So how many of us realised the amount of plotting and scheming and conniving led us into the referendum?
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-parliaments-38402140
I didn't, but I'm not really surprised by it. It's an interesting read though.
|
>> So how many of us realised the amount of plotting and scheming and conniving led
>> us into the referendum?
Isn't that just politics?
|
It started with the plotting and scheming and conniving to get us in the Common Market in the first place.
So much for the equivalent of the local Co-op and handsome dividends......
Notice a record day for the FTSE today.
|
>> It started with the plotting and scheming and conniving lying to get us in the Common
>> Market in the first place.
>>
>> So much for the equivalent of the local Co-op and handsome dividends......
>>
>> Notice a record day for the FTSE today.
>>
|
All these political unions are screwed up.
Farage has suggested that he wants to take part in US politics. I would have thought that they would be perfect for a break up, they did admire Brexit so much over there (though I don't think many of them really knew what it was about) and after all, those rich states like California, Texas, New York, Florida and Illinois might get fed up of paying for Mississippi, New Mexico, Alabama etc. and be happy to separate out and form their own countries!
|
>> >> It started with the plotting and scheming and conniving lying to get us in the Common Market in the first place.>> >>
>> >>So much for the equivalent of the local Co-op and handsome dividends...... >>
>> >> Notice a record day for the FTSE today.>> >>
AFTER Brexit, of course...:-)
|
>> AFTER Brexit, of course...:-)
Got news for you. Brexit ain't happened yet.
|
>>Got news for you. Brexit ain't happened yet.>>
Ah, yet another Remainer still with their head in the sand hoping to overturn a democratic national verdict.......:-)
|
>> Got news for you. Brexit ain't happened yet.
>>
In a sense it already has.
Brexit has already been factored in to the markets, and surely most financial and corporate planning.
The public now assumes it is happening, and the advantages (and to be fair, the disadvantages) are already being counted and accounted for.
There would be the most almighty public backlash if anyone now tried to back-track on it, and surely even the most ardent Remainers would accept that there would be more and possibly worse market ructions if that were to happen.
Adopting a course of action even if unpopular is one thing. But abandoning it half way through and trying to crawl ignominiously back to the starting point would be the worst kind of uncertainty.
|
|
It may have been factored in but that is based on guesswork and assumptions as no formal deals have yet been done, either to get us out of the EU or get us in to anything else. Without really knowing the shape of how it will look I don't see how any factoring in can be any more than a gamble.
|
>>It may have been factored in but that is based on guesswork and assumptions as no formal deals have yet been done, either to get us out of the EU or get us in to anything else. Without really knowing the shape of how it will look I don't see how any factoring in can be any more than a gamble<<
Sounds like just another day in the international financial casino - sorry, markets.
If you want a rueful smile at how good news, post-referendum, can be turned into disaster stories, take a look at the Reuters website. It's even worse than the Grauniad.
|
" just another day in the international financial casino"
Absolutely, so neither leavers nor remainers can really take a lot from it. Once BRXIT is complete it might carry a little more weight than it does now (as to the success or otherwise of BREXIT) but there are so many other completely unrelated factors at play, as there always are (e.g. Trump victory), so in x years time when BREXIT is complete there will be no way to look back and measure what contribution BREXIT may have had to markets, either way.
My earlier point about there being a global upswing in share markets still applies though.
|
I've had no say in the referendum still think we shot ourselves in the foot leaving.
The E.U will carry on it is to big to fail.Going back to pre E.U is a no.But who am I? To say.
What has been said on the continent we need some strong leader or leaders to hold it together.
I don't think Geert Wilders will be one of them.>:)
|
The majority of the UK population decided, rightly, that they didn't want to be part of a massive organisation controlled mainly by unelected leaders (some of who have been involved with corruption or wrong doing at various times) and voted accordingly.
Plenty to read on the subject of the failing EU which, like for instance the NHS, has become far too big to be able to control and manage properly and successfully), such as:
tinyurl.com/jdoppfe
www.hoover.org/research/eu-experiment-has-failed
tinyurl.com/j8p6vjh
A mixed report from a while back:
www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/03/european-union-may-be-verge-regime-collapse
There are, of course, many other examples both for and against that can be looked up.
|
>The majority of the UK population decided, rightly, that they didn't want to be part of a massive organisation controlled mainly by unelected leaders
Wrong.
37.5% of the *electorate* decided they preferred to leave the EU. That's about 27% of the population. It is true to say that the majority (51.9%) of the electorate who actually voted said they preferred to leave.
Now, arguably those that didn't vote (28% of the electorate) should be ignored as not actually caring enough, but let's not over state the case like we're writing Daily Mail headlines.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Fri 30 Dec 16 at 16:27
|
>>Wrong?
Sorry, no.
There was a massive turnout for the Referendum and the Leave voters won by a handsome margin.
You can obfuscate as much as you wish, but you won't change the result no matter how much or hard you try.
The type of percentages you've used to try and illustrate your point prove even more widely apart in a General Election, when total voting figures are generally a lower proportion of the eligible electorate.
|
>> There was a massive turnout for the Referendum and the Leave voters won by a
>> handsome margin.
Leave won but by a margin well short of handsome. Approx 40 million votes cast and winning margin was 1.2 million. In a theoretical re-run 700,000 'Regrixit' folks changing their votes would turn result other way.
Handsome was margin achieved by Wilson govt in 1975 referendum. Cameron assumed he could do that too. Holes in cheese lined up to stymie him;result = crash in flames.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 30 Dec 16 at 19:28
|
> Leave won but by a margin well short of handsome. Approx 40 million votes cast
>> and winning margin was 1.2 million. In a theoretical re-run 700,000 'Regrixit' folks changing their
>> votes would turn result other way.
I was reading an article on voting and regrets, apparently ~3% of voters regret voting the way they did. That covers referendums, national and local elections, whichever way they voted.
|
>>I was reading an article on voting and regrets, apparently ~3% of voters regret voting the way they did. That covers referendums, national and local elections, whichever way they voted.
But if that ~3% is evenly distributed across both camps, then we end up back where we are now. I certainly know a few people who voted Remain who only did because they thought it was a given that it would be a vote to stay in the EU anyway.
Is there any evidence (i.e. not opinion) that the Brexit voters were/are more volatile than the Remainers?
|
> Is there any evidence (i.e. not opinion) that the Brexit voters were/are more volatile than
>> the Remainers?
>>
Not sure what you mean by volatile, however slightly more of those who voted leave regretted their vote than those that voted remain and regretted their vote. Somewhere around 3% vs 5%.
|
By volatile I meant people who voted the way they did and then subsequently regretted it.
Have you got a link to back-up your claim?
|
>> Have you got a link to back-up your claim?
>>
It was some post voting research carried out that someone on here linked. Sorry i can't remember the link, it was a fair old size though. A lot of work had gone into it. Try searching for post referendum analysis, it shouldn't be too hard to find.
|
>>Not sure what you mean by volatile, however slightly more of those who voted leave regretted their vote than those that voted remain and regretted their vote. Somewhere around 3% vs 5%.
I am sure that such regret is true of every vote ever. However, I have no idea how even vaguely dependable statistics could possibly be arrived at, so I'd have to think that was just R*******.
|
Holes in cheese implies something went wrong. It didn't.
People given decision. Decision made.
Not that it will be the end of the matter.
The mob, or at least the the people at the margin, are now being stoat-danced into thinking that we must retain membership of the EU single market. That would not be a Brexit.
Brexit means Brexit, but that will only happen if there is a major cock-up with the management of the negotiations by our two-faced government, in which case it will happen in a disastrously uncontrolled way. Since a cock-up has a significant probability of occurring, it's anybody's guess at this point where we will end up.
This is actually the worst of all worlds. A wholehearted Brexit or Brinit would be doable; trying to blur the lines while saying one thing and doing another risks getting too little at too high a cost, whether we are in the market or out.
Since the government appears unwilling to embrace full separation, we may as well hope for a full Breversal. We will get stuffed if we try to keep the supposedly good bits.
This is potentially a bigger mess than I contemplated, and I don't think many other people saw it coming either.
Out means we would be responsible for our own decisions. That is the way I have have run my life. I look after my family and pay my way. Being a member of a club where everybody wants different things or something for nothing is a dead end.
|
>>. A wholehearted Brexit or Brinit would be doable.
I don't think so.
There are just too many agreements intertwined into too many things. Telecommunications, Broadcasting, air travel to name but three. It'd take years to unpick, and life will change faster than we can get it agreed.
I think full Brexit it is just impossible, irrespective of whether or not its desirable.
We have to find a way to pick and choose, which will inevitably mean getting stuck with some stuff.
The problem is, that people argue about economic and financial metrics, trade laws and agreements, etc. etc. But none of that was really significant to the vote for out.
The vote for out was largely, I think, a sovereignty thing. Well there is no compromise on sovereignty; you have it or you don't, and only a full [and impossible] Exit will satisfy that demand.
There'll be no good come out of this fiasco, whichever side of the fence[s] one sits. And the final result will neither be in nor out. It will emotionally suit nobody.
Whether it'll be an economic disaster or a miracle, is a whole 'nother question. Probably neither, would be my guess.
|
>> >>. A wholehearted Brexit or Brinit would be doable.
>>
>> I don't think so.
I'm frequently wrong, so I won't dispute your view.
My logic is that it would be a lot of work, but achievable with everybody facing the same way; and it wouldn't all have to be done at once. There would be lots of things where both sides would be happy to drop hands and leave things as they are for an indefinite period - product standards for example. All sorts of things that it would be logical simply to have parity/mutuality on regardless of membership status.
Other aspects could be adopted en bloc from what obtains with other non-member countries. I completely agree that none of us will live long enough to reinvent it all.
As an independent state, there is nothing to stop us (both parties) agreeing anything at any time thereafter, even when a treaty exists.
|
>>My logic is that it would be a lot of work, but achievable with everybody facing the same way;
I'm not sure that even then it would be doable, but "everybody facing the same way"? Nice thought.
Was it me;
We would stay a member. That way all the agreements would remain current and we wouldn't need to discuss the ones we were happy with; airline compensation and telco roaming charges for example.
Leaving theoretically means that *every* agreement must be revisited, even the ones we were happy with.
We should then have listed the 'n' things we simply would not accept, were going to change or were going to do.
We should have then made sure we didn't blink first.
However, sensible as that all seems to be to me, it wouldn't resolve the feelings of those who simply have an emotional objection to what they feel the EU to be, and that is typically around sovereignty.
That just isn't a thing that bothers me.
>As an independent state, there is nothing to stop us (both parties) agreeing anything at any time thereafter, even when a treaty exists.
Correct. Its simply a question of volume.
|
>> Holes in cheese implies something went wrong. It didn't.
Oh yes it did. Cameron thought he could repeat Wilson's 1975 plan and kill Europe question for a generation. Or at least kick can down road for another election or so. He failed and created a massive uncertainty that's still to be filled - see bellow.
>> The mob, or at least the the people at the margin, are now being stoat-danced
>> into thinking that we must retain membership of the EU single market. That would not
>> be a Brexit.
But nobody spelled out what Brexit meant. The handfull who decided it had no real idea. MAybe they knew what they (thought) they opposed, They'd no idea what they were voting for.
|
>>The handful who decided it had no real
>> idea. MAybe they knew what they (thought) they opposed, They'd no idea what they were
>> voting for.
Handful? And which of the 52% were those? And which of the 48% were the ones that mattered, and the ones that didn't?
You have built a distorted model something that you would have been quite happy with had it gone the other way.
As for what they were voting for...how could anybody on either side know what lay ahead? The reason I could not support continued membership was because I thought (and still do) that the EU will break up in a messy way.
|
>> As for what they were voting for...how could anybody on either side know what lay
>> ahead?
Agreed. And neither was there any common ground for what the issues actually were, never mind what their outcome might be.
33m ish people voted. close to 50:50. I'd be pretty sure that the vast majority of both sides knew exactly what they were voting for. It just may have been different to what the next person was voting for, or what the politicians thought they were voting for, but they knew.
There was just no way of knowing what could or would be delivered and no consistent view of what was desirable or possible.
If the question had been;
"who is totally happy with the way the EU is"
vs.
"Who think significant changes should be made and we should quit if we don't get them"
...then I think there would then perhaps have been a very convincing majority for change. Including my vote.
.*********
>>The reason I could not support continued membership was because I thought (and still
>> do) that the EU will break up in a messy way.
Perhaps, though I marginally think not.
It is an organisation which will need to evolve and become something else. It needs to lose its social control aspects, its sovereignty desires and its limited world view. But again, I think we'd have been better riding out that change from within.
However, until we have a Government which will enforce the laws and sovereignty that we already have then goodness knows what we think new rule will achieve.
The one thing I thought and hoped that Farage might have got us was political parties with well defined views and action plans. Sadly that has not happened.
|
>>The one thing I thought and hoped that Farage might have got us was political parties with well defined views and action plans. Sadly that has not happened.
Does that come as any surprise?
|
>>Does that come as any surprise?
Little bit.
I did think there was a chance he was going to shift stuff around a bit. Sadly he revealed himself to be as dodgy and wind-blowable as everybody else.
|
>>and the Leave voters won by a handsome margin.
?? How on earth di you work that out?
Firstly you said a majority of the population, which it was not. It was not even a majority of the electorate. It was a majority of the voters, but certainly not "handsome".
I don't have any sympathy with those that didn't vote, neither do I have any sympathy for [or much belief in the existence of] those who later said that they would change their vote. It is what it is and the referendum result was for "Leave".
But there's no sense in lying about it.
My point was that your statement "The majority of the UK Population" was wrong. And the percentages proved that. And the "type of percentages I've used" was the same one you wanted and used yourself, percentage of population.
The only differences being that I was right and understood the figures.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Fri 30 Dec 16 at 19:33
|
>The only differences being that I was right and understood the figures.>>
I'll point out to you one more time, no matter how much you obfuscate what I've said or the actual result, that the voting in the Referendum was far, far higher than at any General Election and the verdict went in favour of the Leave campaign. Indisputable.
Again, you can argue as much as you like (and I realise you are still incredulous that anyone could actually disagree with you about the result) that the final outcome of the electorate's voting was to Leave the EU.
That is also the point where I Leave this argument...:-)
|
|
NoFM2R is right. It clearly isn't a majority of the population or even of the electorate. You can't argue with that any more than they should have put the £350m on the bus.
|
|
I thought we were getting close to New Years Eve, but it seems like it's actually Groundhog Day all over again ;)
|
Yeah, sorry 'bout this one Dave, I started it not really to fan the flames but because I found the BBC article about the chicanery and sleight of hand which led to the referendum interesting, and I thought others might.
Just relating to Bromps post above about Cameron making a duff decision, the article seemed to me to be saying the plotters managed to corner him and force his hand. I'm not supporting Cameron. I was surprised and impressed with the conspiracy which went into kicking off the referendum process. Or the story which whoever wrote the article had come up with.
|
>> Notice a record day for the FTSE today.>> >>
Yes based on an exchange rate of 1.17 Euro to the Pound.
This time last year it was 1.35 Euro to the Pound so in real terms it hasn't done so well!
|
>> so in real terms
>> it hasn't done so well!
>>
Real terms money I spend is £, not € .
|
|
Not when most things you buy ar imported
|
>> Not when most things you buy are imported
>>
Or your job depends on the equally large number of things that you export, mostly to the rest of the world?
|
>> Notice a record day for the FTSE today.
>>
The Guardian and its readers have managed to turn that in to a negative anti-Brexit story.
|
>> The Guardian and its readers have managed to turn that in to a negative anti-Brexit
>> story.
Link?
FTSE 100 is largely international businesses; not too effective as barometer of UK economy.
|
The strength of the FTSE is a function of :
The strength of the US Dollar
The weakness of the pound
The fact that most FTSE 100 companies ar international companies with the bulk of their income in Dollars or other overseas currencies like the Euro.
The only element that those who voted for Brexit can claim as attributable to their vote is the weakness of the pound.
|
>> QED
What has been thus demonstrated?
|
>> >> QED
>>
>> What has been thus demonstrated?
>>
That Remoaners are a sad lot who will continue to turn good news in to bad, who will do the UK down against their beloved EU, who continue to grieve over a decision taken more than 6 months ago.
p.s. If you ask the Remoaner economics "experts", they'll tell you that a "weak" pound is good for the UK economy. Governor Carney will confirm that. I have no intention of reprising the referendum debate. Just look up all the old threads if you are so inclined.
I say to Remoaners, join the Brexiteers in rejoicing when article 50 is triggered. It will do wonders for your mental well being.
|
|
In all the different political discussions there has been on here, has anyone ever changed their mind as a result of what they have read on here??
|
>> In all the different political discussions there has been on here, has anyone ever changed
>> their mind as a result of what they have read on here??
>>
Unlikely.
Remoaning is like a religion. Conversion is going to be pretty difficult, even with preaching by missionaries like Mervyn King.
Some may become born again Brexiteers when they see their beloved EU go down the plughole.
|
>>Remoaning is like a religion. Conversion is going to be pretty difficult, even with preaching by >>missionaries like Mervyn King.
>>Some may become born again Brexiteers when they see their beloved EU go down the plughole.
People that voted remain are entitled to their opinions and can still make forecasts or analyse the state of the current economy.
Criticising people personally for making general comments about the economy is puerile and tantamount to bullying and shows you for what you are.
For the record I voted remain and since the vote then I have been working 80 hour weeks trying to save companies that have been hit by the economic situation. The good old FTSE may be strong but independent businesses are suffering from lack of investment, higher costs for imported goods and no room to increase prices to customers. If you notice the time of this posting, it is because I have just finished a report on a company I saw today that needs urgent help and won't be here in the new year unless help is given.
|
>>In all the different political discussions there has been on here, has anyone ever changed their mind as a result of what they have read on here??
No.
|
What's a "remoaner"? As nicknames go that's about as sad as people who say things like "Main s******" thinking themselves awfully witty. Do you use that one as well?
And why do you write a whole bunch of stuff, raise the subject and then say "I have no intention of reprising the referendum debate"? Wouldn't just not mentioning it be quite a good way of not reprising the debate?
|
>> Wouldn't just not mentioning it
>> be quite a good way of not reprising the debate?
>>
This all I am saying to you, not giving you the satisfaction, as per Dog:
"Silence".
Last edited by: BrianByPass on Thu 29 Dec 16 at 23:53
|
Ha ha ha ha ha !!
You *actually* had to tell me you weren't talking to me??? Did you have your bottom lip stuck out while you did it? Were you worried that if you didn't tell me I might not notice??
Wuss.
|
>> This all I am saying to you, not giving you the satisfaction, as per Dog:
>>
>> "Silence".
>>
...as a sign of seasonal goodwill, could you extend that kind offer to the rest of us.....
;-)
|
>> What's a "remoaner"? As nicknames go that's about as sad
>>
Actually I think it's quite witty, equally on a par with "regrexit".
|
|
Howls about Wrexiteer - Gina Miller being the high muckamuck of the genus.
|
>> The fact that most FTSE 100 companies ar international companies with the bulk of their
>> income in Dollars or other overseas currencies like the Euro.
>>
On 28 June 2016, two trading days after referendum, indexes FTSE100, FTSE250, FTSE350, and FTSE-AllShare all bottomed out.
Since then, up to the close today, they have gained as follows:
FTSE100 +1138 = 19.02% closing at 7120
FTSE250 +3061 = 20.45% closing at 18029
FTSE350 +632 = 19.25% closing at 3919
FTSE-AllShare +623 = 19.26% closing at 3861
So the other indices (than FTSE100) which are a truer reflection of UK £ based businesses, have fared better than FTSE100 since the low of 28 June 2016.
No dounb the Remoaners will come up with a new gloom laden argument about why the highs achieved by those other indices should be ignored.
|
|
I don't really want to stoke the fire of this argument again, but it is interesting to note that other markets which have absolutely no interest in BREXIT have also gone up over the same period. I sampled Japan, Shanghai, Chile, India and Dow Jones to prove the point to myself before posting this. Five out of five had gone up, often by something well in excess of 10%. That wasn't me being selective, it's just the first five I thought of...
Last edited by: smokie on Fri 30 Dec 16 at 00:24
|
Interesting to see new cases / challenges being brought regarding leaving the single market and the EEA.
As far as I recall the referendum asked "Remain a member of the European Union" or "Leave the European Union".
Are these legally separate to the European Union as defined by the referendum question or part of the European Union. If they are separate, then there is no mandate to leave them?
The referendum question was rather stupid in not specifying the type of leave required as in all divorces there has to be some negotiation, and using families, for example, some may think twice if there would be no access to children etc.
|
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12/30/britain-has-secured-15billion-extra-foreign-investment-since/
With recent terrorism in Europe, situation in Turkey, Trump in USA etc. I am even more convinced that leaving EU is right thing to do.
|
>> With recent terrorism in Europe, situation in Turkey, Trump in USA etc. I am even
>> more convinced that leaving EU is right thing to do.
How is UK leaving EU related to any of those things?
|
>> >> With recent terrorism in Europe, situation in Turkey, Trump in USA etc. I am
>> even
>> >> more convinced that leaving EU is right thing to do.
>>
>> How is UK leaving EU related to any of those things?
Obvious Shirley.
When there is equilibrium, all on an even keel, it doesn't matter much. When things become volatile, freedom of action becomes an advantage.
If you are looking down the other end of the telescope, you might say that alliances become more important.
Either way, it isn't irrelevant.
Last edited by: Manatee on Fri 30 Dec 16 at 19:24
|
Europe should have been a separate block from the USA and Russia in my opinion.Maybe we are to hung up about the power of Germany and the Third Reich will return.
The U.K Germany and France are the most powerfull countries in the E.U.It could have happened but drawing the bridges is going back in time.Chauvinism is a powerfull argument but we all live in one melting pot on this planet.My Mrs disagrees..:)
|
>> With recent terrorism in Europe, situation in Turkey, Trump in USA etc. I am even
>> more convinced that leaving EU is right thing to do.
How is UK leaving EU related to any of those things?
1. Berlin terrorist was caught in Milan - freedom of movement!
2. Trump is anti-EU and pro-Russia. So likely to kick EU on the back. He + Putin more likely to kick ISIS and help Assad (unlike EU who does opposite).
3. Turkey can still join in EU - but if UK leaves EU then not our problem.
|
>> and help Assad
He's part of the problem in the region.
|
> and help Assad
>>He's part of the problem in the region
West said same thing about Saddam, Gaddafi and Mubarak. They were all dictators but they kept those countries under control.
|
>> 1. Berlin terrorist was caught in Milan - freedom of movement!
That was a open borders (Schengen) issue, not one about freedom to move as a worker. UK is not in Schengen. As has been pointed out many times previously land borders, even those closed in time of war, remain permeable to the determined.
>> 2. Trump is anti-EU and pro-Russia. So likely to kick EU on the back. He
>> + Putin more likely to kick ISIS and help Assad (unlike EU who does opposite).
If the Donald wants to kick EU we're going to be caught too, whether in (As we will be for at least half his first term) or out. I agree with your point below about Assad and other strongmen. If we're going to press for 'regime change' we need to be clear what follows and be in a position to make it happen. Western style democracy won't necessarily work in countries
>> 3. Turkey can still join in EU - but if UK leaves EU then not
>> our problem.
Turkey won't join the EU. Greece and Cyprus will ensure that. If that is wrong then at least we'd have a veto and a role in negotiation rather than being left to 'lump it' with whatever impact Turkish membership has following agreement on any soft or semi soft Brexit.
|
>> , for example, some
>> may think twice if there would be no access to children etc.
>>
Except that in this case a better example might be losing access to the in-laws? :)
|
>>Except that in this case a better example might be losing access to the in-laws? :)
Yes, divorce certainly has its positives.
|
An interesting and intelligent piece of analysis by Robert Peston.
tinyurl.com/hgwaefv
|
I like Peston the way he voices his views and try's to be sincere.
Any prediction is so unpredictable a week is long in politics.The big powers will have to come to some agreement we don't want this planet turning into a dust cloud do we?
|
"An interesting and intelligent piece of analysis by Robert Peston."
As you well know, CG, everything that you read in the Mail has to be taken with a pinch of salt.
|
Everything you read everywhere should be read critically
An interesting article though don't you think?
|
|
Add to that the fact that Peston has a remarkably good track record.
|
>>Add to that the fact that Peston has a remarkably good track record.>>
Yes, some brilliant scoops over the years.
Just unfortunate that his television presenting style is so irritating compared to just reading his outpourings....:-(
|
>> >>Add to that the fact that Peston has a remarkably good track record.>>
>>
>> Yes, some brilliant scoops over the years.
>>
Peston has a remarkably good track record of getting his economics wrong.
Peston some leaks passed to him over the years by Civil Servants or Cleggies as he did not do very well at hiding his liberal left-wing bias when supposedly reporting as an "unbiased BBC reporter".
I enjoyed reading this:
"Now that almost six months have passed since the EU referendum, might it be time for old enemies to find common ground?
Matthew Parris and Matt Ridley, two of the most eloquent voices on either side of the campaign, meet in the offices of The Spectator to find out."
www.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/matthew-parris-vs-matt-ridley-on-brexit-bitterness/
|
>>Peston has a remarkably good track record of getting his economics wrong.>>
I referred to "some brilliant scoops over the years".
Peston has won numerous awards including the Royal Television Society's Journalist of the Year and Scoop of the Year for his coverage of the financial crisis and the collapse of Northern Rock.
You don't land such awards for being a failure and, of course, as mentioned elsewhere in this thread, future economics forecasting is most certainly not an exact science...:-)
|
>> Add to that the fact that Peston has a remarkably good track record.
>>
.......................of being an insufferable dick.
|
"An interesting article though don't you think?"
Not interesting at all - just journalistic fluff; there was nothing here that hasn't been said before. Alas, just another monied whinging remainiac.
I have to confess that whenever Pesto appeared on the Beeb, I had to turn away; I couldn't listen to the poor bloke, his staccato presenting style was simply unbearable.
|
"whinging"
Mirror, mirror... :-)
|
|
What is you your analysis of how the next few years will go then Haywain? Presumably it is markedly different form Peston's. Perhaps you might let us know.
|
"Presumably it is markedly different form (sic) Peston's. Perhaps you might let us know."
Can you point to something in Pesto's fluff piece that you weren't already aware of? "So 2017 will be neither economic armageddon nor party time." What does that tell us? Pesto is guessing, not analysing - being paid to write words.
From now on, of course, anything that's negative or unpleasant can be blamed on Brexit, and I daresay that I would have taken a corresponding view had the referendum gone the other way.
Anyway, Norwich are at home this afternoon; are you going to the match?
|
I don't read political or economic forecasts.
Most are written by people who were wrong before and operate on the basis if you keep forecasting then by the law of averages you will eventually be right.
(And I am being serious).
Rather like long term weather forecasts, there are so many unknowns, you are wasting your time reading them.
|
Re: regrexit
My right-leaning London professional friends who voted to remain would significantly now vote to leave in a re-run. I'm in that camp. Those who voted to leave are yet more emphatic that they were right.
|
|
Mrs. May is no Iron Lady. I fear her fiddle-faddling waity, waity, approach will do us no good at all in leaving - or is that what she- a remainer - wants ?
|
The real impact, whether positive or negative, of Brexit is completely unknowable at this point. Such a move is unprecedented, and a large part of what happens next is in the hands of the 27 other member states, not our own. It could well turn out to be the best thing we ever did as a country. It could also be a collective act of economic self-harm that takes decades to recover from. Likely there will be elements of both. The point is, nobody knows, and I view with immense suspicion anyone who says otherwise, whichever side they argue from.
I voted remain, but can also accept there were good arguments on the Leave side. I voted for the status quo because I'm pretty happy with it, and things are ticking along OK for me at the moment. Could be better of course. Could always be better. But could be a lot worse. And I have no personal issue with free movement. I've enjoyed it immensely over the past decade.
I am very concerned at the image we are portraying with our approach to Brexit so far though. It smacks of "Oh s***, they voted leave. What do we do now?!" The ownership of the task, and any sort of confident, coherent approach to it has been conspicious by its absence. Reminds me a bit of a bunch of kids playing with matches who have inadvertently started a sizeable fire and are now distancing themselves from it. And I too see the damage that the ongoing uncertainty and threat of upheaval is doing to the businesses of all sizes across this country that I work with every day.
We need to get on with it, and make the best of it, whatever "it" looks like.
Last edited by: DP on Wed 4 Jan 17 at 14:31
|
>> We need to get on with it, and make the best of it, whatever "it"
>> looks like.
I agree. And I find it difficult to see how Brexit can mean anything other than Brexit. I don't think that many leavers or remainers would be happy with being "in" with no votes, cf. Norway.
That is not to say that the transition may not be extended, if it can be seen to be to the mutual advantage of both UK and EU.
|
Nice post DP, up until the last but one para anyway!! :-) Your last para has the answer though - I asked Leave voters here ages ago what Leave should look like but am, as yet, none the wiser, even a fuzzy outline. I don't think I'm alone in that.
So I like to think one cause of the delay is that Government are taking seriously the risk that whatever they do is branded as a half way measure by someone or other and are therefore taking their time deciding what is do-able and what is not, and what people were really voting for.
And anyway, it really isn't as simple as you imply it may be anyway - there is a massive MASSIVE amount of stuff to untangle and even just making a list of what could be in scope would probably take a small army a number of years.
|
>> the risk that whatever they do is branded as a half way measure by someone or other and are therefore taking their time deciding what is do-able and what is not, and what people were really voting for.
With the vote split 52/48, then finding a happy solution for the country is already somewhere between difficult and impossible.
So one might think that keeping 52% happy is a sufficient goal.
But some of that 52% have economic drivers, some sovereignty, and some have less desirable motivations. In each of those areas people vary in degrees between "a bit" and "total".
How on earth does one find a single solution that the 52% will be happy with ?
Worse, some varieties of leave will be more palatable to some of the Remain voters than to some of the Leave voters.
It is a disaster which can only get bigger.
|
Here's a fuzzy outline.
So, I voted to leave.
What did I vote for and what do I expect to see happening?
I want to live in a Country which can make its own laws unhindered by another country.
I want to live where there is a minimal set of rules to adhere to and above all, rules that make perfect sense to the small island we live on.
I want to be able to buy a misshapen cucumber and a crooked banana so it will be cheaper and avoid the amount of food waste we have now.
I want to keep the Pound and carry on driving on the left.
I want to live in a multi-cultural society but still one that remains quintessentially British.
I want to live in a country where foreign people are welcome providing they have a trade, and it is one we need due to a shortage of British workers.
I want to see immigrants, both legal, and illegal, deported immediately if they commit crimes.
I want to elect politicians who are ‘in touch’ with the whole of the population, not just the circles they live and work in.
I want to see this country make a British Bill of (realistic) Human Rights to replace the debacle we have now but are unable to do anything about.
I want to see our borders policed and controlled effectively and make sure we are only responsible for those who are here legally.
I want politicians who are prepared to take bold steps to achieve this even though it will come at a price, but have the foresight to know that price will be worth it in the future.
In short, I want our Politicians to take control of our Country.
Now, how they achieve this is exactly what they are elected to do and why I’m not elected to do it.
I’m happy to pay their wages and expenses, now it is up to them to work for it for once in a long while.
In other words, you don’t have a dog and bark yourself.
This insistence in asking the ordinary working man how it should be achieved is just a way of belittling the working man’s views.
We were asked to vote to stay or leave. We voted and told the government what we wanted, now the ball is in their court to use their education and skills to achieve that.
If it wasn’t achievable the option should never have been offered.
Pat
|
|
Picking out one (not at random) What is so wrong with Human Rights Act as it stands ?
|
It's taken far too literally.
It's taken advantage of.
That will do for starters!
Pat
|
>> It's taken far too literally.
That's the point of a statute. Surely you don't want ambiguous laws?
>> It's taken advantage of.
And if it was written even MORE literally, then taking advantage would be even more difficult.
>> That will do for starters!
Kind of proved my point.
|
Actually you didn't vote for any of that. You voted to leave the EU, no more and no less.
|
|
Being a signatory (arguably the most important piece of legislation ever framed in post war Europe, and largely framed by British lawyers by the way) isn't affected by the UK being in or out. HRA influences loads of different things that we do every day.
|
"I'm happy to pay their wages and expenses, now it is up to them to work for it for once in a long while."
That's all well and good and a sincere thank you for responding Pat.
However you will also find any number of different flavours of this.
And as I said earlier the existing position will take quite some unravelling. You can't just shut your eyes to the "how" and the realism of the requirements.
Which is why the politicians have a dilemma, and why it won't happen overnight.
|
It certainly will happen.
>>Kind of proved my point<<
..and that's why none of us have had the nerve to respond to the request of what we want....fearing mass ridicule but bring it on.
CG, I responded to Smokies request as to what I want. I stated only that I voted to leave so I think you need to read it again.
As my day started at 12.30am I shall switch off now and leave you all to pull it to bits, but at least I've been the only one brave enough to state exactly why I voted leave and what I expect to happen now.
I don't expect to have to itemise it myself.
After all, if you pay a Manager to do a job in a firm you own, you don't do it for him, do you?
Pat
Last edited by: Pat on Wed 4 Jan 17 at 17:48
|
"I stated only that I voted to leave so I think you need to read it again."
Oh sorry since your list of wishes was preceded by the sentence:
"What did I vote for and what do I expect to see happening?" I kind of thought that is what you meant.
I must stop taking words literally. ;-)
|
>> Oh sorry since your list of wishes was preceded by the sentence:
>>
>> "What did I vote for
To leave
and what do I expect to see happening?" I kind of thought that is what you meant.
>>
>> I must stop taking words literally. ;-)
>>
It would be much nicer if you just stopped trying to be clever because I'm not quite as eloquent as you after being up for 17 hours;)
Pat
|
|
I believe I did post an answer to this constant refrain many months ago, although I didn't fully swallow the bait. I probably couldn't find my reply if I tried.
|
All good stuff Pat, but leaving the EU will make no difference to so many of the very valid wishes that you list because it doesn't actually have a say in those things. I don't believe the EU has ever threatened our ability to drive on the right, or to continue using the Pound. It has never dictated the shape of bananas or anything else - that was a myth debunked years ago. It won't get rid of the self interest career politicians in Westminster, and neither will it affect immigration from the 85% of countries in the world who aren't EU member states, or our ability to deport illegal immigrants (again, a myth that was debunked a while ago)
Interestingly, you don't list the biggest issues I have with the EU, which are its vast, wasteful bureaucracy, and the stink of corruption, and lack of accountability from those at the very top. It's a very dodgy setup that provides a lucrative gravy train for a select few.
I'm not arguing with any of the things you want. They are perfectly sensible. But if you think Brexit will address more than a handful of them, I can't help thinking you are going to be disappointed.
I can't help wondering what (or who) will take over as scapegoat for the UK's problems post-Brexit.
|
One of my lads who lives in London voted for out.It baffled me he is surrounded by immigrants meaby that is why.Ok he has a British passport but is half Dutch>:)
The majority of voting leave here up North was about Immigration they are taking our jobs.They never did, you didn't want to do them in the first place.
I find the whole situation unsavory the way some people are behaving.Some good points Pat but it ain't going to happen what you want.
|
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Pat. A comment I found interesting was:
>> If it wasn’t achievable the option should never have been offered.
But what if it isn't easily achievable and someone called Cameron assumed we'd vote to stay and so offered it anyway?
It certainly won't be easy will it.
Like a fair few of us said a while ago, the deal will probably not be to the liking of those voting leave or stay.
|
As I said in an earlier thread, I voted out because that - simply - was what I wanted. I had no belief in the ridiculous claims and warnings that both sides disgracefully tried to put over on us.
I don't have a beef about immigration, except when it comes to the reluctance to integrate that some of our communities exhibit - and some of these are second-generation people, the most problematic of which do not have European backgrounds.
I don't dislike Europe as a place, nor its culture - quite the opposite.
What I wanted (and still do) is for the UK to be run by us - in every respect. I have no faith in the European Union as an organisation to have our best interests at heart. It is probably an organisation that cannot work for all the different cultures it represents anyway, from the work culture of the north to the laid-back countries of the south.
The European Project, whereby the ultimate goal is a federation of states with its own army, troubles me deeply.
And, as has been pointed out, the wasteful and unaccountable bureaucratic and financial workings of the EU are a scandal that no-one seems to care about.
I don't expect to have to stipulate how the extrication process is to happen - that's up to the elected government. Nor do I have any particular ideas about what trade deals should be achieved and what other international agreements should be reached. I don't see why I should be expected to.
I'm thankful that the doom-mongers' apocalyptic economic scenarios haven't happened and maybe never will and remain cautiously optimistic that everything will be OK, but I didn't vote "out" under the assumption that all would be hunk-dory within months or even a few years. Anyone who did is an idiot, in my view.
|
>> We were asked to vote to stay or leave. We voted and told the government
>> what we wanted, now the ball is in their court to use their education and
>> skills to achieve that.
>>
Problem is there was no option to choose who would lead us out. Today the Government have taken a decisive step (in the guise of a resignation) to remove one of the blocks in the process.
order-order.com/2017/01/03/farewell-sir-ivan-rogers/
He was the pro-EU man who negotiated the "improved" EU terms that Cameron relied on to remain in the EU.
His replacement should do a lot better, without much effort:
order-order.com/2017/01/04/tim-barrow-new-eu-ambassador/
Ideally, I would be happy if Jacob Rees-Mogg was in the negotiating team, preferably leading it.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37622778
If you are tired of the Guardian's negativity, as explained here,
brexitcentral.com/rip-manchester-guardian-welcome-euro-guardian-open-letter-guardian-austin-mitchell/#more-1933
then try www.brexitcentral.com/
Bringing you news and analysis of the UK's departure from the EU and promoting a positive and optimistic vision of Britain after Brexit
|
|
I must admit that I thought a vote for BREXIT would translate to a vote for any one of the key BREXIT campaigners. That's the way this stuff often works, and I don't think I was alone in being surprised how quickly they ran away from the poisoned chalice, for that's what it will turn out to be for whoever has to carry it through.
|
|
Yep - got in one. Even that Farage has run away to the States !
|
"... the poisoned chalice, for that's what it will turn out to be..."
I see the doom-mongers are still among us, though they are a lot less vociferous than they were a few months ago.
There's little point in arguing. Let's wait and see.
|
>> I see the doom-mongers are still among us
Yes the ones who voted leave are still mostly here.
We'll all have to see how bad it gets I suppose.
|
If this snippet is correct:
"Theresa May will threaten to take Britain out of the single market unless the UK is given full control of its borders in a significant Brexit speech designed to counter claims she has no plan for leaving the EU."
But isn't being outside the single market the plan? I copied the text from the Telegraph.
|
I wasn't doom mongering, though I must admit I still don't really get how the massive crash in exchange rates is a good thing. For one, it's very inflationary. And I'm not so sure it's a blip, as touted by some in the early days.
My ref to poison chalice wasn't so much about the outcome but the poor sods who have to deliver it, as they are on something of a hiding to nothing - e.g. we have been told firmly that BREXIT is BREXIT and I'm now sort of OK with that (although I've still not seen anything to persuade me I should have voted for it though), but the Leave voters are already complaining that it isn't happening quickly enough, and I'm sure they will eventually have issues with however it finally looks not matching their expectation. Mother Theresa has taken it on (or been dumped with it, depending on your pov) but I doubt she will come out of it smelling of roses.
Some seem to think it's as easy as choosing a new colour for the lounge.
|
>> but the Leave voters are already complaining that it isn't
>> happening quickly enough, and I'm sure they will eventually have issues with however it finally
>> looks not matching their expectation.
>>
" but [some] of the Leave voters "
" I'm sure [some of them] will eventually have issues"
Alas, that is the way of the world. Always will be.
>> Some seem to think it's as easy as choosing a new colour for the lounge.
>>
Getting a new treaty agreed with 27 other EU states where they each have a veto is never going to be easy. That is why most commentators believe that a hard Brexit is most likely.
>> I'm now sort of OK with that
Article by Andrew Marr (I don't think he could remotely have been in the Leave camp) below may help reassure you a little
www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2016/12/optimists-guide-brexit
|
>> I still don't really get how the
>> massive crash in exchange rates is a good thing. For one, it's very inflationary. And
>> I'm not so sure it's a blip, as touted by some in the early days.
>>
It will not be a blip because the Bank Of England wants it to last longer. Inflation has been much below the BoE target for too long, requiring a long line of regular letters from Carney to the Treasury to explain why the Bank has failed to achieve the target.
To understand why the "massive crash" [as you see it] is welcomed by the BoE:
econ.economicshelp.org/2008/12/exchange-rate-mechanism-crisis-1992.html
www.economicshelp.org/blog/1882/economics/winners-and-losers-from-weak-pound/
|
I don't see either article directly states the the BoE has welcomed the "massive crash" (for that's what it is).
Your first article includes "Lessons from ERM", amongst which include
"An overvalued currency can lead to lower economic growth, due to uncompetitive exports." and
"Trying to keep currency at a level which is too high, may require high real interest rates - which can cause economic downturn."
- neither of which applied prior to the BREXIT vote did they?
You missed this one from the same site
www.economicshelp.org/blog/21254/exchange-rates/how-far-will-the-pound-sterling-fall/
which says things like
"The outflow of currency to buy imports is unsustainable without a corresponding inflow of capital and financial flows to finance it."
"Outside the EU, the uncertainty and loss of direct access to the Single Market, makes UK economic prospects weaker and due to this, some investors are moving money outside the UK, or at least not investing in the UK, with this decline in foreign portfolio flows, the previous factors keeping Pound strong have been removed."
"Post Brexit, these plans have been put on hold, and outside the Single Market, there may be a long-term decline in desirability of investing in UK. "
And some very gloomy (but reasonably informed) comments which I won't quote!!
The BoE Nov inflation report predicts inflation will exceed the 2% target as a direct result of the exchange rate changes. Nowhere does it actively welcome the crash, nor does it say anything about it wanting it to last longer, but I do see a number of references (I'd call them gentle warnings but I'm sure you'd disagree) to the uncertain period we are heading into. I can see how you might arrive at the conclusion that the BoE welcomes the crash but I really don't think it would have been their method of choice for achieving the target.
www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Documents/inflationreport/2016/nov.pdf
I will be delighted to be proved to have been a doom-monger but, for me, at the moment I don't feel that the future is rosy, at least economically. Can't help that, to me that's how the key indicators read.
|
>> welcomes the crash
>>
Mark Carney may not be too bothered if Sterling stays at current levels for two or three years. "Sterling starts to really move as it becomes clearer the timing of the Article 50 triggering (to start Brexit talks), and the market's perception - and I really underscore it's the market's perception - of what the potential relationship will be between the United Kingdom and Europe" He said "that perception may well be mistaken" and the BoE had to judge how long sterling weakness was likely to last as it tried to work out its implications for inflation. "It is important to say that that judgement is a judgement about the optimal trade-off," he said, adding that in the longer-term - around three years away - he expected inflation to fall sharply as the impact of the slide in sterling faded.
Bank’s deputy governor Ben Broadbent said the plummeting price of the pound has been an important “shock absorber†for the British economy.
Bank of England policymaker Michael Saunders believes the lower currency is not necessarily a bad thing – it may support economic growth, while pushing up import prices – but said Britain’s economic fundamentals meant the pound was already overvalued before the EU referendum.
“Given the scale and persistence of the UK’s current account deficit, I would not be surprised if sterling falls further, but I am fairly agnostic as to whether any further depreciation is likelyâ€
The slump in sterling is a blessing in disguise after years of overvaluation and helps to break the corrosive stranglehold of the financial elites over the British economy, according to a former bail-out chief for the International Monetary Fund. “It is desirable from every point of view."
Pound sterling collapse a 'welcome change', says former Bank of England governor Mervyn King.
|
I don't think I was alone in being surprised how quickly they ran away
>> from the poisoned chalice, for that's what it will turn out to be for whoever
>> has to carry it through.
IIRC i don't think they ran away, more like they couldn't get the votes.
|
>> and I don't think I was alone in being surprised how quickly they ran away
>> from the poisoned chalice, for that's what it will turn out to be for whoever
>> has to carry it through.
>>
Cameron said he wouldn't but then ran away. On 19th June, just a few days before the referendum:
"The Prime Minister was directly challenged about his position after the referendum, with one audience member on BBC's Question Time asking how he could possibly remain as Prime Minister if Vote Leave win.
"I promised this renegotiation, I carried it out," he said. "I promised a referendum, we're having it.
"I will take and obey the instructions of the British people, and on that basis I think it's right to stay."
No other Remain or Leave politician made a claim before the vote that they would lead the Government after the vote, whether the vote was in or out.
|
So folks voted to leave based on the expectation that Cameron would lead the way out (or, at best with no idea who would be able to lead us out?)?? And they actually believed what a politician said? How quaint!! :-)
Have you never noticed how people "of importance" often say one thing then do another? I guess it's maybe something to do with their ego, or a desire to maintain stability or something. If ever a football manager or politician gets put in a position of having to say whether or not they will be resigning, they often say they won't but also often they are gone within a day.
|
>> So folks voted to leave based on the expectation that Cameron would lead the way
>> out (or, at best with no idea who would be able to lead us out?)??
>> And they actually believed what a politician said? How quaint!! :-)
>>
No, as I said at the start "Problem is there was no option to choose who would lead us out."
( see www.car4play.com/forum/post/index.htm?t=23675&m=522161&v=e )
The folks were only given the choice Leave or Remain, not who would lead the Government. You said leaders had run away. I was pointing out that only one had run away despite having promised to stay.
It was a binary referendum, not an election of Government.
I will assume that you are deliberately being obtuse, not that you really are not able to understand what the referendum question asked. ;-)
Last edited by: BrianByPass on Thu 5 Jan 17 at 10:27
|
"So folks voted to leave based on the expectation that Cameron would lead the way out (or, at best with no idea who would be able to lead us out?)"
I can't speak for others, obviously, but I voted out for reasons stated above. That vote was not based on the expectation Cameron would lead us out - why should it be? I couldn't care less who leads us out.
The referendum was about staying or leaving. I don't understand why anyone wants to attach another agenda to it.
And anyone who listened to what was said by the economic experts, or Cameron, or Farage, or Corbyn - oh, hang on, he didn't say much, did he? - was just naive.
Last edited by: Focal Point on Thu 5 Jan 17 at 11:25
|
Well I must admit, without pretending to be too deep and meaningful, I did consider some of the "collateral" of each outcome when deciding which way to vote, and one which figured fairly strongly for me was that I didn't want that lovable buffoon Boris to be PM, which I thought would be a given.
Of course that wasn't the main factor and there is lots more now predicted and happening which I hadn't foreseen (some good, some not good), but I did try to give the ramifications some serious thought as well as which outcome I wanted.
I don't understand why one would vote for an outcome without considering the impacts of achieving that outcome. Each to his own eh? :-)
|
>> I don't understand why one would vote for an outcome without considering the impacts of
>> achieving that outcome. Each to his own eh? :-)
>>
The only way to judge in future (ten? twenty? thirty? lifetime?) whether In or Out was the better option would be create a parallel world where UK retains the status quo and compare that with the real world where UK has left the EU.
Life goes on, and it is up to the individual's psyche to try to lead it with a positive or negative outlook. I choose the positive course.
Someone once said to me, "Brian ...
Cheer up, Brian. You know what they say.
Some things in life are bad,
They can really make you mad.
Other things just make you swear and curse.
When you're chewing on life's gristle,
Don't grumble, give a whistle!
And this'll help things turn out for the best
And
Always look on the bright side of life!
Always look on the bright side of life
If life seems jolly rotten,
There's something you've forgotten!
And that's to laugh and smile and dance and sing,
When you're feeling in the dumps,
Don't be silly chumps,
Just purse your lips and whistle -- that's the thing!
And always look on the bright side of life
Come on!
Always look on the bright side of life
|
I doubt you will believe this but I am firmly in the "let's get out" camp now, although I do not believe it can or should be rushed.
I don't for a minute think it was the right decision but there is no way to turn back the clock even if we wanted to, and to try to do so prolongs the uncertainty.
I didn't, and still don't agree with much (but not all) of what the Out campaign appeared to want but I do accept that the democracy of the referendum has defined the way forward.
I do hope that governments across the world learn from this event as I don't think there are many who would consider it well managed or thought through.
I dislike some of the Out voters attitudes now as much as some of the Remain people back after the vote. I believe most people on both sides have now accepted that we are going to leave, but nevertheless they retain the right to discuss the rights and wrongs in their own perception, and not suffer smug lectures from the Leave campaigners about how clever they were to get it right and/or patronisingly told how they need to get over it. That is not democracy, that's bordering on suppression of freedoms.
As you have said, (and I think I may have said earlier) none of us will ever know which outcome was best - The UK could be doing startlingly well in 20 years but may have been doing even better with an In vote - too many factors are involved.
|
I agree with most of this.
"I do hope that governments across the world learn from this event as I don't think there are many who would consider it well managed or thought through."
I don't see what could have been done. It certainly wasn't pretty, but you can't suppress discussion, nor campaigning, and you can't regulate truthfulness. Perhaps the one thing that should have been done was for the government to have a Plan B (in case the vote, against all expectation, was won by the "outers"). It clearly did not.
Yes, there are clearly some obnoxious attitudes around from the "outers" still, not helped by the "remainers" who tried to find all sorts of preposterous reasons for not accepting the result. Childish stuff from both sides. What happened to respect for the views of others? The "outers" must realise that we are at the beginning of a (probably) long and difficult process which we will not see the results of for years. This is no time for triumphalism - we haven't actually got anywhere yet. Anyone who voted out can claim only to have kick-started something, that's all.
As for being right or wrong - that really doesn't come into it.
Last edited by: Focal Point on Thu 5 Jan 17 at 14:13
|
>> It clearly did not.>>
Because, as I've pointed out in another recently posted comment, too many southerners were too comfortable and self satisfied to even notice there might be serious opposition to remaining in the EU.
|
" I did try to give the ramifications some serious thought as well as which outcome I wanted.
I don't understand why one would vote for an outcome without considering the impacts of achieving that outcome."
I think that is absolutely fine and I admit to considering the ramifications. The trouble is/was, no-one could be trusted to explain or - even less - to predict what those ramifications would be and in the end I decided the broader principles and the long-term future would be what would guide me, and I have no regrets either about the way I voted or what led me to do so.
Smokie's assumption that Boris would be PM (which at one point seemed a perfectly reasonable idea) shows how shaky looking at the short term has proved to be.
As someone said in an earlier thread, gut feeling was one way of dealing with it all.
I still look back with bitterness on the appallingly unprincipled behaviour of both sides in the lead-up to the vote. I've no doubt it damaged the public's faith in politicians still further, if that was possible.
|
>>"I don't understand why one would vote for an outcome without considering the impacts of achieving that outcome.">>
A large part of the reason for the Brexit victory was the fact that the majority of those who live in the North were tired of the Inner M25 and southern counties' population's belief that all was "fine and dandy" in their own insular existence.
It came as a shock to them that much of the rest of the population resented being left out in the cold as far as support and investment was concerned, along with the perceived or otherwise problems caused by immigration and being ruled by unelected EU big wigs such as Juncker, so voted to end the injustice.
The UK was a massive trading nation for hundreds of years - it can and will be one again once this millstone around its neck has finally been given its marching orders.
|
I'd like to think that for many it was a bit more than a protest vote from the North against the South.
If more youngsters had gone out and voted it could have been a different result. The margin was fairly slim really.
|
>> I'd like to think that for many it was a bit more than a protest
>> vote from the North against the South.<<
It wasn't like that at all, certainly not North v South, it was a cry for anyone outside of middle/upper class to be heard wherever they lived.
>>
>> If more youngsters had gone out and voted it could have been a different result.
>> The margin was fairly slim really.
>>
Granted, but by the same token if more staunch Remainers who thought they didn't need to vote, hadn't been so complacent then it could have been very different too.
I certainly remember voting in the early 70's to join the Common Market and I listened to what we were promised and had no hesitation in voting into that.
40 odd years on, several different political parties have been in power and without fail, all have failed to deliver the Utopia we were supposed to get.
I, and many others of my age, feel we've given them a fair crack of the whip at delivering that and remember the world as it was before we had interference from the EU in every step we as a country take.
Pat
|
>>40 odd years on, several different political parties have been in power and without fail, all have failed to deliver the Utopia we were supposed to get.
Do you not remember what is was like in the '60s and '70s in this country?
We were the poor man compared to Germany and France and joined the EU for much needed economic growth.
The real danger is that the UK economy doesn't reach the potential it could have being outside the UK and the ability to buy bent bananas (if that were ever true) will do little to alleviate pain.
Last edited by: zippy on Thu 5 Jan 17 at 16:30
|
Project Fear Brexit predictions were 'flawed and partisan', new study says
telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/05/project-fear-brexit-predictions-flawed
-partisan-new-study-says/
|
We haven't even triggered article 50 yet. Too early to say anything one way or another.
Petrol has gone up though. I blame Trump.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Thu 5 Jan 17 at 20:29
|
... and he's not even president yet :-)
Oddly, crude is in the $50s per barrel and it's been around that mark for some weeks. I guess crude price changes take a while to filter through.
|
>>Petrol has gone up though. I blame Trump.>>
Nothing, of course, to do with the fact that OPEC agreed to reduce the number of barrels output - if they're running short of brass the West picks up the tab.
|
>>Nothing, of course, to do with the fact that OPEC agreed to reduce the number of barrels output - if they're running short of brass the West picks up the tab.
Of course our laws prevent cartels from fixing prices or output to control pricing, its OK to accept it from oil producers though!?
|
>
>> Of course our laws prevent cartels from fixing prices or output to control pricing, its
>> OK to accept it from oil producers though!?
>>
Well there's hardly a great deal we can do with OPEC is there! ?
|
|
Maybe it'd be the club to join after we leave the EU :-)
|
|
And nothing to do with a 20% drop in the value of the pound after the referendum.
|
I am reminded in the news this morning that "Voters in Scotland backed the UK staying in the EU by 62% to 38%".
It's also interesting that the South East most closely matched the final outcome in percentage terms and therefore was representative of the country as a whole. See the chart under "How Leave won the Referendum" at www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36616028
We all know how much the Scots apparently hate the English, and often say how hard done by they feel, so I'm not sure that either Pat or Stuart's reasoning is supported by the facts.
Whatever, as they say... :-)
|
Bit like a dog with a bone with this one Smokie?
...and one with a permanent smiley face too:)
Pat
|
Not really, as I said earlier the thread was started more as a point of interest about an article which described how the govt may have been manoeuvered into the vote which I thought was quite an interesting tale.
I keep telling myself to stop saying stuff but then along comes another half-truth...
I will really try to say no more on the matter, other than
:-)
and
:-)
Last edited by: smokie on Fri 6 Jan 17 at 11:55
|
"...along comes another half-truth..."
Without wishing to stir the pot (or wrestle with the bone), I would add only that one man's truth is another man's lie. In other words, amongst folk who may be quite genuine and sincere it is amazing how far their ideas about what is true may vary, especially when they get into topics like politics and religion.
As many discussions on here have borne out.
|
>>...so I'm not sure that either Pat or Stuart's reasoning is supported by the facts.>>
Because the voting decision taken by the 33,551,983 who went to the polls resulted in a 48.11% share for the Remainers and a 51.89% winning majority for the Leave camp.
I'm quite sure that you wouldn't have raised the slightest quibble if the verdict had been reversed....:-)
Just like a General Election where the voting preferences equally vary in different constituencies, the First Past The Post status stood as the electorate's decision.
|
The phrase unfinished business comes to mind in the context of a close result in the opposite direction. NF wanted a decisive verdict, or another referendum. www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-wants-second-referendum-7985017
|
Farage comes across to me as a creepy type of character.
The cocky lad in the playground who knows all until you put him in his place.
|
The Supreme Court has said that Parliament must vote on Brexit.
Supposing they vote against it? What happens then?
|
>> Supposing they vote against it? What happens then?
General Election possibly. Not a bad thing as Labour is likely to be wiped out in their Brexit heartland.
It is becoming a farce now. SC judgement was won on 8-3 voting. Just 5-person lead can technically turn down referendum lead of over 1 million people!
|
>> It is becoming a farce now. SC judgement was won on 8-3 voting. Just 5-person
>> lead can technically turn down referendum lead of over 1 million people!
Can you explain to us how you come to that conclusion.
As Lord Neuberger made absolutely clear in delivering the decision the court case was about process not principle.
|
>> court case was about process not principle.
Correct but the process is so convoluted that principle becomes "Head I win, Tail you lose!"
|
>> Supposing they vote against it? What happens then?
Firstly there's no constitutional reason why the Commons couldn't vote the Bill down. The referendum was, unlike the one on voting reform, non binding.
It's not going to happen because MP's, whatever their judgement about the economics etc, won't take the risk in terms of constituency (and perhaps more so media) response. Ken Clarke will probably be one exception but he's not bothered; he's happy to retires in 2020.
If it did happen it would be a constitutional crisis. Mrs May would almost certainly make it a matter of confidence and would be able to call an election.
|
>> If it did happen it would be a constitutional crisis. Mrs May would almost certainly
>> make it a matter of confidence and would be able to call an election.
>>
In short she seems to have been rather clever. Although the government pretended to be upset about being thwarted in their intention to trigger Article 50 without further ado, in fact they must be delighted that someone else has now handed them a better way of doing it on a plate.
They can now dare MPs to risk a constituency and constitutional backlash by ignoring the wishes of a referendum that they themselves approved, and if the Lords try to block it they will catch the blast too.
Splendid! - as the magistrate cheerfully remarked when passing sentence on the hapless and unfortunate Toad. :)
|
|
What makes you think that the government doesn't want or intend to go through with it, apart from common everyday cynicism?
|
>> What makes you think that the government doesn't want or intend to go through with
>> it, apart from common everyday cynicism?
I thought he said the opposite?
It has now dawned on the remainers who are still in denial that this has got them nowhere. Sure, Parliament has to vote on Article 50 notice but it seems inconceivable that they could vote against it in the wake of a referendum to the contrary. Once Parliament has voted it through, then May's mandate is only strengthened.
I didn't catch who it was, but there was someone smarmy on the wireless earlier who has obviously twigged to this and was arguing that the Supreme Court did not expect the government merely to follow the letter of the law but to respect the spirit of it and, basically, have the whole debate in Parliament about whether to Brexit or not. So much for democracy.
|
That's not the way I read the post, but that's not important really.
My expectation isn't that debate will be about whether to BREXIT or not but more about how far-reaching the implementation should be..
How else would that be decided? By small handful of Tory ministers, with no check and balance? That seems pretty undemocratic to me...
|
>>It's not going to happen because MP's, whatever their judgement about the economics etc, won't take the risk in terms of constituency (and perhaps more so media) response.
I suspect you are right although how the Lords will vote is much more difficult to predict.
|
>>Supposing they vote against it? What happens then?
The Remoaners/Wrexiteers will do their utmost to postpone/delay/wreck the plans of Theresa May & Co to trigger Art 50.
|
>> The Remoaners/Wrexiteers will do their utmost to postpone/delay/wreck the plans of Theresa May & Co to trigger Art 50.>>
Isn't it remarkable how Corbyn, mostly conspicuous by his absence during the buildup to the Referendum, has suddenly popped up loud and clear, seemingly sensing the opportunity to cause mayhem without compromising his original beliefs?
|
|
All eyes on the Stoke on Trent by election ;)
|
|
Who on earth are you all going to blame when we have left the EU and you find that contrary to your hopes all is much as before on this grey and drab island and the land of milk and honey that you expect to be created by signing Article 50 has disappeared into the mists?
|
>> Who on earth are you all going to blame
Whether Brexit good or bad is a subjective opinion. Leave won the referendum. Now politicians need to implement the process of leaving EU.
Parliament was consulted before offering the referendum and Parliament agreed to follow result of referendum. So now all these "Parliament is Sovereign" is nothing but derailing the leave process.
|
I strongly do not believe anyone should have an agenda to derail it.
However I quite like the idea that those who we've elected to represent us have the opportunity to influence the process. What BREXIT means is not black and white, so discussion and compromise is still necessary and important for all. It is still a democracy here after all,
Last edited by: smokie on Wed 25 Jan 17 at 11:48
|
>> Parliament was consulted before offering the referendum and Parliament agreed to follow result of referendum.
I'm sure I've pointed this out before but Parliament did not agree to follow the result of the referendum. There is an explicit briefing from the parlaimentary reserchers that spells this out and has been widely circulated.
|
>> Parliament did not agree to follow the result of the referendum
That was the problem. Cameron (and his advisors) thought Remain would win and they did not bother to explain process in detail to public. I recall he did mention that if result is Leave then we'd leave EU promptly. If it were that important statement, it should have been printed in the referendum ballot box.
Common public is not expected to understand intricacies of judicial system, parliamentary processes etc.
On the face of it, referendum was conducted to ask whether EU should leave or remain in EU. Leave side won. So now govt should administer the process.
|
>> EU should leave or remain in EU
Maybe you're right and the EU will leave the EU. Let's see what happens in France.
|
>> >> EU should leave or remain in EU
>>
>> Maybe you're right and the EU will leave the EU. Let's see what happens in
>> France.
>>
You left out a smiley! ;-)
Obviously movilogo meant "UK should leave or remain in EU".
|
"Who on earth are you all going to blame when we have left the EU and you find that contrary to your hopes all is much as before on this grey and drab island and the land of milk and honey that you expect to be created by signing Article 50 has disappeared into the mists?"
Allow me to pose some alternative questions: Why do you assume everyone who voted Leave believed that a paradise of milk and honey would automatically ensue? Why would you believe that people who voted leave are naive idiots? Do you believe that those who voted remain expected the EU would become a land of milk and honey - ever? If not, why not?
The reality of life is that paradises are fiction. We all, unless we are very simple-minded indeed, know that the grey and drab mists are what make up 90% of life and we make decisions designed to make the best of things, not create an impossible ideal.
Last edited by: Focal Point on Wed 25 Jan 17 at 11:29
|
There is a quote from famous "Rich Dad, Poor Dad" book. It says "poor people avoid risk but rich people manage risk".
Leaving EU comes with some risk but managing that risk is sign of competency.
Often not doing anything about a problem is not necessarily the least risky option.
|
>> Who on earth are you all going to blame when we have left the EU and you find that contrary to your hopes all is much as before on this grey and drab island and the land of milk and honey that you expect to be created by signing Article 50 has disappeared into the mists?>>
What a truly condescending comment.
|
>>What a truly condescending comment.
Nuf sed :)
|
I'm not sure why you find it condescending. The point I am making is that the supporters of the leave campaign appear to have an unrealistically high expectation of what will be achieved as a result of leaving the EU.
When we do leave The problems that are inherent in the UK economy will be remain as they have for the past century. Poor education, lack of long term investment and vision, lack of aspiration and a tendency to blame others for our own misfortunes.
To a large degree membership or otherwise of the EU is an irrelevance and this huge expenditire of effort in renegotiating our relationships with the rest of the world is a waste of effort that could be spent sorting out things like our educations system and remodelling oour health care provision and so much more.
It is also proving highly divisive as highlighted by the petty name calling and refusal to listen to opponents arguments.
And as I said when it is all done and we find that we still have a comparatively low wage, low productivity economy that still needs an immigrant labour work force to do the jobs we can't or won't do and the queues are just as long at A and E who are we going to blame then?
|
>>I'm not sure why you find it condescending...>>
I'm not surprised...:-) :-)
|
>>And as I said when it is all done and we find that we still have a comparatively low wage, low productivity economy that still needs an immigrant labour work force to do the jobs we can't or won't do and the queues are just as long at A and E who are we going to blame then?<<
Doom-mongering! - what IF in 10years time it turns out to be the best thing we ever did! Only time will tell for certain, I suspect many folk will be eating humble-pie!
|
>> Only time will tell for certain, I suspect many folk will be
>> eating humble-pie!
>>
The question is, will it be the 48% or the 52%?
|
Well I would certainly be pleased but tell me how is leaving the EU going to improve our education and health system and why can't we do that whether we are in the EU or not?
And to return to my point what if we find as, I rather suspect we will, that the leaving the EU is a magic bullet to cure our woes who are we going to blame then?
|
"...what if we find as, I rather suspect we will, that the leaving the EU is a magic bullet to cure our woes who are we going to blame then?"
You rather ruined your point by omitting the word "not".
But you are still clinging to this notion that the Leavers are naive enough to believe in magic bullets when it comes to leaving the EU. And yes, it is condescending.
|
>> But you are still clinging to this notion that the Leavers are naive enough to
>> believe in magic bullets when it comes to leaving the EU.
>>
You are also clinging to the notion that people who make a wrong judgement need someone to blame.
If for example Brexit were thwarted and we stayed in, but the EU collapsed in chaos in a few years time, would you need someone to blame for having voted to stay in?
We don't need a blame culture - we have been given the task, now we just need to get on with it, making the best judgement we can.
|
>> Well I would certainly be pleased but tell me how is leaving the EU going
>> to improve our education and health system and why can't we do that whether we
>> are in the EU or not?
>>
You're right. We Leavers got it drastically wrong.
>> And to return to my point what if we find as, I rather suspect we
>> will, that the leaving the EU is a magic bullet to cure our woes who
>> are we going to blame then?
>>
Don't worry about it now. If that happens, we'll find someone to blame; maybe we'll blame you for not going out knocking on every door in the land, warning us of the doom you foresee so clearly. ;-)
Last edited by: BrianByPass on Wed 25 Jan 17 at 15:11
|
>> what IF in 10years time it turns out to be the best thing
>> we ever did! Only time will tell for certain
>>
I suspect that in 10 years time so many other things will happen that it will be nigh on impossible to attribute any feature of our economy / environment / situation, whether positive or negative to brexit or otherwise. Not that some people will not try:)
|
"...as I said when it is all done and we find that we still have a comparatively low wage, low productivity economy that still needs an immigrant labour work force to do the jobs we can't or won't do and the queues are just as long at A and E who are we going to blame then?"
Dressing up this thought in more palatable terms doesn't change the basic flaw - morally - in it.
Why does anyone have to blame anybody for what happens? Are the Remainers going to pounce on everything they think is a negative consequence of the referendum result and try to beat the Leavers with it?
|
>> Why does anyone have to blame anybody for what happens? Are the Remainers going to
>> pounce on everything they think is a negative consequence of the referendum result and try
>> to beat the Leavers with it?
>>
The Guardian and its readers do it everyday. They find something negative in any news to blame it on Brexit. But it is fun reading all that stuff - as long as you don't get drawn to drown in their negativity.
Any positive news is dismissed thus "ah, but Brexit hasn't happened yet."
|
I kind of think you are missing my point. Brexit was or many people thought it would be a cure for the prolbems that they perceived in society. The EU was the problem. Without the EU things would get better. Everything from the revitalisation of industry to the National Health service.
The problems facing this country have little to do with he EU and staying in or leaving will in my opinion make much difference to these basic issues. Personally I would have advocated maintaining the status quo and putting our efforts elsewhere than in arguments about trade deals stretching into the distant future but we are leaving the EU and so be it.
My fear is that when all is done and dusted very lttle will have changed . Those with poor job prospects in decaying industrial area will still have poor job prospects. Our educations system will still not be up to scratch and our heailh system may well have worsened. I do not see how leaving the EU will change any of these things.
You ask why does anyone have to blame anyone for what happens? Well just look at history. people whose expectations are not met tend to seek a scapegoat.
|
|
That's probably why God was invented! ;-)
Last edited by: devonite on Wed 25 Jan 17 at 15:48
|
"I kind of think you are missing my point. Brexit was or many people thought it would be a cure for the prolbems that they perceived in society. The EU was the problem. Without the EU things would get better. Everything from the revitalisation of industry to the National Health service."
Maybe some people were naive enough to think that; not all were. Some of us had the concept of a much bigger and longer-term scenario.
"You ask why does anyone have to blame anyone for what happens? Well just look at history. people whose expectations are not met tend to seek a scapegoat."
So you're saying that the Leavers will be up in arms that Nirvana has not happened and will be raising hell because of it? Purely speculative. No evidence even to hint that this might happen. It would be interesting to know what historical precedent you have in mind. Germany in the 1930s? That would be a very nasty parallel to pursue.
I think you're looking for trouble where there is none.
|
Sky says the "Brexit trigger bill laid in front of Parliament" and "MPs will debate the European Union Notification of Withdrawal Bill on Tuesday and Wednesday, the Government has announced, with third day of debate and a vote on 8 February.".
It says "The two-clause bill says simply: "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.""
I must admit I thought there'd be more to it than that, like what the plans were with regard to the single market, immigration and all the other topics. If that's all it is then it should be a formality, as Parliament ought not be allowed to override the referendum (even though it was not binding blah blah)
Maybe the White Paper will give more details but that, the article says, is unlikely to be issued before the vote.
news.sky.com/story/brexit-trigger-bill-laid-in-front-of-parliament-1074336
|
|
Surely the white paper will be more-or-less what May set out in her Brexit speech last week.
|
|
I dunno really. Are there not levels of detail which require discussion and agreement in Parliament, for example the approach to immigration and free movement?
|
More than likely. I leave it to 'them' as I'm sure they know what they're doing.
8-)
|
www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/n3ct0c7f
I was very impressed with this mornings Hard Talk and the way Dominic Raab handled the arrogant Stephen Sackur!
Well worth a watch.
Pat
|
>> I was very impressed with this mornings Hard Talk and the way Dominic Raab handled
>> the arrogant Stephen Sackur!
Dominic Raab is my MP. He is quite arrogant enough himself.
|
That's why, for once, it was a particularly interesting and even discussion with the person being interviewed insisting on being allowed to speak.
I watch it every morning and that rarely happens.
Pat
|
>>... handled the arrogant Stephen Sackur!>>
Interrogating journalists on programmes such as HARDTalk need to adopt a feisty approach otherwise those being interviewed would have an easy and comfortable ride and the real truth or facts would go undiscovered.
Remember Jeremy Paxman and Michael Howard?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uwlsd8RAoqI
Also Sir Robin Day and John Nott?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ln3SpXXYTHY
|
>> www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/n3ct0c7f
>>
usually I get an iPlayer link, but above is appearing as merely a description of the episode. Can't find any link to iPlayer for it. ?
edit: Dog's link works. thanks.
Last edited by: BrianByPass on Tue 31 Jan 17 at 12:27
|
I saw none of arrogance in that clip that Duncan accuses Raab of.
My three favourite politicians who say what they mean, and answer questions with a straight bat, are Dominic Raab, Daniel Hannan, and Jacob Rees-Mogg.
You don't get any Alistair Campbell's "Yes Minister" cricket school of spinning or deflecting the ball with a crooked bat.
|
>> I saw none of arrogance in that clip that Duncan accuses Raab of.
As I said, he is my MP and I have met him on a number of occasions. He is arrogant.
|
>> As I said, he is my MP
>>
And mine.
>> and I have met him on a number of occasions.
>>
and So have I.
>> He is arrogant.
>>
Not arrogant with me at all. Perhaps your attitude to him shows through to him.
|
>> >> He is arrogant.
>> >>
>> Not arrogant with me at all. Perhaps your attitude to him shows through to him.
>>
I didn't say he was arrogant when speaking to me.
|
....but did you vote for him Duncan?
Pat
|
>> ....but did you vote for him Duncan?
>>
>> Pat
>>
At the last general election, I abstained from voting in the parliamentary election.
There was a local election, IIRC at the same time and place. I asked for papers for the local election and declined papers for the Parliamentary election. This caused some confusion to the polling station staff and annoyance to Lady Duncan who accompanied me.
When someone behind me in the queue asked what was happening and a member of staff explained that I wasn't voting in the general election, I pointed out that voting, or not voting, was also confidential.
|
>> I pointed out that voting,
>> or not voting, was also confidential.
But unless your name had been announced to everyone present then surely confidentiality had been maintained?
Unless voters are smuggled individually into the poling station in sealed crates then everyone knows that "someone of unknown name" is voting?
|
|
Would not it be simpler to accept both ballot papers and only complete the local paper unless the intention was to draw attention to oneself as you succeeded in doing?
|
I think that was aimed at my comment Cliff asking Duncan if he voted for him:)
I'm not concerned how he voted but there is no point being critical if you support someone when it matters.
Almost as bad as those who don't bother to vote and then criticising the result!
Pat
|
>> I'm not concerned how he voted but there is no point being critical if you
>> support someone when it matters.
I'd vote for a candidate I thought to be personally an arrogant twonk if his views were otherwise sound.
|
Sigh!
OK Bromp, let's put it another way.
If he was my local candidate and I had voted for him, I would have been proud of the way he handled himself in that interview and would have said so.
I certainly wouldn't have felt the need to criticise him on the basis of a good performance but then again, it does seem to be the 'modern' way to do things.
Pat
|
>> But unless your name had been announced to everyone present then surely confidentiality had been
>> maintained?
Round here there's a Polling Station in every village. There's every chance that if Poll Clerk had acted as in Duncan's case it would be witnessed by people who know me, or at least who's spouse/father I am*.
*Mrs B taught at village comp and both kids went through gamut of footie/scouts/community orchestra etc etc.
|
You are all managing to miss the point.
It was and is a question of principle.
Regardless of whether everyone in the polling station did, or didn't, know me personally to a greater, or lesser, degree of intimacy, it was not for the polling station clerk to tell everyone of my intentions.
It was a betrayal of a confidence.
|
" It was and is a question of principle"
It always is.
|
>> You are managing to miss the point.
>>
>> It was a betrayal of a confidence.
>>
Which you invited.
If you didn't want to vote and didn't want anyone to know, why didn't you take both papers, submit the local one and shove the other one in your pocket and take it home, or otherwise dispose of it?
|
>> If you didn't want to vote and didn't want anyone to know, why didn't you
>> take both papers, submit the local one and shove the other one in your pocket
>> and take it home, or otherwise dispose of it?
>>
That what I was thinking. Simple and draws no attention.
|
|
Did you complain to the Returning Officer?
|
|
Voting papers can be, and possible are, sifted through after the event. They are stored for a period of time, and not very securely:) Personal knowledge and this: www.theguardian.com/notesandqueries/query/0,,-1051,00.html
|
>> I pointed out that voting, or not voting, was also confidential.
>>
As NortonES2 pointed out, it is not confidential.
www.car4play.com/forum/post/index.htm?m=524678&v=e
|
|
Not good for Labour though.
|
>> Not good for Labour though.
>>
On the contrary, it may yet be their salvation. Corbyn will have to carry out far more than a "mini re-shuffle" to quote the Telegraph, and he's fast running out of suitable candidates.
This may yet open the eyes of Labour voters to the undeniable fact that St. Jeremy is the most utterly inept leader they've ever had, provoke a grass-roots revolt and unseat him.
Even as a Tory voter myself I mourn the lack of an effective opposition.
|
|
It's not the Labour voters that need convincing it's the party members and they show no sign of being willing to dump Corbyn.
|
>> It's not the Labour voters that need convincing it's the party members and they show no sign of being willing to dump Corbyn. >>
Because they are not genuine, long term Labour supporters. Even as a Tory supporter all my life, I do despair at the almost complete lack of scrutinisation of the present Government, because of a leader who strongly reminds me of Michael Foot and Neil Kinnock. Both abject failures.
|
Parliament in general, and Labour in particular, are now reaping the consequences of jumping on the "Let's have a referendum" bandwagon without giving any thought as to what democratic status the possible outcomes might have.
They have revealed all too glaringly the cynicism behind holding a referendum that is supposed to have only one answer.
|
"a leader who strongly reminds me of Michael Foot and Neil Kinnock. Both abject failures."
You could hardly call NK an 'abject failure'; after all, NK and his clan have done very nicely out of the EU. ;-)
|
|
Indeed, his son ( a Labour MP) was on the telly the other night in a news article about Port Talbot Steel Works saying how he identified with the working man,,,,,,,HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
|
>>You could hardly call NK an 'abject failure'; after all, NK and his clan have done very nicely out of the EU. ;-)>>
Yes, I'm well aware of their noses in the trough life style since and, of course, his failure to sort out corruption in the EU, but I was alluding to his and Foot's times as Labour leader.
|
"......... but I was alluding to his and Foot's times as Labour leader."
I sort of guessed that - hence the ;-)
A lovely example of the pigs walking on their hind legs. [Didn't Orwell crop up a few days ago? So famous, we named our river after him!]
|
>> Michael Foot and Neil Kinnock. Both abject failures."
>>
>> You could hardly call NK an 'abject failure'; after all, NK and his clan have
>> done very nicely out of the EU. ;-)
And his attempt to win the 1992 General election?
I mean, what could possibly go wrong?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TOgB3Smvro
|
I remember seeing Neil Kinnock at the rally on the television.
John Major canvassing on a soapbox.There was always going to be one winner.Kinnock was always to swarmy in my opinion.
|
How politics works Pt 1: The Referendum - sooty123
