-per-cent-voter-turnout-electoral-register-7399226

 

 

 

[davieG]

On that basis the country has rarely if  ever voted for anyone or anything

[Facecloth]

18 hours ago, Steven said:

Show this chart to anyone who says Brexit is the 'will of the British people'

https://www.indy100.com/article/brexit-leave-remain-52-48-per-cent-voter-turnout-electoral-register-7399226

 

 

 

I voted remain, but I have a real problem with people who us this as an argument. The grey part is irrelevant. One part of it wasn't entitled to vote, the other part couldn't be bothered. Now you could say that abstaining more likely means you'd rather keep the status quo, but we can't actually know if they did. If most of that didn't vote section were likely to go remain, they aren't some group of heroes we can refer to reverse the result, they're the villain, it's they're fault remain lost because they couldn't be arsed.

 

What I would say is that if the government wanted this referendum to be binding and provide a mandate they should have either made voting compulsory, and/or set a threshold where one side had to get a certain percentage for it to go ahead. The vote was certainly too close to say there's s clear mandate, and when brexit is so vague then I'm not sure what it's a mandate for.

[The Railway Man]

On 11/5/2016 at 13:23, Strokes said:

It seems the only people claiming we didn't know what we were voting for, are remainers. I have heard not one leaver, claim to be disgruntled or bewildered. Not on here or out in the wider world, it's a myth, peddled by desperate, scheming remainers.

THANK GOD SOMEONE HAS SAID THIS.

 

The arrogance of the remainers knows no bounds, they spent the whole campaign trying to tell people voting leave they didn't know what they voting for and now they are still doing it, I know exactly what I voted for and aside from one very confused MP it appears everybody else did. They should actually get out and actually speak to some leave voters.

 

I challenge anyone from Labour/REMAIN to actually write down what they think the Tories should actually put to the house to get the vote through and do it in a way that gives a guarantee and doesnt weaken the negotiating position by telling the EU exactly what we'll be asking for.

 

Go on.

[The Railway Man]

3 hours ago, Steven said:

Show this chart to anyone who says Brexit is the 'will of the British people'

https://www.indy100.com/article/brexit-leave-remain-52-48-per-cent-voter-turnout-electoral-register-7399226

 

 

 

Stupid point to make, if you used this argument no one or anythng has been elected in history.

 

To even try and count the greys as some sort of "pro-EU" stance is a joke and you know it.

[The Railway Man]

17 hours ago, jammie82uk said:

If they do that they might just find themselves in the same situation as the Scottish arm of the party come the next election 

Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it etc....

[Guest MattP]

On 11/4/2016 at 19:48, GaelicFox said:

@Alf Bentley is of the opinion that long posts are the future 

 

@MattP is the son of Nigel and Teresa

I am not.

 

On 11/4/2016 at 21:06, Alf Bentley said:

 

Would still be interested to hear what sort of "direct action" @MattP intends to take against MPs who don't implement Hard Brexit.... 

Are we talking chained to the railings outside parliament, serious biffing or something more bloodthirsty?

We don't riot and intimidate on the right @Alf Bentley!You should know that, we write strongly worded letters to points of view and complain about it at the local church group!

 

On a serious note if any MP seeks to block article 50 I think there has to be a concerted effort to remove them from parliament at the next election, I'd like to UKIP only challenge pro-EU MP's of any party and give a free walk to eurosceptics, be them Tories in the South or Labour in the North.

 

If Article 50 is blocked and the next election is turned into another referendum, which is possible at the minute it still should be easy for our side to win providing we don't make it complicated, 70%+ of constituencies voted to leave and the remain vote was highly concentrated in London, the Home Counties and Scotland.

 

(52%-48%) obviously looks close in a referendum, on FPTP leave won by a distance.

 

On 11/5/2016 at 21:38, The Doctor said:

It shouldn't - the eu and our involvement in it is far too complex for anyone to reasonably understand the implications of each option - remainers and leavers alike 

Who should decide? I'm sure plenty of people in the country on both sides fully understood the complexities of what staying in and leaving meant.

 

We certainly need a more representitive parliament though, when less than 20% of the house supports something 52% of the country do the system is wrong, it would probably have dissolved immediately after the referendum in any other century after it was found to be that out of touch with it's electorate.

 

Although I'm hazarding a guess the people who you would have decide would keep us in?

 

On 11/5/2016 at 23:04, Watson said:

He came out and demanded article 50 was invoked the day after the referendum, now he's saying he'll order his party to vote against the whole thing unless he gets the Brexit he wants.

 

No idea how anyone outside his own clique can anybody take this guy seriously anymore.

 

21 hours ago, GaelicFox said:

Is mattp farage ? 

 

Riots  

No.

 

1 hour ago, The Railway Man said:

THANK GOD SOMEONE HAS SAID THIS.

 

The arrogance of the remainers knows no bounds, they spent the whole campaign trying to tell people voting leave they didn't know what they voting for and now they are still doing it, I know exactly what I voted for and aside from one very confused MP it appears everybody else did. They should actually get out and actually speak to some leave voters.

 

I challenge anyone from Labour/REMAIN to actually write down what they think the Tories should actually put to the house to get the vote through and do it in a way that gives a guarantee and doesnt weaken the negotiating position by telling the EU exactly what we'll be asking for.

 

Go on.

Were you watching This Week by any chance? I think so.

 

Michael Portillo said the same thing and then Andrew Neil pushed Liz Kendall on it and she couldn't, to me it's starting to look like some Labour MP's want to position themselves into an argument that they won't block Brexit unless it's a soft Brexit, a guarantee that we'll be staying inside the single market, if so they should just show some balls and block article 50, the end result will pretty much be the same thing. This must be the first time in history the losing side in a referendum is the one making the demands about how the winning side implements the result.

 

Anyone on here want to give it a go about how they would lay down their negotiating terms to parliament without giving away to the EU what we want?

[GaelicFox]

Just now, MattP said:

I am not.

 

We don't riot and intimidate on the right @Alf Bentley!You should know that, we write strongly worded letters to points of view and complain about it at the local church group!

 

On a serious note if any MP seeks to block article 50 I think there has to be a concerted effort to remove them from parliament at the next election, I'd like to UKIP only challenge pro-EU MP's of any party and give a free walk to eurosceptics, be them Tories in the South or Labour in the North.

 

If Article 50 is blocked and the next election is turned into another referendum, which is possible at the minute it still should be easy for our side to win providing we don't make it complicated, 70%+ of constituencies voted to leave and the remain vote was highly concentrated in London, the Home Counties and Scotland.

 

Who should decide? I'm sure plenty of people in the country on both sides fully understood the complexities of what staying in and leaving meant.

 

We certainly need a more representitive parliament though, when less than 20% of the house supports something 52% of the country do the system is wrong, it would probably have dissolved immediately after the referendum in any other century after it was found to be that out of touch with it's electorate.

 

Although I'm hazarding a guess the people who you would have decide would keep us in?

 

He came out and demanded article 50 was invoked the day after the referendum, now he's saying he'll order his party to vote against the whole thing unless he gets the Brexit he wants.

 

No idea how anyone outside his own clique can anybody take this guy seriously anymore.

 

No.

 

Were you watching This Week by any chance? I think so.

 

Michael Portillo said the same thing and then Andrew Neil pushed Liz Kendall on it and she couldn't, to me it's starting to look like some Labour MP's want to position themselves into an argument that they won't block Brexit unless it's a soft Brexit, a guarantee that we'll be staying inside the single market, if so they should just show some balls and block article 50, the end result will pretty much be the same thing. This must be the first time in history the losing side in a referendum is the one making the demands about how the winning side implements the result.

 

Anyone on here want to give it a go about how they would lay down their negotiating terms to parliament without giving away to the EU what we want?

Ahh Matty smile 

 

the whole world smiles with you, when your smiling  

[Alf Bentley]

1 hour ago, The Railway Man said:

Stupid point to make, if you used this argument no one or anythng has been elected in history.

 

To even try and count the greys as some sort of "pro-EU" stance is a joke and you know it.

 

I agree that it's a stupid point if you try to use non-registered and non-voters to invalidate the vote to leave the EU. The rules of the referendum were known and we voted Leave.

 

Where it becomes more valid is if the Leave side try to force through a particular, extreme version of Brexit for which they have no mandate on the grounds of their 51.9% v 48.1% victory.

Who knows what the result would have been if the referendum question had been: "Should the UK leave the EU and the Single Market and take complete control of immigration?"

Whatever, that wasn't the question - and Leave spent the whole campaign, until very late on, avoiding questions about the Single Market and being completely unclear, presumably because they suspected that it might lose them votes.

 

Our negotiating stance for Brexit IS up for debate as the only question answered at the referendum was: Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?

 

 

1 hour ago, The Railway Man said:

I know exactly what I voted for and aside from one very confused MP it appears everybody else did. They should actually get out and actually speak to some leave voters.

 

I challenge anyone from Labour/REMAIN to actually write down what they think the Tories should actually put to the house to get the vote through and do it in a way that gives a guarantee and doesnt weaken the negotiating position by telling the EU exactly what we'll be asking for.

 

Go on.

 

A lot of people on both sides were very confused. I'm sure most people haven't changed their minds - but some will have done (on both sides). God knows what the result would be now, but that doesn't matter as the vote won't be rerun.

Here's one bloke: http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien/repentant-leave-brexit-voter-chokes-up-tear-son/

 

I half-tried to take up your challenge before you even made it (see below). The Tories should put to the House that they'll make membership of the Single Market (or a close relationship with it) a negotiating priority - alongside border control, no doubt.

They cannot guarantee any outcome of the negotiations, as that's in the  nature of bilateral negotiations. The negotiations are also ultimately under EU law, not UK law (though the UK has the right to refuse any deal and to leave regardless). What the Govt could do is to give guarantees about particular UK legislation that would replace some of the EU legislation ditched (e.g. social/employment rights & environmental protection).

 

Of course, if the Govt guarantees to negotiate for membership/close relationship with the Single Market and that isn't included in the deal, its opponents will face a dilemma: would they vote down the negotiated package, risking us leaving the EU with no agreed deal and triggering a general election. Likewise, the opposition face a dilemma if the Govt refuses point blank to make the Single Market a priority: if Parliament voted down their plans, delaying Brexit, who would the electorate blame - the Govt for its intransigence or the Opposition for not co-operating with Govt Brexit plans? Particularly if that generated a general election in spring 2017?

 

On 11/6/2016 at 01:10, Alf Bentley said:

 

As Webbo says, the Govt can't "guarantee" anything as it's a two-way negotiation process.

I suppose the most they could do is "guarantee to negotiate for membership of the Single Market" or "to negotiate for free/easy access".

 

 

[Guest MattP]

Haven't the Tories already done that Alf? May has said numerous times she intends to get the best deal for Britain that includes access to the single market. How would she guarantee in a paper to the house we'll be staying in that without telling the EU what our negotiating position would be on it.

 

I do get the feeling a lot of this is still hot air though, May should go hard and dare the house to vote it down, imagine Labour having to go into a General Election having blocked Brexit on the grounds partly they want to defend freedom of movement, they'll be looking at the worst result in living memory.

 

Quote

Who knows what the result would have been if the referendum question had been: "Should the UK leave the EU and the Single Market and take complete control of immigration?"

That wouldn't have been possible though, for that to happen you would have needed three questions on the ballot paper, it had to be a binery choice.

 

Hence why (as you mentioned) if people werent sure it was made very clear towards the end a vote to leave meant a vote to leave the single market, as the leaders on both sides of the campaign stated.

[Alf Bentley]

19 minutes ago, MattP said:

Haven't the Tories already done that Alf? May has said numerous times she intends to get the best deal for Britain that includes access to the single market. How would she guarantee in a paper to the house we'll be staying in that without telling the EU what our negotiating position would be on it.

 

I do get the feeling a lot of this is still hot air though, May should go hard and dare the house to vote it down, imagine Labour having to go into a General Election having blocked Brexit on the grounds partly they want to defend freedom of movement, they'll be looking at the worst result in living memory.

 

That wouldn't have been possible though, for that to happen you would have needed three questions on the ballot paper, it had to be a binery choice.

 

Hence why (as you mentioned) if people werent sure it was made very clear towards the end a vote to leave meant a vote to leave the single market, as the leaders on both sides of the campaign stated.

 

The phrase "access to the single market" is meaningless, whether it's May or Corbyn using it. China has access to the single market. It's the terms of that access that matter.

Likewise, "the best deal for Britain" is meaningless. Does anyone support NOT getting the best deal for Britain?

 

Yep, Labour would be in a difficult position if May did call their bluff. They'd have to be exceptionally stupid to make a stand on the freedom of movement, maybe less so on the single market. It would be a massive gamble for both sides - and possibly a much bigger one for Labour, as you suggest (significant risk for May, too, though).

 

Would we have needed 3 questions? The alternative question I used does pose a binary choice, in effect: "here's a package - leave the EU, leave the Single Market & take control of immigration, take it or leave it? Some voters might have liked certain parts of the package and not others, but they'd have had to take a binary decision overall. We're seeing now the consequences of presenting voters with a simpler binary question - people voted the same way in anticipation of different outcomes, leading to chaos and strife. If it had been 3 separate questions, people would probably have voted to leave the EU, to control immigration but to stay in the Single Market - which would probably have been impossible to negotiate with the EU!

 

We'll have to rehash our argument about how clear/unclear Leave were about leaving the Single Market. You posted a video showing that certain individuals sort of made their individual views clear in the last couple of weeks. I posted various links showing that they had been distinctly unclear, even avoiding questions about the Single Market until the last couple of weeks. I also posted a link to the Vote Leave web site showing that it doesn't make any such commitment - and to a couple of leading quality newspapers pointing out that Leave was being unclear even in the last weeks. I'll try to fish my links out later, but have urgent work now....

[GaelicFox]

Alf will have arthritis in his thumbs by the time article 50 is triggered 

 

Typing king 

 

 

[yorkie1999]

I voted brexit, nothing to do with politics, just simply the sight of bob geldof flicking the "v" sign at uk fishermen and his fellow remain activists jeering and patronising them. It just gave me the impression of a "**** you, we're doing alright, pull the ladder up" attitude towards people struggling because of EU policies.

[Guest MattP]

1 hour ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

The phrase "access to the single market" is meaningless, whether it's May or Corbyn using it. China has access to the single market. It's the terms of that access that matter.

Likewise, "the best deal for Britain" is meaningless. Does anyone support NOT getting the best deal for Britain?

 

Yep, Labour would be in a difficult position if May did call their bluff. They'd have to be exceptionally stupid to make a stand on the freedom of movement, maybe less so on the single market. It would be a massive gamble for both sides - and possibly a much bigger one for Labour, as you suggest (significant risk for May, too, though).

 

Would we have needed 3 questions? The alternative question I used does pose a binary choice, in effect: "here's a package - leave the EU, leave the Single Market & take control of immigration, take it or leave it? Some voters might have liked certain parts of the package and not others, but they'd have had to take a binary decision overall. We're seeing now the consequences of presenting voters with a simpler binary question - people voted the same way in anticipation of different outcomes, leading to chaos and strife. If it had been 3 separate questions, people would probably have voted to leave the EU, to control immigration but to stay in the Single Market - which would probably have been impossible to negotiate with the EU!

 

We'll have to rehash our argument about how clear/unclear Leave were about leaving the Single Market. You posted a video showing that certain individuals sort of made their individual views clear in the last couple of weeks. I posted various links showing that they had been distinctly unclear, even avoiding questions about the Single Market until the last couple of weeks. I also posted a link to the Vote Leave web site showing that it doesn't make any such commitment - and to a couple of leading quality newspapers pointing out that Leave was being unclear even in the last weeks. I'll try to fish my links out later, but have urgent work now....

I don't think we are ever going to agree on the last point, given the EU's position I would even argue saying you are going to control your borders now means you are arguing to leave the single market, but as you say, pointless us both just posting the same stuff at each other over and over again.

 

The referendum having three questions was never going to happen as it quite rightly would have led to it being unfair and leaving us with an impossible problem to solve unless Remain had scored 50.01% or more, what would the government had done had most people wanted to leave the EU but only as a condition that we stayed in the single market, it would have had to leave to some some sort of second referendum then on the terms, as you say, the most likely being giving the government a decision as to which would probably have been impossible to negotiate with the EU.

 

From what I gather some Labour figures want a guarantee of single market access not to veto article 50, which the government clearly can't do if the EU is serious about it not negotiating on the freedom of movement, the question now appears to be whether they will accept the declaration you want, a commitment to prioritising membership of the single market.

 

Having a General Election in mind the Tories now have to bash home why they can't guarantee access to the single market it and make sure the reason the public knows they can't do it is because the EU will not compromise on Open borders, then after that is the centrepiece of the argument allow Labour to hang themselves defending that position.

 

44 minutes ago, GaelicFox said:

Alf will have arthritis in his thumbs by the time article 50 is triggered 

 

Typing king

Let's hope he continues to do so as well, whatever the subject it's always worth taking the time to read, I do get a buzz of excitement when I see he has replied to a topic that I want to hear his viewpoint on, I think he would write a fantastic political column for the Mercury as well, not only because of how enjoyable it would be but because his politics probably does represent Leicester as a city better than any of us. (Labour left leaning, but no desire to head towards the hard left Labour/Corbyn ways of doing things).

 

There was a period earlier this year where Alf barely posted and to say the forum was the worse for it is the understatement of the century.

[leicsmac]

43 minutes ago, MattP said:

 

Let's hope he continues to do so as well, whatever the subject it's always worth taking the time to read, I do get a buzz of excitement when I see he has replied to a topic that I want to hear his viewpoint on, I think he would write a fantastic political column for the Mercury as well, not only because of how enjoyable it would be but because his politics probably does represent Leicester as a city better than any of us. (Labour left leaning, but no desire to head towards the hard left Labour/Corbyn ways of doing things).

 

There was a period earlier this year where Alf barely posted and to say the forum was the worse for it is the understatement of the century.

Totally agree. Wish I could approach his level of eloquence (and hold my tongue sometimes in the way he does) on most topics.

[GaelicFox]

Wow !!!!! 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters?CMP=twt_gu

[Darkon84]

1 hour ago, MattP said:

Let's hope he continues to do so as well, whatever the subject it's always worth taking the time to read, I do get a buzz of excitement when I see he has replied to a topic that I want to hear his viewpoint on, I think he would write a fantastic political column for the Mercury as well, not only because of how enjoyable it would be but because his politics probably does represent Leicester as a city better than any of us. (Labour left leaning, but no desire to head towards the hard left Labour/Corbyn ways of doing things).

 

There was a period earlier this year where Alf barely posted and to say the forum was the worse for it is the understatement of the century.

 

Too bloody right! All hail King Alf!

 

A political column in the Mercury by Alf really would be a good read and would certainly enhance the paper as a whole. Make it so!

[Nick]

CPS are considering a complaint regarding alleged misleading brexit leave campaign:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters

 

 

[Guest MattP]

7 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

CPS are considering a complaint regarding alleged misleading brexit leave campaign:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters

Two posts up.

[Finnegan]

4 hours ago, GaelicFox said:

Alf will have arthritis in his thumbs by the time article 50 is triggered 

 

Typing king 

 

 

 

If the contents of this thread are going over your head, instead of resorting to ridicule to mask your insecurity, you could always just avoid it.

 

 

[The Guvnor]

So who will hold the remain campaigners to account? as I recall they told a few whoppers and no doubt many undecided voters would have voted for the status quo to avoid the forecast Armageddon so it's all sour grapes and bitter lemons. 

 

[Carl the Llama]

I wonder how many people read that Guardian article far enough to learn that it's not a challenge against - or will in any way affect - the outcome of the referendum?  Genuinely good news to learn that there might actually be some accountability for deliberately misleading people during elections, although even if there is it needs to be strong enough to be a disincentive otherwise politicians will continue to lie their way through campaigns and just take the slap on the wrist afterwards.

[GaelicFox]

26 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

If the contents of this thread are going over your head, instead of resorting to ridicule to mask your insecurity, you could always just avoid it.

 

 

What ? you know what Finners your as big a knob as me some times , and that's not bloody easy 

 

I wasn't having a go at all or making ridicule just continuing a joke about the length of his postings, postings which I have acknowledged on a few time are excellent and always on point. 

 

but as your anally repressed you missed the little smile at end which signifies a little bit of humour 

 

I'm beginning to think your as young as Scousefox .....  

 

 

 

[Finnegan]

I'm beginning to think you're as thick as @ScouseFox