Realist Guy In The Room Posted 25 January 2017 Share Posted 25 January 2017 I would love for them to have another referendum which remain won by a small margin. We could then go over the whole thing again but with the leave side losing their shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 25 January 2017 Share Posted 25 January 2017 1 minute ago, Realist Guy In The Room said: I would love for them to have another referendum which remain won by a small margin. We could then go over the whole thing again but with the leave side losing their shit. Would be mental. I remember them all going mad when Obama got elected in the USA, Blair was winning landslides here and our governments were pushing through European treaties without consulting them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realist Guy In The Room Posted 25 January 2017 Share Posted 25 January 2017 2 hours ago, MattP said: Would be mental. I remember them all going mad when Obama got elected in the USA, Blair was winning landslides here and our governments were pushing through European treaties without consulting them. The good old days. Its crazy to think that during that period, Labour were unstoppable. Compared to now its just chalk and cheese. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benji Posted 26 January 2017 Share Posted 26 January 2017 As expected the Bill is essentially a one liner. "The Prime Minister may notify, under Article 50(2) of the Treaty on European Union, the United Kingdom’s intention to withdraw from the EU." Even as someone who voted Remain, I hope they just bloody get on with it now and get it passed and don't turn this into a farce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 26 January 2017 Share Posted 26 January 2017 Hearing quite a few MP's say it's now the responsibility of them to vote as their constituents did and block article 50, does anyone think there is any merit in this? I really do think it's a dodgy road to go down given the referendum was calculated on the overall result of the country, if this was the case that they were going to vote on the basis of their own area they really should have told us before and we maybe should have been changing the way the result was presented. Because of the high concentration of the remain vote in London/HomeCounties and Scotland, it was very possible we could have had a 52-48% victory for Remain (roughly) but then would have been taken out of the EU as the Leave vote was more widespread and would have won more constituencies overall. Would anyone have seen that as justified? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 26 January 2017 Share Posted 26 January 2017 16 minutes ago, MattP said: Hearing quite a few MP's say it's now the responsibility of them to vote as their constituents did and block article 50, does anyone think there is any merit in this? I really do think it's a dodgy road to go down given the referendum was calculated on the overall result of the country, if this was the case that they were going to vote on the basis of their own area they really should have told us before and we maybe should have been changing the way the result was presented. Because of the high concentration of the remain vote in London/HomeCounties and Scotland, it was very possible we could have had a 52-48% victory for Remain (roughly) but then would have been taken out of the EU as the Leave vote was more widespread and would have won more constituencies overall. Would anyone have seen that as justified? Why not? It worked for Trump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 26 January 2017 Share Posted 26 January 2017 7 minutes ago, leicsmac said: Why not? It worked for Trump. Difference is everyone knew the system for that. I think this is quite important and those MP's need to explain why they feel this is appropriate, not to mention the potential for a second referendum, it would of course mean even in the event of Remain winning a reversal MP's would be totally justified in still taking us out if their constituency voted to leave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 26 January 2017 Share Posted 26 January 2017 3 minutes ago, MattP said: Difference is everyone knew the system for that. I think this is quite important and those MP's need to explain why they feel this is appropriate, not to mention the potential for a second referendum, it would of course mean even in the event of Remain winning a reversal MP's would be totally justified in still taking us out if their constituency voted to leave. Yeah, I know. The US is less keen on direct democracy than we are. Though FPTP isn't what you'd call 100% democratic either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benji Posted 26 January 2017 Share Posted 26 January 2017 30 minutes ago, MattP said: Hearing quite a few MP's say it's now the responsibility of them to vote as their constituents did and block article 50, does anyone think there is any merit in this? I really do think it's a dodgy road to go down given the referendum was calculated on the overall result of the country, if this was the case that they were going to vote on the basis of their own area they really should have told us before and we maybe should have been changing the way the result was presented. Because of the high concentration of the remain vote in London/HomeCounties and Scotland, it was very possible we could have had a 52-48% victory for Remain (roughly) but then would have been taken out of the EU as the Leave vote was more widespread and would have won more constituencies overall. Would anyone have seen that as justified? No. If they wanted to do it on a constituency basis they should have framed the referendum in that way. They didn't and it was yes or no so they should collectively vote in line with the country on this issue. There will be a few who use this as an excuse but I'm confident the Bill will pass fairly comfortably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 26 January 2017 Share Posted 26 January 2017 1 minute ago, leicsmac said: Yeah, I know. The US is less keen on direct democracy than we are. Though FPTP isn't what you'd call 100% democratic either. Perhaps we should have another referendum on that. After all this one is going so well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 26 January 2017 Share Posted 26 January 2017 1 hour ago, MattP said: Hearing quite a few MP's say it's now the responsibility of them to vote as their constituents did and block article 50, does anyone think there is any merit in this? I really do think it's a dodgy road to go down given the referendum was calculated on the overall result of the country, if this was the case that they were going to vote on the basis of their own area they really should have told us before and we maybe should have been changing the way the result was presented. Because of the high concentration of the remain vote in London/HomeCounties and Scotland, it was very possible we could have had a 52-48% victory for Remain (roughly) but then would have been taken out of the EU as the Leave vote was more widespread and would have won more constituencies overall. Would anyone have seen that as justified? Just the same as remain MPs are going to vote to invoke A50 if they're from a leave constituency because they know where their bread is buttered then I suppose if you're in a remain constituency you've got to think likewise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voll Blau Posted 26 January 2017 Share Posted 26 January 2017 Barclays apparently off to Dublin once we've popped off... http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-barclays-idUSKBN15A1TS?utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_content=588a102204d3010ce02b5130&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Innovindil Posted 26 January 2017 Share Posted 26 January 2017 5 minutes ago, Voll Blau said: Barclays apparently off to Dublin once we've popped off... http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-barclays-idUSKBN15A1TS?utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_content=588a102204d3010ce02b5130&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter That's it. Cancel brexit. 150 barclays bankers are leaving. Shut it down. Shut it all down right now. Wait. It says "add 150 bankers" to the base it has there already. Are they moving from London or no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokes Posted 26 January 2017 Share Posted 26 January 2017 2 hours ago, Voll Blau said: Barclays apparently off to Dublin once we've popped off... http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-barclays-idUSKBN15A1TS?utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_content=588a102204d3010ce02b5130&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter They don't pay any tax anyway, good riddance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barky Posted 26 January 2017 Share Posted 26 January 2017 It's just a steady drip drip drip of financial services leaving Britain now. Pretty bad news, really, considering we haven't even left yet. These banks are obviously convinced that Britain is no longer the place for them to do business regardless of whether the brexit is hard, soft, moist or whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueSi13 Posted 27 January 2017 Share Posted 27 January 2017 15 hours ago, Barky said: It's just a steady drip drip drip of financial services leaving Britain now. Pretty bad news, really, considering we haven't even left yet. These banks are obviously convinced that Britain is no longer the place for them to do business regardless of whether the brexit is hard, soft, moist or whatever. Correction (for the umpteenth time)...steady drip drip drip of financial services THREATENING to move a PORTION of their business out of the UK if the terms of the dial aren't SATISFACTORY to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Innovindil Posted 27 January 2017 Share Posted 27 January 2017 21 minutes ago, BlueSi13 said: Correction (for the umpteenth time)...steady drip drip drip of financial services THREATENING to move a PORTION of their business out of the UK if the terms of the dial aren't SATISFACTORY to them. Don't try. He doesn't listen. La la land isn't just a film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 27 January 2017 Share Posted 27 January 2017 Santander boss: London to remain Europe's financial hub http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/01/25/santander-boss-london-remain-europes-financial-hub/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benji Posted 27 January 2017 Share Posted 27 January 2017 Reality is they will all have to move portions out of the UK to somewhere like Ireland for passporting reasons. Quite a few financial services lawyers are re-qualifying as Irish qualified lawyers for the same reason. But if they want to continue doing business in the UK, which they will, they can't just up and out everyone. 17 hours ago, Strokes said: They don't pay any tax anyway, good riddance. Slightly unfair. Your average banker pays a shed load of tax. The bank itself and the guys at the very top will find ways around it, but your average employee who would be moved/replaced abroad will put in above average amounts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 27 January 2017 Share Posted 27 January 2017 20 hours ago, Webbo said: Just the same as remain MPs are going to vote to invoke A50 if they're from a leave constituency because they know where their bread is buttered then I suppose if you're in a remain constituency you've got to think likewise. But this is just so wrong, it's a complete affront to democracy and people seem to be prepared to just wave this sort of behaviour away because article 50 is going to pass anyway. Had remain won the referendum and leave MP's then decided to still to bring forward a bill trigger article 50 and vote for it because their constituents wanted to leave the public would be going apoplectic and rightly so, I can understand the logic of those who voted against the referendum doing so, but those who choose to hand over the decision to the nation in a referendum now voting against are no worse than a dictator from a banana republic. The Daily Mail shouldn't have had those three judges on the front page as the "enemies of the people" - it should be the MP's who are hiding behind their constituents to try and subvert the will of people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benji Posted 27 January 2017 Share Posted 27 January 2017 1 minute ago, MattP said: But this is just so wrong, it's a complete affront to democracy and people seem to be prepared to just wave this sort of behaviour away because article 50 is going to pass anyway. Had remain won the referendum and leave MP's then decided to still to bring forward a bill trigger article 50 and vote for it because their constituents wanted to leave the public would be going apoplectic and rightly so, I can understand the logic of those who voted against the referendum doing so, but those who choose to hand over the decision to the nation in a referendum now voting against are no worse than a dictator from a banana republic. The Daily Mail shouldn't have had those three judges on the front page as the "enemies of the people" - it should be the MP's who are hiding behind their constituents to try and subvert the will of people. Worryingly Dianne Abbott explained it best on Question Time last night. Everything else she said was complete inaudible drivel, but she got it right on this. This Bill is a matter of legal process, not choice. The choice was to have the referendum, this is simply a green light to negotiations. The scrutiny should follow over the two years when people know what the hell is actually happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barky Posted 27 January 2017 Share Posted 27 January 2017 30 minutes ago, Webbo said: Santander boss: London to remain Europe's financial hub http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/01/25/santander-boss-london-remain-europes-financial-hub/ Yeah, she can say that and probably be right to an extent. London is such a major centre that it could suffer heavy losses and still be described as a "hub". But that doesn't change the fact that we're getting a steady drip drip drip of banks saying they will move operations out of britain. Interesting in that article as well that santander's share price is growing while uk bank profits are evaporating due to the decimation of the pound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 27 January 2017 Share Posted 27 January 2017 3 minutes ago, Benji said: Worryingly Dianne Abbott explained it best on Question Time last night. Everything else she said was complete inaudible drivel, but she got it right on this. This Bill is a matter of legal process, not choice. The choice was to have the referendum, this is simply a green light to negotiations. The scrutiny should follow over the two years when people know what the hell is actually happening. It was worrying, I was nodding along with everything she said The audience seemed reasonable for London, I was expecting a load of youngsters all throwing toys out the pram. Some of the reasoning to try and stop it is getting more and more desperate, Angus Robertson was even going on about the loss of workers rights etc as a reason to stop it, this will be government discussion for after the 2020 election, absolutely nothing to do with negotiations and certainly not a reason to block article 50. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 27 January 2017 Share Posted 27 January 2017 @Alf Bentley - 44 minutes in today there is a discussion on whether article is revokable with two lawyers on the Daily Politics. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08c00wl P.S Have a look at Peter Hitchins during it, I'm sure he's trying not to laugh at the ridiculous accents the two courtroom bogeymen are speaking in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkon84 Posted 27 January 2017 Share Posted 27 January 2017 The guy in the dark suit was DEFINITELY used as a toast rack at school Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.