Farage says Brexit will be delayed again when PM Johnson's deal falls

[JonnyF]

If the Lib Dems win the General Election there is no way they should be given power.

 

Everyone should pontificate for 3 years, claim the Lib Dem voters were stupid or didn't know what they voted for, then claim a lot of the voters have since died so the vote is no longer valid. Then simply let Parliament argue amongst themselves about the best way forward (after all, Parliament is sovereign) and then point out the vote is now 3 years old so we need to have another election before the Lib Dems even get into government. After all, people are allowed to change their minds, right. Democracy doesn't happen on one day, right.

 

That's the way the Liberal Democrats like it, so let them taste their own medicine. Swinson is a disgrace. Lied about tuition fees and now lied about respecting the referendum result. Yet expects the GE result to stand if she wins. What a muppet.

 

[JonnyF]

4 minutes ago, baboon said:

Goes to show just how thick a good number of the public are. 

There are elites on both sides of the argument. If you don't realize that, well...

[Blue Muton]

3 hours ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Swinson, you and others posters who are against democracy are the swamp that has infested a great country. It is that statement of ignoring democracy embarrasses all those who fought for democracy, in two world wars.

 

You ought be be ashamed of yourself. If you are not, then I am ashamed for you and any other Brit who believes that ignoring the democratic referendum result, is more important than democracy itself.

A result achieved by fraud deserves respect from nobody.

[welovesundaysatspace]

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

If the Lib Dems win the General Election there is no way they should be given power.

Brexiteers again fail to know their own country’s laws. 

 

[baboon]

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

There are elites on both sides of the argument. If you don't realize that, well...

I wasn't referring Brexit in particular. 

[JonnyF]

4 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

Brexiteers again fail to know their own country’s laws. 

 

Laws can be changed. The last month should have shown you that.

 

Parliament is sovereign. 

[wombat]

Leave first, deal later 

[welovesundaysatspace]

18 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Laws can be changed. The last month should have shown you that.

 

Parliament is sovereign. 

Sure, find a parliamentary majority to change the UK system that general elections are advisory only. 

[JonnyF]

Just now, welovesundaysatspace said:

Sure, find a parliamentary majority to change the UK system that general elections are advisory only. 

Why not? The public are too stupid to vote apparently. If 17.4 million people mean nothing, then democracy is pretty much dead in the UK anyway. Why bother keeping up the pretense?

 

[welovesundaysatspace]

Just now, JonnyF said:

Why not?

Yes, go for it. You have a proven track record with these things; I’m pretty sure it will be as successful as Brexit. 

 

[Rookiescot]

52 minutes ago, CaptainNemo said:

Remainers don't want a good deal, that's the problem. This defines their divisiveness.

For every single referendum we've had, the losing side has accepted the result and moved on, and that is key to repairing any rifts afterwards. Even in Scotland, an similarly contentious referendum, with a similar result, has not be dragged to the brink of civil war by the losing side. Until Remainers unite around a clear and sincere vision of what they want that also accepts the result, then this situation will drag on further. Leavers are very clear and consistent, we want out, and WTO is fine.

 

It's Remainers who are the problem, because they keep trying to apply post-referendum conditions that they have no reasonable right to. Remainers can be bitter and angry towards Leavers all they want, but it's Remainers' own leadership that failed them. Remainers failed to make the case for Remain, failed to inform the electorate of facts, and just expected voters to lap up overt apocalyptic propaganda, all voters ever heard from Remain was how bad Leaving was, not how good Remaining was. They did this with a fair wind behind their sails, and all the resources and support they would wish for from the establishment, they hijacked the Jo Cox murder, they pulled every dirty trick in the book, and they failed.

 

They haven't moved on from this failure, and haven't presented a deal that they want the government to present to the EU. It's a good chance that the reason the Remain faction in Parliament has run scared of a General Election twice, is a lot to do with them having nothing to present to the electorate in terms of a positive vision and nation-uniting deal, all they seem to have is more project fear, more Judicial intervention in the Executive and Legislature, and some of them, the Liberal Democrats, want to do away with the inconvenience of Liberal Democracy altogether and just bin the result and pretend the refendum didn't happen.

 

This is not an approach from the left that is going to win them a General Election, and so they sit there, sulking, opposed to the people, and refusing to get a mandate from them, whilst simultaneously calling those who want to go to the people, a dictator... it'd be laughable if it wasn't so serious. Remainers seem willing to bring down every structure of our democracy in the name of remaining in the EU. When it's reached depths like that, it's really hard to see anywhere good this can go.

 

Political parties need to present their case to the public in a General Election, and that is the only reasonable way to settle this. Trying to play games and undermine or wreck the constitution to slip in some General Election precondition is undemocratic and unacceptable. One of the worst Speakers in history has gone, and now it's time for the MPs to go to... It's that simple.

 

Brexiteers dont know what they want. Before the referendum they all said they wanted to leave with a deal.

Suddenly after they won it changed to we all voted to leave with no deal.

You guys cant even get a consensus in the Conservative party for what you want.

[stephenterry]

2 hours ago, Basil B said:

Do not forget he has lost 23 MP's in the lats few weeks,  30 Tories in total since the last election.

 

First meaningful vote defeated 202-432 3 Labour and 3 independent MP's voted for...

Second meaningful vote defeated 242-391 3 Labour and 4 independent MP's voted for...

Third meaningful vote defeated 286-344 5 Labour and 4 independent MP's voted for...

 

You really think Labour 50 MP's will vote with the Government on basically the same deal? 

 

 

Realistically, no. Labour would reject it because they sense a GE would be their reward. If they got rid of Corbyn, they'd walk through.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, baboon said:

Goes to show just how thick a good number of the public are. 

I don’t agree.

 

The lure of simple answers to complex questions and scapegoating foreigners for domestic problems has a long history of fooling large numbers of people regardless of their intelligence.

 

I much prefer Abe Lincoln’s comment on fooling people.

 

It’s now time to see how many people remain fooled.

[david555]

Jon Henley

@jonhenley

Mon 16 Sep 2019 19.47 BST

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/16/bettels-anger-highlights-a-bleak-truth-the-eu27-just-wants-britain-to-go

Bettel's anger highlights a bleak truth: the EU27 just wants Britain to go

 

Luxembourg PM’s exasperation is shared by EU officials and national leaders

it was, by any standards, an unusual spectacle: the leader of the European Union’s second-smallest country deciding to empty-chair the British prime minister at what was supposed to have been a joint press conference after their meeting.

 

Ostensibly, logistics were the problem: No 10 was concerned by the small but very noisy protest awaiting Boris Johnson outside; Luxembourg government officials said there was no room big enough to move the event inside.

 

Whatever the reason, the press conference that Xavier Bettel ended up giving alone – gesturing to the lectern where his counterpart should have stood – served as a striking symbol of EU leaders’ mounting frustration with the Brexit process.

 

 

Edited September 17, 2019 by david555

[englishoak]

1 hour ago, Rookiescot said:

Brexiteers dont know what they want. Before the referendum they all said they wanted to leave with a deal.

Suddenly after they won it changed to we all voted to leave with no deal.

You guys cant even get a consensus in the Conservative party for what you want.

 

Do NOT blame the people for any of this circus, they were asked, gave their answer and its been Parliament and ruling class that have messed this up (on purpose ) ever since. 

 

It was May initially being arrogant enough trying to get a larger majority in order fudge things, spectacularly failing then attempting to ram through her surrender deal x 3 and having it roundly rejected, rightly so too as it was the worst of deals possible. Remember "no deal is better than a bad deal" ? 206 times out of her mouth no less... that was a monumental lie ..Instead of negotiating a proper one let alone a good one she did NOTHING but capitulate so failed miserably.

 

It is the dishonesty, corruption and treasonous behaviour of the political class since being given that clear mandate and request, not the public that leaves us where we are... with no election allowed because  ? the political elite are too scared of the peoples voice now to have it... they would get a resounding slap in the face bigger than before and they know it ... the system is now broken all because the vote of the people is not being honoured. Its as simple as that.

 

The British system has had parliament for 800 years...but only had democracy of a sort for about 150 and properly for all for about 90, if the will of the people is thwarted now that democratic experiment has come to an end. Truly all that will be left is a police state and voting proven to be no longer worth the ballot paper. 

 

I dont think most people appreciate the bigger picture and risks of that, if the British democratic experiment fails then the consequences will be felt and impact democratic process globally... many countries would love to abolish democracy if it were possible without global condemnation, where Britain goes others will follow.. and no I dont think im exaggerating. 

 

Careful what you wish for.

 

 

Edited September 17, 2019 by englishoak

[Rookiescot]

12 minutes ago, englishoak said:

 

Do NOT blame the people for any of this circus, they were asked, gave their answer and its been Parliament and ruling class that have messed this up (on purpose ) ever since. 

 

It was May initially being arrogant enough trying to get a larger majority in order fudge things, spectacularly failing then attempting to ram through her surrender deal x 3 and having it roundly rejected, rightly so too as it was the worst of deals possible. Remember "no deal is better than a bad deal" ? 206 times out of her mouth no less... that was a monumental lie ..Instead of negotiating a proper one let alone a good one she did NOTHING but capitulate so failed miserably.

 

It is the dishonesty, corruption and treasonous behaviour of the political class since being given that clear mandate and request, not the public that leaves us where we are... with no election allowed because  ? the political elite are too scared of the peoples voice now to have it... they would get a resounding slap in the face bigger than before and they know it ... the system is now broken all because the vote of the people is not being honoured. Its as simple as that.

 

The British system has had parliament for 800 years...but only had democracy of a sort for about 150 and properly for all for about 90, if the will of the people is thwarted now that democratic experiment has come to an end. Truly all that will be left is a police state and voting proven to be no longer worth the ballot paper. 

 

I dont think most people appreciate the bigger picture and risks of that, if the British democratic experiment fails then the consequences will be felt and impact democratic process globally... many countries would love to abolish democracy if it were possible without global condemnation, where Britain goes others will follow.. and no I dont think im exaggerating. 

 

Careful what you wish for.

 

 

The problem is there is no clear mandate and request. Vote Leave campaigned on leaving with a deal. 

We dont know how many people want Brexit with a deal or Brexit with no deal.

May went to the EU and got the BEST deal she could. Johnson will do no better. So the people need to be asked "Do you want to accept this deal or not"?

[parryhandy]

11 hours ago, sirineou said:

It is a very sad situation,

Whichever way you go (remain, Brexit)  unless things go real well , which I don't think will happen,  because the dynamics that brought the ills that led to Brexit are not entirely EU caused but rather caused by the disruption the transition from the industrial era to the Information era has brought about.

 In other words the snake oil you were all sold will do litle to remedy your condition, and the political will does not yet exist to do the necessary changes to adapt to the new socioeconomic paradigm. 

So if you remain and things don't go well,  Half the country will blame the other half, and if you leave, and things don't go well, the other half will blame the first half.

That's what happens when you have a vote of such importance without requiring a supermajority to provide a clear mandate. 

IMO the only viable way forward is another vote and a hope that there will be a clear decision one way or another.  Otherwise you will be fighting this thing for generations, Not to mention the real danger of the disintegration of the UK.

No skin in the game Just my opinion.

 

This post absolutely nails it.

[Baerboxer]

17 hours ago, Enoon said:

"So we won't leave on the 31st of October and then we are really into uncharted waters - whether parliament imposes a second referendum or we have a general election, I really don't know," Farage, 55, said.

 

Or whether the would be "King Johnson the First" decides to defy Parliament, the Law, at least half of the people, and raise his standard in some provincial city and declare himself "Rightful and True Dictator" of........half of the people.

 

Not about Brexit anymore.

 

S***......Fan.......here it comes.

 

 

 

Bettel was right when he said Cameron and the Tory party had created this mess. And it was never ever about leaving the EU really. 

 

No it's becoming a constitutional disaster. A PM openly saying he'll defy the law; the government refusing to be accountable to parliament; an opposition leader demanding a GE then chickening out; the currency and business confidence severely weakened as the World teeters on the verge of recession etc etc.

 

Well played Cameron! Now your Bullingdon Boozer mate is playing an equally great innings!

[Baerboxer]

1 hour ago, david555 said:

Jon Henley

@jonhenley

Mon 16 Sep 2019 19.47 BST

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/16/bettels-anger-highlights-a-bleak-truth-the-eu27-just-wants-britain-to-go

Bettel's anger highlights a bleak truth: the EU27 just wants Britain to go

 

Luxembourg PM’s exasperation is shared by EU officials and national leaders

it was, by any standards, an unusual spectacle: the leader of the European Union’s second-smallest country deciding to empty-chair the British prime minister at what was supposed to have been a joint press conference after their meeting.

 

Ostensibly, logistics were the problem: No 10 was concerned by the small but very noisy protest awaiting Boris Johnson outside; Luxembourg government officials said there was no room big enough to move the event inside.

 

Whatever the reason, the press conference that Xavier Bettel ended up giving alone – gesturing to the lectern where his counterpart should have stood – served as a striking symbol of EU leaders’ mounting frustration with the Brexit process.

 

 

 

Bettel et al want stability. And that won't happen until Brexit is concluded one way or another.

 

But, to be fair, they also want to have the 39 billion GBP up-front and to still control many aspects for the UK in return for some vague promises.

 

There are 27 of them plus all those wonderful EU bureaucrats. And none can come up with a better solution or any ideas either?

 

This is showing the entire EU political and bureaucrats up for what they really are. None of them look good.

 

How are Luxembourg doing with any reforms since the Lux Leaks tax avoidance scandals btw?

[Baerboxer]

2 hours ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

Sure, find a parliamentary majority to change the UK system that general elections are advisory only. 

 

General elections are not advisory only. Referendums are, and currently, cannot be anything more.

 

The UK parliament should have taken the advice, explored all the options, remaining with the existing deal, leaving with a deal looking like .... various scenarios, and leaving with no-deal BEFORE invoking Article 50. All these options could have been explained to people and another advisory referendum held to determine the direction people want to go. 

 

But, politicians jumped in and started to try and exploit things for themselves and their agendas. May thought she'd got a winner by trying to use the Royal Prerogative so that she and her executive could simply agree a deal they liked. All been downhill, steeply, since then.

 

A real leader, with the best country's interests at heart would revoke Article 50. Call a GE and the country would move on. If a substantial (not a tiny %) still wanted to leave, things could be handled correctly. If not then it's end of.

 

 

 

 

Edited September 17, 2019 by Baerboxer

[David in the north]

11 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 If they not only had the majority of seats in the House, but also polled well over 50% of the votes nationwide, then I'd say go for it.

 

But even if she wins the most seats, will she have over 50% of the votes? The last time that happened was 1931!

 

So, I'm against her party's policy; let's settle this in the only true democratic way; a final, legally binding referendum.

The 2016 referendum was " a final, legally binding" one.
The elite are trying to ignore that. Swinson has stated if another referendum was "out" she would still fight to remain.
Common Market - maybe - Federal State of Europe - no way.

[Mike Teavee]

7 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

General elections are not advisory only. Referendums are, and currently, cannot be anything more.

 

The UK parliament should have taken the advice, explored all the options, remaining with the existing deal, leaving with a deal looking like .... various scenarios, and leaving with no-deal BEFORE invoking Article 50. All these options could have been explained to people and another advisory referendum held to determine the direction people want to go. 

 

But, politicians jumped in and started to try and exploit things for themselves and their agendas. May thought she'd got a winner by trying to use the Royal Prerogative so that she and her executive could simply agree a deal they liked. All been downhill, steeply, since then.

 

A real leader, with the best country's interests at heart would revoke Article 50. Call a GE and the country would move on. If a substantial (not a tiny %) still wanted to leave, things could be handled correctly. If not then it's end of.

 

 

 

 

In order to have a national referendum, Parliament needs to pass legislation & as part of this they can state that the result is legally binding as they did with the 2011 "Alternative Vote" referendum... 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/23/eu-referendum-legally-binding-brexit-lisbon-cameron-sovereign-parliament 

 

[david555]

7 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Bettel et al want stability. And that won't happen until Brexit is concluded one way or another.

 

But, to be fair, they also want to have the 39 billion GBP up-front and to still control many aspects for the UK in return for some vague promises.

 

There are 27 of them plus all those wonderful EU bureaucrats. And none can come up with a better solution or any ideas either?

 

This is showing the entire EU political and bureaucrats up for what they really are. None of them look good.

 

How are Luxembourg doing with any reforms since the Lux Leaks tax avoidance scandals btw?

The major fact is that the U.K. decided to leave, not the E.U. was kicking them out ….. the leaver supposed to see for them a better future , just same as in any divorce..., and same also the running tab bills need to be paid for which both signed in…,any divorce is a pain.

So the reasons to give in on a leaver are very small , as the existing 27 just keep running their union  ….only with a even ( important ) member less ….

 

Even when that one was only considering themselves as a part time member , one foot in and 1 foot out ….the E.U  shall never make that mistake again

 

About scandals we can play ping pong forever, country to country ...party to party …! What about the Russian money laundering in "the city"... from the oligarchs ?...And same time having the Russians killing renegades agents on British soil  contaminating a big part of a village  ?…. double standards or not ….money talks ...then principals are covered ! 

[Bluespunk]

20 hours ago, webfact said:

Farage said Britain was in the grip of its biggest row since the English Civil War in the 17th century

Nonsense.

[welovesundaysatspace]

30 minutes ago, David in the north said:

The 2016 referendum was " a final, legally binding" one.

It’s sad that you guys don’t even know your own laws. 

 

 

[david555]

7 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Nonsense.

For once I think he is right ... it is comparable …., only lucky it is now happening 300 years later and people supposed to be more civilized , a 50/50 (almost ) contradiction  creates such 

Edited September 17, 2019 by david555

[metisdead]

Some troll posts and replies have been removed.

 

A post containing some trolling memes as well as offensive language has been removed as well as the replies. 

[Bluespunk]

3 minutes ago, david555 said:

For once I think he is right ... it is comparable …., only lucky it is now happening 300 years later and people supposed to be more civilized , a 50/50 (almost ) contradiction  creates such 

Personally I think the Chartist movement, the events prior to and after the Peterloo massacre regarding voter reform, the great strike wave from 1889 till the outbreak of WWI were times of greater civil strife.

Edited September 17, 2019 by Bluespunk

[Krataiboy]

4 hours ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

...says the person who thinks people shouldn’t exercise their right of free speech by booing a Prime Minister ???? 

 

It was an advisory referendum only. Nothing is being ignored.  

The referendum was not made legally binding (as it could have been) despite the then Prime Minsioter, David Cameron, promising to abide by the result, with the Tory manifesto making the same commitment. 

 

Was this an oversight - or a deliberate ploy by the Cameron government to leave a loophole which could be exploited if the referendum produced an unexpected result? No prizes for guessing the right answer.

 

Of course, one could argue that irrespective of the legally advisory-only nature of the referendum, the promises made to the electorate at the time were politically and miorally binding and should be honoured. 

 

But as the marathorn bid to betray the referendum result rolls on, to use the words "moral" and "Parliament" in the same breath is to utter an oxymoron.

[billd766]

13 hours ago, whitemouse said:

For once Farage is right. BREXIT will never happen, but it will be a torturous road until the second referendum and its aftermath.  

What second referendum would that be?

 

The first one has not been completed yet.