EU will delay Brexit until February if Johnson fails to ratify deal this week - The Sunday Times

[wreckingcountry]

If it can be said that a new Parliament will give a clearer view of the electorate's views, then the same can be said of a new referendum. Dozy Hard Brexiteers stuffed on that one.

Sent from my SM-N935F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

Mrs Wan is the “dozy loser “


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Denim]

41 minutes ago, oldhippy said:

Did you not say:

Unless the electorate surprise everybody again and get it wrong for the second time in which case it is not binding just an expression of the voters opinion.

 

I understand that as "remainers will never accept an unfavorable result of a second referendum and will again claim the referendum was not binding".

 

Sorry if you meant something else.

 

 

 

Apology accepted.

[jvs]

6 hours ago, Mike Teavee said:

IMHO Brexit should be a standalone "Vote" hence via Referendum 

Did i miss something?They had that referendum already and they should have worked with that.

IMO a second referendum can do more harm then good.

Nobody could have(or did see)what they were getting into,not even the peopel who planned this.

The only piece of advice i have is that if there is going to be another referendum(i find this very likely)make it a mandatory vote.They should have done that in the first place.

I just hope the next countries who want out learn from this mess and do it right from the start.

[Pattaya46]

11 minutes ago, jvs said:

// I just hope the next countries who want out learn from this mess and do it right from the start.

Next countries ?? 

I think that we may see the UK asking to enter in the EU again long before any other country has the stupid idea to want to quit it... 

[kingdong]

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The court that backed Miller and forced TM to obey the law, the court that forced Johnson to recall Parliament or the court that forced Johnson to write a letter he childishly didn’t sign?

 

 

The law is an ass---- Oscar Wilde

[kingdong]

3 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Just because you aren’t getting what you want doesn’t mean the Government is dysfunctional.

 

Far from it.

 

A majority voted to leave,not one person,is that the best you can do?

[fishtank]

51 minutes ago, jvs said:

I just hope the next countries who want out learn from this mess and do it right from the start.

Why would any country want to want out?

Not many xenophobic countries out there.

[DannyCarlton]

1 hour ago, jvs said:

IMO a second referendum can do more harm then good.

I'd love to hear a justification for that statement. Do tell.

[tebee]

2 hours ago, Jip99 said:

 

 

Nobody told me it it would be quick and easy - the EU are not capable of that.

 

A deal, at least, sets a foundation.

It will never be over 

 

[dunroaming]

12 hours ago, nausea said:

Don't care anymore, took the plunge and transferred money over, and have a steady pension income, so whichever way it goes I win/lose. I'm now looking at a 2 year window for them to sort this mess out. I must say, it's been an eye-opener to me, like, the way politics works.

It's been an eye opener for me too.  I thought for a long time that politicians were pretty low life, especially when they were supposed to be representing the people, but never at this level.  Leaver or remainer we are all in the same boat and the fallout from all this will affect every one of us.

 

Politics in Britain are broken and it may be that way for years to come.  We need to clear out all the dross and start again but who is there to get behind and trust.  I don't see any from the current shower. 

[dunroaming]

45 minutes ago, tebee said:

It will never be over 

 

2192?  People won't travel anywhere. We will all live in bubbles with artificial atmospheres.  The only thing left will be Coronation Street and Countdown!

[jvs]

1 hour ago, DannyCarlton said:

I'd love to hear a justification for that statement. Do tell.

Like i said before no one knew what would happen when they decided on a Brexit

vote,i think they hoped for a remain.Done deal,but it went different.

A second vote will only show the incompetence of the government and their lack

of foresight.

If a new vote shows to remain they will still have to deal with the Brexiteers

and the way they will feel betrayed.

If a new vote turns out to be Brexit again what kind of a deal will they have to make?

Either way it will do a great deal of damage in the way the people will trust their government.From both sides and it will be a very long time before politics is taken

serious again.

It is what it is,a great big mess!

 

 

[Monomial]

6 hours ago, DannyCarlton said:

But once resolved, becomes insignificat and we are left with a government who's policies we may or may not agree with. A GE is not and never has been a single issue election. Much more sensible to have a binding people's vote, deal vs. remain. Then have a GE on the real issues that parliament should be dealing with.

 

I disagree strongly with your statement. Brexit, and the consequences thereof, are going to be affecting the UK people and influencing politics for years. However, even if that were not the case, you still have not addressed the main point of my argument, which is that you can't simply extract a single issue and vote on it seperately merely because that issue is inconvenient to the major parties which make up the political status quo.

 

Each candidate and/or party needs to adopt a specific position on brexit, because it is going to be so divisive and so important over the coming years. And you, as a voter, need to choose your representative in part because of their position on this issue. This is actually the perfect chance for new parties to crop up that more closely align with specific voter values.  This is exactly how real change happens.

 

As a final thought, all issues could be considered "insignificant" once resolved by the logic above. After all. They're resolved. You can not treat the brexit issue as special simply because it makes conventional party politics messy. If no major party candidate matches your value on brexit and the economy, find a different candidate who does. Minor parties might actually become the majority if people do this.  This is how representative democracy, which is the UK's chosen form of democracy, is supposed to work.

 

 

[oldhippy]

3 minutes ago, Monomial said:

 

I disagree strongly with your statement. Brexit, and the consequences thereof, are going to be affecting the UK people and influencing politics for years. However, even if that were not the case, you still have not addressed the main point of my argument, which is that you can't simply extract a single issue and vote on it seperately merely because that issue is inconvenient to the major parties which make up the political status quo.

 

Each candidate and/or party needs to adopt a specific position on brexit, because it is going to be so divisive and so important over the coming years. And you, as a voter, need to choose your representative in part because of their position on this issue. This is actually the perfect chance for new parties to crop up that more closely align with specific voter values.  This is exactly how real change happens.

 

As a final thought, all issues could be considered "insignificant" once resolved by the logic above. After all. They're resolved. You can not treat the brexit issue as special simply because it makes conventional party politics messy. If no major party candidate matches your value on brexit and the economy, find a different candidate who does. Minor parties might actually become the majority if people do this.  This is how representative democracy, which is the UK's chose form of democracy, is supposed to work.

 

 

Have you not noticed that both brexiteers and remainers (to a lesser extent) are divided on this issue?

So you would need zillions of parties from europhiles to isolationists to stand in every constituency.

OR..... 1 or 2 statesmen that can find a compromise.

 

 

[tebee]

5 hours ago, Jip99 said:

 

 

Nobody told me it it would be quick and easy - the EU are not capable of that.

 

A deal, at least, sets a foundation.

Just remember, this is what you are letting yourself in for....

 

 

 

[DannyCarlton]

2 hours ago, jvs said:

If a new vote turns out to be Brexit again what kind of a deal will they have to make?

The deal would have been made before it goes on the ballot paper. presumably Johnson's deal.

[DannyCarlton]

2 hours ago, Monomial said:

However, even if that were not the case, you still have not addressed the main point of my argument, which is that you can't simply extract a single issue and vote on it seperately merely because that issue is inconvenient to the major parties which make up the political status quo.

Isn't that what happened with the 2016 referendum? makes far more sense than a single issue GE.

[tomacht8]

Wednesday or Thursday will be crucial.

It can be expected two additional applications. I think a second referendum will not win a majority, but the request to stay in the Customs Union could win a majority. 

Would be a first reasonable, logical step towards a Brexit in stages. Would also give everyone involved the time to settle all the many details more stress-free.

[SheungWan]

It’s divisive because those who lost never accepted the result ! Can only imagine the response from remainers if the leave campaign had reacted the way they had if lost ! Cowardly lying bunch of Europhiles ! And believe me if this were ever reversed there would be anarchy and subversive acts of which I will be a part


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

The result was not no-deal Brexit. Subvert that.

Sent from my SM-N935F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Jip99]

6 hours ago, tebee said:

Just remember, this is what you are letting yourself in for....

 

 

 

 

 

In the meantime........... life goes on.

[jastheace]

18 hours ago, evadgib said:

Copied and pasted direct from the surrender treaty written by none other than...

 

Thankfully there are only 10 days to go.

Any trade arrangements after that are unlikely to take longer than the three and a half years wasted to date despite some of the gloom-merchant predictions in this thread.

 

IMO full umbilical severance is the best possible outcome for UK no matter how painful the short term effect might be.

no other option now. honestly . seriously. 

[SheungWan]

no other option now. honestly . seriously. 

Simplistic hopes.

Sent from my SM-N935F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[kingdong]

1 hour ago, SheungWan said:

The result was not no-deal Brexit. Subvert that.

Sent from my SM-N935F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

The vote was stay or leave,simple as that sorry you got bullied at school.

[kingdong]

13 hours ago, oldhippy said:

I don't know enough about the labour party to have an opinion about them.

Now please answer my question: do you really believe Boris, Jacob and the Tories have the best interest of the working people in mind?

I will take YOUR word for it.

Do,'es your beloved eu and it's freedom of movement which has led to zero hour contracts,bogus self employment contracts,and the gig economy,how many more times must it be explained to you?

[kingdong]

14 hours ago, tebee said:

of course you realize with the deal it won't be over ? It will years and years of negotiating the stuff that's in the political declaration. You will be lucky if we are back to a stable state again in 10 years. 

No deal will be even worse, wouldn't expect that  to be sorted out for a generation or more, especially NI.

 

The people that told you Brexit would be quick and easy - they lied 

What?like project fear?

[kingdong]

12 hours ago, DannyCarlton said:

I'd love to hear a justification for that statement. Do tell.

The eu already think we're mugs that,d confirm it.

[kingdong]

14 hours ago, oldhippy said:

I like the "anarchy" part in your post - but I sincerily doubt that your anarchy and my anarchy are the same anarchies. Bit of a hooligan perhaps?

Action speaks louder than signing petitions,want to try it sometime.

[kingdong]

14 hours ago, billd766 said:

My constituency voted to leave but the MP is a Remainer.

That about sums up the whole fiasco,our" betters" thinking they know best,( for themselves )

[kingdong]

16 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

A fresh Parliament is due in 2022.

 

It can wait.

Why should it?when offered a general election they bottled it,another 3 years of uncertainty,the spivs in the city must love it.

[JAG]

16 hours ago, MRToMRT said:

I have also considered this but then heard Tony Blairs argument which I could not fault ... it went something like .... why have an election on one issue (Brexit) why not just have another referendum (confirmatory) and then you can have an election (because we have a no majority gov) on matters that are of greater ideological importance for the coming 10 years (education, health, taxation, social care, environment, etc).

 

I think the issue now is that Brexit is being used as a political gambit by all sides to further their own future governing aims rather than as what it actually is. We need to clear Brexit off the table (either way, yes or no) so we can see the wood from the trees.

 

 

 

When the alliance of opposition parties and Tory rebels took control of the Parliamentary agenda some weeks ago, with the intention of frustrating the governments efforts to deliver Brexit, the government asked for an election. I remember hearing Tony ("look I'm a pretty straight sort of guy") Blair warning against allowing an election, he said Labour would lose, it was, he said, an elephant trap!

 

I too listened to that interview which you describe (the Andrew Neill Programme - yes?) and it seems that he has refined his arguments as any "pretty straight sort of guy" would. However it doesn't take the eyesight of a <deleted>house spider to see that the real reason remains that heffalump trap in the background!

 

As  an aside, it is interesting to note his sudden enthusiasm for further referendums on membership of the EU, given his behaviour in promising such a referendum in 2004 and again in 2005, and then going back on his word. Maybe that duplicitous behaviour is  haunting him, as a "pretty straight sort of guy". Mind you his role, lies and duplicitous behaviour in helping to start a war in 2003 (a war which he could have very probably, and far more honourably prevented), a war which cost the lives of 179 British Soldiers and well over 1/2 a million Iraqi civilians, doesn't seem to bother him, as a "pretty straight sort of guy"!

 

No, an election is needed - it is known as "going to the country" for a reason; but far too many are scared of what the country would say!