UK's worst-case no-deal Brexit plan warns of food shortages, public disorder

[billd766]

1 hour ago, vogie said:

From the man that quotes Hitler and uses right wing slogans, you really couldn't make this up.????????????????

I think he really did make it up. ????

[welovesundaysatspace]

6 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Doesnt really matter either way , Remainers are just looking for a reason to invalidate the vote .

  They lost the vote and are now looking for a technicality to invalidate the vote

The law doesn’t care what you think about Remainers. It says that the referendum isn’t binding. 

[sanemax]

12 hours ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

The law doesn’t care what you think about Remainers. It says that the referendum isn’t binding. 

OK, it may not have been legally binding .

Doesnt effect the situation though .

[Laughing Gravy]

14 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Doesnt really matter either way , Remainers are just looking for a reason to invalidate the vote .

  They lost the vote and are now looking for a technicality to invalidate the vote

Exactly. And here is a classic example of politicians claiming they are democratic but want to thwart democracy. Vile people who should not be allowed to be an MP..

 

"Jo Swinson will tell Liberal Democrats at their conference in Bournemouth today to go back to their constituencies and prepare to stop Brexit."

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/together-we-ll-stop-brexit-swinson-rallies-the-lib-dem-faithful-w6g8hfx3s

[Krataiboy]

 

1 hour ago, stephenterry said:

The 'bad' deal honoured the referendum vote. That's factual. It's tough tittie if leavers (and remainers) don't like it - neither did the DUP or rebel ERG tories who prevented the deal passing through parliament. That's also factual. 

 

I seriously believe you are deluded in thinking that a no-deal would bring about your above benefits because the consequences would bring about far more downsides in the coming years, than future estimated aspirations of economy outturns. Anticipated trade deals take years to implement. The Telegraph article posted in February is long out of date with the failure of exiting the EU in March.

 

As you said, be careful what you wish for. 

 

 

 

 

 

Get real, Stephen. Even the mostly-Remainer Parliament came to the conclusion (three times) that the May Deal did not deliver the Brexit which the people MPs represent actually voted for.

 

Why else do you think it was labeled a BRINO - Brexit in name only.

 

And as for the perceived economic benefits of leaving or staying in the EU, the truth is nobody has a crystal ball and the outcome - medium and long term at least - is impossible to predict, as a quick glance through some of the conflicting views of so-called "experts" shows clearly.

 

What I DO know is that the Brexit referendum result was not just about, or even mainly about, the economy. It had more to do with a general desire to regaining our sovereignty from the globalist United States of Europe and having our own democratically elected Parliament acountable to us for their policies and actions.

 

The "shock" Brexit result, of course, was also a much-needed kick in the pants for the London-centric political class whose ivory tower attitude to mass immigration has had a brutal impact on the security, social fabric and traditional British way of life the majority of us hold dear.

 

 

[wilcopops]

2 hours ago, vogie said:

But it is you that doesn't understand, posters that shout from the top of a high building that referendums are advisory, non binding and illegal are the same posters that are crying out for another referendum, even for you that must seem quite strange or even slightly duplicitous, at best hypocritical.

Sadly you don't seem to grasp the dituation.....because of going down that constitutionally questionable road the UK is in situation where a second referendum is one of the few options. In fact a post extension election would probably be better followed by a rejection of article 50.

Why do you think BJ wants a snap election?

 

[vogie]

11 minutes ago, wilcopops said:

Sadly you don't seem to grasp the dituation.....because of going down that constitutionally questionable road the UK is in situation where a second referendum is one of the few options. In fact a post extension election would probably be better followed by a rejection of article 50.

Why do you think BJ wants a snap election?

 

You keep saying "you don't seem to grasp the situation" is garble, I totally grasp what you said, you said:

"It was advisory and not binding and this is part of the problem. For anyone who still doesn't understand the legal situation regarding the referendum here is the parliament document explaining it to MPs...."

I am not arguing that it is binding, infact I agree that it is advisory, and parliament took that advice and agreed to honour that advice, and that is indesputable. 

what I am saying, and you don't seem to be listening is that many on here want another referendum, which you say is non binding, so you must agree that it would be a waste of time asking for something that just advisory and non binding, you have exposed a flaw in the remainers arguement, so thank you for that.

[DannyCarlton]

19 minutes ago, vogie said:

what I am saying, and you don't seem to be listening is that many on here want another referendum, which you say is non binding, so you must agree that it would be a waste of time asking for something that just advisory and non binding, you have exposed a flaw in the remainers arguement, so thank you for that.

Not at all. You have just exposed a flaw in the Brexiteers argument.

 

"so you must agree that it would be a waste of time asking for something that just advisory and non binding,"

 

So you now agree that the 2016 referendum was a waste of time.

[vogie]

1 minute ago, DannyCarlton said:

Not at all. You have just exposed a flaw in the Brexiteers argument.

 

"so you must agree that it would be a waste of time asking for something that just advisory and non binding,"

 

So you now agree that the 2016 referendum was a waste of time.

It is the remainers that keep going on about, we want another referendum, it was advisory, it wasn't fair, Nigel Farage said....... We are more informed now. You cannot have both ways, surely you must understand that.

I was quite happy with the 2016 referendum result, but then I am not a remainer nor am I anti-democratic.

[DannyCarlton]

2 minutes ago, vogie said:

I was quite happy with the 2016 referendum result, but then I am not a remainer nor am I anti-democratic.

You are very much anti democratic, by the British definition of democracy, if you want a straw poll to overrule the sovreignty Of British parliamentary democracy.

[stevenl]

59 minutes ago, vogie said:

You keep saying "you don't seem to grasp the situation" is garble, I totally grasp what you said, you said:

"It was advisory and not binding and this is part of the problem. For anyone who still doesn't understand the legal situation regarding the referendum here is the parliament document explaining it to MPs...."

I am not arguing that it is binding, infact I agree that it is advisory, and parliament took that advice and agreed to honour that advice, and that is indesputable. 

what I am saying, and you don't seem to be listening is that many on here want another referendum, which you say is non binding, so you must agree that it would be a waste of time asking for something that just advisory and non binding, you have exposed a flaw in the remainers arguement, so thank you for that.

"what I am saying, and you don't seem to be listening is that many on here want another referendum, which you say is non binding,"

No. What many on here are saying is there should be a new, binding referendum. The referendum 3 years ago was not.

[sanemax]

12 hours ago, stevenl said:

"what I am saying, and you don't seem to be listening is that many on here want another referendum, which you say is non binding,"

No. What many on here are saying is there should be a new, binding referendum.

Must be a non legally binding referendum though .

 

[sanemax]

12 hours ago, DannyCarlton said:

You are very much anti democratic, by the British definition of democracy, if you want a straw poll to overrule the sovreignty Of British parliamentary democracy.

Have i got this straight ?

Its undemocratic to listen to what 50 million people said and to implement what they voted for , but its democratic to ignore what 50 million people voted for and let 600 people over rule the 50 million and let the 600 do what they want .

  Let me think about that for a while

[vogie]

6 minutes ago, stevenl said:

"what I am saying, and you don't seem to be listening is that many on here want another referendum, which you say is non binding,"

No. What many on here are saying is there should be a new, binding referendum. The referendum 3 years ago was not.

Referendums are non binding so you cannot have a binding referendum without changing legislation, and if you change legislation there is nothing to prevent our duplicitious parliament to reverse it, so there would be no point in having something that isn't MP proof. We have had our referendum and I suspect that most of the country is happy with it, only a few bad losers seem to be despondent about the result.

It does not matter whether the referendum was binding or non binding, it was only an advisory referendum where parliament chose to act on that advice, this is irrefutable.

[stephenterry]

1 hour ago, Krataiboy said:

 

Get real, Stephen. Even the mostly-Remainer Parliament came to the conclusion (three times) that the May Deal did not deliver the Brexit which the people MPs represent actually voted for.

 

Why else do you think it was labeled a BRINO - Brexit in name only.

 

And as for the perceived economic benefits of leaving or staying in the EU, the truth is nobody has a crystal ball and the outcome - medium and long term at least - is impossible to predict, as a quick glance through some of the conflicting views of so-called "experts" shows clearly.

 

What I DO know is that the Brexit referendum result was not just about, or even mainly about, the economy. It had more to do with a general desire to regaining our sovereignty from the globalist United States of Europe and having our own democratically elected Parliament acountable to us for their policies and actions.

 

The "shock" Brexit result, of course, was also a much-needed kick in the pants for the London-centric political class whose ivory tower attitude to mass immigration has had a brutal impact on the security, social fabric and traditional British way of life the majority of us hold dear.

 

 

I think it's you that needs to get real. How many more times do I have to state that May honoured the referendum result? Ad infinitum in your case, I expect.

 

Maybe you don't recollect that it was to Leave the EU.  NOTHING ELSE.

 

As to the highlighted passage - what a load of garbage that can be dropped in the bin as being a  troll statement.

 

 

[DannyCarlton]

24 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Must be a non legally binding referendum though .

 

Not so, an amendment to the Bill calling for a confirmatory vote, can have a clause inserted in it that would make the result legally binding. Something that was not done with the 2016 referendum.

[Mike Teavee]

35 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Must be a non legally binding referendum though .

 

A referendum can be legally binding if legislation is put in place to make it so BEFORE it is held... 

 

From the Guardian article previously posted https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/23/eu-referendum-legally-binding-brexit-lisbon-cameron-sovereign-parliament 

 

Is the EU referendum legally binding?

The simple answer to the question as to whether the EU referendum is legally binding is “no”. In theory, in the event of a vote to leave the EU, David Cameron, who opposes Brexit, could decide to ignore the will of the people and put the question to MPs banking on a majority deciding to remain.

 

This is because parliament is sovereign and referendums are generally not binding in the UK.

 

An exception was the 2011 referendum on changing the electoral system to alternative vote, where the relevant legislation obligated the government to change the law to reflect a “yes” vote had that occurred. No such provision was contained within the EU referendum legislation.

[DannyCarlton]

24 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Have i got this straight ?

Its undemocratic to listen to what 50 million people said and to implement what they voted for , but its democratic to ignore what 50 million people voted for and let 600 people over rule the 50 million and let the 600 do what they want .

  Let me think about that for a while

Well it wasn't 50 million but we'll ignore that.

 

The short answer is "yes". We have a parliamentary democracy in the UK. The soveriengnty of parliament trumps straw poll.

[metisdead]

Some troll posts and the trolling replies have been removed. 

[Krataiboy]

2 hours ago, stephenterry said:

I think it's you that needs to get real. How many more times do I have to state that May honoured the referendum result? Ad infinitum in your case, I expect.

 

Maybe you don't recollect that it was to Leave the EU.  NOTHING ELSE.

 

As to the highlighted passage - what a load of garbage that can be dropped in the bin as being a  troll statement.

 

 

To describe Brexiteers' motivations as "garbage" smacks of the same elitist arrogance as demonstrated by venal Remainer MP's doing everything they can to thwart the referendum result.

 

I'm done wasting my breath on you.

[Laughing Gravy]

52 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

To describe Brexiteers' motivations as "garbage" smacks of the same elitist arrogance as demonstrated by venal Remainer MP's doing everything they can to thwart the referendum result.

 

I'm done wasting my breath on you.

Most people have had him on the ignore list for ages. I am glad that you have seen the light and saving your breath.

[transam]

6 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Most people have had him on the ignore list for ages. I am glad that you have seen the light and saving your breath.

I will be the only one left soon, and I'm only here for the beer.........Listening too ....

[Blue Muton]

19 hours ago, kingdong said:

Isn,t 9.3 million pounds of tax payers money used in project fear fraud,how much in benefit did the brexi t party receive in government funding for their campaign?

Clearly it's not fraud, if you had any idea of the meaning of the word you'd understand that fact.

[Forethat]

43 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Most people have had him on the ignore list for ages. I am glad that you have seen the light and saving your breath.

Who?

[wilcopops]

4 hours ago, sanemax said:

Have i got this straight ?

Its undemocratic to listen to what 50 million people said and to implement what they voted for , but its democratic to ignore what 50 million people voted for and let 600 people over rule the 50 million and let the 600 do what they want .

  Let me think about that for a while

Clear evidence of a Brexiteer not understanding democracy and then confusing it with mob rule.

[DannyCarlton]

35 minutes ago, transam said:

I will be the only one left soon, and I'm only here for the beer.........Listening too ....

If only. 555

[wilcopops]

19 hours ago, kingdong said:

Isn,t 9.3 million pounds of tax payers money used in project fear fraud,how much in benefit did the brexi t party receive in government funding for their campaign?

Brexit has cost the British economy £66 billion since the referendum,  -   Credit ratings agency Standard and Poor suggested that since the June 2016 vote, 3% has been shaved off GDP.

 

Read more: https://metro.co.uk/2019/04/04/britain-already-66000000000-poorer-brexit-9113538/?ito=cbshare 

Twitter: https://twitter.com/MetroUK | Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MetroUK/

[DannyCarlton]

3 minutes ago, Forethat said:

Who?

I don't think anyone's going to answer that. They've all got you on ignore.

[sanemax]

12 hours ago, wilcopops said:

Clear evidence of a Brexiteer not understanding democracy and then confusing it with mob rule.

Before you accuse others of not understanding ,understand your own words . Look up the word "mob rule"

[Mike Teavee]

51 minutes ago, transam said:

I will be the only one left soon, and I'm only here for the beer.........Listening too ....

I would put you on ignore but occasionally you come up with some (music) classics that I'd forgotten about that makes it worth it... 

 

Just joshing about the ignore, but serious about the old time music fella ????