42 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

 

But that wasn't the point I answered.....

 

You are the one that didn't answer the points raised, preferring to answer un-asked questions!

 

Big companies and politicians do this a lot, and it annoyed the hell out of me then - and still does now.

Sorry DD, perhaps I wasn’t clear enough.

 

I was simply pointing out that the PM chose to answer the question on what Brexit means as ‘Brexit = Brexit’.

 

The genious of this definition is it allows for precisely the disappointing performance you point to at #172.

 

I’m only surprised that it never occurred to you earlier that this is what would happen. 

 

The leaders of Brexit never had a plan.

 

Over two years later there is still no plan.

 

It’s just as well that ‘Brexit = Brexit’.

16 minutes ago, Expatthailover said:

Silly old public school Oxbridge educated old trouts that are the tory party, are too busy selling the return of maypoles in village squares, a return to empirical measurements etc to little englanders than to dirty their hands in real politicking and decisionmaking

IMO no.

 

They are trying to find a way for many of their MPs to not be voted out at the next election in areas where the constituents voted leave.

 

The Labour party has an even bigger problem in this respect.

36 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

So if a deal is made for a soft brexit it should go back to the electorate? And if a deal is made for a hard brexit, what should happen then?

No 'agreement' will be reached with the eu for a hard brexit IMO.

 

If I'm wrong and the eu agree to a mutually beneficial trade deal/no open borders and the like, then this would be what the electorate voted for.  So no point in putting it back to the electorate.

2 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

"It could be - probably certainly - that parliament has a better idea of what would happen to their constituencies than the cabinet."

 

I agree with this to a certain extent.

 

MPs in leave constituencies are very aware that they could well be voted out at the next GE if they overtly support remain....  On the other hand, whilst the cabinet are also v. aware of what could happen if they overtly try to stop the leave vote, at least their seats are safe?  So either way, they're trying to find a way to get a 'leave in name only' result - without the majority of MPs in leave areas losing their seats.....

 

As for " The collective 'wisdom' of parliament" ?!

 

Have you already forgotten that they supported the war in Iraq??  They clearly had zero knowledge on the issue, and few could be bothered to point out why the 'arguments' presented were more than inadequate....

 

 

That's comparing apples to pears. All fruit but a totally different situation. MP's should be aware of what's going on in their constituencies but (as you said) wouldn't have any knowledge of what was happening in Iraq, but depending on USA's 'WMD intelligence' fed to Tony Blair who accepted it. He misled parliament, IMO.

 

It is also as likely that both leave and remain Tory MP's will lose their seats in borderline constituencies come the next election, even with 'sitting on the fence' Corbyn heading up the Labour party.  I'm pretty sure that anyone interested is fed-up with Tory bickering, especially at cabinet level. 

 

I'd put my bet on Sajid Javid being the next PM - if TM is displaced. 

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Sorry DD, perhaps I wasn’t clear enough.

 

I was simply pointing out that the PM chose to answer the question on what Brexit means as ‘Brexit = Brexit’.

 

The genious of this definition is it allows for precisely the disappointing performance you point to at #172.

 

I’m only surprised that it never occurred to you earlier that this is what would happen. 

 

The leaders of Brexit never had a plan.

 

Over two years later there is still no plan.

 

It’s just as well that ‘Brexit = Brexit’.

You clearly haven't been following this topic for long enough!

 

I said from pretty much day 1, that the govt. would be looking for a 'leave in name only deal'!

 

Brexit does = Brexit.  Certainly not 'retain the parts most hated by the electorate' and pretend that it's brexit.

2 hours ago, stephenterry said:

I'm in favour of a people's vote on whatever deal or no deal that transpires prior to leaving the EU. The deal  or no deal parameters and reasons must be stated in clear concise neutral language without any attempt by the government to influence the vote either way. The reasons should contain a net costing element.

 

That would be in accordance with a democratic society and an electoral population that has changed since 2016. Only two options: 'Accepted' or 'Not accepted'.  If the latter, parliament should vote on whatever course the government should take, and with a strict timeline to enact it.

 

So, for Brexiters and Remainers alike, it would be a definitive 'will of the people'.  I would go one step further - only voters aged 45 or less should be permitted to vote, because the after effects of Brexit would impinge on the younger generation more than any other age-group. And if older people complain that their rights are impinged, I would do a Boris on them, f*** you, like he did to Business, and for which he should have been fired from the cabinet.

 

In reality, it would never happen in my lifetime, which just goes to show that instead of Brexit being a beneficial process for the UK people, on the evidence to date with the economy losing £400 million a week since the 2016 referendum it's been an abject failure for both Brexiteers and Remainers - and has split the country into two camps - a bit like politics...

 

BTW - the one main reason TM is still carrying on with Brexit, is because none of the senior ministers  - who harbour leadership aims - would want to overthrow her to take over a doomed process.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"That would be in accordance with a democratic society and an electoral population that has changed since 2016."

 

Well if you want to promote democracy and population changes then you can see that there has been a big change from 1975 to 2016. So, to be fair, why not just wait another 39 years?? 

24 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

IMO no.

 

They are trying to find a way for many of their MPs to not be voted out at the next election in areas where the constituents voted leave.

 

The Labour party has an even bigger problem in this respect.

I volunteered with Labour during the last election.

 

As I remarked at the time here on TVF, despite speaking face to face with  over a hundred people a day in what was a very strongly pro Brexit area, no more than two people a day raised Brexit as an issue.

 

The top concerns were: welfare, the NHS, local services, jobs and wages. [edit] housing and rents.

10 minutes ago, nauseus said:

"That would be in accordance with a democratic society and an electoral population that has changed since 2016."

 

Well if you want to promote democracy and population changes then you can see that there has been a big change from 1975 to 2016. So, to be fair, why not just wait another 39 years?? 

About 7 million people increase in that period, but recently increasing more rapidly, which is probably one reason the UK government is focusing on immigration targets. And can't wait as Brexit will be enacted in 2019

A flame post has been removed.

 

7) You will respect fellow members and post in a civil manner. No personal attacks, hateful or insulting towards other members, (flaming) Stalking of members on either the forum or via PM will not be allowed.

8.) You will not post disruptive or inflammatory messages, vulgarities, obscenities or profanities

 

 

3 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Are you arguing that human rights are not ‘one size fits all’?

 

 

If they were one size fits all the civilized world would have adopted the 18th century American Bill of Rights  or subsequent Bills. One mans or cultures absolute value can be another  mans  peripheral value.

 

“The West now masks its own will to power in the impartial, universalizing language of human rights and seeks to impose its own narrow agenda on a plethora of world cultures that do not actually share the West’s conception of individuality, selfhood, agency, or freedom” – Michael Ignatieff

5 minutes ago, aright said:

If they were one size fits all the civilized world would have adopted the 18th century American Bill of Rights  or subsequent Bills. One mans or cultures absolute value can be another  mans  peripheral value.

 

“The West now masks its own will to power in the impartial, universalizing language of human rights and seeks to impose its own narrow agenda on a plethora of world cultures that do not actually share the West’s conception of individuality, selfhood, agency, or freedom” – Michael Ignatieff

Oh I see.

 

The European Convention on Human Rights (which the U.K. helped write) is now being used by ‘the west’ against the U.K.?

 

Or something like that?!

 

 

4 hours ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

You mean like the government didn't try and influence the referendum vote by spending £9 million of taxpayers money sending a leaflet to every household advising everyone to vote remain

 

You are perfectly correct, the government screwed up, there should never have been any leaflets sent out.

A white paper should have been published spelling out exactly what action the government would take under either scenario, had the job been better managed we wouldn't be in this mess.

I fail  to understand why people have such faith in a government that continually gets it wrong.

Another can of worms about to be opened.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-unite-union-support-final-deal-public-vote-theresa-may-negotiations-a8424561.html

7 minutes ago, sandyf said:

You are perfectly correct, the government screwed up, there should never have been any leaflets sent out.

A white paper should have been published spelling out exactly what action the government would take under either scenario, had the job been better managed we wouldn't be in this mess.

I fail  to understand why people have such faith in a government that continually gets it wrong.

I fail  to understand why you think people have such faith in a government........

4 minutes ago, nauseus said:

I fail  to understand why you think people have such faith in a government........

I am more than happy to stand corrected if you are agreeing that TM has got it wrong.

14 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Another can of worms about to be opened.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-unite-union-support-final-deal-public-vote-theresa-may-negotiations-a8424561.html

 

I haven’t read the article because my computer's anti-drivel software prevents me from accessing the Independent, among other publications; but looking at the link, I assume this is the membership of the union Unite, headed by Corbyn’s left wing puppet master and policy maker, deciding that they would like a final Brexit deal public vote. Well, hardly a can of worms, although the satirist in me can see the irony of your description.

3 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

 

I haven’t read the article because my computer's anti-drivel software prevents me from accessing the Independent, among other publications; but looking at the link, I assume this is the membership of the union Unite, headed by Corbyn’s left wing puppet master and policy maker, deciding that they would like a final Brexit deal public vote. Well, hardly a can of worms, although the satirist in me can see the irony of your description.

The issue is likely to create a problem between your apt description of the union head and JC. This must be the last thing JC would want to see. He is playing for time in the hope that TM will hang herself rather than he should wield the knife.

What he wants is another election, not a referendum, anything other than a hard brexit will interfere with his nationalisation plans.

11 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

 

I haven’t read the article because my computer's anti-drivel software prevents me from accessing the Independent, among other publications; but looking at the link, I assume this is the membership of the union Unite, headed by Corbyn’s left wing puppet master and policy maker, deciding that they would like a final Brexit deal public vote. Well, hardly a can of worms, although the satirist in me can see the irony of your description.

This summer will see more and more popularist moves towards a people's vote on the final deal. College students rallies will make their mark, and by October  - will TM be able to stay in power if she ignores the people and continues her kamikaze approach to delivering Brexit? 

Many off topic, bickering. flames and replies have been removed

3 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

This summer will see more and more popularist moves towards a people's vote on the final deal. College students rallies will make their mark, and by October  - will TM be able to stay in power if she ignores the people and continues her kamikaze approach to delivering Brexit? 

Ah! Now I understand! The remainers are the populists! ?

47 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Oh I see.

 

The European Convention on Human Rights (which the U.K. helped write) is now being used by ‘the west’ against the U.K.?

 

Or something like that?!

 

 

The European Convention on Human Rights was a compromise document written to serve European needs. I would prefer to have a document which solely serves the needs of the UK; in the same way, I would prefer UK laws created and administered in the UK not Brussels..

20 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

 

I haven’t read the article because my computer's anti-drivel software prevents me from accessing the Independent, among other publications; but looking at the link, I assume this is the membership of the union Unite, headed by Corbyn’s left wing puppet master and policy maker, deciding that they would like a final Brexit deal public vote. Well, hardly a can of worms, although the satirist in me can see the irony of your description.

It was a poll conducted on behalf of the '' Peoples Vote Campaign ''

 

No doubt it would have been very fair with no bias whatsoever ??

 

 

 

Love the headline, who will blink first. 

20 hours ago, markaoffy said:

Who chooses the threads on this site! What about a thread on how the EU is threatening Uk by not sharing security data! Get your EU propagandist Junk From The Nation and TV

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

 

The same people who suspend you for complaining about the topics!

4 hours ago, stephenterry said:

This summer will see more and more popularist moves towards a people's vote on the final deal. College students rallies will make their mark, and by October  - will TM be able to stay in power if she ignores the people and continues her kamikaze approach to delivering Brexit? 

Well you are certainly shining a new light on ‘populist’ despite your misspelling, which certainly cannot be attributed to a typo.

 

We have been hearing from remainers for months, that ‘populist’s’ are rightwing fascists, or Nazis, or preferably both; now you tell us that all along, they were really cunningly disguised remainers, that are going to stamp their little tootsies this summer in Cappuccino student rallies.

 

So, populism, is fine when it supports the cause and views of remainers, but when it doesn’t, it is to be mocked and derided. The remainers hypocrisy brilliantly illustrated once again ….. I am obliged to you.   

Temperatures are rising and time is certainly running out.  The White Paper will only be the next step and getting anything agreed by October is looking shakier every day.  That would then push us to December.  In which case it is going to a hell of a push to get anything in place for the March deadline.  I wonder if the government have considered applying for an extension of the article 50 deadline?  Maybe delaying the deadline by two years in place of the transition period.  We would then be still working to the same timeline.

 

I am not suggesting that this is a good idea, it was just a thought.

 

In the meantime we do have the issue of parliament having a meaningful say and what would influence that the most?  The answer must be that their main aim would be to protect their seat and so ironically they would have to vote in favour of the way their constituents voted.  Unless any of you guys can see an alternative view?

5 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

Well you are certainly shining a new light on ‘populist’ despite your misspelling, which certainly cannot be attributed to a typo.

 

We have been hearing from remainers for months, that ‘populist’s’ are rightwing fascists, or Nazis, or preferably both; now you tell us that all along, they were really cunningly disguised remainers, that are going to stamp their little tootsies this summer in Cappuccino student rallies.

 

So, populism, is fine when it supports the cause and views of remainers, but when it doesn’t, it is to be mocked and derided. The remainers hypocrisy brilliantly illustrated once again ….. I am obliged to you.   

You object when generalisations are made about Brexiteers, but you cannot help throwing them out yourself today. Hypocrisy, you say?

6 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

Temperatures are rising and time is certainly running out.  The White Paper will only be the next step and getting anything agreed by October is looking shakier every day.  That would then push us to December.  In which case it is going to a hell of a push to get anything in place for the March deadline.  I wonder if the government have considered applying for an extension of the article 50 deadline?  Maybe delaying the deadline by two years in place of the transition period.  We would then be still working to the same timeline.

 

I am not suggesting that this is a good idea, it was just a thought.

 

In the meantime we do have the issue of parliament having a meaningful say and what would influence that the most?  The answer must be that their main aim would be to protect their seat and so ironically they would have to vote in favour of the way their constituents voted.  Unless any of you guys can see an alternative view?

After Gove apparently ripping it up, is there any prospect of anything being released under this current PM? What is interesting is how this tidbit of gossip ended up in the press - is Gove himself trying to paint himself as the natural Brexiteers' choice to replace TM, should she suddenly be ousted?

27 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

After Gove apparently ripping it up, is there any prospect of anything being released under this current PM? What is interesting is how this tidbit of gossip ended up in the press - is Gove himself trying to paint himself as the natural Brexiteers' choice to replace TM, should she suddenly be ousted?

 

 

It didn't work last time.

 

 

 

 

..... and I doubt that the obsequious little b4stard will succeed this time.

"It may surprise those posters to learn that many people voted for Brexit, including some ex-pats, even though realising that there could be some initial disadvantages and financial costs to them personally."

 

I think you'll find that it is precisely those who voted Brexit who will be the most surprised