***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 33 *****
==============================================================
Continuing debate.
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 1 Jul 16 at 16:38
|
This is from a week ago, the day before the referendum. And *THIS* was the best list they could come up with?
Its not even accurate.
Utterly, utterly pathetic. Looking back, the Leavers must be so proud.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/22/20-reasons-you-should-vote-to-leave-the-european-union/
|
This article in the Guardian is an interesting read. It's about Ebbw Vale who voted overwhelmingly to leave. Despite getting more EU investment than probably anywhere. And there are basically no immigrants.
www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jun/25/view-wales-town-showered-eu-cash-votes-leave-ebbw-vale
With people like this the remain campaign had to do more it seems to convince these people. Maybe their intelligence was below the reading age of a 12 year old mentioned earlier! The young man Even Kelly quoted in this article is not exactly the smartest person I've heard of.
“What’s the EU ever done for us?†Zak Kelly, 21, asks me this standing next to a brand new complex of buildings and facilities that wouldn’t look out of place in Canary Wharf. It’s not Canary Wharf, though, it’s Ebbw Vale, a former steel town of 18,000 people in the heart of the Welsh valleys, where 62% of the population – the highest proportion in Wales – voted Leave.
To go there – along a new dual carriageway – and stand next to the town’s new sixth form and training college, a glass and steel architectural showpiece next to its new leisure centre, a few hundred yards away from a new train station, is to stare into the abyss of the UK’s failed Remain campaign.
Even Kelly, who has just finished a training session on a brand new football pitch, backtracks slightly after asking that question. “Well, I know … they built all this,†he says, and motions his head at the impressive facilities that are all around us. “But we put in more money than we get out, don’t we?â€
Last edited by: rtj70 on Wed 29 Jun 16 at 21:20
|
What are you trying to say.
Where I live the vote to leave was 70% to Leave and 30% to Remain.
And I live in a Port City that does a lot of trade with the rest of Europe.
|
|
He is trying to say fluffy that the 70% are dom.>:) Or dense.
|
>> What are you trying to say.
Did you read it. The EU has done a lot for Ebbw Vale and still 60+% voted to leave. Madness. Or stupidity.
No way will they get that from central funding.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Wed 29 Jun 16 at 21:40
|
The EU has no money of its own.
The money they are dishing out to Ebbw Vale is a fraction of what the UK pays as membership fees.
I'll form a union and invite you to join for £10,000 a year.
You have to do nothing while a member of the union except be prepared to give me more cash whenever I call for it, you only just have to accept the rules I set. You can trade freely with the other members who will sell you more than you sell to them. You can go and stay at their house at any time; but in return they can come over and stay at yours at any time without any notice whether or not you have spare bedrooms for them.
For this free trade and free movement deal, I'll happily give your wife or children £100 every year as a grant in return. Just think about it, they'll get free £100!
Last edited by: BrianByPass on Thu 30 Jun 16 at 08:56
|
|
Very clever, BBP. So a Johnson-Gove EU-free government will keep up the regional development spending, will it?
|
>> Very clever, BBP. So a Johnson-Gove EU-free government will keep up the regional development spending,
>> will it?
>>
In my opinion? Not a chance.
One of biggest recipients of EU aid is Liverpool (which voted Remain).
The Mayor of Liverpool Joe Anderson keeps slagging off teh Tories (he ia Labour of course) so there is zero political capital to be won.
|
That was the point of my post and the news article. Ebbw Vale only got the money because of the EU. If the UK has spare cash it won't go there. Tories would rather tax cuts.
At least it's not going to be Johnson-Gove.
|
The best Universities are in Britain.
Oxford and Cambridge.Everything else is pot luck.Depending on teachers and where you live.
Students where sayin now we leave the UK you need a visa to travel.No you don't a passport is sufficient.It used to be before the UK joined the common market.Unless that has changed?
|
|
I travelled to Czechoslovakia in 1990. It was not part of the EU. We had to purchase a visa at the border - or more accurately in no-mans-land between Germany and Czechoslovakia.
|
|
Anyone thought about wearing a safety pin since the racist attacks. I assume people have read about it. I'm not sure I will (but I'd step in to help if it was not dangerous otherwise I'd call 999). You'd look a little silly.
|
|
I won't be wearing one while doing jobs for obvious reasons but when I go out on Friday I will be wearing one.
|
|
Thanks for sharing. I like the play on words... safety...pin.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Thu 30 Jun 16 at 01:03
|
I regret to say that I don't like this safety pin campaign. I kind of want to like it, but I don't.
[Even ignoring the confusion between being an immigrant, a foreigner and/or of different race].
Will someone who doesn't wear a safety pin be assumed to be unsympathetic towards anti-racism and/or immigrants, or worse sympathetic towards racism and/or anti immigration etc.? If I wear a badge does that prove I am not racist or bigoted? Seems there ought to be more to it than wearing a pin.
Further, I am no more sympathetic towards immigrants than I am to anyone else. Anyway, some of them might not be nice people, I don't want to sympathise with and support all immigrants; I don't support and sympathise with all Brits. For example, quite a lot of do-as-you-likeys are immigrants, and I certainly don't support them.
I am not racist nor do I have any value opinions about immigrants as a group, why should I need to prove that with a badge? Its a standard I believe I live by, I don't need someone telling me I should wear an emblem to somehow be better.
I'm quite happy to revile racists and bigots, but that's not what this pin says.
Nope. Not a supporter. Stuff and nonsense. Not going to do it.
|
Thanks FM2R. I think you I agree on some of what you say on this.
This safety-pin thing is a reaction to the intolerance we have seen since last Friday in the UK.
I wonder if the closet racists/xenophobes (a minority I know and thankful for that) would have reacted if we all voted in. Something we'll never know.
So for a safety-pin symbol.... would a nappy pin have been an even safer symbol ;-) Think about it.
|
>> Anyone thought about wearing a safety pin since the racist attacks. I assume people have
>> read about it. I'm not sure I will (but I'd step in to help if
>> it was not dangerous otherwise I'd call 999). You'd look a little silly.
What's this about a safety pin?
|
>> >> What's this about a safety pin?
>>
>> www.telegraph.co.uk/good-news/2016/06/29/safety-pins-used-to-fight-racism-and-show-solidarity-with-immigr/
>>
Bromp, you are too quick for me. I tried to add this to my post, but got stopped by your reply. (Why do we do that on this forum?)
Edit
I have just Googled 'safety pin campaign'. What a load of BS. Which particular half-wit thought of that?
|
>> I have just Googled 'safety pin campaign'. What a load of BS. Which particular half-wit
>> thought of that?
There's evidence going beyond anecdotal that the focus on immigration has emboldened the loony fringe on the extreme right. I posted in earlier volume about fears/experiences of an English friend with Indian Heritage.
Do you have an alternative suggestion fro those who wish to express solidarity with the potential victims?
|
>> Do you have an alternative suggestion fro those who wish to express solidarity with the
>> potential victims?
We don't need any suggestions, or alternative suggestions.
I am a strongly anti-gesture person. The various players in different sports that 'make a gesture to show something or the other', get on my wick. If it were up to me, I would disallow the goal, try, wicket or whatever if any player made a gesture.
Humbug.
|
>> I am a strongly anti-gesture person.
That's fair enough. As somebody happy to support appropriate supportive gestures I'm in the opposite camp.
|
I think we need to stop redundancies and recruit civil servants. How are you fixed Bromptonaut? Seriously we do. We need the best deal and this will take people to work on it. Forget redundancies I say.
So that's good for employment. Might not have been budgeted for but I think it is necessary.
Could borrow some from New Zealand apparently:
www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/06/29/new-zealand-offers-uk-its-top-trade-negotiators-for-post-brexit/
fluffyRob
Last edited by: rtj70 on Wed 29 Jun 16 at 23:34
|
|
Thanks VxFan. We appreciate your house-keeping here.
|
Tam Dalyell's comments, available in full from the BBC Newsnight site.
Members of Parliament should say: "Parliament is sovereign... They should have some guts and less cowardice."
That's the view of Scottish Labour Party politician Tam Dalyell. He told BBC Newsnight he was "furious" at the Brexit vote. MPs should defy the EU referendum result and vote against invoking Article 50 and withdrawal from the EU, he argues.
"People did not understand that they were voting for the end of the single market on which many of their jobs will depend. They didn’t understand about immigration and how little could be done about immigration."
The issue here is that the Government cannot give notice under Article 50 of the Treaty of Lisbon without the approval of Parliament. Dalyell is reminding MPs that their duty, according to section III.6 of their Code of Conduct, is to act 'in the general interest of the nation as a whole', and that this supersedes the result of a discredited referendum.
|
A referendum result that seems unsafe. 1.5% counting error would nearly reverse the result. It's a blunder to base the future of the UK on a simple YES/NO vote, where the issues are complex, and emotions come into it,influenced by the partisan elements of the media.
Parliament needs to decide. In any case, that is necessary under our constitution prior to a decision on Article 50.
|
Michael Gove to stand for Conservative leadership
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36671336
|
|
Seems he doesn't trust Bozza to 'provide the leadership or build the team for the task ahead'.
|
BoJo gets my vote as PM.
It's not as if we haven't had a few clowns in office before him.
|
Yes, but most have waited till they got the job before becoming big fat liars. Johnson is not to be trusted with anything - as we've heard from his own side.
[edit: just in case anyone thought that was a pitch in favour of Gove.]
Last edited by: WillDeBeest on Thu 30 Jun 16 at 10:11
|
Theresa May if they have any sense.
Boris came back with two second hand water guns from his European adventures with the Duitsers>:) I like her.
|
I met TM briefly during the campaign. She seemed pleasant and personable (for a Tory) and very much on top of the issues.
She's also the last person Westpig wants in charge, which is another plus point.
|
>> Theresa May
Every time I hear her name , it reminds me of the porn star with a similar spelling forename.
|
"BoJo gets my vote as PM."
Too bad he's not standing then.
|
Best news in a week :-)
I wonder what those that voted for 'him' in the referendum are thinking now? It's looking like Theresa May.
So if they all decided to stand aside apart from her... would there need to be a ballot to select the next Conservative leader?
Goodness knows what will happen next.
|
Maybe there will be a new PM before next week! May as leader and Gove as deputy leader or another senior role? Boris will have a role in leaving the EU for sure.
I like May's joke about Boris getting three used water cannons the last time he negotiated with Germany.
|
"three used water cannons the last time he negotiated with Germany." Like it.
|
>> Best news in a week :-)
...I'm not too sure of that.
Apart from being stabbed in the front by Gove, there are other factors at play in Boris's psyche. One: he didn't really want Brexit anyway (just the PM's job), and two: he's realised somewhat late that it's all going to be a bit difficult, and most likely a poisoned chalice (an understatement if there ever was one)......
If he had got the top job, there's just a chance he might have taken those two things into account, and done something about it (though I suspect that he has realised he can't maintain any aura of national popularity whatever he did).
I have to say that, even with Gove's actions, he might well have got a shot at it, but I suspect he has realised just what a mess he has been instrumental in creating, and invoked the first law of holes.
|
Has to be between Gove and May. May would probably be my favourite but has little public "image", unlike Gove, who has an image, albeit not always popular.
Much as I have enjoyed BoJo's clowning over the years, and will probably continue to do so, I didn't see him as fit for the PM role. I think tyrednemotional sums it up nicely above.
|
A year is a long time in politics, it would not surprise me to see Boris come back with another attempt on the Tory leadership in a few years time.
It will be easier to do that if he has not been defeated in a previous contest.
He has always been careful not to get involved in things he has no chance of winning.
|
>>It will be easier to do that if he has not been defeated in a previous contest.
I think that is exactly right and very likely his thinking. I can only assume that he thought the vote would be Remain and he could offer to continue to carry the torch. I suspect that Leave was such a shock to him that he had no plan B.
However, if he dos go for the leadership in the future, I think this will very likely all rise up and bite him.
|
I agree, Mark. However a gap of maybe 5 years, especially if a post brexit UK is starting to work again, might just be the right time for him.
A character, whether you like him or not, and there's very few of them in modern politics.
|
I *did* like him. But this has been a massive miscalculation, and some of the statements attributed to him have been appalling. I have quite revisited my opinion of him as a potential PM.
You may be right about 5 years, but unless that covers a significant change in behaviour and reputation, then I suspect that his time has come and gone. The electorate may have short memories, but the press. broadcasters and other politicians typically do not.
|
>> >> Best news in a week :-)
I meant best news since we found out we had to leave the EU. That is very bad news but I didn’t want Boris as leader. I wasn't including BREXIT winning in my thinking. Feels like a Friday to me. Wish it was.
>> I can only assume that he thought the vote would be Remain and he could offer to continue to
>> carry the torch. I suspect that Leave was such a shock to him that he had no plan B.
Possibly - I wonder why Gove did what he did. A surprise for all. I don’t want to see Gove or Fox as leader.
|
|
Unlikely as nominations closed 2 hours ago.
|
A few of us on here who voted remain are relieved Boris Johnson won't become prime minister. My fear was if he was one of the last two names in the contest, the Conservative party members would have voted for him. I know personally hope we get Theresa May. She's wanted embroiled in either campaign too which is a bonus. And having a woman PM will be a refreshing change. Could have a woman in charge the UK, Germany and the USA.
What do the leave voters on here think of the treacherous activities that led to Boris not putting himself forward?
It will be interesting to hear from the like of Westpig and Roger.
|
Is it true that May supports Sharia law?
Personally I want someone from Leave side to be PM.
|
Hardly. She launched an investigation into the way Sharia law is applied in the UK, led by the eminent Professor Mona Siddiqui, to ensure that no-one is being disadvantaged by the outcome of Sharia cases relative to their rights in secular English law. So far, so sensible.
You can get this stuff from the newspapers, you know, Movi - as I just did. A few weeks of that and you might know your Article 50 from your elbow.
|
Someone from the leave side will do the talks in Europe.She will steady the ship whilst all this turmoil is going on.
I'm no Conservative far from it be she has got to be the sensible choice.
|
I would think someone like Gove and Boris will have a role to play. And much of the negotiations will be done by others for sure.
I think she's the sensible choice. She has a chance to unite her party. There will be a lot of bad feelings from between those fronting the leave/remain camps.
One has to wonder if Gove was persuaded to stand just to stop Johnson standing. That email his wife sent yesterday was clearly not a mistake was it.
If Gove didn't trust Johnson, and Johnson wouldn't trust Gove.... why should we trust either. And I'm not sure about Liam Fox as a PM either.
|
>> Personally I want someone from Leave side to be PM.
Presumably you don't have a say. If this comes down to say May and Gove it is down to the Conservative party members to decide. Are you a paid up member of the Conservative party?
And there's an outside chance it doesn't even go to a members vote. A lot has happened in the last 6 days. Nothing will surprise my over the next 7 days.
|
>> Is it true that May supports Sharia law?
>>
No
As she said in a statement when the inquiry was set up
“There is only one rule of law in our country, which provides rights and security for every citizen.
“Professor Siddiqui, supported by a panel with a strong balance of academic, religious and legal expertise, will help us better understand whether and the extent to which Sharia law is being misused or exploited and make recommendations to the Government on how to address this.â€
Don't think that is in any way support
|
>> Could have a woman in charge the UK, Germany and the USA.
>>
And don't forget about Nicola
Now that could be an interesting pairing
|
|
Nicola will be in the middle getting squashed.>:)
|
Nicola got the brush-of in Brussels.
My French rag is in a rage over Brexit and devotes an article to Gove in the current issue. It sees the partnership between him and Boris as like one between Mr. Bean and Benny Hill (the "Benny 'ill" series was hugely popular in France in its day), Boris (a "weathercock") with his "dishevelled blond wig" and Gove with his "over-groomed hair and swot glasses". Switching shows somewhat, it calls Gove Brutus after his betrayal of Dave. A cartoon shows kindly grandparents Francois and Angela offering to take custody of Dave's kids, Ireland and Scotland.
So much more fun than the stodgy Telegraph.
|
So how it will work now? Will all conservative members cast their votes in secret ballot and person having most votes will become next PM?
|
|
Another thing you might get from a newspaper, Movi. This time I'm not going to do it for you.
|
I see what you mean, Ambo.
"Take back control!" ... The proud campaign slogan ... now sounds more like empty bravado.
|
Is this the process?
The new prime minister will be chosen by a Conservative party leadership election.
This election will have two parts:
Firstly, Conservative MPs elect two candidates.
After these two candidates have been chosen, a postal ballot will be sent out to all Conservative party members (~150,000), on a "one member, one vote" basis.
Problem with newspapers is that lot of opinions are featured as factual news!
Last edited by: movilogo on Thu 30 Jun 16 at 15:45
|
|
No. Well, sort of, but you've left out some important detail.
Last edited by: WillDeBeest on Thu 30 Jun 16 at 15:48
|
Basically it is an iterative process of the Conservative MPs voting on Tuesdays and Thursday until they are left with just two (or even one if someone drops out of the running). So net week they will vote and eliminate the one with the least votes.
After each round of voting, some might choose to drop out and side with one of the others (and therefore take their supporters with them).
When there are two remaining it is put to the Conservative Party members to vote. It can take a few rounds if nobody drops out of their own free will. If they end up with only one then there need not be a vote by the party members.
That's my understanding anyway.
As it stands the list with the number of MPs supporting them is something like:
May 69
Crabb 21
Gove 11
Leadsom 7
Fox 6
Of course there are more MPs than this to vote. But in round one Fox say goes. His support might switch to Gove. Next round Leadsom goes and her support might also go to Gove.... So now the list (ignoring the other MPs to make it simpler) might be:
May 69
Gove 26
Crabb 21
Crabb at this point might drop out or might get voted out in the next round. Then we have a final list of say:
May 91
Gove 26
Note I have used simple logic for reassigning support and do not take into account the many other MPs with a vote. And I have reallocated support based on LEAVE vs REMAIN positions in the referendum. And when someone is knocked out they get to vote in the next round. I have also ignored the fact Crabb is homophobic and was against same sex marriages and that will be dragged up and may play a part in any decisions.
|
|
So kind of alternative voting process where most disliked person is eliminated first and it repeats?
|
|
Does anyone here actually trust politicians and believe a word that they say?
|
|
Yes, I trust them to be what they are and I believe the things they say that seem to be true.
|
>> Does anyone here actually trust politicians and believe a word that they say?
>>
If you did that with Boris and all his contradictory remarks, they would balance out so you would not have to believe anything as there would be nothing there.
|
Silly question, ON - and reflects an attitude that's partly responsible for getting us into this sorry mess.
Some more than others, obvs. We tolerate a certain amount of exaggeration and best-casing (or worst-casing, depending on which way they're looking.) But big lies that they knew weren't true at the time, that we told them weren't true, and that they went on telling anyway because they fit the prejudices of enough credulous fools who want to believe them - not good enough. Tony Blair did it, Nigel Farage has made a career of it, now Michael Gove thinks it qualifies him to be Prime Minister.
|
>> Silly question, ON -
In your case that is obviously a yes.
|
|
Did you read my whole answer?
|
>> Does anyone here actually trust politicians and believe a word that they say?
>>
No.
|
No more or less than any other individuals. Nearly ever one lies to a degree or bends the truth if necessary. Human society would be impossible otherwise. Most people aren't fussed by a little deception provided of course the person doing the deceiving's aims align with theirs.
Human nature really
|
I suspect Michael Gove is a Cameron Mole who joined Boris to stab him in case Leave went and won .
Job Done.
He'll give way and help TM if he gets the position of COE..
Fox is a nasty self important man. not to be trusted and Leadsom is a former banker which rules her out.
Crabb? Who's he?
|
Gove said he was not up to being Prime Minister. He probably still believes that. He was therefore standing to take Boris out of the running - well maybe. Maybe they didn't think Boris wouldn't stand down - just needed to split votes in earlier rounds.
So maybe the remain campaign or just his conscience (or wife) changed his mind.
I don't think Fox or Leadsom will get far. Crabb won't get onto a final list either. So it could end up May and Gove. If Gove knew he'd get the chancellors position then he could drop out before the final round of voting.
In fact, in theory all but May could drop out after next Tuesday's first round of voting. She then becomes leader of the party and therefore Prime Minister soon afterwards.
Has anyone seen her talking today - sounds more like a leader than many of them of late. I'd vote for her. She also pointed out it was her that finally negotiated a deal with Jordan to get rid of Abu Hamza.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Thu 30 Jun 16 at 16:04
|
>> I don't think Fox or Leadsom will get far. Crabb won't get onto a final
>> list either. So it could end up May and Gove.
I don't think so (unfortunately). Correspondents report Gove, having stabbed Boris and given previous statements/form etc is regarded as toxic.
May is clearly the front runner, safe pair of hands and making Brexit committed promises. But she was, albeit low profile, a Remainer. The Outies want one of theirs to stop backsliding. Leadsom may do unexpectedly well, report on lunchtime news that Boris might endorse her. If she's on list going to Constituencies which are more Out than the MP's...........
|
>> The Outies want one of theirs to stop backsliding.
So they will want Fox, Leadsom or Gove then. Maybe they'll accept the best next candidate who happened to support remain.
|
"Crabb? Who's he?"
Was I alone in not knowing of Corbyn before his accession to the leadership? And that Liberal bloke who's name escapes me? :-) (And I think I'm reasonably well read compared to many).
One of Crabb's key credentials appears to be that he is the "first Conservative cabinet minister for generations to sport a beard". Didn't Mrs T have one then? :-)
IMO he's just getting his name out there for awareness, to strengthen his CV for the future.
|
May has been home Secretary since 2010, in charge of massive cuts in various budgets including the Police.
There can be no doubting the size of her dongle considering she is still in office when lesser men wither and die in that position.
She get's my vote (if I had one).
Fox is a warmongering doctor, ergo a POS and needs jetted into orbit.
Last edited by: Lygonos on Thu 30 Jun 16 at 16:25
|
Fox would be a mistake. As Smokie says... who's Crabb. I had no idea who he was or whether he was on the leave or remain side until I looked. And then read he denies being homophobic but has said a few things to suggest he is.
Gove won't get the support of the many Boris backers... No way. and he probably knows it. Boris/Gove might have worked from the point of view of Boris being leader but he (for whatever reason) decided Boris would not become prime minister. Well done Gove. Still don't like him.
That leaves May. Yes she seems to have done a good job as Home Secretary - she must have because she's still doing the role. She sounded like a leader today and I think she can probably unite the party for now. Let's hope she is leader ASAP and we can start the exit from the EU with a plan sooner than later so we avoid more damage than necessary to the country.
I can see why Westpig really dislikes her because of what the HO did to the police service. You can't have everything.
The irony is we might have May as the PM because Westpig and others voted to leave the EU. If we'd stayed in the EU we'd still have Cameron for a few years. I guess having May as PM is a small price to pay to leave the EU.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Thu 30 Jun 16 at 16:43
|
|
...if we do leave the EU, that is.
|
Well there is that slight chance. I think we'll leave. The referendum result says we do.
So... what if we stop being part of the EU (satisfies the referendum leave vote) and then agree to everything we had before and continue paying for this relationship. We'd call it something new and snazzy like EEA Extended Edition (EEAEE for short) or something. So we're not in the EU (ticks the box) but we have a new agreement. Perhaps we get to vote in the EU parliament with this new agreement too with associate MEPs with an extra condition that Farage is banned.
Or something close to that anyway.
We never did get much response from the leave voters about what they hoped for. In fact many of them have not visited the forum for a few days or longer. Perhaps VxFan will have to put the lights off when he leaves the building tonight.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Thu 30 Jun 16 at 16:58
|
|
...but then his camera won't pick up his neighbour peeing on his car.
|
>> We never did get much response from the leave voters about what they hoped for.
>> In fact many of them have not visited the forum for a few days or
>> longer. Perhaps VxFan will have to put the lights off when he leaves the building
>> tonight.
>>
Maybe they feel they had their say in the referendum and don't the need to justify themselves to anyone. Their lifestyle may be alien to those with a comfortable life with a nice house, company car, investment portfolio, company private medical cover, private schools for their kids etc. It may be a bit different from the point of view of someone in a zero hours job or with no prospect of owning a house, finding it hard to afford life in general, struggling to find a school place for their kids or to see a doctor.
And yes, I have a nice house, newish car, and investments (worth a bit less now).
Last edited by: Old Navy on Thu 30 Jun 16 at 18:14
|
|
I see where you're coming from. But for someone with a good income (early retirement say), owns their own house outright (call it a £500k house), has grandchildren... why would they vote to leave? That's the sort of out voter I don't understand.
|
>> ...if we do leave the EU, that is.
>>
Only three options not to leave
1 Parliament ignores referendum result and votes to stay in with no mandate to do so.
2.Parliament calls referendum mark 2
3 General election looking for a mandate to stay in
Can't see any of these happening as we stand at the moment.
Which one were you thinking of WDB?
|
We will have the same environment, agreements, duties, conditions and costs that we had before.
But we will have no input, no membership and will be of lower importance ( with all the implications of that reduced rank) .
|
Big question for the negotiation - can we accept freedom of movement or do we have to have immigration control?
I can accept freedom of movement, as I suspect many people here can, how about our out voters?
|
>> I can accept freedom of movement, as I suspect many people here can, how about our out voters?
I can accept that. None of the out voters have a say. The Government and Parliament will try to implement the wishes of the majority of the people. Key word here is try. If they can't get concessions on movement of people then we'll have to accept it. Maybe we can get a tiny tiny concession to say we got something - e.g. you can't come if you have a criminal record (might have that today?) or.... well you get the idea.
|
Only three options not to leave
1 Parliament ignores referendum result and votes to stay in with no mandate to do so.
2.Parliament calls referendum mark 2
3 General election looking for a mandate to stay in
Can't see any of these happening as we stand at the moment.
Which one were you thinking of WDB?
A version of (1). I'd question the 'no mandate' idea because Parliament has its mandate from the electorate in 2015 and a sworn duty to act in the interest of the nation as a whole. The referendum could have been designed to bind Parliament (the 2011 one was) but it was not. Remainers among MPs outnumber Leavers by 3:1.
Outside, 63% of the electorate did not support Leave - and a fair few more have changed their minds since last Friday. That leaves maybe 30-35% who might feel disenfranchised, 40% or more who would be actively pleased or relieved, and the remaining 25% or so who never understood or cared either way in the first place. In other words, it's hard to see the cries of 'shame' outnumbering those of 'phew' if Parliament were to refuse to grant authority to issue notice under Article 50. That is the gist of the letter I've sent to my MP asking him to oppose any measure aimed at implementing an exit from the EU.
|
>> ...if we do leave the EU, that is.
>>
I think Boris not becoming PM has slightly decreased the already low probability that we will remain.
I alluded to that above, and I see that there are now a few background stories doing the rounds that there were growing concerns in the Leave camp that he might choose not to pull the trigger if he were to become PM.
Of course, such an approach would have required him to take one of the three options outlined by CD (or something akin).
Of the potential candidates, the only one I could see that might have sufficient a combination of balls and motivation was Boris, and even that was a very long shot.
The only way out I can now see is for sufficient MPs, cross-party, to vote the whole lot down in the Commons (assuming that the increasingly widely-held opinion that a PM can't invoke Article 50 without the authority of parliament holds sway). Unfortunately, that would take a level of organisation and selflessness that is currently conspicuously absent among our MPs.
Maybe "the other place", then.........
|
Presumably to trigger Article 50 there has to be agreement in the House of Commons. And then the House of Lords has to rubber stamp it. Or should a prime minister be allowed to just write a letter that starts it.
Surely a debate and vote is required. But the country voted to leave and I can't see how either house will go against the choice of the citizens of the UK.
|
BBC article on "Can the law stop Brexit?".
Lord Pannick was a classmate of mine (my claim to fame...)
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-uk-leaves-the-eu-36671629
Last edited by: smokie on Thu 30 Jun 16 at 18:00
|
>> "Crabb? Who's he?"
>>
>>>>
My constituency MP.
Decent enough bloke (Mrs O'R has met him briefly) but very strong religious beliefs, which rules him out for me.
|
|
ROR that explains the stance on same sex marriage etc. Rules him out for me too.
|
>> ROR that explains the stance on same sex marriage etc. Rules him out for me too.
And he's Welsh.
|
I can't support any of them, I don't know enough about the other candidates to comment but I think it is very important who ever it is comes from an ordinary background. The Eaton elites just have nothing in common with the general ordinary middle and working class people of the UK.
|
Of course it matters not who you support. Unless you are a member of the Conservative Party then you have no say.
What do people think regarding a new general election to endorse the choice of prime minister?
Teresa May is firmly against the idea and think we should continue to 2020 without an elections.
Last edited by: CGNorwich on Thu 30 Jun 16 at 18:12
|
I think there should be a general election however the danger of that is that a PM might not resign fearing their part will loose control if they do. I think a the public should get to vote for the leader of the party though if it changes.
If an MP stands down or dies there is always a bi-election so what is the difference?
|
|
Nobody has stood down as an MP, and the one who died recently was not a member of the government.
|
|
I didn't say that I had, I just mean when it happens.
|
You're failing to grasp the distinction between Parliament and Government. The Government consists of the people the queen thinks are most able to command a majority in Parliament.
If the political situation changes so that the existing government can't command a majority, the queen looks for someone else who can. Only if nobody wants to or is able to - or if the five-year term is up - does she have to dissolve Parliament and precipitate a general election.
|
The Government cannot call a general election - they all voted to stop early elections. Only the Queen could dissolve parliament should there be nobody in the House of Commons who could come together to create the Government.
Theresa May has promised no election - i.e. she's not going to the Queen to say she quits or whatever. That means the Conservatives frightened of keeping their seats in an election are safe until May 2020. So she'll get their backing.
I'll not say I'd be surprised she doesn't end up as PM because I didn't think a majority would vote leave, the Labour party turn on Corbyn and Boris decide not to run for leader of the Conservatives. A lot of surprises could be still to come.
|
>> The Government cannot call a general election - they all voted to stop early elections.
>> Only the Queen could dissolve parliament should there be nobody in the House of Commons
>> who could come together to create the government.
Mps can still call an early election though. Needs a 2/3 of them to vote on it and there is some mechanism by where a simple majority can force one however there is some sort of 14 day pause built in in that case.
|
>> I can't support any of them, I don't know enough about the other candidates to
>> comment but I think it is very important who ever it is comes from an
>> ordinary background. The Eaton elites just have nothing in common with the general ordinary middle and working class people of the UK.
>>
>>
>>
While it is undesirable to have all our leaders come from the same social subset, it is a mistake to think the rich by default have no understanding of the lives of those lower down the pecking order. They are often very sympathetic to the needs of the poor, if sometimes only out of guilt. In contrast, someone born to a poor family will have worked incredibly hard to reach the top and this can have the effect of making them think that if they can do it anybody can, and the only reason they haven't is because they are idle and feckless.
Some of the most enlightened and progressive rulers have come from the aristocracy, and some of the cruellest had very humble beginnings. Judge the person, not the background.
|
That's worth a thumb, RR. good work!
Worked hard and been lucky. Very few successful people acknowledge the luck they've had along the way, but you can bet they needed it at some point.
|
>> >>
>> Worked hard and been lucky. Very few successful people acknowledge the luck they've had along the way, but you can bet they needed it at some point.
>>
An important point I missed out, thank you. Something many of them forget, however...
|
|
As an aside, Crabb attended the same local school as Bradley Manning.
|
>> As an aside, Crabb attended the same local school as Bradley Manning.
>>
Who is Bradley Manning?
Edit
May should walk it. The contrast between evil Tories and perfect Labour will be immense..Labour support wimmin's rights , allow segregated meetings and have never had a woman Leader.
Tories don't care and have had two women leaders..
Says it all :-)
Last edited by: madf on Thu 30 Jun 16 at 18:22
|
>>>> >>
>> Who is Bradley Manning?
>>
>>
>>
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chelsea_Manning
|
Been up to Liverpool today to meet The Lad (BA Hons) and clear out his digs.
His housemate Phil, graduating in a business related subject had seven guaranteed interviews this week in banking etc. Six cancelled on Friday 24th.
|
|
Not surprising to me - but that is terrible for him and his future. What damage this vote has done him on a personal level.
|
>>Brilliant.
Yes, thanks for posting Bromptonaut!
Heseltine has the measure of the man and put his boot in and I do think that if Boris didn't lead the leave campaign then the result could have been different - of course we will never know.
I truly hope he never recovers from this, but the man is covered in Teflon and will be back when the brown stuff has receded.
|
And that is why I am so mad and humming about the situation, at least the banking crisis was out of our control but this was caused by us. If Phil has any money or his parents have a bit of money the best thing he can do is go travelling and experience the world, by the time he gets back the markets should be more settled.
From a personal point of view, at least this means I for the moment anyway have no choice but to carry on with my business because there won't be any jobs out there. Once the single market situation is clear things will either fix them selves or get much worse but until we know what the deal is things will only get worse.
The important thing is not to talk ourselves into a recession. For me it is business as usual although I suspect I will have to work harder on the sales side of things.
Last edited by: RattleandSmoke on Thu 30 Jun 16 at 21:41
|
Looking into to the leave process now the EU representatives are coming forward... we need to really think how we proceed. I won't say knowing the facts we have another referendum because that could be a mistake.
But weighing up risks etc. needs to be something to MPs do and work out a way forward.
I do now think Cameron et al were naive. They might not have had a leave plan but they should have understood the basics beyond 'article 50', e.g. the next steps.
Last Friday through Monday it was alluded we'd negotiate unofficially before we would trigger article 50. We get told we won't have any chance to discuss anything until we officially request we leave. And now they are saying any negotiations will start after we leave.
Someone higher up the thread questions the two years limit - so do I. I thought from what we'd been told we could negotiate a deal then. Can we? If not then this is even worse than any of us thought.
Would even Westpig have voted for that if it's the case. Sorry I forget he's playing golf at Wrangaton Golf Club or something.
|
> Someone higher up the thread questions the two years limit - so do I. I
>> thought from what we'd been told we could negotiate a deal then. Can we? If
>> not then this is even worse than any of us thought.
It was me, watching the short clip of the trade bod from the eu, i think she is getting ideas above her station. Such broad terms wouldn't be sorted by her. It might come to pass of course but it's unlikely for the simple reason its in nobody's interest for that to happen.
|
|
I think she referred to EU law which does not allow individual states to negotiate unique deals whilst subject to EU law. I suspect she is on top of her brief, unlike our government.
|
|
I think it's a bit circular this particular point if you think it's upto her and that's going to happen, fair enough.
|
I don't think it's circular. She's either right or wrong.
If EU law which we must obey whilst part of the EU states you cannot negotiate a new trade deal with the EU or anywhere else when you are part of the EU .... fine by me. They might be the legal rules.
My issue is why wasn't this explained during the build up to the referendum.
|
I've been informed by the liberal branch of the family that funding has been made to Crowd Justice to tease out the constitutional issues on the shoddily organised referendum.
Whether it is in the PM gift to trigger Art. 50, or whether there would have to be a prior Parliamentary decision. At this stage it seems they are taking advice. www.crowdjustice.co.uk/case/should-parliament-decide/
|
|
My understanding is that because it's advisory the referendum needs both houses of parliament to vote this through. The 'majority' of the voters want this to happen. The majority of the country didn't say leave the EU. Tricky one.
|
Indeed it is tricky. An important factor is the sequence of events. If the next PM takes the view that it is in her gift to exercise the Royal Prerogative, and initiates the Art. 50 process, it is possibly ultra vires and open to challenge on the legality. This could drag on for years. Facing up to the responsibilities of Parliament to decide, in the face of the mob, convinced that an "advisory" referendum is a mandate, is far from easy. But it would allow the UK to remain whole and avoid chaos if Parliament exercises wisdom over orchestrated emotion.
And stays in, committed to play a full part in proceedings, without hauteur.
Last edited by: NortonES2 on Thu 30 Jun 16 at 21:16
|
Facing up to the responsibilities of Parliament to decide, in the face of the mob, convinced that an "advisory" referendum i> a mandate, is far from easy. But it would allow the UK to remain whole and avoid chaos if Parliament exercises wisdom over orchestrated emotion.
>> And stays in, committed to play a full part in proceedings, without hauteur.
>>
I think to ignore the referendum is to bring about the chaos you look to avoid. Yes I'm sure there are various legal arguments to support ignoring it however i don't think it will happen. On a basic level how would we go back now?
|
Except the EU are basically saying we can't negotiate anything with the EU or any other country or trading bloc without first fully leaving the EU. We then might have years before we have a deal.
If this is how it must work.... perhaps it needs to be explained to us properly and we get asked again.
I am starting to think the government really thought we'd vote to stay. They didn't have a plan to leave that's fine but surely you'd know how to cancel a 'contract'.
If you sign up to Sky and fine the small print says that's it forever unless you pay them say £20k... you'd not join.
The Lisbon Treaty is sounding like it said how you could leave. But you'd not want to actually try! Maybe we are best to leave in the end ;-) *
* No I don't mean that.
|
Right, what's the point in waiting two years then?
I think she's the only one to say that.
|
>> The Lisbon Treaty is sounding like it said how you could leave....
...Welcome to the Hotel California......
|
|
To sooty. If I had to choose, I'd opt for chaos following the right course of action, rather than cowering because an advisory reflects the power of emotion over facts. As admitted by the paymaster of Brexit, Aaron Banks, inspired by the Trump campaign.
Last edited by: NortonES2 on Thu 30 Jun 16 at 21:47
|
>> To sooty. If I had to choose, I'd opt for chaos following the right course
>> of action, rather than cowering because an advisory reflects the power of emotion over facts.
>> As admitted by the paymaster of Brexit, Aaron Banks, inspired by the Trump
. I just think it's inevitable that we leave now and that we have passed the point of no return. I think nearly all MPs think that as well.
|
If the EU Trade Commissioner is correct in saying no trade negotiations are possible before we leave the EU. We need to either not leave or leave in the next few weeks. Forget 2 years.
Had the remain campaign outlined the process (did they know?) and timeline some might have voted differently. Even retired police inspectors on £30k+ pensions? Maybe not.
We are where we are and thing are fluid. I'll not post as much when I'm in Greece. How can I post and work.... current assignments are writing documents and a break from that is good. And so I stretch the working day quite a bit. Lots of time outs.
|
>> If the EU Trade Commissioner is correct in saying no trade negotiations are possible before
>> we leave the EU.
That was my point, she has an opinion and that's fine. But it won't be up to her what happens within those two years.
|
|
That's why I wrote to mine - a Tory Remainer - to make the point that this is not a done deal - or even a deal ready to be done. Happy to share the words I used. If Smokie is amenable I could send him the template for people to request.
|
I'd be happy to send the same. I have sent emails (last week) to my MP. Today to Theresa May.
The more I look into this as a naive layman the more I think the damage in leaving is going to be felt for decades. Surely the outline leave process was known...??? If it wasn't that was arrogant - they could have asked and instead of 'project fear' said how things would pan out. So a sort of 'project fear plus' but with some extra substance.
Personally I hope I get made redundant.. it's either very soon or after April 2017. There's tax implications.
EDIT: Mods you can let WdB know my email address.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Thu 30 Jun 16 at 22:18
|
The Telegraph - why we should leave........ - No FM2R
