Brexit has created chaos in Britain – nobody voted for this

[Grouse]

41 minutes ago, CharlesSwann said:

My first appearance in this thread. To me the issue is so banal I don't usually bother commenting on it, but as this thread is taking on historic proportions, here is my say.

 

Brexit is all about curbing rampant immigration, getting our country back, clawing back some of the cultural integrity of the nation - meaning, the simple ability to talk and behave in the way we have become accustomed over generations going back to... Stonehenge. That's why the people voted out. Don't deny it.

 

Problem is, no one is allowed to acknowledge this - not the mainstream media and certainly not the politicians - as it goes against the multicultural narrative that the politicians have been forcing down our throats as a result of post-war virtue signalling and a desperation to keep on delivering economic growth by constantly importing cheap labour.

 

Of course, the other half of the nation (many of which are now immigrants themselves) profess to be more concerned about the economic consequences. Personally I don't care. If the economy takes a hit - good - everyone should have less in any case - it's good for their soul. However, I think the economic concerns are exaggerated and if Brexit had bee implemented immediate after the referendum, all those issues would have been solved long ago, and, if some issues proved to be insurmountable, then by now Britain could have legitimately had another referendum and rejoined the EU on new terms. The EU would certainly be pleased to have Britain back on any basis.

 

The delay in Brexiting since the referendum has been shabby, reprehensible, incompetent, and agonising for everyone. And the foot-dragging has come about because of the simple inability of everyone to honestly express and acknowledge the issue above. The result is massive cognitive dissonence in the country.

Thank you for confirming what we remainers suspected

 

Personally, I have no problem with intra-EU migration.

 

The UK government has plenty of levers it can pull and can 100% control immigration from RoW.

 

As for cultural integrity, as a mongrel nation that's tough. Let's dump Christmas and bring back Jule. That will please the Celts, Vikings, Angles, Saxons etc! ? 

[aright]

5 hours ago, StreetCowboy said:

I don't think anyone said we could not trust parliament.  The point was that the membership of parliament is not necessarily an accurate quantitative indication of the views of the people.  You might remember that from the Thatcher years.

Mistrust of Thatcher came many years after she was elected and I accept government policy changes as a result of domestic and global issues also peoples perception and reality of government policy changes but you can't have an election every six months. My point is the significant increase in extreme right wing parties happened suddenly and recently and is non contrived, hard evidence of the voters reality now and in my view is as as a result of dissatisfaction with the EU. If that's not the reason ,what do you think was?

 

RuamRudy's  satisfaction rating chart  is no more than an EU compiled self serving judgement on itself which flies in the wind of recent voter statements. Its incongruous for a body to sit in judgement on itself but that's what unelected, unaccountable bodies do.

 

[aright]

2 hours ago, Grouse said:

Come on aright, you know that's not correct. Under our system, MPs are supposed to vote according to their conscience for what they believe to be in the best interests of their constituents and the country; party whips not withstanding.

What a strange thing to say. What formula do they apply when their conscience conflicts with the opinions of the majority of their constituents.

I'm off to Camden Lock market. Catch you later. 

[RuamRudy]

5 minutes ago, aright said:

Mistrust of Thatcher came many years after she was elected and I accept government policy changes as a result of domestic and global issues also peoples perception and reality of government policy changes but you can't have an election every six months. My point is the significant increase in extreme right wing parties happened suddenly and recently and is non contrived, hard evidence of the voters reality now and in my view is as as a result of dissatisfaction with the EU. If that's not the reason ,what do you think was?

 

The EU is not marmite - feelings about it do not have to be binary. I am sure that even the most fervent europhile can point to areas of it with which they are dissatisfied; to use a much repeated analogy, we in the UK are throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Therefore I find it wholly reasonable that there can be both a rise in right-wing populism in certain areas of Europe and a rise in general satisfaction levels across the region. Add to that the vagueries of voting methods and how a wide field of candidates can split a vote sufficiently that a minority preference controls a majority of seats, and this might go some way to explaining the conundrum.

 

12 minutes ago, aright said:

RuamRudy's  satisfaction rating chart  is no more than an EU compiled self serving judgement on itself which flies in the wind of recent voter statements. Its incongruous for a body to sit in judgement on itself but that's what unelected, unaccountable bodies do.

Then provide (a) something that contradicts it - and not simply general election results; or (b) evidence that the integrity of this poll is not to be trusted.

[Grouse]

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-44096507

 

Encouraging

 

The richest man in Britain is pro Brexit but pro EEA

Edited May 13, 2018 by Grouse

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, aright said:

What a strange thing to say. What formula do they apply when their conscience conflicts with the opinions of the majority of their constituents.

I'm off to Camden Lock market. Catch you later. 

https://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/british-politics/representative-democracy/

[StreetCowboy]

2 hours ago, aright said:

Mistrust of Thatcher came many years after she was elected and I accept government policy changes as a result of domestic and global issues also peoples perception and reality of government policy changes but you can't have an election every six months. My point is the significant increase in extreme right wing parties happened suddenly and recently and is non contrived, hard evidence of the voters reality now and in my view is as as a result of dissatisfaction with the EU. If that's not the reason ,what do you think was?

 

RuamRudy's  satisfaction rating chart  is no more than an EU compiled self serving judgement on itself which flies in the wind of recent voter statements. Its incongruous for a body to sit in judgement on itself but that's what unelected, unaccountable bodies do.

 

They are not sitting in judgement of themselves, they are eliciting feedback on how people feel; trying to get additional information beyond the raw numbers of party members elected to parliament.  Apparently, customer surveys are considered to be:

a) a good thing

necessary

c) essential

d) not a waste of time at all and I am happy to fill in another one.

[StreetCowboy]

2 hours ago, aright said:

What a strange thing to say. What formula do they apply when their conscience conflicts with the opinions of the majority of their constituents.

I'm off to Camden Lock market. Catch you later. 

We appoint MPs to know better than the man in the street.  That is why we have a representative democracy, rather than a list of referenda to be ticked off every miorning.  MPs are employed to govern.

[RuamRudy]

Back to the topic of this thread, which is about Brexit related chaos (percieved or otherwise):

 

Brexit: Falkland Islands government sounds alarm on leaving single market

 

"The Falkland Islands’ fishing industry exports almost exclusively to the EU, with 94 per cent of fishing exports by bulk heading to the single market in 2017. Fishing accounts for 41 per cent of the islands’ exports and two-thirds of the corporation tax received by its treasury. "

[tebee]

Theresa May asks us to trust her - I think the one thing leavers and remainers are agreed upon is that they don't.

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/trust-me-ill-take-back-control-but-ill-need-your-help-6dr6lhwws

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-44098473

[SheungWan]

3 hours ago, aright said:

What a strange thing to say. What formula do they apply when their conscience conflicts with the opinions of the majority of their constituents.

I'm off to Camden Lock market. Catch you later. 

Camden Lock Market??? I guess you need to replenish your wardrobe of second-hand ripped Levi jeans. Not exactly Ye Olde Englande though and Brexit supporters about 0.5% around there. BTW, I have an address in the London Borough of Camden (fortunately on the fringe and well away from the Lock tourist trap). Do drop in sometime.

Edited May 13, 2018 by SheungWan

[beautifulthailand99]

5 hours ago, CharlesSwann said:

My first appearance in this thread. To me the issue is so banal I don't usually bother commenting on it, but as this thread is taking on historic proportions, here is my say.

 

Brexit is all about curbing rampant immigration, getting our country back, clawing back some of the cultural integrity of the nation - meaning, the simple ability to talk and behave in the way we have become accustomed over generations going back to... Stonehenge. That's why the people voted out. Don't deny it.

 

Problem is, no one is allowed to acknowledge this - not the mainstream media and certainly not the politicians - as it goes against the multicultural narrative that the politicians have been forcing down our throats as a result of post-war virtue signalling and a desperation to keep on delivering economic growth by constantly importing cheap labour.

 

Of course, the other half of the nation (many of which are now immigrants themselves) profess to be more concerned about the economic consequences. Personally I don't care. If the economy takes a hit - good - everyone should have less in any case - it's good for their soul. However, I think the economic concerns are exaggerated and if Brexit had bee implemented immediate after the referendum, all those issues would have been solved long ago, and, if some issues proved to be insurmountable, then by now Britain could have legitimately had another referendum and rejoined the EU on new terms. The EU would certainly be pleased to have Britain back on any basis.

 

The delay in Brexiting since the referendum has been shabby, reprehensible, incompetent, and agonising for everyone. And the foot-dragging has come about because of the simple inability of everyone to honestly express and acknowledge the issue above. The result is massive cognitive dissonence in the country.

Thanks for that - that's cleared up a lot of the loose ends  of implementation. Hmm Stonehenge - you say what about the Roman, Viking, Saxon, French invasions and takeovers of 'our' country - should we turn those back whilst we are at it. When ancient Britons were making Stonehenge the Egyptians were building awe inspiring temples and pyramids. Our island is strong exactly because we are a mongrel nation refreshed periodically by new blood. The world is a complicated beast these days - just think about all the tech that goes into writing these words now - the complexity and the fact it works is staggering. An advanced first world trading nation is a member of a complex integrated eco-system of laws , treaties , agreements , and the like. Your touted quick implementation would be akin to chopping off the leg of someone complaining about a sore foot. Just get on with it - don't worry you won't miss one leg you've got another anyway. And besides having a disability is good for the soul - just look at the inspiration of Douglas Baader. What you are proposing or lamenting the lack of is butchery when we need world class brain surgery. 

 

Oh and thanks for your concern for NE car workers who may lose jobs if the Japs up sticks and move operations to mainland Europe because the supply chains are critically impaired and believe me this is no idle threat . Or you can't get a doctor could the NHS is hemorrhaging European staff who made UK their homes and contributed massively to the wellbeing of the  system. Who feel they have been told to f'off  back to their own countries. Never  mind ...we've taken our country back. Let them eat bread...

Edited May 13, 2018 by beautifulthailand99

[Grouse]

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/european-union-neoliberal-conspiracy-labour-party-brexit-jeremy-corbyn-a8349316.html

 

Good discussion piece on Neo-liberalism for all you intellectuals.

 

And Corbyn ?

[beautifulthailand99]

1 hour ago, RuamRudy said:

Back to the topic of this thread, which is about Brexit related chaos (percieved or otherwise):

 

Brexit: Falkland Islands government sounds alarm on leaving single market

 

"The Falkland Islands’ fishing industry exports almost exclusively to the EU, with 94 per cent of fishing exports by bulk heading to the single market in 2017. Fishing accounts for 41 per cent of the islands’ exports and two-thirds of the corporation tax received by its treasury. "

Maybe Argentina should 'take back control' of 'their' island. An impoverished Britain with denuded armed forces may not get the same result next time. Have always felt we have spent over 2 billion quid and many lives to save what is in essence a pretty worthless village. So Falklands, Gibraltar , Northern Ireland , the integrity of the UK yet more potential sacrifices on the altar , nay bonfire  of misguided , ill-informed outdated nationalism. 

[nontabury]

2 hours ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

Maybe Argentina should 'take back control' of 'their' island. An impoverished Britain with denuded armed forces may not get the same result next time. Have always felt we have spent over 2 billion quid and many lives to save what is in essence a pretty worthless village. So Falklands, Gibraltar , Northern Ireland , the integrity of the UK yet more potential sacrifices on the altar , nay bonfire  of misguided , ill-informed outdated nationalism. 

To hell with the inhabitants. Typical statement from a selfish remoaner.

[StreetCowboy]

3 minutes ago, nontabury said:

To hell with the inhabitants. Typical statement from a selfish remoaner.

Perhaps people that wanted to be British, but not part of Europe, could move out of Europe to the Falkland Islands; then everyone would be happy

[aright]

4 hours ago, StreetCowboy said:

We appoint MPs to know better than the man in the street.  That is why we have a representative democracy, rather than a list of referenda to be ticked off every miorning.  MPs are employed to govern.

The first paragraph on "What do MP's do?" in www.parliament.uk.

 

The UK public elects Members of Parliament (MPs) to represent their interests and concerns in the House of Commons. MPs consider and can propose new laws as well as raising issues that matter to you in the House. This includes asking government ministers questions about current issues including those which affect local constituents.

 

The important word(s) are "represent" and "issues that matter to you" "Knowing better" doesn't come into it.  How can they possibly "know better" when they get it wrong so often.  I can guarantee from my meetings with my MP he knows far less than me when it comes to business concerns and the everyday and long term  major concerns of the man in the street.

 

 

 

[StreetCowboy]

5 minutes ago, aright said:

The first paragraph on "What do MP's do?" in www.parliament.uk.

 

The UK public elects Members of Parliament (MPs) to represent their interests and concerns in the House of Commons. MPs consider and can propose new laws as well as raising issues that matter to you in the House. This includes asking government ministers questions about current issues including those which affect local constituents.

 

The important word(s) are "represent" and "issues that matter to you" "Knowing better" doesn't come into it.  How can they possibly "know better" when they get it wrong so often.  I can guarantee from my meetings with my MP he knows far less than me when it comes to business concerns and the everyday and long term  major concerns of the man in the street.

 

 

 

Business concerns are the responsibility of the businessman.??I trust that the MP that you elected can take on board your helpful suggestions, and reconcile them with the dogma of his party and his own conscience regarding matters of government.  If not, you have made a mistake in electing him.

[aright]

14 minutes ago, StreetCowboy said:

Business concerns are the responsibility of the businessman.??I trust that the MP that you elected can take on board your helpful suggestions, and reconcile them with the dogma of his party and his own conscience regarding matters of government.  If not, you have made a mistake in electing him.

 Business concerns are the concern of everyone especially the man on the street who finds it difficult paying the rent/mortgage and feeding his kids if he looses his job. I have no problems with the conscience of my elected MP nor the aims and ambitions of his party. I have made the point before during my life I have voted for all 3 major parties. I am not tied to anyone's mast.

I already asked the question of Grouse. What formula should an MP use when his conscience is at odds with the opinions of the majority of his constituents? Your answer?

I will call it a day here we need to get back on topic.

 

[StreetCowboy]

14 minutes ago, aright said:

 Business concerns are the concern of everyone especially the man on the street who finds it difficult paying the rent/mortgage and feeding his kids if he looses his job. I have no problems with the conscience of my elected MP nor the aims and ambitions of his party. I have made the point before during my life I have voted for all 3 major parties. I am not tied to anyone's mast.

I already asked the question of Grouse. What formula should an MP use when his conscience is at odds with the opinions of the majority of his constituents? Your answer?

I will call it a day here we need to get back on topic.

 

Solely his conscience.  You can try and influence your MP, but he is appointed because you support his opinions, not because he echoes yours.

[nontabury]

2 hours ago, StreetCowboy said:

Perhaps people that wanted to be British, but not part of Europe, could move out of Europe to the Falkland Islands; then everyone would be happy

Except the majority that voted to leave this so called union, prefer to live in their own country. Likewise those that would prefer to live in the E.U should go and live there.

 

[tebee]

4 minutes ago, nontabury said:

Except the majority that voted to leave this so called union, prefer to live in their own country. Likewise those that would prefer to live in the E.U should go and live there.

 

 

Something i've noticed is the  leave majority (maybe) don't seem all that happy with the county they have ! As for us moving to Europe, you do realize the irony of suggesting  that, as that is one of the rights you are trying to take away from us !

[tebee]

How many Brexit ministers does it take to change a light bulb?

 

1 to promise a brighter future and the rest to screw it up.....

[Scott]

Inflammatory post removed.  

[SheungWan]

5 hours ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

Maybe Argentina should 'take back control' of 'their' island. An impoverished Britain with denuded armed forces may not get the same result next time. Have always felt we have spent over 2 billion quid and many lives to save what is in essence a pretty worthless village. So Falklands, Gibraltar , Northern Ireland , the integrity of the UK yet more potential sacrifices on the altar , nay bonfire  of misguided , ill-informed outdated nationalism. 

The Falkland Islands were uninhabited when first discovered by Europeans. First claimed by the British in 1765. Argentina wasn't founded until 1810.

[SheungWan]

1 hour ago, StreetCowboy said:

Solely his conscience.  You can try and influence your MP, but he is appointed because you support his opinions, not because he echoes yours.

Well that isn't quite right. The idea that MPs vote according to their conscience. What?

[beautifulthailand99]

2 hours ago, nontabury said:

Except the majority that voted to leave this so called union, prefer to live in their own country. Likewise those that would prefer to live in the E.U should go and live there.

 

402 pages in and this is all the leavers have up their sleeve    Ingerlaaaand.....a country they love so much that they spend as much time half way round the world. The thing is the vast majority of the European incomers to the UK are hard working , attractive responsible citizens who have added greatly and quietly to the prosperity and dynamism of the UK. The malcontents would be unhappy whatever the situation. The problem isn't immigration but their thwarted  and unhappy lives and they have never been happier celebrating the chaos and disruption this ridiculous and tragic process that Cameron unleashed. How the hell did we come to a juncture where the spiv chanchers of  Farage , Johnson , Rees -Mogg et al are the voice of the people. Well done Britain - we have created the biggest self-inflicted own goal of my lifetime - our bloodless Suez as you were. 

 

[beautifulthailand99]

1 hour ago, SheungWan said:

The Falkland Islands were uninhabited when first discovered by Europeans. First claimed by the British in 1765. Argentina wasn't founded until 1810.

Fair point I was being fast and loose with the facts to make the point that Brexit is gnawing away at the state of the Union and what it means to be British. And on a more practical note we could have probably sold the Falklands back to the Argies and given each islander a million quid and righto settle in the UK and solved a problem and made a profit at the same time.  Thinking outside of the box as it were rather than sending back Britain's finest in them. 

[beautifulthailand99]

[aright]

3 hours ago, StreetCowboy said:

Solely his conscience.  You can try and influence your MP, but he is appointed because you support his opinions, not because he echoes yours.

 

Not solely conscience also his aims and ambitions on behalf of  his party. Read more slowly.

We have moved on from the shot down arguments, MPs know more than the man in the street, and the contention, that the man in the street has no business concerns, to questioning the principles of, in the case of my MP, someone you don't even know. I don't even know you yet you also think you know my root and branch reasons for voting for him. 

You seem very good at asking questions but not answering them so I will repeat the question. What formula would you want to apply when an MP's conscience is at odds with the opinions of the majority of his constituents?

When did  you last speak to your British MP?. I have spoken to mine 4.2 times in the last 12 mths.

 

If you aren't prepared to answer the questions don't bother replying.