UK voters should make final Brexit decision if talks with EU collapse: poll

[Chelseafan]

Instead of making a glorious leap to independence, Britain will become a satellite orbiting the European planet, obliged to follow rules it will have no say in devising.
 
This is an exercise in damage limitation, not a bold break from the recent past. But the question is whether the British political system is capable of resigning itself to this least bad outcome.
 
Oscar Wilde’s Lady Bracknell did not quite say that when a government loses its mind it may be regarded as a misfortune but when the opposition does so as well, it begins to look like carelessness.
 
https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2018/11/13/how-brexit-broke-up-britain/

So no different to how it is now then. The Veto doesn't exist anymore so all decisions made by Brussels are implemented by the UK whether we like it or not.


Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[nontabury]

9 hours ago, candide said:

It's a shame but these students are not necessarily from the EU. Actually the country with the highest unpaid debt amount is Australia.

 

I repeat, E.U. Citizens owe the British tax payer 1.3 Billion £ +.

Regarding the debt from Australia, that includes British citizens, who after completing their University education then depart the U.K for warmer climates. Very similar to many University graduates, who come to live and work in Thailand. This of course is all down to the Question,should university education be free.

While I don’t condone want they do. I certainly think that once Again the British tax payers are being taken for a ride by the E.U.

And why are British tax paying citizens discriminated against? Just a fraction of this money could pay for the 100% +50% that British, Tax paying ex - pats must pay.

Please Candide, if you are British, think about the interest of your fellow citizens, first and foremost.

 

 

Edited November 19, 2018 by nontabury

[beautifulthailand99]

23 minutes ago, CanterbrigianBangkoker said:

Utter rubbish, as usual.

But very informative of your views of independent media and well, hey!, If it's on RationalWiki it must be non-partisan, totally correct and beyond reproach. The factual analysis from this report is in fact a direct (and credited) quote of information from 'The Spectator' - or are they also a 'bat-shit' crazy, antisemitic rag?... 

 

...and if so, what would you recommend browsing for fair, impartial and factual reporting - The FT, The Independent or The Guardian I guess, right!? ????

not or the Guardian but and ,  and now let's add the repentant Daily Mail to the list and of course TVF when we shall eventually Remain the 50 baht pound party will go on for days. I'll pitch in with a Makro box of Changs (nay Heineken from Holland for such an important date). God Save the Queen !

[nontabury]

5 hours ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

Sure, in cloud cuckoo land there’s a solution for everything, and cloud cuckoo land people can do everything. They can invent border technology that doesn’t exist yet,  they can negotiate the best deals in history, they don’t even need medicine or supplies when they can have some pills of sovereignty and a dose of take-back-control. Fortunately, no ones buys into phantasy products anymore; people get back to reality. 

Well, some experts on boarder controls do in fact believe, a system can quickly be put in place. Just because you and other remoaners say it’s impossible, does not necessarily mean it’s true.

Edited November 19, 2018 by nontabury

[sandyf]

1 hour ago, whatsupdoc said:

Why, oh why, do some Brexiteers have such an obsession with Selmayr? By the way, I find the Iain Dale statement very, very hard to believe.

Probably yet another Brexiteer getting so desperate that he feels the need to spread lies..... 

Desperate for distraction rather than face up to the issues on their own doorstep.

[CanterbrigianBangkoker]

19 minutes ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

not or the Guardian but and ,  and now let's add the repentant Daily Mail to the list and of course TVF when we shall eventually Remain the 50 baht pound party will go on for days. I'll pitch in with a Makro box of Changs (nay Heineken from Holland for such an important date). God Save the Queen !

I was listing them individually not as a group, so or is just fine per grammar. I could lump them in as being as biased and recalcitrant as each other, but I don't think that, so I won't. They've all become pretty dire, but to varying degrees and with varying regularity, IMHO. ????

 

...and Chang!!! C'mon, an IPA is more becoming surely? 

Edited November 19, 2018 by CanterbrigianBangkoker

[sandyf]

In today's circumstances, only the arrogant would claim that the door to a variety of scenarios is not somewhat ajar, a bit wider on some than others.

With the MP's having had the weekend to contemplate, the fog may get patchy later in the day.

[beautifulthailand99]

Nontabury calm down dear life goes on hopefully for all of us - let go of your anger and come and join us nice remain chaps. We shall welcome all returners with open arms and a warm welcome cold beer. Your leaders on the other hand await a Mussolini garage ending , I'll bring the rope. 

[melvinmelvin]

Chang? IPA?

Belhaven for me.

 

[bomber]

4 hours ago, tebee said:

 

well said mr sugar i couldnt agree more

[beautifulthailand99]

2 minutes ago, bomber said:

well said mr sugar i couldnt agree more

In a nutshell that's it - let's call the whole thing off.

[nontabury]

4 hours ago, SheungWan said:

 

David Davis.

What a pathetic reply, supported by what?

Do try and keep up with the debate, and put forward constructive criticism. That is of course, if you have the ability.

[sandyf]

Negotiation has only come to an end for Theresa May, got her head stuck drawing the line.

 

The line in the sand from Brussels stops short of ruling out a renegotiation, but effectively means that red lines would have to change for a substantially different deal to emerge.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-deal-latest-theresa-may-draft-agreement-withdrawal-eu-tusk-tajani-a8635116.html

[bomber]

34 minutes ago, nontabury said:

 

I repeat, E.U. Citizens owe the British tax payer 1.3 Billion £ +.

Regarding the debt from Australia, that includes British citizens, who after completing their University education then depart the U.K for warmer climates. Very similar to many University graduates, who come to live and work in Thailand. This of course is all down to the Question,should university education be free.

While I don’t condone want they do. I certainly think that once Again the British tax payers are being taken for a ride by the E.U.

And why are British tax paying citizens discriminated against? Just a fraction of this money could pay for the 100% +50% that British, Tax paying ex - pats must pay.

Please Candide, if you are British, think about the interest of your fellow citizens, first and foremost.

 

 

the british taxpayers have been taken for a ride by the single mothers,alcoholics,DLA scroungers and the refugee's we lavished houses and goods on,none of which had anything to do with the EU,i will always remember about 15 years ago seeing a guy loading a van up with about 40-50 used hovers so i asked him where had they come from he replied they came from the homes of refugee's and he was taking them to tip as the refugee's had all received brand new one's,do they still work i asked yes bar a handful he replied,total madness and nothing to do with EU law,i dont recall seeing any hovers on show when the jungle in calais was in its prime,the french treat them correctly,give the f---ers nowt.

[welovesundaysatspace]

30 minutes ago, nontabury said:

Well, some experts on boarder controls do in fact believe, a system can quickly be put in place. Just because you and other remoaners say it’s impossible, does not necessarily mean it’s true.

Is that the same “experts” that calculated the weekly NHS savings? Thanks, but no thanks. While I enjoy listening to Brexit-experts when I want to have a good laugh, when it comes to our borders, I prefer to go with someone reliable. But hey, go ahead and develop such technology. You’ll have some years time now for that anyways ???? 

[nontabury]

4 hours ago, oilinki said:

What is included to the 2%? Buying expensive fighters and other equipment from USA, making a nice profit for the US military contractors?

 

How about aftermath of the wars. Refugee management, rebuilding? Should those be included with the 2% defence budgets as well?

 

It was mostly the USA that built up Europe after WW2.

And since that time, again it’s been the USA who have financed the defence of Europe. 

Compared to Finland who at one time fought with NAZI Germany against the Allies. And who have since the end of WW2 relied on NATO to defend them, without Finland paying towards the costs. Free riders.

[beautifulthailand99]

30 minutes ago, nontabury said:

Well, some experts on boarder controls do in fact believe, a system can quickly be put in place. Just because you and other remoaners say it’s impossible, does not necessarily mean it’s true.

We had a scrapped  12 billion NHS system you may remember a few years back all for nowt - nothing to do with the EU.  We have more chance of successfully landing an unmanned vehicle on Mars at Christmas than bringing off such a system. 

[bomber]

11 minutes ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

In a nutshell that's it - let's call the whole thing off.

i never voted as at the time i could see points from both sides,what hit me within days/weeks of the vote is just what an absolute disaster the whole thing was.

[CanterbrigianBangkoker]

1 hour ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

the loo paper, just a joke on your observation that the deal ain't even suitable for bumwiping

the pic above is the best pic I have of bum wipers, and the story behind it is just great

 

I think you somewhat underestimate the effects of project fear. MPs ain't particularly smart, I expect

that several would be too skeptical (ie scared - lack of confidence) to vote down the deal and go hard.

 

As long as the deal is in movement there is a point in keeping TM,

she knows the EU mgt and she knows the heads of state/pm circle, and they know her

that is undoubtedly an advantage

any TM replacement would need considerable time to build relationship, trust and MO

 

As soon as deal is no longer in play - TM should go ASAP.

A terrible

mistake with her as PM.

I think only UK could do smth like this - putting a remainer in charge of Brexit.

She shocked me hard, 4 times, since becoming PM

a) pretty soon after being PM she announced her plan to bypass parliament - wild public discussions

    went to court and lost solidly

 

 b)  keeping quiet? nee way - shouting loud - pushing to higher court

     loosing solidly again

 

bloody hell, having a PM with so shaky knowledge of what goes and what does not go within the

UK legal framework is frightening to say the least

 

c) snappy GE, very bright what the f for, she had majority - geez - not a good grip on reality

 

d) offering Tory/UK to the DUP so that they can hold UK at ransom - geeeez again

 

e) yes, one more DDavies, nothing wrong with him per se, me thinks, but it was so bloody obvious from

   a very very early stage that he would not be able to produce worth zilch together with Barnier,

   those two quite simply do not go together,

   DD should have been shifted out long long time ago

 

 

 

 

'the loo paper, just a joke on your observation that the deal ain't even suitable for bumwiping

the pic above is the best pic I have of bum wipers, and the story behind it is just great'

- Fair enough, it gave me a laugh, on a Monday afternoon in the office that's always welcome, so, cheers.

 

I find myself agreeing with some of these. ????

 

a) Strange turn of events, indeed. 

b) I think she imagined a different outcome ????

c) This was probably a way to further mandate the decision due to close call in ref. - and not leave the Tories 'undemocratically answerable' for any further fudges, not sure it has worked though. Actually, it was more democratic, essentially, as (if I remember rightly) both parties included within their manifesto a guarantee to leave - because of the ref result, but in any case, the Tories won and so effectively had the referendum decision confirmed by the electorate in the same year as its outcome.

d) That's politics, they needed the majority to deliver a non-hung parliament - one which I think they may soon lose if the deal on the table is not drastically altered / rejected, and if that's the case and we return to a hung-parliament it could give JC and his mob the chance to form a new government as the opposition has the right to in such circumstances, so I believe.

 

'bloody hell, having a PM with so shaky knowledge of what goes and what does not go within the

UK legal framework is frightening to say the least' 

'any TM replacement would need considerable time to build relationship, trust and MO'

- with this I'm in some agreement, I think she was always gonna have a very tough road to walk, but she never wanted to walk it in order to arrive at it's mandated conclusion, if you follow my meaning. She was a horrible choice from the outset. If Davies (or another competent and staunch Brexiteer) had for example thrown his hat in the ring earlier OR been allowed to do his job as chief negotiator, then this mess could perhaps have been avoided. This sentiment has been echoed by many over the last few months, for good reason. I take your point about being 'late in the day', but because of that something must be done! Soon. Rather than extend the process. I think we're all just about sick of this continual clusterf***>.

 

The British political class has been shown up for the totally incompetent, nepotist little clique that they are - those who backed Remain and have been trying to sabotage proceedings from the off and those who were staunch Brexiteers have not done enough (or perhaps not been allowed to) to redress this balance. It has all been pretty embarrassing, but I have to wonder if it happened elsewhere, how much better or worse it might have been. Again, the past is the past and can't/shouldn't be dwelt on, especially right now, the government needs to get a grip. Quick! 

I would hope and half expect to see:

 

1) Confidence vote called

2) May given a vote of no confidence

3) Someone (Gove, Davis or Johnson perhaps?) replacing her

4) Extension on Art-50 requested

5) Renegotiation drawn up 

 

OR

 

6) Hard Brexit

 

The sooner all this is put to bed, the better.

 

 

 

  

Edited November 19, 2018 by CanterbrigianBangkoker

[welovesundaysatspace]

31 minutes ago, CanterbrigianBangkoker said:

 

4) Extension on Art-50 requested 

Enough time and resources have been wasted already on this circus. If the UK needs more time for implementation then fine, but for that, it should be a prerequisite that the UK agrees to a deal first. No more extension for going in circles please. 

[CanterbrigianBangkoker]

8 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

Enough time and resources have been wasted already on this circus. If the UK needs more time for implementation then fine, but for that, it should be a prerequisite that the UK agrees to a deal first. No more extension for going in circles please. 

I agree with you that we shouldn't waste anymore time or resources leaving, unless of course we can get a deal that is something representing a proper Brexit - I needn't explain these precepts at this point. A deal of this nature might actually get through parliament, but is very unlikely to be offered.

 

In my view we should simply stop wasting everyone's time and put someone (a Leaver) at the helm who takes the position to leave asap on WTO rules - and then get on with it. Let the sky fall and the four horseman ride yada yada yada...

 

I was simply stating that I'm not sure, at this juncture, that this will happen due to a lack of support in parliament. Ext of art.50 is just one of the possibilities in the near future in the event of the current 'bog-roll' being rightly rejected.

 

Edited November 19, 2018 by CanterbrigianBangkoker

[billd766]

2 hours ago, sandyf said:

Why one or the other? NATO was formed before the EU so what would be the problem with the EU member states restructuring as one member of NATO. Certainly simplify the overall structure and after all the HQ is in Brussels.

No doubt the anti EU brigade will have 1001 reasons why not, even though it would have nothing to do with them.

Most probably the lack of man and women power plus a doubling up on material resources and the cost of starting and Army of xxx,xxx people and all the infrastructure that goes with it.

 

NATO HQ is in Brussels and to run 2 organisations with much the same targets and ideas will be expensive, There are only 5 countries contributing 2% of GDP into NATO now and to start a new EU military from scratch means that the 27 EU countries will have to stump up even more of their GDP.

 

Just assuming the plan gets off the ground, what will the new Army do all day that isn't already being done by NATO.

 

Putin must be laughing his socks off.

[mommysboy]

16 hours ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

Yeah well you can wave goodbye to the pound if he gets in. Blackpool for me if he does from now on - which ain't that bad and where I nearly hail from.

'Yeah well you can wave goodbye to the pound if he gets in.'

 

It left some time ago!

[Guest]

I was listening to this debate, where it seems, that the brexiteer was thinking that the already negotiated deal can somehow be opened for a new round. 

 

I think EU has quite clearly said that this is the deal. There might be some very minor changes to be done, but nothing major. 

 

If brexiteers are really thinking like him, then it's likely that no-deal will be the final answer. 

At this point, I'm not too sure how willing EU member countries are anymore to allow UK to withdraw A50, which could be the possibility via People's vote. It's time to move on.

 

 

[JAG]

18 hours ago, melvinmelvin said:

that is a rather strange way of calculating results of a vote

 

one computes on the basis of those who  voted

One of the features of this debate is what might be called "electoral gymnastics" - assorted convoluted manoeuvres designed to convince that the losing side (the one which actually and quite simply received less votes nationwide) really won...

[Jack100]

22 hours ago, My Thai Life said:

Yes it would be extremely naive. The Germans, Dutch and Italians tend not to export to France via Calais.

My Thai  Calais ? .  Pit props ?

I was thinking Orly and all those high value super urgent parts needed ever so quickly . Anyway It's a good chance to find out if these JIT systems will still work .

[nontabury]

3 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

As pointed out in the article,  this is not the case - unless you consider that the uk should contribute towards those previously unfunded projects.

 

And let's not even get into the uk paying towards the future pension of eu MPs and bureacracy!

Even the pro E.U. House of Lords committee declared that their is no legal obligation for the U.K to pay 39Billion of British tax payers money to the E.U.

[beautifulthailand99]

58 minutes ago, billd766 said:

Most probably the lack of man and women power plus a doubling up on material resources and the cost of starting and Army of xxx,xxx people and all the infrastructure that goes with it.

 

NATO HQ is in Brussels and to run 2 organisations with much the same targets and ideas will be expensive, There are only 5 countries contributing 2% of GDP into NATO now and to start a new EU military from scratch means that the 27 EU countries will have to stump up even more of their GDP.

 

Just assuming the plan gets off the ground, what will the new Army do all day that isn't already being done by NATO.

 

Putin must be laughing his socks off.

Brexit and Trump he's got his money back on a few hundred Russian geek programmers at sowing western chaos. 

[beautifulthailand99]

Anyway I think we all agree NO deal is disaster, the Deal is worse than what we already have ergo we remain. Job done let's get back to normal discourse such as where to get HP sauce in Pattaya and the like and how much does a Kwai cost (around 13.5k baht I think). See that wasn't difficult should have listened to Grouse all along. He deserves a 50 year old Macallan single malt for his sterling efforts to keep sterling ......errmmmm sterling and sound as a pound. 

[beautifulthailand99]

51 minutes ago, JAG said:

One of the features of this debate is what might be called "electoral gymnastics" - assorted convoluted manoeuvres designed to convince that the losing side (the one which actually and quite simply received less votes nationwide) really won...

Don't worry we've got Ollie on the case already - he's had two years to finesse the Whitehall wordsmithing it will truly be a work of art. 

Edited November 19, 2018 by beautifulthailand99