Brexit has created chaos in Britain – nobody voted for this

[Kieran00001]

13 minutes ago, aright said:

 

Only half the story. When we decided to leave the EU the Government (a mixture of Remainers and Leavers) decided to leave the EU Bill of Human Rights(not Court) in due course and replace it with a British Bill of Human Rights. This is designed to be more au fait with British needs. Makes sense. 

 

Farage stated in 2011 that getting out of the Human Rights court would only be achievable if we leave the EU.

The convention, not bill, formed the court, they are kind of one in the same.

And no, it is designed to make them unaccountable which only makes sense if they want to deny humans their rights, which we know they do as they fought and fought against the protections the ECHR brought us.  As for a British Human Rights bill being more au fait with British needs, did you not realise that it was Churchill who wrote the first one?

[Kieran00001]

7 minutes ago, aright said:

In the case of Mr Selmayer no. Who the official in the Commission is doesn't matter. You are either democratic or undemocratic . You seem to think it's alright to be undemocratic sometimes. Coming close only counts when you are throwing hand grenades. Once again address the length of the chain, rubber stamping issues and my part in the election of Mr Selmayr or sign off. 

 

What you have failed to explain is why you would want to vote on the secretary.  Consider this, who would you vote for and why?

[talahtnut]

32 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

The Leave campaign were very vocal about their desire to leave the Human Rights Court, anyone using their vote in hope of gaining more freedom might have considered that the court brings a greater level of freedom.

Yes, 'might be considered' is not a good argument.

You should know that he UK will still be signed up to

the ECHR when it leaves the EU. In Britain our human

rights under the ECHR are protected by the Human

Rights Act 1998, so no need to panic Sir.

 

 

 

[aright]

8 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

What you have failed to explain is why you would want to vote on the secretary.  Consider this, who would you vote for and why?

Different argument. As for who I would vote for and why sounds like you are coming round to my way of thinking.

Edited April 22, 2018 by aright

[aright]

15 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

 As for a British Human Rights bill being more au fait with British needs, did you not realise that it was Churchill who wrote the first one?

You learn something new every day. There was me thinking it was Magna Carta

[Kieran00001]

1 minute ago, aright said:

You learn something new every day. There was me thinking it was Magna Carta

 

Nah, that was just a myth, it only protected the rights of the barons, hence why we need something post Brexit instead of just reverting back to the Magna Carta.

 

[aright]

10 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

Nah, that was just a myth, it only protected the rights of the barons, hence why we need something post Brexit instead of just reverting back to the Magna Carta.

 

Really

Another of the earliest and most commonly cited milestones in the history of human rights in the UK is the Magna Carta – an English Charter issued in 1215 which contained the writ of habeas corpus, allowing people to appeal against imprisonment without trial.

[talahtnut]

53 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

Nah, that was just a myth, it only protected the rights of the barons, hence why we need something post Brexit instead of just reverting back to the Magna Carta.

 

Deep folly.

[bristolboy]

Brexit: Theresa May ‘may surrender over customs union’

Theresa May’s team has privately admitted she may have to accept permanent membership of a European customs union, after a secret wargaming exercise concluded that even Brexiteers such as Michael Gove and David Davis would not resign in protest.

The prime minister has insisted that the UK will leave the common tariff area so it can pursue free trade deals outside the EU. But one of May’s political team told a meeting on March 20 that she and senior aides “will not be crying into our beer” if parliament forces the government’s hand — a position that will enrage some Brexiteers.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/brexit-theresa-may-may-surrender-over-customs-union-lr7qkhslv?utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=newsletter_101&utm_medium=email&utm_content=101_22.4.18 Best of ST Queen (1)&CMP=TNLEmail_118918_3193097_101

 

Theresa May is preparing to surrender over plans to leave the Customs Union after Brexit
Theresa May is preparing to surrender over her promise to leave the Customs Union with senior advisers to the prime minister telling the Sunday Times that she is now willing to live with a Commons defeat on the issue.

The prime minister and her Cabinet have repeatedly promised that Britain will leave the EU Customs Union and not join any similar arrangement, after Brexit.

However, plans to follow through with this commitment were defeated in the House of Lords earlier this week and ten Conservative MPs have already signed an amendment to the government's Trade bill which could force a rethink.

http://www.businessinsider.com/theresa-may-advisers-u-turn-customs-union-eu-brexit-2018-4?r=UK&IR=T

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

It was Neil Martin, he was one of the leader of the Leave campaign.

 

This is the pamphlet the post office distributed to every British household in 1975, note the opening paragraph, as you can see there was no deception, every household was informed that the EEC planned to make Europe into one nation.

1975-referendum-no.pdf

"For the British people, membership of the Common Market has already been a bad bargain.  What is worse, it sets out by stages to merge Britain with France, Germany, Italy and other countries into a single nation. This will take away from us the right to rule ourselves that we have enjoyed for centuries."

 

 

 

 

 

I've seen this before but not until way after the referendum was done. It's very good and mainly still valid today.

 

I remember the government (yes recommendation from Harold) leaflet arriving at home but not the other yes / no leaflets from the two independent groups, which I've just found as Britain for Europe and the National Referendum Campaign. The statements within the latter have turned out to be far more truthful than either of the other two! 

 

Powell was one of just a very few I can remember doing most of the no campaigning on TV and I think that everyone was still wary of openly supporting him after his 1968 "rivers of blood" speech - this was the start of the era of so-called political correctness, I suppose. Most of the media coverage was pro Europe and the referendum passed easily.

 

Powell's insight and stand against the EEC was discounted by many at the time, although it looks like he was spot on, in retrospect.

 

 

 

Edited April 22, 2018 by nauseus
pro

[malagateddy]

Maybe stand by for T May getting binned and JTM as new PM..then cat is right amongst pidgeons[emoji6][emoji6][emoji6]

Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[nauseus]

4 minutes ago, malagateddy said:

Maybe stand by for T May getting binned and JTM as new PM..then cat is right amongst pidgeons

Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

Just saw Brexit the Movie. Should have got an Oscar.  Thanks.

[Grouse]

15 hours ago, aright said:

Saw this today and found it very interesting. The reduction in the share of world GDP by the EU is almost 50%. The EU could hardly be described as a growing dynamic market. The Commonwealth has always had a greater population than the EU but now it has a greater share of world GDP than the EU or the USA. I wonder if the UK discussed a trade deal with them at this weeks Commonwealth meeting In London....I hope so They would provide us with a market greater than the EU. I also heard today that Zimbabwe would be invited back into the Commonwealth contingent on their next General Election being above board. 

 

 

 

There is insufficient data to draw that conclusion. You can say that the USA and EU are not growing as rapidly as China and India.

 

Suggest you stick with self adaptive automotive control systems.

[Grouse]

9 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

Yes, it's true, although I do not see it as being a "soft touch" but as meeting our agreement as parties to the Refugee Convention, also something I call humanity.  

If you care about our pensioners then you should choose the best for the UK economically, leaving the EU has been shown now to have a bad effect regardless of the deal we get, it is the likes of pensioners who will suffer.

Well said that man! Where are you from friend?

[Grouse]

8 hours ago, nauseus said:

Yes, they should have known. A few people knew. Heath certainly knew. The information was there but it was not fully and openly disclosed. If it had been we would have not joined! Most did not know the realise the extent of the deceit and were not told the full truth. No honesty from the government of the day and no internet. 

we all knew in uni at the time. Discussed it all through the nights before 9 O'Clock lectures.

[Eloquent pilgrim]

 

PETER SHORE ….. ONE OF LABOURS MOST BRILLIANT PARLIAMENTARIANS AND  A TRUE VISIONARY,  TALKING ON THE EVE OF THE 1975 REFERENDUM OF JOINING WHAT WOULD BECOME THE EU …… NOTE THE TRAITOR TED HEATH SQUIRMING IN THE BACKGROUND 

Edited April 22, 2018 by Eloquent pilgrim

[nauseus]

1 minute ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

 

PETER SHORE ….. ONE OF LABOURS MOST BRILLIANT PARLIAMENTARIANS AND  A TRUE VISIONARY,  TALKING ON THE EVE OF THE 1975 REFERENDUM OF JOINING WHAT WOULD BECOME THE EU ……

Yes. Nobody listened to him much either. Pity.

[nauseus]

4 minutes ago, Grouse said:

we all knew in uni at the time. Discussed it all through the nights before 9 O'Clock lectures.

But did you believe it?

[Grouse]

3 minutes ago, nauseus said:

But did you believe it?

To be perfectly honest the conversation was less about subsidiarity and more about beer price differentials and Inter-rail card futures. We were all in favour!

[7by7]

"Brexit has created chaos in Britain" Really? Not so that anyone actually living here would notice!

 

Lot's of hot air which, like most of the 306 pages here, is coming mainly from Brexiteers trying to convince themselves they made the right decision!

Edited April 22, 2018 by 7by7

[evadgib]

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

 

I've seen this before but not until way after the referendum was done. It's very good and mainly still valid today.

 

I remember the government (yes recommendation from Harold) leaflet arriving at home but not the other yes / no leaflets from the two independent groups, which I've just found as Britain for Europe and the National Referendum Campaign. The statements within the latter have turned out to be far more truthful than either of the other two! 

 

Powell was one of just a very few I can remember doing most of the no campaigning on TV and I think that everyone was still wary of openly supporting him after his 1968 "rivers of blood" speech - this was the start of the era of so-called political correctness, I suppose. Most of the media coverage was pro Europe and the referendum passed easily.

 

Powell's insight and stand against the EEC was discounted by many at the time, although it looks like he was spot on, in retrospect.

The BBC broadcasted and dissected Enoch's full speech on Radio 4 yesterday (50th anniversary), voiced by an actor sounding like Ray Alan's 'Lord Charles' in places but it's nonetheless the first time I have heard it in full. I found the programme quite interesting.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09z08w3

Edited April 22, 2018 by evadgib

[Grouse]

7 hours ago, tebee said:

OK, say I live in Manchester. I vote for my elected representatives on Manchester town council. 

 

Should I be concerned that on some subjects they can be overruled  by elected representatives in Westminster that I have also voted for ?

Subsidiarity again. Depends on what was agreed ahead of time

[Grouse]

6 hours ago, vogie said:

Why do you answer questions which infact nobody has asked you? ???

Because he won't get a sensible answer otherwise? I have some sympathy with that view?

[nauseus]

13 minutes ago, Grouse said:

To be perfectly honest the conversation was less about subsidiarity and more about beer price differentials and Inter-rail card futures. We were all in favour!

Thanks for your honesty. If you hadn't mentioned beer I would have doubted that this took place at uni at all. 

[Grouse]

5 hours ago, nauseus said:

Weak growth - just fact. It shows that EU protectionism is actually failing. 

 

NATO - what I'm on about there is European security. The UK also fought independently in 1982.

 

Infant mortality rates improved from 49/1000 to 16/1000 from 1950 to 1980 (before they joined the EEC) - the trend was already there - you attribute any improvements in anything to the EU alone.   

 

Interest rates were low everywhere. The bailout/help came along with numerous conditions which have cost the Greeks far more than interest rate payments as: more cuts to the pension system, forced privatizations/asset sales (with close "supervision" by the Troika), EU "monitoring" of the government itself and even law-making. Pretty much a total giving over of fiscal sovereignty, with the Germans as the main proponents.

 

 

 

Protectionism for whom exactly? How about US? Our people, our workers, our farmers, our standards, our environment.

 

I don't and won't live like some third world peasant thank you 

[vogie]

12 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Because he won't get a sensible answer otherwise? I have some sympathy with that view?

I can only answer you by saying that Arthur Askey died in 1982.

[Grouse]

5 hours ago, nauseus said:

I think you were right - Davis has been given this exit job but he has obviously not been allowed to do it! I think May put him in there as a token leaver but he is being overruled. He would have been far better as the PM now, instead of May.  

Anyone, including you, would be better than May! I'd vote for you ?

[Grouse]

3 hours ago, aright said:

 

Only half the story. When we decided to leave the EU the Government (a mixture of Remainers and Leavers) decided to leave the EU Bill of Human Rights(not Court) in due course and replace it with a British Bill of Human Rights. This is designed to be more au fait with British needs. Makes sense. 

Sounds American to me; how about Magna Carta being updated? OK John?

[nauseus]

8 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Anyone, including you, would be better than May! I'd vote for you ?

Ooh Grouse. You wouldn't want me in there! If I was we'd be heading for that WTO door! But at least everyone would know what in hell was going on.

 

I thought of applying but the perks aren't up to EU rates! One EU directive that won't be coming across The Channel! 

 

Late for drinks and dinner with the ageing wife! Tatty bye.

Edited April 22, 2018 by nauseus

[StreetCowboy]

2 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Sounds American to me; how about Magna Carta being updated? OK John?

British humans clearly require different rights than Europeans.  Maybe fewer of them, and more economically competitive.  And possibly more tailored to the needs of British people and not Johnny Foreigners who think that they can come here and settle and raise families who might be treated as equals.