Cont: Brexit: Now What? Magic 8 Ball's up

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

How does the one follow from the other?

One does not follow from the other. They are two separate but linked pieces of information.

Can you show me where this is coming from? Some document or statute that shows that what you say above has any significance in international law or diplomacy?

https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CDP-2018-0171

What significance would you want it to have in international law? There is no need for it to have any significance in international law or diplomacy. You might as well as what significance does Man City's status as Premiership Champions have in international law.

What effect do you think your statement has? What weight does it apply to your argument?

The effect is self explanatory. Sovereignty lies with the Scottish people, it is up to the Scottish people to determine what it's government is and how they are governed. Ergo any government which has been soundly rejected by the people of Scotland has no legitimacy to govern the people of Scotland.

I'm afraid I just don't get it, It just seems to me like meaningless bluster. It clearly means something to you and I'd just like to know what and from which authority or academic source you derive the information to form your opinion.

Well yes... you can think whatever you like as I keep saying. Your opinion is of no importance to me.

Can anyone not emotionally invested in the topic please tell me if I'm making any sense here? Because the answers I'm getting just don't seem to fit the question I'm asking. Am I asking it wrong?

Perhaps you are asking the wrong question? you seem to be unable to see anything in terms other than international law. Are you a lawyer by any chance? They tend to have this problem.

 

[ceptimus]

They're only blamed on Brexit when the companies making the redundancies specifically mention Brexit as a major factor in the decision.

People are always asked by the media to explain why they're making people redundant, and at the moment, of course, Brexit is one of the main things they can blame. Brexit uncertainty probably really is having an effect, and even if it isn't the people claiming that it is might honestly believe that to be the case. If the referendum losers had accepted the result then that uncertainty would have been eliminated, so they must carry a lot of the blame for dragging out the uncertainty to the present and beyond.

If Brexit wasn't happening then there would be something else to blame: the downturn in the global car market, Trump's policies on tariffs, Climate change, or whatever.

 

[Lothian]

People are always asked by the media to explain why they're making people redundant, and at the moment, of course, Brexit is one of the main things they can blame. Brexit uncertainty probably really is having an effect, and even if it isn't the people claiming that it is might honestly believe that to be the case. If the referendum losers had accepted the result then that uncertainty would have been eliminated, so they must carry a lot of the blame for dragging out the uncertainty to the present and beyond.

If Brexit wasn't happening then there would be something else to blame: the downturn in the global car market, Trump's policies on tariffs, Climate change, or whatever.

Accepted what result? In what way did people vote to leave? Did they vote for a soft brexit as laid out in the Vote leave literature and campaign or a hard brexit as adopted by brexiteers since the election?

 

[Dave Rogers]

If the referendum losers had accepted the result then that uncertainty would have been eliminated, so they must carry a lot of the blame for dragging out the uncertainty to the present and beyond.

Did you fail to notice that a lot of the reason for the current level of uncertainty is nothing to do with not accepting the result of the referendum, but is largely the result of Crobyn's soft Brexiteers and the ERG's hard-line Brexiteers repeatedly voting against May's compromise deal? This hasn't been a rearguard action by remainers; it's been internecine squabbles between Brexiteers because none of them can agree with each other about what kind of Brexit they actually want. If any of them had had an ounce of sense or the slightest ability to compromise, we'd have left the EU in March. A lot of the time remainers have just been sitting back, watching them fight amongst themselves, and laughing.

Dave

 

[ceptimus]

Tie the Scottish Government up in court cases. Possibly withhold Treasury funding,

I don't understand why Sturgeon's calling for more referendums. She's already chosen to ignore the results of the 2014 and 2016 referendums - why should we have any confidence that she'd accept the result of any future loser's referendum on Brexit, or a re-run of the 'once in a generation' Scottish Independence referendum of just five years ago?

 

[ceptimus]

Did you fail to notice that a lot of the reason for the current level of uncertainty is nothing to do with not accepting the result of the referendum, but is largely the result of Crobyn's soft Brexiteers and the ERG's hard-line Brexiteers repeatedly voting against May's compromise deal? This hasn't been a rearguard action by remainers; it's been internecine squabbles between Brexiteers because none of them can agree with each other about what kind of Brexit they actually want. If any of them had had an ounce of sense or the slightest ability to compromise, we'd have left the EU in March. A lot of the time remainers have just been sitting back, watching them fight amongst themselves, and laughing.

Dave

No. If the losers had accepted the result, Brexit would be done by now. The problem is that we have a remain parliament, a remain civil service, and until very recently, a remain government headed by a remain PM.

 

[zooterkin]

Derail on what constitutes a country, and whether Scotland is one, moved to AAH. If you wish to discuss that, please take it to a new thread.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: zooterkin

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

I don't understand

I'm not surprised.

She's already chosen to ignore the results of the 2014 and 2016 referendums

Last I checked Scotland isn't independent so the 2014 result is implemented in full. In 2016 Scotland voted to remain the EU. So she is trying to implement that result to. It's the Tory government who don't respect that result.

Odd that you insist we have a Remainer parliament and yet also that the last election was won by Leaver parties. The majority of MPs want to leave. They just can't agree how. Blame the DUP and the ERG for refusing to vote to leave when given multiple opportunities.

 

[Lothian]

No. If the losers had accepted the result, Brexit would be done by now. The problem is that we have a remain parliament, a remain civil service, and until very recently, a remain government headed by a remain PM.

We don't have a remain parliament. If the ERG voted for May's brexit deal we would be out. It is the brexiteers who have stopped us leaving.
The civil service is neutral. They simply follow the orders of thier minister. In any case the civil service do not have the power to keep us in or take us out if the EU. They effect the decisions of parliament they don't make them.
The Government is a leave government as you repeatedly make clear each time you claim that a vote for the Tory party equated to a vote to leave. May was a Leave PM. She agreed a deal to leave with the EU. It is not her fault that brexiteers stopped her taking the UK out of the EU.

0/5 but one day you will get something right. Don't give up yet.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Did you fail to notice that a lot of the reason for the current level of uncertainty is nothing to do with not accepting the result of the referendum, but is largely the result of Crobyn's soft Brexiteers and the ERG's hard-line Brexiteers repeatedly voting against May's compromise deal? This hasn't been a rearguard action by remainers; it's been internecine squabbles between Brexiteers because none of them can agree with each other about what kind of Brexit they actually want. If any of them had had an ounce of sense or the slightest ability to compromise, we'd have left the EU in March. A lot of the time remainers have just been sitting back, watching them fight amongst themselves, and laughing.

Dave

All true except for the laughing bit. You can't enjoy the schadenfreude when you know they're dragging us all down with them.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

No. If the losers had accepted the result, Brexit would be done by now. The problem is that we have a remain parliament, a remain civil service, and until very recently, a remain government headed by a remain PM.

Fantasy. I know Leavers will keep blaming others forever but the logjam is Leave vs Leave, not Leave vs Remain.

 

[ceptimus]

We don't have a remain parliament. If the ERG voted for May's brexit deal we would be out.

Have you checked your numbers on that? Perhaps you should.

It only requires the DUP to vote against a deal, plus the opposition, and it's defeated. Add to that the Tory remainers: Clarke, Grieve, and company (though, of course some of them DID vote for remainer May's rotten deal). The ERG were powerless to vote through a deal - even one they liked - providing the opposition and the DUP continued to vote against.

 

[ceptimus]

Last I checked Scotland isn't independent so the 2014 result is implemented in full.

Can't you read? I said Sturgeon ignored the result - not the UK government. She wanted a vote from her own people to support what she wanted, and when they voted against her, she immediately began campaigning for another vote.

Of course, as long as the SNP exists, and Scotland remains part of the UK, the SNP will continue to campaign for referendums on independence. It won't matter how many times they lose - they'll always find some excuse for another try. Independence for Scotland is what their party's all about - the clue is in their party's name.

 

[erwinl]

Fantasy. I know Leavers will keep blaming others forever but the logjam is Leave vs Leave, not Leave vs Remain.

It must be so frustrating, being a brexiteer, never getting your way, despite having almost all political parties trying to act out that policy you want. Yet it is also so refreshing, being a brexiteer, never ever having to bear any responsibility or even do anything at all, except for pointing at others that you say have failed you.

 

[Samson]

We don't have a remain parliament. If the ERG voted for May's brexit deal we would be out. It is the brexiteers who have stopped us leaving.
The civil service is neutral. They simply follow the orders of thier minister. In any case the civil service do not have the power to keep us in or take us out if the EU. They effect the decisions of parliament they don't make them.
The Government is a leave government as you repeatedly make clear each time you claim that a vote for the Tory party equated to a vote to leave. May was a Leave PM. She agreed a deal to leave with the EU. It is not her fault that brexiteers stopped her taking the UK out of the EU.

0/5 but one day you will get something right. Don't give up yet.

The proper question is if there is a remain plebescite after the organic education exercise of the last 3 years.
How about:
Ask the EU for an extension while a referendum is held asking one question.

Should Britain revoke article 50?

This would save a lot of bother because we all know the answer, and it won't be rinse and repeat in my humble opinion.

 

[Degeneve]

"Possible", "Possible", "Potential", "Could", "May", ... not very sure, are they? And they're right not to be sure given the accuracy of their previous forecasts. More of the same old project fear for the sheep.

These statements looks quite mild in comparison to what Rees-Mogg just said: https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/en...witter_cooo9wqtham&utm_campaign=share_twitter

 

[ceptimus]

These statements looks quite mild in comparison to what Rees-Mogg just said: https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/en...witter_cooo9wqtham&utm_campaign=share_twitter

"just said" ? That was over a year ago.

 

[jeremyp]

No. If the losers had accepted the result, Brexit would be done by now.

No it wouldn't. The British Parliament has had a majority of MPs largely in favour of getting Brexit done since the referendum occurred. The reason it hasn't been done is entirely the fault of the Brexiteers' incompetence and inability to understand that Britain was not in a position to dictate terms.

Don't blame the people who told you it would be a bad idea when it turns out to be a bad idea.

The problem is that we have a remain parliament, a remain civil service, and until very recently, a remain government headed by a remain PM.

That's demonstrably false. The government negotiated a deal to leave. They didn't stop Brexit. Parliament didn't stop Brexit. The Civil Service didn't stop Brexit.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Can't you read? I said Sturgeon ignored the result - not the UK government. She wanted a vote from her own people to support what she wanted, and when they voted against her, she immediately began campaigning for another vote.

Which is not ignoring the result. The result was implemented by the Scottish Government who did not start negotiating with the UK government on independence. You seem incapable of reasoned thought.

Of course, as long as the SNP exists, and Scotland remains part of the UK, the SNP will continue to campaign for referendums on independence. It won't matter how many times they lose - they'll always find some excuse for another try. Independence for Scotland is what their party's all about - the clue is in their party's name.

Which is nothing to do with 'ignoring the result of the referendum'. Unless of course you also think Farage et al ignored the results of elections when people repeatedly voted for parties who did not want to leave the EU and they didn't go away and shut up?

 

[jeremyp]

I'm not surprised.
In 2016 Scotland voted to remain the EU.

This is not correct. Scotland didn't vote for anything. The referendum was not decided by the regions/countries, it was a direct vote by each individual voter.

That said, we do know that nearly 2/3 of voters living in Scotland voted to Remain and in 2014, a major argument for staying in the UK was that, with Independence, Scotland would be leaving the EU and would have to reapply for membership. Even without the knowledge that the majority of people in Scotland are Remainers, the UK leaving the EU is a major change in the political landscape and it justifies another "once in a generation" vote.

If Brexit occurs, I think the only way to stop a Scottish vote for independence is to not allow them a referendum. That would be rank hypocrisy, of course.