• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Cont: Brexit: Now What? 7th heaven...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Robert Peston believes the UK will be crashing out with no deal:
To be clear, though, the EU’s leaders can’t and won’t say no if we insist on fighting them. But they would hate it and would say yes with the heaviest of hearts.

What matters more than anything therefore is that in the three weeks of breathing space EU leaders have given us - JUST THREE WEEKS - UK party leaders, ministers, senior politicians, MPs have to do what they have singularly failed to in the more than 1000 days since Brexit, which is to co-operate as far as they can to find an outcome that is in the national interest, take proper responsibility for it, and lay to one side narrow party considerations.

If they don’t, won’t or can’t, we will be leaving without a deal on 12 April. And truthfully, based on what you might call behavioural evidence on the current generation of MPs, I am retaining my prediction that we will be leaving without a deal, probably in 21 days.
https://www.itv.com/news/2019-03-22/eu-leaders-want-rid-of-brexit-poison/
 
A) it indicates it could be different? How? A third of the people that voted for a position went online. How is that an indicator.

One sixth as many people as voted in an annonymous poll decided to petition the government, asking them to reverse course on their flagship policy. In the process they made their names known to the government. For each that has done so there may be ten or more who do not wish their names to be revealed in this manner.
Plus there is no proof for anyone of these people to have voted against the motion in the first place. There may be indications and speculation, but no proof. The number of people that put their names on the petition already exceeds the margin between the two groups almost threefold. Given the gravity of the subject they should not be disenfrenchised so calluosly.

B) if it needs another direct vote when the will changes, that means to he more wishy washy you are, the more votes you get. That seems undemocratic to vary the votes like that.

Maybe, but there are ways to get around that. The usual method is to demand certain quorum for major constitutional changes: for Brexit to happen at least 70% of the electorate must vote in the referendum and at least 60% of the votes cast must be in favor.

Easy peasy. Incompetence is not an excuse for authoritarianism.

McHrozni
 
Last edited:
I think the EU has long given off signs that they're sick to death of the entire thing and want us to **** or get off the pot. They've also been saying for a while now that May's deal is it and that there will be no further negotiations for a deal.

True, but there is a caveat: May's deal is a withdrawal agreement. Most of the criticism levied against it is due to the things that will become relevant from 2021 onward. If the eventual trading agreement is reached in extra time, EU might be persuaded to say yes.

McHrozni
 
Presumably the 'Men in grey suits' that did Thatcher in. A quiet tap on the shoulder, a few words about rebels potentially supporting a motion of no confidence, and out she goes.


They won’t want her to go yet, though. They need her to stay until after Brexit so she can take all the blame away with her.
 
For each that has done so there may be ten or more who do not wish their names to be revealed in this manner.
Plus there is no proof for anyone of these people to have voted against the motion in the first place.

Those all seem like questions that need to be answered before you can place any weight on a petition.

If someone believes decisions should be based on evidence, what is the evidence that this petition result is an indicator that the mood nay have changed? What is the data on petitions?
 
The TL/DW version is that in the latest meeting Theresa May was asked "what about the pain" to the UK public in the case of a no deal exit, and her reply was "the people voted for pain".

There really are people who think that any amount of economic pain would be worth it if it meant no longer having to work with with those nasty foreigners we fought against in WW2. I know a couple.
 
There really are people who think that any amount of economic pain would be worth it if it meant no longer having to work with with those nasty foreigners we fought against in WW2. I know a couple.

So they want out of NATO, too, I presume.
 
So your boss puts you on a zero-hours contract. You find yourself kicking your heels at home. You work very few hours so you go down to the Benefits office. They put you on Universal Credit. Five weeks later you have a few coins in your pocket for food, the bills are mounting up, interest is accruing on your credit card at an alarming rate because of you can only make 'minumum payment' you are still waiting for your Univefrsal Credit benefit to come through.

In the meantime you discover your boss has taken on a Romanian worker paying him a fraction of what you were being paid, as in Romania, average monthly wage is £200, so he is ecstatic to be now earning £600 pcm.

Either your Schrödinger's Romanian is only working 18½ hours per week, or he's being paid less than minimum wage. How much of a "fraction" of the previous employee's wage does this represent? Said Schrödinger's Romanian is also going to have higher living costs in the UK, so £600 here is not going to be that much better than £200 in Romania.

Of course, I only know two Romanians living in the UK. One is a GP, and the other is an asbestos contamination specialist, neither of which are minimum wage jobs.
 
But the correct course of action at this point is not to exit the EU a week from now. Article 50 should be revoked until the people who want to leave can come up with a credible plan for it to happen.

Talk of General Elections, 2nd votes, new deals, or any of that nonsense has to saved until after the immediate threat is halted. And we can't keep having ticking time bombs and artificial deadlines.

Revoke it now.

The sad truth is that the leaders of both the largest parties want a Brexit. For sure neither prefers a no-deal Brexit but both prefers no-deal to no-Brexit.

Jeremy Corbyn is labouring under the delusion that he will be swept to power and will be able to negotiate a workers' utopia Brexit, even from the jaws of a no-deal.

The two largest parties, accounting for the vast majority of MPs, refuse to revoke Brexit. One because her party is absolutely gagging for Brexit, the other because he's ideologically wedded to it (against the wishes of his members and supporters).
 
The sad truth is that the leaders of both the largest parties want a Brexit. For sure neither prefers a no-deal Brexit but both prefers no-deal to no-Brexit.

Jeremy Corbyn is labouring under the delusion that he will be swept to power and will be able to negotiate a workers' utopia Brexit, even from the jaws of a no-deal.

The two largest parties, accounting for the vast majority of MPs, refuse to revoke Brexit. One because her party is absolutely gagging for Brexit, the other because he's ideologically wedded to it (against the wishes of his members and supporters).

Indeed. There are just enough Brexiteer nutjobs around that they won't let go of their sordid little wet dream for their own personal reasons. And there really isn't a credible prominent Remain voice countering them.
 
And the ECHR. Or at least they would if they realised it wasn’t part of the EU.

IIRC Theresa May is one of those who wants to be free of the ECHR - freedom is being able to deny people basic human rights...
 
IIRC Theresa May is one of those who wants to be free of the ECHR - freedom is being able to deny people basic human rights...
Which is one of the reasons that her participation in the referendum was so quiet. She believed Cameron would win the referendum so she couldn't politically go against him but she was so weak in her support of remain she could say her heart was never in it to the leavers when the time came to court them. And her blatant political maneuvering paid off, she got what she wanted.
 
Against all expectations it has become a national cause célèbre with numbers and support swelling exponentially. It's like the Jarrow March all over again except better organised and with far greater numbers.

Yesterday the number of marchers grew to over 3 million demonstrating that Brexit, and especially a no deal Brexit has far more support than Remain which has managed only to get a paltry 2 million or so signatures on an online petition.

The enthusiasm of the support and the sheer numbers involved means that Nigel Farage's march is the single largest public movement the country has ever known.

It's expected that the numbers will grow to well over 10 million by the time that the march reaches the capital demonstrating once and for all the enthusiasm that the UK population have for Brexit and for their natural leader, Nigel Farage.


The dripping sarcasm got on my sofa! But I laughed anyway.
 
There really are people who think that any amount of economic pain would be worth it if it meant no longer having to work with with those nasty foreigners we fought against in WW2. I know a couple.

Oh, you are so right! And the number of them who are given, in my strongly held opinion, far too much air time....... well,, the radio gets turned off all the time nowadays.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom