Remainers continually resorting to creating false straw man arguments. Nobody has said that the decision can't be undone. After the 2016 referendum has been respected and implemented, and we have left the EU, they can campaign to rejoin - campaign to undo the decision.

 

Remainers don't want the decision undone. They want the decision reversed before it is enacted. Which begs the question, why bother asking people what they think at all?

 

Remainers get their way on this and they will have shown that there is absolutely no need to follow through on the results of a referendum.

19 hours ago, vinny41 said:

and from your own link "The following searchable table displays 200 of the most in-demand goods shipped from the United Kingdom during 2017.

Most in demand is different from Largest export commodities of the United Kingdom (UK) in 2017 (in million GBP

But at least both stats do agree that Machinery including computers: US$68 billion (15.3% of total exports) is the largest export item

I have to assume that you believe ' Machinery including computers' to be a singular description.

19 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

Says it all ☹️. 

 

"You have to be registered with YouGov"

I do not know if every poll is from the website or not but I would consider them about as accurate as the length of a piece of string.

1 hour ago, rixalex said:

Remainers get their way on this and they will have shown that there is absolutely no need to follow through on the results of a referendum.

they are only advisory

parliament is sovereign

19 hours ago, talahtnut said:

Not everyone would agree with that, Felixtowe, the port I use

has already seen a 10% growth in non EU trade, and is extending

berthing capacity.

Its usually good to widen ones horizons beyond the back garden.

I used to know Felixstowe very well, had a static caravan on a site there in the mid 70's. When I was in Germany I was one of the first passengers on the Thoresen Townsend service to Zeebrugge when it started up, late 73 I think.

You are quite right that Felixstowe has seen tremendous growth since the days I used the port and your figure on non EU trade is more than likely. So why do people think that non EU trade growth will be better than it is now?

China is one of the UKs largest trading partners but there is no trade agreement with the UK or the EU. The EU has not done a deal with China because the Chinese were not prepared to meet the EU regulations. Are we to assume that the view is China will become an even bigger trading partner once the UK has the ability to shed the EU regulations.

That would be the thin end of the wedge, the EU would only make it that much more difficult to send goods from the UK into Europe, the EU already have a problem with UK customs arrangements.

 

Systematic failures by UK customs officials have allowed criminal gangs to defraud the European Union of at least £2bn in just four years plus billions more in lost VAT, the EU anti-fraud office OLAF has claimed.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-39502316

The EU took about 7 years to create CETA, the Canadian free trade agreement. Do people really think that the EU will sit down with the UK on the future trading relationship holding a blank piece of paper?

 

On the basis that the UK gets into the transition period and the EU say its the CETA model or no FTA, what then? There is a very good reason why the EU has been insistent on the backstop, leaves the UK with nowhere to run.

 

Theresa May has said she would get an ambitious bespoke free trade agreement, but then she has said many things.

the British people got us into this mess

let them decide

seems that parliament can't

DS Smith, in common with many other companies, has previously bemoaned the lack of guidance and information that it received in the two years following the referendum but the withdrawal agreement has offered much-needed clarity on the government's intentions, Mr Roberts said.
"We have kept investing elsewhere and waited for clarity in the UK."

https://news.sky.com/story/heartened-but-cautious-british-business-reacts-to-mays-brexit-plan-11556159

7 hours ago, nontabury said:

 

 Not only that,but the only other pro leave backing national newspaper, the Mail is now under the editorial control since Sept of the very staunch remainer and old Etonian Gordie Greg.

So the remoaners can now promote their one sided biased veiw on the people’s decision to leave the hated E.U.

Therefor Today the democratic will of the people has been stolen from them by remainer T. May, and along side this we have no neutral and free media, it’s  becoming more and more like North Korea every day.

 

 

Prior to the Referendum, the national daily newspapers were split, 4 supporting Leave (Telegraph, Mail, Express, Sun) and 4 Remain (Times, Guardian, FT, Mirror), with the Star and i uncommitted. However, when circulation was taken into account, there was a clear leaning towards Leave. Loughborough University, in its analysis of Referendum-related articles in the press leading up to the vote, put the pro-Brexit penetration level as high as 82%, mainly because the pro-Leave newspapers (in particular the Mail and Express) tended to be more partial in their coverage.

If some of these newspapers have since changed their editorial stance, is it not because they are reflecting the way public opinion has changed since 2016?

59 minutes ago, AGareth2 said:

the British people got us into this mess

let them decide

seems that parliament can't

Plenty of spinning going on here.

1 hour ago, AGareth2 said:

they are only advisory

parliament is sovereign

They will only be advisory from now on.Super majorities will be the norm, That's if there is another one ever again after the cluster this one turned out to be.

26 minutes ago, Stupooey said:

 

Prior to the Referendum, the national daily newspapers were split, 4 supporting Leave (Telegraph, Mail, Express, Sun) and 4 Remain (Times, Guardian, FT, Mirror), with the Star and i uncommitted. However, when circulation was taken into account, there was a clear leaning towards Leave. Loughborough University, in its analysis of Referendum-related articles in the press leading up to the vote, put the pro-Brexit penetration level as high as 82%, mainly because the pro-Leave newspapers (in particular the Mail and Express) tended to be more partial in their coverage.

If some of these newspapers have since changed their editorial stance, is it not because they are reflecting the way public opinion has changed since 2016?

The telegraph and times are behind a pay wall.The mail is the big beast here it's reportedly the most read online paper in the world! The mirror has articles about the soaps that seem to make out that they are real events.Read the Wikipedia page on the express you couldn't make it up...on second thoughts they do.

All media is fair and balanced except right wing media.

2 hours ago, sandyf said:

The EU took about 7 years to create CETA, the Canadian free trade agreement. Do people really think that the EU will sit down with the UK on the future trading relationship holding a blank piece of paper?

 

On the basis that the UK gets into the transition period and the EU say its the CETA model or no FTA, what then? There is a very good reason why the EU has been insistent on the backstop, leaves the UK with nowhere to run.

 

Theresa May has said she would get an ambitious bespoke free trade agreement, but then she has said many things.

Which is precisely why hard brexit has now proven to be the only option.

the British people got us into this mess
let them decide
seems that parliament can't

The British people didn't get us into any mess. They were just given a binary choice and made the decision the way they did.

It's all on the politicians who have messed things up, by taking a half hearted, let's-hope-we-can-figure-a-way-out-of-actually-going-through-with-this approach, starting by appointing a leader who was a remainer. Since then it's been 10% of the Commons genuinely trying to row towards exiting the EU, with the other 85% doing a lot of flapping about pretending to try to enact the will of the people, but blatantly doing the opposite. The final 5% are the likes of the Soubrys who have actively and openly being trying to stop it. With all that movement against it, is it any wonder Brexit is in the state it's in?

And you blame it on the people, and think the people should vote again?! For what purpose? You've already stated the technical nonsense about the referendum being advisory. Why not just be done with it and say that staying in the EU comes before democracy. Then we can forget about the 2016 referendum, we can forget about having another, in case it doesn't go your way again, and we can just get on with the country being run by the people who think they know best. Who really needs elections after all.

Sent from my SM-G610F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

7 hours ago, adammike said:

you think the express has toned down! No such luck.The mail has so the glass is half full give it another five years and the express readership will have died off, and then all those young people who the brexiteers have denied the opportunity to have the freedom to live and work in an expanding EU will come gunning for you.I hope I live long enough to see it.

Don’t beleive everything you are told.

 

 

Former Finnish PM who was also competing for Junker's position, says how brexit is.

 

"Reading the latest on #Brexit. New definition of the lowest form of democracy: campaign for Brexit, negotiate Brexit, realise that Brexit is a disaster; then resign, blame others and challenge for leadership. I know that democracy is not perfect, but this is simply repugnant."

 

 

 

48 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Which is precisely why hard brexit has now proven to be the only option.

Obviously you are entitled to believe that option is in the national interest.

16 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Obviously you are entitled to believe that option is in the national interest.

 

whatever the interest domain, hard/softer is pretty much up to the parliament now

(provided the deal survives the EU top level meeting)

1 hour ago, dick dasterdly said:

Which is precisely why hard brexit has now proven to be the only option.

Two alternatives now I'd say:

 

1. Hard brexit

2. Stay as we are.

 

That could be the showdown.

15 minutes ago, oilinki said:

Former Finnish PM who was also competing for Junker's position, says how brexit is.

 

"Reading the latest on #Brexit. New definition of the lowest form of democracy: campaign for Brexit, negotiate Brexit, realise that Brexit is a disaster; then resign, blame others and challenge for leadership. I know that democracy is not perfect, but this is simply repugnant."

 

 

 

We don’t give a dam what your P.M wants. It’s completely irrelevant.

The important FACT is that the British people went to the polls,and made our decision. Furthermore we were told our decision would be respected.

Unfortunately the unelected Bureacrats in Brussels along with some unelected civil servants in London,decided our decision would not be implemented. But get this through your head, even if treacherous May is successful in thwarting the will of the people. This will not go away. In fact when the Bureacrats return to implimenting their future ideas for the E.U.

the call for leaving the E.U. will only increase.

34 minutes ago, rixalex said:

Why not just be done with it and say that staying in the EU comes before democracy.
 

Obviously you are of the opinion that 'the people' can never be misled into taking the wrong action.

The great famine in China came about because the people were misled into taking the wrong action. Mao Zedong didn't get rid of the sparrows, the people did, chased them until they were exhausted and died.

 

History is littered with environmental disasters, but few compare to the one kicked off in 1958 in China. That was the year that Mao Zedong, the founding father of the People's Republic of China, decided that his country could do without pests like sparrows. The impact of this ill-conceived decision — along with many other policies he put in place — caused a domino effect of destruction. Three years later, as many as 45 million people were dead.

https://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/animals/stories/the-great-sparrow-campaign-was-the-start-of-the-greatest-mass

Just now, sandyf said:

Obviously you are of the opinion that 'the people' can never be misled into taking the wrong action.

The great famine in China came about because the people were misled into taking the wrong action. Mao Zedong didn't get rid of the sparrows, the people did, chased them until they were exhausted and died.

 

History is littered with environmental disasters, but few compare to the one kicked off in 1958 in China. That was the year that Mao Zedong, the founding father of the People's Republic of China, decided that his country could do without pests like sparrows. The impact of this ill-conceived decision — along with many other policies he put in place — caused a domino effect of destruction. Three years later, as many as 45 million people were dead.

https://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/animals/stories/the-great-sparrow-campaign-was-the-start-of-the-greatest-mass

Well that's the most obscure and ridiculous 'similarity' I've read on these threads!

10 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Obviously you are of the opinion that 'the people' can never be misled into taking the wrong action.

The great famine in China came about because the people were misled into taking the wrong action. Mao Zedong didn't get rid of the sparrows, the people did, chased them until they were exhausted and died.

 

History is littered with environmental disasters, but few compare to the one kicked off in 1958 in China. That was the year that Mao Zedong, the founding father of the People's Republic of China, decided that his country could do without pests like sparrows. The impact of this ill-conceived decision — along with many other policies he put in place — caused a domino effect of destruction. Three years later, as many as 45 million people were dead.

https://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/animals/stories/the-great-sparrow-campaign-was-the-start-of-the-greatest-mass

Very true, we were mislead,many would say conned into voting to join a common trading union in 1975. Aferwhich as you well know, the establishment has since deceitfully transformed into the present day political so called E.u. However the thinking people,have woken up to the reality of this monstrosity. And we will never accept it.

1 hour ago, dick dasterdly said:

Which is precisely why hard brexit has now proven to be the only option.

Proven? Explain 

 

Even the PM says no brexit is an option

 

Brexit is looking more and more foolish; Brexiters are a busted flush

8 hours ago, kwilco said:

Finally some businesses that are looking forward to benefitting from Brexit......

 

 

https://news.sky.com/story/report-says-brexit-will-create-some-80000-jobs-in-frankfurt-11004308

add BMW,nissan,toyota,JL and the best part of 14000 Airbus jobs to the list and theres another 80k,never mind there will be plenty of work tattie picking in Lincolnshire

3 minutes ago, nontabury said:

We don’t give a dam what your P.M wants. It’s completely irrelevant.

The important FACT is that the British people went to the polls,and made our decision. Furthermore we were told our decision would be respected.

Unfortunately the unelected Bureacrats in Brussels along with some unelected civil servants in London,decided our decision would not be implemented. But get this through your head, even if treacherous May is successful in thwarting the will of the people. This will not go away. In fact when the Bureacrats return to implimenting their future ideas for the E.U.

the call for leaving the E.U. will only increase.

 

The UK was respected. The problem is that Brexit voters were told that the EU would be bending over backwards to give us a great deal, because they need us more than we need them. Car companies would lobby Merkel, Italian prosecco makers would lobby their government, etc etc. Remain voters believed that the deal that we would get would be worse than what we have now, with any benefits not being able to fill the gap ... so better to remain.

 

That is where we are. And the so-called "will of the people" is looking a bit ropey. If May fails to get her plans approved (or amended then approved) the remainer MPs from all parties will join forces to vote through another referendum. The risk for extreme brexiteers is that the whole project will end up in the dust. I'm currently watching a long documentary series called The World At War, about the second World War. The Nazi's stormed through West and East Europe and looked invincible ... then Stalingrad, North Africa, British bombing, America's entry ... and a great victory turned into a disaster. Same with Japan. They swept everyone in their path ... then Midway, US bombing ... and ultimately Hiroshima and Nagasaki ... victory turned to disaster. At the peak of their success, neither Germany nor Japan would have thought that possible. Brexiteer extremists beware!

 

16 minutes ago, nontabury said:

We don’t give a dam what your P.M wants. It’s completely irrelevant.

The important FACT is that the British people went to the polls,and made our decision. Furthermore we were told our decision would be respected.

Unfortunately the unelected Bureacrats in Brussels along with some unelected civil servants in London,decided our decision would not be implemented. But get this through your head, even if treacherous May is successful in thwarting the will of the people. This will not go away. In fact when the Bureacrats return to implimenting their future ideas for the E.U.

the call for leaving the E.U. will only increase.

Hillarious! Thanks for brightening my Sunday morning! 

13 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

Two alternatives now I'd say:

 

1. Hard brexit

2. Stay as we are.

 

That could be the showdown.

The problem with that scenario is the people didn't vote to stay as we are, can you imagine the ramifications if Brexit doesn't happen.

 

The Sky news poll this morning 56% of Brits do not want another referendum, but worryingly a majority want PM May to carry on.

 

A reminder that May and Corbyn will be on 'Sophy Ridge on Sunday' at 0900hrs UK time, 1600hrs Thai time.

3 hours ago, sandyf said:

The EU took about 7 years to create CETA, the Canadian free trade agreement. Do people really think that the EU will sit down with the UK on the future trading relationship holding a blank piece of paper?

 

On the basis that the UK gets into the transition period and the EU say its the CETA model or no FTA, what then? There is a very good reason why the EU has been insistent on the backstop, leaves the UK with nowhere to run.

 

Theresa May has said she would get an ambitious bespoke free trade agreement, but then she has said many things.

 

1 hour ago, dick dasterdly said:

Which is precisely why hard brexit has now proven to be the only option.

 

Just now, Grouse said:

Proven? Explain 

 

Even the PM says no brexit is an option

 

Brexit is looking more and more foolish; Brexiters are a busted flush

I was responding to Sandy's post, quoted above.

 

If you're going to 'argue a point', please at least quote the relevant posts - rather than relying on someone else to do so....