Britain can end Brexit unilaterally, EU court advisor says

[vogie]

3 minutes ago, tebee said:

Yes, but my original post referred to "half+" which isn't the same thing.

 

if 634,751 people had changed their mind and voted the other way remain would have won.

And my original post refered to 1,300,000 leavers voted more than remain, to which you stated that brexiters maths is not their strong point, well maybe not but I can subtract one figure from another.

 

"If 643,751 people had changed their mind" 

Well "if" I had put 46 instead of 47 on my national lottery ticket I would be a millionaire.

[nauseus]

27 minutes ago, tebee said:

Yes, but my original post referred to "half+" which isn't the same thing.

 

if 634,751 people had changed their mind and voted the other way remain would have won.

Like Norway + then?

[Dumbastheycome]

Face  fact.  The "plan"  which  never was  has  become a  cluster  F...!

Take it back  to  the  electorate who by  now are  somewhat  more aware of the ramifications that they were  denied knowledge of  originally.

Demonstrate true Democracy......not the dictate of partisan definition.

[aright]

9 hours ago, Grouse said:

Please tell me the clear tangible benefit for this gamble.

I think rixalex makes a good point

Please tell me the tangible benefits if we gamble on staying in the EU?

Is it because the remain vote supercedes the largest democratic vote taken in British history?

Is it because the EU is a beacon of Democracy?

Is it because the EU is a leader in growing each member country's economy at a faster rate than those countries outside its boundaries?

Is it because it is run by politicians who are the epitome of rectitude and understanding?

Is it because of the EU's effectiveness in ending the growing gap between Northern and Southern Europe?

Is it because of the EU's ability to effectively offer defence capability for itself and it's neighbours? How did it respond to Serbia, Kosovo and Ukraine?

Is it because...……...I could go on but I am tired.

Seven question marks. I would hope you could give me a reply before the EU becomes a single state and the House of Lords and House of Commons have been replaced with a 60 person regional committee to rule a once proud nation. 

 

"A good political system is one where lots of people have lots of scrutiny over lots of power. The EU seeks the opposite. Their design is for the minimum number of people to meet in secret and decide the fate of the maximum number of people. They advance a pseudo-democracy in which voting only exists to confirm choices already made by a ruling elite. At every juncture they take the path of least representation. The EU is a war against democracy."

[melvinmelvin]

25 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Like Norway + then?

jeeeez guys, why can't you just stick to 48-52

 

[melvinmelvin]

4 minutes ago, aright said:

I think rixalex makes a good point

Please tell me the tangible benefits if we gamble on staying in the EU?

Is it because the remain vote supercedes the largest democratic vote taken in British history?

Is it because the EU is a beacon of Democracy?

Is it because the EU is a leader in growing each member country's economy at a faster rate than those countries outside its boundaries?

Is it because it is run by politicians who are the epitome of rectitude and understanding?

Is it because of the EU's effectiveness in ending the growing gap between Northern and Southern Europe?

Is it because of the EU's ability to effectively offer defence capability for itself and it's neighbours? How did it respond to Serbia, Kosovo and Ukraine?

Is it because...……...I could go on but I am tired.

Seven question marks. I would hope you could give me a reply before the EU becomes a single state and the House of Lords and House of Commons have been replaced with a 60 person regional committee to rule a once proud nation. 

 

"A good political system is one where lots of people have lots of scrutiny over lots of power. The EU seeks the opposite. Their design is for the minimum number of people to meet in secret and decide the fate of the maximum number of people. They advance a pseudo-democracy in which voting only exists to confirm choices already made by a ruling elite. At every juncture they take the path of least representation. The EU is a war against democracy."

 

cant offer you tangible benefits

can offer some views on why

 

project fear campaign has worked well

MPs are simply afraid of going it alone

they have no confidence in themselves

don't believe in the UK doing it alone 

 

quite simply, they want the protection that EU offers

[mommysboy]

Pointless to talk about the Brexit vote.

 

This could well spell the end of Brexit

:https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/vote-leave-referendum-overspending-high-court-brexit-legal-challenge-void-oxford-professor-a8668771.html

 

Then there is the NCA investigation in to Banks.

 

Given the vote was narrow, it's very difficult not to conclude that the outcome was influenced by cheating.

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

jeeeez guys, why can't you just stick to 48-52

 

Does this means that Norway is not willing to take our wild girl who is about to break free as a friend?

[tebee]

24 minutes ago, Jip99 said:

 

 

In a democracy there is is no requirement for “overwhelming”... the word “majority” is what matters.

 

Tebee, having you argue that maths is not a strong point for Brexiteers really does take the biscuit.

But this is why in referendums that will cause major constitutional    change you do need a supermajority - an Overwhelming one.

 

Doing something that will have great cost and affect the country for generations should not be done on a simple majority

 

Otherwise you put a great deal of time an effort into something that may not be the wishes of the majority by the time you come to execute it.

 

This is why the politicians in  parliament are wavering so much on their support for brexit now   - if they were sure it still was the will of the people and they would be acclaimed for giving those people what they want, you would have the brexit you desire now.  

 

But they are not sure - now delivering that brexit could see them wiped out at the polls afterwards if it negatively impacts people. 

 

Politicians main aim in life is to get re-elected - when they are sure of the will of the people they will implement that will, but if they are unsure and especially if there are negative results from doing that, you can't be surprised if they hesitate. 

[StreetCowboy]

3 minutes ago, tebee said:

But this is why in referendums that will cause major constitutional    change you do need a supermajority - an Overwhelming one.

 

Doing something that will have great cost and affect the country for generations should not be done on a simple majority

 

Otherwise you put a great deal of time an effort into something that may not be the wishes of the majority by the time you come to execute it.

 

This is why the politicians in  parliament are wavering so much on their support for brexit now   - if they were sure it still was the will of the people and they would be acclaimed for giving those people what they want, you would have the brexit you desire now.  

 

But they are not sure - now delivering that brexit could see them wiped out at the polls afterwards if it negatively impacts people. 

 

Politicians main aim in life is to get re-elected - when they are sure of the will of the people they will implement that will, but if they are unsure and especially if there are negative results from doing that, you can't be surprised if they hesitate. 

They might also be wavering because they believe that it will be a disaster, regardless of what their constituents think.  We don't elect politicians to be our puppets, we elect them to make decisions on our behalf.  To understand difficult decisions on our behalf, and make those decisions in our best interests, according to broad principles on which they are elected.  Good on our MPs for doing their job, and trying to execute "The Last Will of the People" that cannot be changed, to the least detriment of the country.

 

[tebee]

6 minutes ago, oilinki said:

Does this means that Norway is not willing to take our wild girl who is about to break free as a friend?

Na - they've seen some of her wild partying and are worried she might trash the place.

 

[SheungWan]

3 hours ago, vogie said:

It's all right for you, you are obviously from good stock, you could probably get a job as J C Junckers butler or a similar servile position, what about the rest of us, we'd be lucky to be thrown into the Bastille and fed bread and water with yearly visits from the Emperor Macron.

The Bastille was demolished 1789-90.

[StreetCowboy]

43 minutes ago, Dumbastheycome said:

Face  fact.  The "plan"  which  never was  has  become a  cluster  F...!

Take it back  to  the  electorate who by  now are  somewhat  more aware of the ramifications that they were  denied knowledge of  originally.

Demonstrate true Democracy......not the dictate of partisan definition.

That would be clearly wrong.  It would be like asking con-men to return money they'd obtained under false pretenses.  No-one would do that.  Would they?

[SheungWan]

1 hour ago, Jip99 said:

If my aunty had balls, she would have been my uncle.

They worked in the circus?

[melvinmelvin]

8 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

They worked in the circus?

who?

the balls, yes

 

[tebee]

This really is a terrible  deal. As far as trade goes, nothing substantive has been agreed in the last two years, this leaves the UK in a distinctly worse situation in the interim, ensuring that the UK continues to have to negotiate with a gun held to its head.

 

This is understandably unacceptable for both leavers and remainers.  TM has done a great disservice to this country by attempting to chart some kind of middle ground.  Because she has taken ownership of the deal, the Brexiters can somehow claim that this is not their deal and protest that the "will of the people" has been thwarted.  This is classic TM - play the middle ground.  Attrition is what got her to the top.  Unfortunately, once you get to the you need to lead.  Attempting to ram through a middle of the road agreement is not leadership.   It is foolhardy, not because no one likes it, but because it fails to address the fundamental contradictions that have prevented a true agreement.
 

[melvinmelvin]

5 minutes ago, tebee said:

This really is a terrible  deal. As far as trade goes, nothing substantive has been agreed in the last two years, this leaves the UK in a distinctly worse situation in the interim, ensuring that the UK continues to have to negotiate with a gun held to its head.

 

This is understandably unacceptable for both leavers and remainers.  TM has done a great disservice to this country by attempting to chart some kind of middle ground.  Because she has taken ownership of the deal, the Brexiters can somehow claim that this is not their deal and protest that the "will of the people" has been thwarted.  This is classic TM - play the middle ground.  Attrition is what got her to the top.  Unfortunately, once you get to the you need to lead.  Attempting to ram through a middle of the road agreement is not leadership.   It is foolhardy, not because no one likes it, but because it fails to address the fundamental contradictions that have prevented a true agreement.
 

 

jeez teebe, get real

 

this is all Tory crap doing

install an announced remainer as the champion of Brexit

she  did not have a stellar reputation as home sec

 

what the fuuuuuuuuuuk do you expect?

 

 

[tebee]

12 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

jeez teebe, get real

 

this is all Tory crap doing

install an announced remainer as the champion of Brexit

she  did not have a stellar reputation as home sec

 

what the fuuuuuuuuuuk do you expect?

 

 

Yep, suppose silly to expect anything better - her own self-declared red lines prevented us getting anything that would cause less damage to the economy and fear of more damage  prevented her getting something that would have pleased the brexiters more.  

 

 

[StreetCowboy]

5 minutes ago, tebee said:

Yep, suppose silly to expect anything better - her own self-declared red lines prevented us getting anything that would cause less damage to the economy and fear of more damage  prevented her getting something that would have pleased the brexiters more.  

 

 

It's not a problem, because the wishes of the British people are clear.  When she is defeated in parliament, someone will arise to represent the wishes of the British people, and they will get the unequivocal support of both people and parliament on that basis.  

 

It might be worth getting a representative thousand random members of the public to draw up a clear mandate for what they wanted from Brexit, to help guide May's successor.  That shouldn't be too difficult, should it? 

 

 

 

 

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, aright said:

I think rixalex makes a good point

Please tell me the tangible benefits if we gamble on staying in the EU?

Is it because the remain vote supercedes the largest democratic vote taken in British history?

Is it because the EU is a beacon of Democracy?

Is it because the EU is a leader in growing each member country's economy at a faster rate than those countries outside its boundaries?

Is it because it is run by politicians who are the epitome of rectitude and understanding?

Is it because of the EU's effectiveness in ending the growing gap between Northern and Southern Europe?

Is it because of the EU's ability to effectively offer defence capability for itself and it's neighbours? How did it respond to Serbia, Kosovo and Ukraine?

Is it because...……...I could go on but I am tired.

Seven question marks. I would hope you could give me a reply before the EU becomes a single state and the House of Lords and House of Commons have been replaced with a 60 person regional committee to rule a once proud nation. 

 

"A good political system is one where lots of people have lots of scrutiny over lots of power. The EU seeks the opposite. Their design is for the minimum number of people to meet in secret and decide the fate of the maximum number of people. They advance a pseudo-democracy in which voting only exists to confirm choices already made by a ruling elite. At every juncture they take the path of least representation. The EU is a war against democracy."

Been fine for the past 45 years!

 

We can fix what needs fixing except Brexiter cry babies are too soft to standup to the EU and have to run away 

[Grouse]

On 12/5/2018 at 7:41 PM, Grouse said:

Historical NOT contemporary data

A majority voted leave 2.5 years ago. I doubt the same is true today

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, Dumbastheycome said:

Face  fact.  The "plan"  which  never was  has  become a  cluster  F...!

Take it back  to  the  electorate who by  now are  somewhat  more aware of the ramifications that they were  denied knowledge of  originally.

Demonstrate true Democracy......not the dictate of partisan definition.

You said it 

[Jip99]

2 minutes ago, Grouse said:

A majority voted leave 2.5 years ago. I doubt the same is true today

 

 

You will never get to know.

[nauseus]

13 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Been fine for the past 45 years!

 

We can fix what needs fixing except Brexiter cry babies are too soft to standup to the EU and have to run away 

No. It's been regressively not so fine. The UK voting history failures and similar poor veto success rate show that we will not be able to fix the "fix" that is the EU. Forget it!

[StreetCowboy]

6 minutes ago, Jip99 said:

 

 

You will never get to know.

Until we have enacted the will of those that went before, we have no right to an opinion of our own.

Do you not understand democracy?

[Jip99]

1 minute ago, StreetCowboy said:

Until we have enacted the will of those that went before, we have no right to an opinion of our own.

Do you not understand democracy?

 

I most certainly do.

[StreetCowboy]

15 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Been fine for the past 45 years!

 

We can fix what needs fixing except Brexiter cry babies are too soft to standup to the EU and have to run away 

Once we're on the outside we can establish our own trading standards, our own trade agreements, which, with our industrial and commercial might, will be adopted by all our trading partners.  Having no say in the development of Eurpoean standards, or trading principles, will be a trivial irrelevance. Right?

 

[elliss]

On 12/5/2018 at 7:48 PM, Grouse said:

If May now decides upon Remain she would save her party ( save the country also, but that doesn't count)

So , what does count ? , in your intellectual opinion,  we are indeed blessed , with such an intellectual member on TV.

    Are you buy any chance , resident in Thailand , and  dependant  on gbp / thb  exchanges rates,,  which fall daily.

      Not many TV posters , live in Thailand ,and yet continually comment on this topic , WHY ?, boredom..in UK .

         I no longer live in UK , there fore i no longer use my  vote . Those living in UK must decide their destiny /fate.

          The   Brexit  vote , has  caused us expats , living in Thailand , much financial hardship , and worse is expected .

[StreetCowboy]

3 minutes ago, elliss said:

So , wheat does count ? ,    in your super intellectual opion,   we are indeed blessed , with such an intellectual  member on TV.

       Are you buy any chance , resident in Thailand , and  completelyy dependant  on gbp / thb  exchanges rates,,  which fall daily

        Sadly i fear not many TV posters ,  do not  live in Thailand ,and yet continually comment on this topic , WHY ?, boredom..in UK .

"Sadly I fear not many TV posters , do not live in Thailand ,and yet continually comment on this topic ."

 

Please could you re-word that sentence to make it clear?
Are you saying that people who do not live in Thailand should not post regarding Brexit? 

 

Perhaps it would be better if TV did not carry threads on overseas issues which are irrelevant to The Kingdom. 

Many people who live outside Thailand have an interest in things that go on in Thailand and elsewhere, but perhaps you think they should not be allowed to post on this forum?

You may want to review, and make your point more clearly.

 

SC

 

 

 

 

[bomber]

7 minutes ago, StreetCowboy said:

Once we're on the outside we can establish our own trading standards, our own trade agreements, which, with our industrial and commercial might, will be adopted by all our trading partners.  Having no say in the development of Eurpoean standards, or trading principles, will be a trivial irrelevance. Right?

 

what might? it finished years ago we only have rolls royce left <deleted>,new deals will take years in the meantime the nation goes into recession and theres a world one just starting and as usual it will hit the UK the hardest,not the time to be taking risks iam afraid,is the pound below 40 yet?