May ready for tough talks over Brexit

[Grouse]

3 hours ago, Laughing Gravy said:

It has been discussed on numerous occasions in threads, how biased the BBC are and have been. Numerous links had been put about this. So it isn't worth discussing again.. I read many sources but I find the BBC which should and use to be a decent, reporting news network, paid for by the people, to be as bad as CNN and Fox news. They are a politically motivated news network which they should not be and have been reported to OfCom numerous times.So to your question, I read all news networks and non mainstream news to get a more balanced view and opinion. Something the BBC has lost and regarding the referendum was an absolute disgrace.

 

The BBCs even handedness annoys me. They go out of their way to present both arguements on every issue. However, they have some very bright people and I am sure they must find it difficult to present the case for something so obviously stupid.

[Grouse]

2 hours ago, StefanBBK said:

What is all that fuss about. Just get out. Simple as that.

 

The fuss is because it's a stupid idea. The government did not realise there were so many numpties. Bring back grammar schools I say ?

[cumgranosalum]

3 hours ago, Laughing Gravy said:

It has been discussed on numerous occasions in threads, how biased the BBC are and have been. Numerous links had been put about this. So it isn't worth discussing again.. I read many sources but I find the BBC which should and use to be a decent, reporting news network, paid for by the people, to be as bad as CNN and Fox news. They are a politically motivated news network which they should not be and have been reported to OfCom numerous times.So to your question, I read all news networks and non mainstream news to get a more balanced view and opinion. Something the BBC has lost and regarding the referendum was an absolute disgrace.

You are talking like someone who has fallen over and assumes the room has gotten taller.

[Grouse]

2 hours ago, jpinx said:

If the government had no intention of acting on the result, why was the referendum held?

 

Mainly to limit a perceived potential loss of voters to UKIP. However, the Con party have morphed in to UKIP-Lite. So they will gain UKIP voters but lose many to Lib Dems

 

 

[rockingrobin]

56 minutes ago, jpinx said:

The confusion exists between what the politicians could legally have done immediately after the result, and the long delay and then feeble attempt to circumvent the law.    This and other threads are being bulked out because of this confusion.

This I dont understand

The law has not changed regarding Art 50, referendum since June 23rd and now.What has occurred is a court has given a judgement .

 

[cumgranosalum]

2 hours ago, jpinx said:

 

so ...  at the risk of becoming boringly repetitive -- why did the government set up a referendum when it has no significance other than some nebulous form of guidance which every MP should have been getting from his constituents anyway?

Partly at least because of that.....all refendums in UK are limited in their  "power".it was a ploy to gain voters - wildly miscalculated ploy too - it was not considered likely that Brexit vote would get the lead......the vast majority of MPs are pro EU and still are -

te HoC guidelines explain quite clearly the limitations of any referendum in the Uk and this enabled the HoC to approve it taking place.

 

" The UK does not have constitutional provisions which would require the results of a referendum to be implemented," 

 

if there is an election fought on this it may give MPs the courage to throw the whole thing out - which they are perfectly entitled to.

 

 

" for example the Republic of Ireland where the circumstances in which a binding referendum should be held are set out in its constitution.

 

In contrast the legislation which provided for the referendum held on AV in May 2011 would have implemented the new system of voting without legislation, provided that the boundary changes also provided for in the “Parliamentary Voting System and Constituency Act 2011” were also implemented. In the event, there was a substantial majority against any change. The 1975 referendum was held after re-negotiated terms of the UK’s EC membership had been agreed by all EC Member States and the terms set out in a command paper and agreed by both houses" - HoC June 2015

[kevkev1888]

12 minutes ago, Grouse said:

 

The fuss is because it's a stupid idea. The government did not realise there were so many numpties. Bring back grammar schools I say ?

 

You never stop with your pathetic insults of the majority who voted leave.

YOU LOST!!!!!! Live with it!!!!! 

[Grouse]

2 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

What do you mean that it wasn't accepted politically?  The odds are that the conservatives will go ahead with Brexit.

 

I wouldn't bet on it

[cumgranosalum]

1 hour ago, jpinx said:

The confusion exists between what the politicians could legally have done immediately after the result, and the long delay and then feeble attempt to circumvent the law.    This and other threads are being bulked out because of this confusion.

The referendum specifies that there is NO TIME LIMIT on any actions - in fact it could be repealed by a subsequent Government.

 

Brexit would have been much more effective if they had gone through the parliamentary course, then the decision would be permanent - at least for the next 30 years or so. It's why we elect MPs and give them power to govern....

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, jpinx said:

 

Enacting Article 50 appears to legally require a debate on a motion and an act of parliament.  The technicalities appear to have been decided, but the political will appears to be lacking - demonstrating (yet again) how self-serving politicians really are.  If they were feeling honour-bound to follow the will of the result, they could have had a short debate and vote and the thing would have been done by now.  The terms can be debated at length once the process is under way since separation will not happen instantly

 

MPs are bound to vote in what they consider to be the BEST INTERESTS of their constituents. That may not be what a majority ask for....

 

[jpinx]

The bulk of the postings appear to demonstrate a lack of clarity on what was possible, but not done immediately after the result was given.  As I said, it would have been perfectly legal to have a motion debated quickly on the implementation of Article 50 without going into the details, which would have been debated after Article 50 had been triggered

[kevkev1888]

6 minutes ago, Grouse said:

 

I wouldn't bet on it

 

Go and bet on us staying then. You can add that to your exchange rate losses!

 

1 minute ago, Grouse said:

 

MPs are bound to vote in what they consider to be the BEST INTERESTS of their constituents. That may not be what a majority ask for....

 

 

You are a never ending cracked record.

 

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, Khun Han said:

 

It was actually 48.1%.

 

Surely there's a 'hilarious' joke in the mistake I've just pointed out, for posters of a certain ilk?

 

Nothing hilarious about pedantry ?

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, jpinx said:

Leave won by 52% to 48%. The referendum turnout was 71.8%, with more than 30 million people voting. 

England voted strongly for Brexit, by 53.4% to 46.6%, as did Wales, with Leave getting 52.5% of the vote and Remain 47.5%.

Scotland backed Remain by 62% to 38%, while 55.8% in Northern Ireland voted Remain and 44.2% Leave

 

But what is the majority today? Or next year? Surely you want MPs to vote in line with their constituents rather than use their best judgement ?

[rockingrobin]

1 hour ago, jpinx said:

Leave won by 52% to 48%. The referendum turnout was 71.8%, with more than 30 million people voting. 

England voted strongly for Brexit, by 53.4% to 46.6%, as did Wales, with Leave getting 52.5% of the vote and Remain 47.5%.

Scotland backed Remain by 62% to 38%, while 55.8% in Northern Ireland voted Remain and 44.2% Leave

You omitted Gibraltar high 90s remain

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, jpinx said:

 

Oh - go on -- have a try -- I've got nothing else to do this morning :)  Switzerland does ok with all it's referendums :)

 

fwiw - -I'd still vote to join the Common Market - as per 1972, but with some mechanism to not allow it to morph into what the EU has become. 

 

Maybe the average Swiss got a decent education and they have fewer numpties as a result ?

[Khun Han]

5 minutes ago, Grouse said:

 

Nothing hilarious about pedantry ?

 

There is (to you) when you're doing it.

[billd766]

22 minutes ago, kevkev1888 said:

 

You never stop with your pathetic insults of the majority who voted leave.

YOU LOST!!!!!! Live with it!!!!! 

 

This is the reason I put Grouse on my ignore list. Now the only time I see his posts is when somebody responds to him.

 

I feel sorry for him really as he is a sad little person who, if you disagree with him in any way, just responds with insults. He does not appear to be able to stop himself doing it on almost every thread he posts on.

Edited November 6, 2016 by billd766
Spelling mistakes yet again.

[Khun Han]

4 minutes ago, Grouse said:

 

But what is the majority today? Or next year? Surely you want MPs to vote in line with their constituents rather than use their best judgement ?

 

On an issue the importance of brexit, yes. And the government agrees .

[Grouse]

13 minutes ago, kevkev1888 said:

 

Go and bet on us staying then. You can add that to your exchange rate losses!

 

 

You are a never ending cracked record.

 

 

I think it's too close to call

 

What exchange losses? I moved into USD as a hedge.....

[Khun Han]

7 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

This is the reason I put Grouse on my ignore list. Now the only time I see his posts is when somebody responds to him.

 

I feel sorry for him really as he is a sad little person who, if you disagree with him in any way, just responds with insults. He does not appear to be able to stop himself doing it on almost every thread he posts on.

 

I must admit, I'm getting near to the same opinion. I refuse to believe that someone could really be so buffoon-ishly arrogant, so I'm heading toward the opinion that he's just trolling.

[Grouse]

8 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

This is the reason I put Grouse on my ignore list. Now the only time I see his posts is when somebody responds to him.

 

I feel sorry for him really as he is a sad little person who, if you disagree with him in any way, just responds with insults. He does not appear to be able to stop himself doing it on almost every tread he posts on.

 

I have no desire to insult anyone.

 

In this case I use the word numpty to describe someone who voted on a very serious matter without having adequate knowledge to make such a decision.

 

I am not saying all Brexiteers are numpties. But a majority of numpties tended to vote out it appears.

 

Have you really never thought about the fact that bright people, the educated, the experts, the MPs tended to vote remain? Bit odd?

 

The bluntness level of my response is related to the tone of the original message.

 

Finally, I have never said that the EU was perfect. Indeed many issues need to fixed. My own decision was 60/40 after extensive research.

 

I don't ignore anyone as I am interested to see the full debate. I accept criticism with equanimity ?

[Grouse]

17 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

On an issue the importance of brexit, yes. And the government agrees .

 

Great, so let's re-run the referendum and vote within 30 days!

[chiang mai]

3 hours ago, jpinx said:

Either way -- why did they set up a referendum and not accept the result?

 

Why do countries enter into battle and then loose? Because they never thought that was a possibility at the outset hence managing defeat is rarely ever considered beforehand.

[jpinx]

1 minute ago, chiang mai said:

 

Why do countries enter into battle and then loose? Because they never thought that was a possibility at the outset hence managing defeat is rarely ever considered beforehand.

 

Did they have a referendum before going into Iraq? Korea? Europe in '39?  Brexit wasn't a defeat for government - it was an piece of advice from the electorate.

[chiang mai]

3 minutes ago, jpinx said:

 

Did they have a referendum before going into Iraq? Korea? Europe in '39?  Brexit wasn't a defeat for government - it was an piece of advice from the electorate.

 

Of course Brexit was a defeat for the government, the PM had to resign as a result did he not! The fact that it was seen as advice from the populace is only an after thought, the initial mindset was certainly that the population would never vote in favour of such a thing, they'd be absolutely barking, had it been anything else the referendum would never have been held.

[jpinx]

1 minute ago, chiang mai said:

 

Of course Brexit was a defeat for the government, the PM had to resign as a result did he not! The fact that it was seen as advice from the populace is only an after thought, the initial mindset was certainly that the population would never vote in favour of such a thing, they'd be absolutely barking, had it been anything else the referendum would never have been held.

He did not have to resign.  In fact, before the referendum, he stated that he would enact whatever the outcome.

[chiang mai]

1 minute ago, jpinx said:

He did not have to resign.  In fact, before the referendum, he stated that he would enact whatever the outcome.

 

What else could or would he say, I'm going to quit if you vote leave, get real!!

[jpinx]

8 minutes ago, chiang mai said:

 

What else could or would he say, I'm going to quit if you vote leave, get real!!

He could have stayed neutral -- but that is water under the bridge now.  This thread has run to an end for me.  Thanks for the chat :)

[chiang mai]

Interesting also to read the impact assessments of a Trump win, it is being said that such a win will cause massive economic upset that will ripple around the world, a US led Brexit equivalent if you like. I wonder if people are calling those assessments scaremongering or are the Americans being adult and accepting the risk assessment is fair at this stage, methinks the later, very much so. What relevance to the UK Brexit you ask: well USD would fall against the Pound for one and the stockmarket gains made thus far as a result of Brexit would be wiped out for two, I think that's probably enough to think about at this stage - it'll be interesting to see if the Americans revert to name calling and if all accept the outcome of the vote.