UK PM Johnson's Brexit 'brain' Cummings to leave Downing Street

[7by7]

5 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

27 times Cameron stated voting leave would mean leaving the eu, leaving the single market and leaving the customs union

 So you keep saying, and so neither I nor anyone else has ever denied.

 

But Cameron was a campaigner for Remain! Why can't you understand that?

 

You may say that you voted Leave despite, or even because of, what Cameron said; but are you really trying to convince us that the other 17,410,741 leave voters did likewise?

 

Especially after Cameron's comments were consistently labelled "Project Fear" by Vote.Leave?

 

10 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

Gove  

??????

 

11 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

Key figures from both the Remain and Leave campaigns said before the referendum that voting to leave meant leaving the single market. The customs union itself was rarely mentioned before the referendum, as far as we’ve seen.

There are some cases where Leave campaigners appeared to suggest the UK could stay in the single market after a vote to leave, although these examples aren’t all necessarily as straightforward as they look. In any case, they are rare exceptions, rather than the rule.

See Fullfact they are rare exceptions rather than the rule

Look forward to your links that state that fullfact is incorrect

https://fullfact.org/europe/what-was-promised-about-customs-union-referendum/

 No dispute whatsoever from me about what Full Fact says about the customs union.

 

But I have been talking about access to the single market, not remaining in the customs union, or even remaining a member of the single market! As that article says 

Quote

The customs union and single market are different things

 

As that article also says, no Leave campaigner actually said that we would, or even could, remain in the single market. But many, including Gove in the Marr interview the article quotes, said that we could maintain access to it! Indeed, Gove even went as far as saying that we "should have access to the single market, but we should not be governed by the rules that the European Court of Justice imposes on us." 

 

As already said, no other country with the full, unfettered access which Vote.Leave promised has that sort of access without having to accept the four freedoms, including the FoM directive, and agree to be bound by EU law when it came to settling disputes.

 

But Johnson was still promising that access to the single market after the referendum! From 27/6/16: Boris Johnson: UK will 'still have access to single market’ despite Brexit.

Quote

“British people will still be able to go and work in the EU; to live; to travel; to study; to buy homes and to settle down. As the German equivalent of the CBI – the BDI – has very sensibly reminded us, there will continue to be free trade, and access to the single market.

A claim immediately dismissed by the EU: Brussels rejects Boris Johnson 'pipe dream' over single market access

Quote

European diplomats have dismissed claims from Boris Johnson that the UK could negotiate access to the EU single market without obeying any of the rules.

“You cannot have your cake and eat it,” said an EU diplomat, echoing a phrase the former mayor of London used during the campaign and which looks set to come back to haunt him.

 

 

If Brexit was a vote to leave the single market, why didn’t campaigners say so?

Quote

Starmer, though, does not need to retort that the EU referendum was not about the single market - that point is already being made by Oliver Norgrove, a former Vote Leave staffer. "We argue for things which are utterly achievable in the EEA and make no mention at all of leaving the single market," he wrote, while urging the public to check the official campaign's aims. 

 

[7by7]

More evidence of single market promises made by the leave campaign: 

 

Thanks to @bannork who first posted it here:

 

 

[vinny41]

it doesn't matter what side the Prime minister of 2016 and the chancellor of exchequer at the time were on , Most people that voted for leave or remain would have listen to what they said, Some of them would have voted for remain after listening to the PM and Coe and other people didn't

Just because you listen to one side it doesn't mean you have to agree with everything they said

I am sure the same applies to today where everyone doesn't agree with Boris

And what we do know is the majority of the 17,410,741 leave voters had already made their minds up long before the  EU referendum

[7by7]

So having been shown that Vote.Leave did say we would, or even according to Gove "should," maintain access to the single market, you are still saying that Cameron influenced Leave voters more than them!

 

Desperation indeed.

 

6 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

And what we do know is the majority of the 17,410,741 leave voters had already made their minds up long before the  EU referendum

How do you know? Asked them all? 

[vinny41]

On 11/14/2020 at 9:19 PM, 7by7 said:

 

I think it is fair to say that most of those who voted were already pro or anti EU before the referendum was even thought of.

 

But the committed do not decide elections nor referendums; it is the don't knows.

Both campaigns were aimed at these, not the committed.

 

 A reminder of what I said: " the Leave side repeatedly said that leaving would not mean jeopardising access to the single market!" Access to, not membership of.

 

Not only was Gove saying there that we should have access to the single market; both he, Johnson and all of Vote.Leave promised us that we would have that access.

 

Of course, as any sensible person knew at the time and the rest have all found out since, what Cummings, Johnson, Gove and the rest said we should have and what the EU are willing to let us have are not the same thing!

 

Gove's 'should' is illustrative of one of Cummings and his Vote.Leave's major campaign thrusts; that we could leave the EU but still retain all the benefits of membership. This fooled enough of the don't knows to tip the vote into the 52/42 win for leave.

 

A margin, by the way, which Farage said would be unfinished business when he thought Remain were going to win by such a small majority!

 

 

3 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

So having been shown that Vote.Leave did say we would, or even according to Gove "should," maintain access to the single market, you are still saying that Cameron influenced Leave voters more than them!

 

Desperation indeed.

 

How do you know? Asked them all? 

No Need to ask them as you have indicate in your 1st post

"I think it is fair to say that most of those who voted were already pro or anti EU before the referendum was even thought of"

[7by7]

7 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

 

No Need to ask them as you have indicate in your 1st post

"I think it is fair to say that most of those who voted were already pro or anti EU before the referendum was even thought of"

 

I see, so you are taking my word for it rather than finding out for yourself. How gratifying.!

 

I also said, among other things, "Gove's 'should' is illustrative of one of Cummings and his Vote.Leave's major campaign thrusts; that we could leave the EU but still retain all the benefits of membership. This fooled enough of the don't knows to tip the vote into the 52/42 win for leave."

 

Do you agree with that, as well?

 

Edit: I now need to turn my attention to other pursuits; so you've plenty of time to think of a response.

 

Edited November 16, 2020 by 7by7

[vinny41]

6 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 

I see, so you are taking my word for it rather than finding out for yourself. How gratifying.!

 

I also said, among other things, "Gove's 'should' is illustrative of one of Cummings and his Vote.Leave's major campaign thrusts; that we could leave the EU but still retain all the benefits of membership. This fooled enough of the don't knows to tip the vote into the 52/42 win for leave."

 

Do you agree with that, as well?

 

Edit: I now need to turn my attention to other pursuits; so you've plenty of time to think of a response.

 

No I don't agree with the majority of your posts I just pointed out that it was you that stated

""I think it is fair to say that most of those who voted were already pro or anti EU before the referendum was even thought of"

As for Desperation I think you win the award 

Are you trying to change the result of the 2016 eu referendum that took place over 4 years ago

If you are Good Luck can't see it happening myself

[7by7]

2 hours ago, vinny41 said:

No I don't agree with the majority of your posts I just pointed out that it was you that stated

""I think it is fair to say that most of those who voted were already pro or anti EU before the referendum was even thought of"

 And I repeat; it's gratifying that you're taking my word for it!

 

2 hours ago, vinny41 said:

As for Desperation I think you win the award 

Are you trying to change the result of the 2016 eu referendum that took place over 4 years ago

If you are Good Luck can't see it happening myself

 

Trying to change the result? Not really, it's too late for that!

 

Not too late to keep pointing out that the win for leave was based primarily on Vote.Leave's major campaign thrust; that we could leave the EU but still retain all the benefits of membership. This fooled enough of the don't knows to tip the vote into the 52/42 win for leave.

 

Not too late to want our country to obtain a trade deal which does mean the damage to our economy Brexit will cause is minimised as much as possible.

[AmySeeker]

On 11/14/2020 at 1:05 AM, vogie said:

You can either love or loathe Cummings, but one thing is for sure that he is a winner and as we all know that losers hate winners. Without Cummings the democratic vote to leave the EU might never have happened, so in affect the man is worth his salt just by that one action alone, we won't even mention giving the Tories an 80 majority in parliament, it's just too embarrassing for the remainers.

And since you have brought Trump into the discussion, it has been said that like the remainers neither believe in honouring a democratic vote.

 

 

Good riddance to an individual who has caused so much damage to the UK. 

 

He may be a strategist who can organise a campaign - or maybe he was given way too much credit for both results. For the election, he faced one of the worst oppositions in living memory. And he was not the sole campaign for Brexit. Infact other than the data selling scam i had not even heard of him up to that point. There were many other characters around, including Boris himself (who is a very good campaigner as well), along with other groups that wanted the UK to leave Brexit, pandering xenophobia during one of the worst crippling austerity programmes the UK had gone through since the second world war. 

 

So whilst yes he may do well as a strategy, this did not put him in place to lead a country - which by all accounts Boris had him doing. 

 

It is rumoured and often touted he pushed herd immunity in the first instance, which meant the UK left it's borders open, and allowed the infection to run rife, even when they were seeing the scenes in China, and Italy unfold infront of them. 

 

The irony with Dominic - that one of the major reasons he wanted to leave the EU was nothing to do with immigration, but rather state aid rules and the state able to invest in projects it deemed fit. What was the glorious investments he had planned? ROBOTS AND AI. You can't make it up. Even if this was an aim, India, China, Japan, and the USA are miles ahead of the UK. 

 

The Tory government at it's chore is about supporting the private sector, not the state investing in projects (in this instance Dom's mates). When Chancellor Rishi Sunak admitted him sitting in an office, he would have no idea who to invest state funds in was the final nail in the pitiful objective. Coupled that, with state money during the pandemic going to Tory politicians, and Dom's mates it was never going to fly. Infact the abuse of state money will go down as one of the most shocking abuses of the pandemic. 

 

The guy seemed to let it get to his head that Dominic Benedict playing him a Hollywood movie. 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 16, 2020 by AmySeeker

[stevenl]

9 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 So you keep saying, and so neither I nor anyone else has ever denied.

 

But Cameron was a campaigner for Remain! Why can't you understand that?

 

You may say that you voted Leave despite, or even because of, what Cameron said; but are you really trying to convince us that the other 17,410,741 leave voters did likewise?

 

Especially after Cameron's comments were consistently labelled "Project Fear" by Vote.Leave?

 

??????

 

 No dispute whatsoever from me about what Full Fact says about the customs union.

 

But I have been talking about access to the single market, not remaining in the customs union, or even remaining a member of the single market! As that article says 

 

As that article also says, no Leave campaigner actually said that we would, or even could, remain in the single market. But many, including Gove in the Marr interview the article quotes, said that we could maintain access to it! Indeed, Gove even went as far as saying that we "should have access to the single market, but we should not be governed by the rules that the European Court of Justice imposes on us." 

 

As already said, no other country with the full, unfettered access which Vote.Leave promised has that sort of access without having to accept the four freedoms, including the FoM directive, and agree to be bound by EU law when it came to settling disputes.

 

But Johnson was still promising that access to the single market after the referendum! From 27/6/16: Boris Johnson: UK will 'still have access to single market’ despite Brexit.

A claim immediately dismissed by the EU: Brussels rejects Boris Johnson 'pipe dream' over single market access

 

 

If Brexit was a vote to leave the single market, why didn’t campaigners say so?

 

I think that is the whole argument there. Cameron said withdrawal from the EU would mean away from single market, called 'project fear' by brexiteers. Now brexiteers are saying they knew all along and it was their aim.

 

 

[JonnyF]

14 hours ago, Phulublub said:

From where?  And how much will the transport costs add?  And the time to reach market for perishables not a concern?  And given just how much is transported by sea, will the UK suddenly find vastly more port capacity?

 

But hey, you knew what you were voting for.

 

PH

Many of these products are already available. Australian and Chilean wine for example. Japanese and Korean cars. Now the competition for these EU equivalent products will be higher due to the increased levy on EU goods. If UK citizens still want to pay the extra for French wine that's OK, more tax for the UK government to collect and subsidize other UK industries as we see fit.

 

I've never known a Lexus perish due to sea transportation. But hey, the Germans don't need to sell luxury cars to the UK do they?

 

In fact, not much of this is perishable? But hey, the EU doesn't need to sell this stuff.

 

 

I knew what I was voting for.

 

 

[transam]

13 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

Has it?

From what I can see the EU has been consistent throughout the negotiations. The terms for access to the single market were made clear BEFORE the referendum. You guys just chose to pretend that you were more important than the entire EU. That somehow the EU needed the UK more than we needed them. Easiest trade deal in history. German car manufacturers. Dunkirk spirit. They dont like it up em. ????

All that bluff. All that bluster. All that false bravado. Where did it get you?

Oh yeah thats right.

Nowhere.

 

Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeer, are you confused again ???? , or have you replied to the wrong post, as I and another were discussing 750,000,000,000 euros that has to be found to bolster the EU's problems. ????

Edited November 17, 2020 by transam

[theoldgit]

Off topic troll post removed.

[JonnyF]

12 hours ago, vinny41 said:

Its 3 seperate transactions

1) Scotland independence from the Uk - If the  EU requested to be involved the UK would tell the EU where to go

2) Scotland seperation terms between UK and Scotland - Once again if EU requested to be involved the UK would tell the EU where to go

3) Scotland  eu accession process discussions between Scotland and the EU UK not involved

Not to mention Scotland fails many of the requirements for EU membership. So unless the EU breaks their own rules on membership they might be left out on a limb, truly independent as they like to pretend they want.

 

Well I say truly independent with tongue firmly in cheek. They would still be using the pound, much like Ecuador using the dollar, so they'd have the Bank of England setting their monetary policy including interest rates. True independence. As one commentator said, "enslaved by the pound and tied to the apron strings of London".

 

Still, they know what they're voting for.????

[transam]

13 hours ago, Mavideol said:

and where would that be. Poland? China? North Korea? come on mate, open your eyes, get real. Maybe you don't live in the UK but your acquaintances and/or relatives do, they would be the ones hit hard with all the new import duties

Being hit hard was 1940, we got over that and moved on ......????

[JonnyF]

15 hours ago, Phulublub said:

Not your question, but of just a little bit more relevence to UK inhabitants

 

Gosh that IS a big number isn't it.  Sadly for any scare factor, so is the number of people in the EU - about 446,000,000.  So under €2 each.  I think they may be able to manage to find that without the UK.

 

PH

Its 750 Billion bailout not 750 million. So for 450 million inhabitants that's 1666 Euros per person, not 2 Euros.

[transam]

4 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Its 750 Billion bailout not 750 million. So for 450 million inhabitants that's 1666 Euros per person, not 2 Euros.

Thanks for that, I missed out a few zero's....????

[stevenl]

27 minutes ago, transam said:

Being hit hard was 1940, we got over that and moved on ......????

With your frequent references to WWII, you apparently didn't get over it, nor did you move on.

Edited November 17, 2020 by stevenl

[stevenl]

25 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Not to mention Scotland fails many of the requirements for EU membership. So unless the EU breaks their own rules on membership they might be left out on a limb, truly independent as they like to pretend they want.

 

Well I say truly independent with tongue firmly in cheek. They would still be using the pound, much like Ecuador using the dollar, so they'd have the Bank of England setting their monetary policy including interest rates. True independence. As one commentator said, "enslaved by the pound and tied to the apron strings of London".

 

Still, they know what they're voting for.????

Thanks for that. When I was in Ecuador they were using the Sucre, didn't know it had changed since.

[JonnyF]

6 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Thanks for that. When I was in Ecuador they were using the Sucre, didn't know it had changed since.

Yes, officially since 2000.

 

An interesting article which also confirms what I said about Scotland's continued deference to the Bank of England if they left the UK. They would join the likes of Ecuador, Zimbabwe and El Salvador in countries that use another's currency. 

 

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/eric-schnurer/2014/05/02/why-ecuador-and-other-states-dont-use-their-own-money#:~:text=Like about a dozen other,just uses the U.S. dollar.&text=That makes it very simple,to the foreign exchange window.

 

[Chomper Higgot]

39 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Its 750 Billion bailout not 750 million. So for 450 million inhabitants that's 1666 Euros per person, not 2 Euros.

It’s not a bailout, it’s a stimulus package. 

 

Banks get bailouts, economies get cash injections to increase economic activity.

[transam]

20 minutes ago, stevenl said:

With your frequent references to WWII, you apparently didn't get over it, nor did you move on.

I have personal reasons, which stay with me, plus in the UK we are reminded of the useless carnage every year on the 11th of November, is that OK with you...?

[Chomper Higgot]

51 minutes ago, transam said:

Being hit hard was 1940, we got over that and moved on ......????

Who’s this ‘we’ you are referring to?

 

I’m very proud of the part members of my family played in WWII and I’m extremely grateful for the sacrifices and bravery of millions of people from across the globe who fought and defeated fascism, but I had no part in it, I can’t and won’t say ‘we’ in reference to the sacrifice of those people.

 

You of course might have taken part in that war against fascism, if so you have my unending gratitude, if not quit with the ‘we’ and quit using the sacrifice of millions of people as a cheap prop to your nationalist points of view.

 

 

[JonnyF]

18 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It’s not a bailout, it’s a stimulus package. 

 

Banks get bailouts, economies get cash injections to increase economic activity.

Bailout? Recovery fund? Cash injection? Stimulus package? Semantics.

 

My point was that it's 1666 Euros per man, woman and child across the bloc. Not 2 Euros.

[Chomper Higgot]

Just now, JonnyF said:

Bailout? Recovery fund? Cash injection? Stimulus package? Semantics.

 

My point was that it's 1666 Euros per man, woman and child across the bloc. Not 2 Euros.

No it’s not semantics.

 

I recommend some reading on economics, it will help you engage in informed discussion on the subject.

[JonnyF]

4 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

No it’s not semantics.

 

I recommend some reading on economics, it will help you engage in informed discussion on the subject.

I guess the Europhiles favourite source of news The Guardian is also uninformed, seeing as they also refer to it as a bailout since (you guessed it) the EU has agreed a "bailout package".

 

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/jul/26/eu-bailout-deal-union-rich-members-helping-poor

 

 

Your pedantry aside, my point remains that it's not 2 Euros per head, it's 1666 Euros per man, woman and child. 

[transam]

18 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Who’s this ‘we’ you are referring to?

 

I’m very proud of the part members of my family played in WWII and I’m extremely grateful for the sacrifices and bravery of millions of people from across the globe who fought and defeated fascism, but I had no part in it, I can’t and won’t say ‘we’ in reference to the sacrifice of those people.

 

You of course might have taken part in that war against fascism, if so you have my unending gratitude, if not quit with the ‘we’ and quit using the sacrifice of millions of people as a cheap prop to your nationalist points of view.

 

 

"We" is a term I use for the UK populace of the time or at any time for that matter, do you have a problem with that or are you just nitpicking...?

During WW2 my dad was a RSM class 1, my mum worked on Mosquito fighter plane stuff, that was after being bombed out of two houses.

Fascism you refer to was the German government of the day, as well as the other axis fascist country governments, remember, they were political parties..

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

Yes, officially since 2000.

 

An interesting article which also confirms what I said about Scotland's continued deference to the Bank of England if they left the UK. They would join the likes of Ecuador, Zimbabwe and El Salvador in countries that use another's currency. 

 

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/eric-schnurer/2014/05/02/why-ecuador-and-other-states-dont-use-their-own-money#:~:text=Like about a dozen other,just uses the U.S. dollar.&text=That makes it very simple,to the foreign exchange window.

 

Hardly anything about Scotland in that, not very objective, article. The Euro seems the most logical choice at that point. So Scotland would be joining Germany, Netherlands and others as not having their own currency.

[JonnyF]

7 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Hardly anything about Scotland in that, not very objective, article. The Euro seems the most logical choice at that point. So Scotland would be joining Germany, Netherlands and others as not having their own currency.

 

How quickly do you think they could start using the Euro after leaving the UK? 

 

Changing currency is a huge undertaking. Not as easy as a trip to SuperRich I'm afraid. They'd be using the pound for years, and subject to the interest rates and monetary policy that the Bank of England set for them.

 

No way around it. 

[onthedarkside]

A series of posts commenting on forum members has been removed.

 

Let's stay on topic here, which is NOT commenting on each other.