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

[Chomper Higgot]

2 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

And quite right too, as that is democracy in action.

 

But the democratic referendum resulted in a majority 'leave' result.

 

Consequently, I have zero 'time' for those advocating (not to mention spending vast sums of money - obviously only those that have the money to do so....) trying to overturn that democratic vote.

 

If/when brexit actually happens, then yes - fair enough, start a party to campaign to rejoin.  It took the rise of UKIP to force a referendum to leave, and I'd have no problem at all with remainers pursuing the same path.  Again, it would be democracy in action.

Democracy did not come to a shuddering halt on the morning of the referendum result.

[BwindiBoy]

2 hours ago, sandyf said:

To the average brexiteer, standards mean very little, just more EU bureaucracy. 

 

CE marking is followed by several non-EU European countries to demonstrate that certain products are safe to be placed in local markets. The UK has benefited from mutual recognition agreements between the EU and ‘third countries’, such as Japan, Australia, New Zealand, USA and Israel. The EU has led the world in many ways on product safety and quality and CE marking has driven up standards outside of the EU. At a time when global supply chains and international markets are becoming essential, the UK will be at a disadvantage if it was to move away from such EU legislation that is now a leading global standard.

https://www.theiabm.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/TechUK-Position-Paper-CE-marking-good-for-consumers-and-business.pdf

After the disrespectful, blatant lies of your first sentence, I didn't read any more.

[Sir Dude]

25 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Democracy did not come to a shuddering halt on the morning of the referendum result.

No it didn't, but we can't have the neverendum situation where we have them every few months or years...not tenable. The SNP doesn't get this either. How are you going to get business to invest in the future somewhere if some bunch of disgruntled, intolerant and entitled sections think they can just call these things willy-nilly or on-the-fly when they want? Doesn't fly Chompy..sorry, but the remoaners (like the SNP) had their chance and it didn't work out, at least deal with it for a while. Do you think for one minute if it had gone the other way, in either case, there would be the slightest accommodation for a second vote....you're having a laugh?

Edited August 23, 2018 by Sir Dude
Typos

[overherebc]

The basic problem was that no-one actually knew what they were voting on/about.

Now that people realise what it's going to mean they are starting the 'that's not what we voted for.'

The vast majority voted based on Immigration figures, they had no idea about the single market, the Irish border/customs problems etc etc because no-one told them.

Emotional votes on a 1950's mental attitude, 'we won the two wars so no European

( German controlled system ) can tell us what to do.'

 

[Grouse]

4 hours ago, CanterbrigianBangkoker said:

The 34b figure is what is being touted as our payment to the EU on (and after) divorcing from them next year. Not related to historic contributions in 2016. The point is, isn't it unreasonable for the EU to expect us to pay a sum as huge as 34b euros (or more) once we have left (fingers x'd) next March? Payment into schemes like CAP, Foreign Aid funds and The 'cohesion' fund ?, which make up a large percentage of the overall payments, why would we be required to continue paying those - it shouldn't even be considered by any UK government, even one as obviously weak and split as the current one. Schemes like the Erasmus exchange etc. are a different story, but the 'big ticket' item payments we should unequivocally eschew. It's scandalous. And to think we had staunch remainers echoing the sentiments of Barnier et al, that leaving would be 'a snip' only to then be served with a bill (yet to be finalised) that may exceed 30+ billion euros. If you didn't laugh you'd cry.

We were clearly talking at cross purposes. IMO 0.32% of GDP is not unreasonable.

 

As for leaving fees, that depends on what was signed up for. I guess if we gave 5 years notice it would tend toward zero

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, Sir Dude said:

No it didn't, but we can't have the neverendum situation where we have them every few months or years...not tenable. The SNP doesn't get this either. How are you going to get business to invest in the future somewhere if some bunch of disgruntled, intolerant and entitled sections think they can just call these things willy-nilly or on-the-fly when they want? Doesn't fly Chompy..sorry, but the remoaners (like the SNP) had their chance and it didn't work out, at least deal with it for a while. Do you think for one minute if it had gone the other way, in either case, there would be the slightest accommodation for a second vote....you're having a laugh?

Do you see now why referendums on major issues (constitutional change) are normally used to ratify decisions already taken and even then require a super majority (60/40; 74/25 etc)

 

It is an act of dereliction of responsibility if not insanity to ask the general population to take a decision on an issue both as complex and as serious as this. The Cons should be banished for allowing this to happen ?

Edited August 23, 2018 by Grouse

[billd766]

3 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

Except parliament consists of MPs, that are only voted in by their constituents....

 

How many MPs do you think genuinely stand for idealistic beliefs (as opposed to self-serving....) - and therefore likely to put anything ahead of their own interests?

 

It needs to be remembered that the vast majority of constituencies voted to leave, even though their MPs supported remain....

 

Hence the ratification in parliament of article 50....

 

My constituency voted to leave even though the MP is a remainer.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Lords

 

The House of Lords on the other hand is a non elected body of 793 members only 92 of whom are heredity peers and only 1 of those 92 is a woman. 26 are Lords Spiritual and are Bishops. Only one of them is a woman.

 

Attendance allowance[edit]

Members of the House of Lords can, since 2010, opt to receive a £300 per day attendance allowance, plus limited travel expenses. Peers can elect to receive a reduced attendance allowance of £150 per day instead. Prior to 2010 peers from outside London could claim an overnight allowance of £174. It is also tax free.

 

Nice work if you can get it.

 

The majority of members are  given life peerages at the elections party dissolution and as such ar ex MPs..

 

 

[Grouse]

3 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

Except parliament consists of MPs, that are only voted in by their constituents....

 

How many MPs do you think genuinely stand for idealistic beliefs (as opposed to self-serving....) - and therefore likely to put anything ahead of their own interests?

 

It needs to be remembered that the vast majority of constituencies voted to leave, even though their MPs supported remain....

 

Hence the ratification in parliament of article 50....

And yet again, this is why we have representative democracy. Do you think the majority are always correct? Sometimes correct? Sometimes incorrect? No, I don't want a people's vote, I want parliament to do the RIGHT THING and can Brexit. Nobody but Komodo Cons and the synaptically challenged think it a good idea 

[Grouse]

8 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

My constituency voted to leave even though the MP is a remainer.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Lords

 

The House of Lords on the other hand is a non elected body of 793 members only 92 of whom are heredity peers and only 1 of those 92 is a woman. 26 are Lords Spiritual and are Bishops. Only one of them is a woman.

 

Attendance allowance[edit]

Members of the House of Lords can, since 2010, opt to receive a £300 per day attendance allowance, plus limited travel expenses. Peers can elect to receive a reduced attendance allowance of £150 per day instead. Prior to 2010 peers from outside London could claim an overnight allowance of £174. It is also tax free.

 

Nice work if you can get it.

 

The majority of members are  given life peerages at the elections party dissolution and as such ar ex MPs..

 

 

Sadly you illustrate a typical Brexiter trait: jealousy.

 

My charge out rate 20 years ago was 1,000 USD per day.

 

The UK main problems are inequality and too high population density.

 

I do not think MPs or Lords are over paid. Many are underpaid however. I thinks stars of the screen and stadium are massively over rewarded. Our representatives should be paid sufficiently highly and punished sufficiently severely so as to discourage corruption 

[RuamRudy]

1 hour ago, Sir Dude said:

No it didn't, but we can't have the neverendum situation where we have them every few months or years...not tenable. The SNP doesn't get this either. How are you going to get business to invest in the future somewhere if some bunch of disgruntled, intolerant and entitled sections think they can just call these things willy-nilly or on-the-fly when they want? Doesn't fly Chompy..sorry, but the remoaners (like the SNP) had their chance and it didn't work out, at least deal with it for a while. Do you think for one minute if it had gone the other way, in either case, there would be the slightest accommodation for a second vote....you're having a laugh?

A couple of issues I have with the above are, firstly, you say that referenda cannot be called "every few months or years", and then you continue to remain wooly when you say that remainer and the SNP should 'wait a while'. So my question is - what is a while, and why should your definition of a while take precedence over mine?

 

Secondly, what if it becomes apparent that the referendum under dispute was not executed fairly? What if there was proven illegality and malfeasance by one or both parties? Should we stick with a potentially ruinous result simply because it is too difficult to rerun it? 

 

As it is, FDI in Scotland is outperforming the rest of the UK so your suggestion that opposition to the status quo deters businesses from investing is quite simply wrong.

Edited August 23, 2018 by RuamRudy

[Sir Dude]

Lol...knew that post would suck you in as you are the SNP's fully signed up member on TV. As for you spouting the bile about the the Scottish economy is somehow a "Tiger" is such BS...read the news about the SNP's fake figures on everything just recently. You really need to absorb that the only reason the SNP even exists is to break with the UK, at any cost, and they don't care for the average Scot or economic sense. It's funny they want to break with the UK but then submit to the EU's fascism and control on everything. You have all watched 'Braveheart' too many times...ridiculous. 

Edited August 23, 2018 by Sir Dude
Typos

[RuamRudy]

1 minute ago, Sir Dude said:

Lol...knew that post would suck you in as you are the SNP's fully signed up member on TV. As for you spouting the bile about the the Scottish economy is some how a "Tiger" such BS...read the news about the SNP's fake figures on everything. You really need to absorb that the only reason the SNP exists is to break with the UK, at any cost, and they don't care for the average Scot or economic sense. It's funny they want to break with the UK but then submit to the EU's fascism and control on everything. You have all watched 'Braveheart' too many times...ridiculous. 

I am confident in stating that, of the two of us, I am not the one spouting bile here. As it is, you have posited nothing of fact, only hyperbolic, tired tropes, except, of course,  your remarkable observation that the primary goal of the SNP is to exit the UK. At least you can claim to be correct on one point. 

 

But way off topic and complete deflection from my points:

 

1) How long is 'a while'?

2) What if the integrity of a referendum is found to have been infringed?

3) Why is Scottish FDI outperforming the rest of the UK if political uncertainty is bad for business?

[Sir Dude]

 

Guess we are done here then....and to comment further would invoke the wrath of moderators.

Edited August 23, 2018 by Sir Dude

[tomacht8]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

We were clearly talking at cross purposes. IMO 0.32% of GDP is not unreasonable.

 

As for leaving fees, that depends on what was signed up for. I guess if we gave 5 years notice it would tend toward zero

Generally correct.
The current EU budget planning runs over 7 years 2014-2020.
The chosen termination date of the uk with paragraph 50 was decidedly stupid. Almost the entire uk parliament has slept here and acted completely unaware.

Edited August 23, 2018 by tomacht8

[tomacht8]

1 hour ago, billd766 said:

 

My constituency voted to leave even though the MP is a remainer.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Lords

 

The House of Lords on the other hand is a non elected body of 793 members only 92 of whom are heredity peers and only 1 of those 92 is a woman. 26 are Lords Spiritual and are Bishops. Only one of them is a woman.

 

Attendance allowance[edit]

Members of the House of Lords can, since 2010, opt to receive a £300 per day attendance allowance, plus limited travel expenses. Peers can elect to receive a reduced attendance allowance of £150 per day instead. Prior to 2010 peers from outside London could claim an overnight allowance of £174. It is also tax free.

 

Nice work if you can get it.

 

The majority of members are  given life peerages at the elections party dissolution and as such ar ex MPs..

 

 

console yourself.
All politicians and deputies get a much higher salary plus pension package compared to the income of a normal worker.
This is (theoretically) important to ensure independence.
However, comparing the salary of politicians with those of top executives, athletes, tv showmasters, musicians, then the politicans are looking poor. Both the eu politicians and the uk politicians.

 

The UK is one of the EU countries with the highest per capita income, but distribution across the population is poor.
Few have a lot and many have very little. But that is not the fault of the EU, how fair or unfair that income is distributed within the UK. I can say cynically, in that case, the uk has its independence since centuries.

[melvinmelvin]

On 8/22/2018 at 12:55 PM, Grouse said:

Actually, I find EU influence a comfort and a tangible benefit in many ways. I am well travelled and I can tell you that, sadly, the U.K. Is far from being top of the class in many areas. We retain excellence in certain fields such as academe generally and many art forms. I will retire to Denmark

 

Denmark is a very good choice, right now Giselle is on at the opera in Copenhagen.

 

[melvinmelvin]

2 hours ago, Grouse said:

We were clearly talking at cross purposes. IMO 0.32% of GDP is not unreasonable.

 

As for leaving fees, that depends on what was signed up for. I guess if we gave 5 years notice it would tend toward zero

 

no, 0.32 is a give away

problem is that too many claim that there are no benefits from the membership,

(weirdos are everywhere and in high numbers)

 

 

[Grouse]

13 minutes ago, tomacht8 said:

console yourself.
All politicians and deputies get a much higher salary plus pension package compared to the income of a normal worker.
This is (theoretically) important to ensure independence.
However, comparing the salary of politicians with those of top executives, athletes, tv showmasters, musicians, then the politicans are looking poor. Both the eu politicians and the uk politicians.

 

The UK is one of the EU countries with the highest per capita income, but distribution across the population is poor.
Few have a lot and many have very little. But that is not the fault of the EU, how fair or unfair that income is distributed within the UK. I can say cynically, in that case, the uk has its independence since centuries.

You are absolutely correct 8

 

An Amsterdam publican once told me over several rounds of Geneva; the trouble with you British is you have too many people with too much money, too many with nothing and a tiny middle class. It will end in tears!

 

I've been banging on about Gini coefficients for years. THIS is the root cause of all our troubles. Brexit will make it worse. We who kind of do OK will be wanting guns soon....

[Grouse]

31 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

Denmark is a very good choice, right now Giselle is on at the opera in Copenhagen.

 

Delightful!

 

At the risk of being branded an elitist by Corbyn or being banished by the Mods for being off topic, here is one of my favourite pieces of ballet

 

 

The Nutcracker pas de deux. Such beauty and such melancholy. Enjoy!

Edited August 23, 2018 by Grouse

[vogie]

30 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Delightful!

 

At the risk of being branded an elitist by Corbyn or being banished by the Mods for being off topic, here is one of my favourite pieces of ballet

 

 

The Nutcracker pas de deux. Such beauty and such melancholy. Enjoy!

Is that Juncker and Merkel from the Opera The Butter Mountain, dancing the Sugar Plum Dairy.

[Grouse]

7 hours ago, aright said:

Their role is to do what is best for their constituents, not what the constituents want. 

 

So if 80% of his constituents want plan A and he prefers and votes for plan B the majority(80%) haven't been represented have they. Is that what you call representative government?

Why as a constituent would anyone think the MP 's opinion is more valuable than their own?  

That's just being silly

 

One elects an MP to act in ones best interest

 

If you want to change the system, be my guest

 

An MP has duty to act in the BEST INTEREST of his constituents and the country.

 

The end

[Grouse]

3 minutes ago, vogie said:

Is that Juncker and Merkel from the Opera The Butter Mountain, dancing the Sugar Plum Dairy.

I think you need a new set of speculators!

[aright]

1 minute ago, Grouse said:

That's just being silly

 

One elects an MP to act in ones best interest

 

If you want to change the system, be my guest

 

An MP has duty to act in the BEST INTEREST of his constituents and the country.

 

The end

Most probably works in your case because you are very confused about your best interests are and need someone else and the Guardian to tell you what are the best decisions for you. You would have been useful in Germany in 1939. 

While you are on your Scandinavian kick picked this up in Edinburgh.

 

Olaf Swenson, out in his pasture in northern Minnesota, took a lightning-quick kick from a cow...right in his crotch; writhing in agony, he fell to the ground. 

 

As soon as he could manage, he took himself to the doctor. He said:

 

"How bad is it Doc? I'm going on my honeymoon next veek and my fiance, Lena, is still a virgin -- in every vay.

 

The doctor told him, "Olaf, I'll have to put your willy in a splint to let it heal, and keep it straight.  It should be okay next week, but leave it on dere as long as you can.

He took four tongue depressors and formed a neat little 4 sided splint, and taped it all together...

Quite an impressive work of art.

 

Olaf mentioned none of this to Lena, married her, and they went on their honeymoon to Duluth.

That night in the Motel 6, Lena ripped open her blouse to reveal her beautiful, untouched breasts.

 

She said: "Olaf...you're the first vun! No vun has EVER seen deez."

 

Olaf immediately dropped his pants and replied:

 

"Look at dis Lena ... Still in DA CRATE!"

 

[bannork]

I expect the majority of Brit migrants will try to cross The Channel and North Sea in the summer months.

[kwilco]

Tsk, Tsk, more "scaremongering" - from the government this time...

 

 

 

[kwilco]

12 minutes ago, aright said:

Most probably works in your case because you are very confused about your best interests are and need someone else and the Guardian to tell you what are the best decisions for you. You would have been useful in Germany in 1939. 

It seems that reductio ad hitlerum is the order of the day for Brexiteers who seem to love to show off their profound ignorance of history.

[mommysboy]

An orderly no deal Brexit done in a 2/3 year time frame would suit me (and I am a reluctant remainer.)

 

I don't believe that can't be done- I don't believe that would result in much disruption.

 

There isn't a free trade deal available, because the EU has its red line conditions.

 

If Parliament votes against any deal then that is their right- indeed people would complain if they did not look after the nation's interests- and in that case we could conclude Brexit is just not do-able in a satisfactory manner, and remains that way until someone comes up with an acceptable alternative.

 

[billd766]

1 hour ago, tomacht8 said:

console yourself.
All politicians and deputies get a much higher salary plus pension package compared to the income of a normal worker.
This is (theoretically) important to ensure independence.
However, comparing the salary of politicians with those of top executives, athletes, tv showmasters, musicians, then the politicans are looking poor. Both the eu politicians and the uk politicians.

 

The UK is one of the EU countries with the highest per capita income, but distribution across the population is poor.
Few have a lot and many have very little. But that is not the fault of the EU, how fair or unfair that income is distributed within the UK. I can say cynically, in that case, the uk has its independence since centuries.

 

Perhaps we are paying the politicians what we think they are worth.

 

OTOH the politicians vote for their own pay rises, usually much higher than the workers and get far better index linked pensions too.

 

Time to bring out the tumbrils and the executions axe perhaps?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1qd3bwv3N4

 

[PAWNEESE]

The British people wanted out on the very first time we wre properly consulted about giving away our sovereignty and self rule. The 1975 referendum was the biggest con trick you could imagine.  No one other than politicians were asking to join. It was imposed. The referendum was about joining a common market. No import tariffs etc. Indeed it was called simply the "Common Market". A clue in the name. There was no mention of open borders, common currency, a European parliament, laws being imposed. Its not hard to goggle the leaflet every address was sent at the time. It said we were joining a market .. not the United States of Europe. Opposition had no money to mailshot similarly. The government refused to pay but could afford the pro pamphlet ! Opposition were warning the true intent was a US of Europe but were dismissed as scare mongerers.  

 

Unbelievably I recently happened upon a site of pro marketeers re the 75 election ... which said its rubbish that the public were not informed it was going to lead to a huge political join up and open Europe because opposition were warning that was what was intended and we were being conned. (The government and pro Europeans denied it) So because we were fooled and conned .. and a few wise people warned us .. we apparently thus DID know and so cant complain. We were conned they admit so cant complain now. Grrrrrrr. Its not me making it up. Its not hard to research the pamphlet and 1975 con trick. 

[tomacht8]

51 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

Perhaps we are paying the politicians what we think they are worth.

 

OTOH the politicians vote for their own pay rises, usually much higher than the workers and get far better index linked pensions too.

 

Time to bring out the tumbrils and the executions axe perhaps?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1qd3bwv3N4

 

No axe.

I'm sorry for the politicians.

Total popularity and no privacy anymore. Constantly possible assassination target, constant media scolding and they are actually always to blame for everything.

And that for lousy 150K-250K a year.

But they choose their own job.
Nothing for me.
I could not visit a gogo bar without being recognized.

Terrible imagination.

Give them a small salary increase and let them do the shit job.

Edited August 23, 2018 by tomacht8