May ready for tough talks over Brexit

[Laughing Gravy]

13 minutes ago, Grouse said:

 

I think May's interpretation was not exactly the same as yours and your mates'?

 

I don't think anyone is angry; just reconciled. (It was the wrong decision though)

Again we disagree. It is the remain camp still marching, demonstrating and trying every way possible (through the courts) to stop what the people wanted. Me and my mates were exactly right.

Yes Mays interpretation is the same. If it is not then she will be political history.

[Khun Han]

25 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Again we disagree. It is the remain camp still marching, demonstrating and trying every way possible (through the courts) to stop what the people wanted. Me and my mates were exactly right.

Yes Mays interpretation is the same. If it is not then she will be political history.

 

It's quite tlear what PM May meant. A large part of her first speech as PM was dedicated to the subject, and she has revisited it on numerous occasions. I think the cynicism shown by some is, so far, misplaced. She may yet fail, but she has shown real intent.

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Again we disagree. It is the remain camp still marching, demonstrating and trying every way possible (through the courts) to stop what the people wanted. Me and my mates were exactly right.

Yes Mays interpretation is the same. If it is not then she will be political history.

 

I said on many occasions that the main reason for the majority who voted going for Brexit was inequality as reflected by the worsening Gini coefficient for this country ( though not as bad as USA yet). I was shouted down by the Brexiteers on TV. Now May seems to be taking a similar opinion. 

 

My point, slightly tongue in cheek, was that May had the temerity to interpret the vote.

 

Everyone accepts Brexit. It is the terms that are focusing minds now. What is your view on the single market and customs union for example?

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, Khun Han said:

 

It's quite tlear what PM May meant. A large part of her first speech as PM was dedicated to the subject, and she has revisited it on numerous occasions. I think the cynicism shown by some is, so far, misplaced. She may yet fail, but she has shown real intent.

How did the Autumn statement reflect this? 

 

Her words are fine, but the actions!

[Khun Han]

15 minutes ago, Grouse said:

 

I said on many occasions that the main reason for the majority who voted going for Brexit was inequality as reflected by the worsening Gini coefficient for this country ( though not as bad as USA yet). I was shouted down by the Brexiteers on TV. Now May seems to be taking a similar opinion. 

 

My point, slightly tongue in cheek, was that May had the temerity to interpret the vote.

 

Everyone accepts Brexit. It is the terms that are focusing minds now. What is your view on the single market and customs union for example?

 

There was general agreement in the discussions that a large section of the population had been left behind over recent years. And there is some consensus by those holding the reins of power that this needs to be addressed. Mark Carney made it a keynote of a major speech recently.

 

You were shouted down because of the childish, derogatory language that you used to describe those who feel left behind (and those who take an opposing view to yours on here).

 

My view of any trade deal we do with Europe is that it should not restrict us from doing independent deals with the rest of the world. A big lesson learned from our experience with the EU is to never again get so tied in with such an organisation. It's one of the oldest and most basic unwritten rules of business: don't put all your eggs in one basket.

[Grouse]

12 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

There was general agreement in the discussions that a large section of the population had been left behind over recent years. And there is some consensus by those holding the reins of power that this needs to be addressed. Mark Carney made it a keynote of a major speech recently.

 

You were shouted down because of the childish, derogatory language that you used to describe those who feel left behind (and those who take an opposing view to yours on here).

 

My view of any trade deal we do with Europe is that it should not restrict us from doing independent deals with the rest of the world. A big lesson learned from our experience with the EU is to never again get so tied in with such an organisation. It's one of the oldest and most basic unwritten rules of business: don't put all your eggs in one basket.

 

I actually quoted Carney when voicing my opinion.

 

My language was indeed derogatory and probably arrogant

 

If you think my language was childish then you have some remarkably bright children! 

 

Another unwritten rule is that your best sales prospects are your existing customers; don't piss them off ?

 

Glad to see you are adopting a rational viewpoint ?

[melvinmelvin]

From where I look at this, just a wee bit north of BKK, it seems to me that PM TM is doing quite OK, so far,

she is an experienced politician and she is getting the hang of it.

 

She has some very very challenging times ahead, how she will handle that remains to be seen.

 

Getting the UK out of this negos in good style and with OK results will not be an easy walk.

 

Bringing up lack of equality in the British society at this point will in my view just make things more difficult.

Do the EU/Trade stuff first, then do the inequality stuff.

Addressing lack of equality iis honorable, but there is a limit to the number of heavy tasks

any gov. can take on at any one time.

The cabinet has limited resources and the Brexit will be very resource consuming.

 

Edited December 22, 2016 by melvinmelvin

[Khun Han]

31 minutes ago, Grouse said:

 

I actually quoted Carney when voicing my opinion.

 

My language was indeed derogatory and probably arrogant

 

If you think my language was childish then you have some remarkably bright children! 

 

Another unwritten rule is that your best sales prospects are your existing customers; don't piss them off ?

 

Glad to see you are adopting a rational viewpoint ?

 

Which brings us back to the unwritten rule that I cited: We have, more-or-less, put all our eggs in one basket. And, just like the big company that the small company committed to at the expense of everyone else, the big company has become an overbearing bully which tries to get everything on it's own terms. This is the last chance for UK Inc to get away from the clutches of it's own big bully. It won't be easy in the short-to-medium-term. But it makes perfect business sense in the long-term.

[billd766]

A little something to gladden (or sadden) the hearts of both sides.

 

 

[AlexRich]

12 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

The big argument for remainers is the money. They won't even touch upon the issue of EU economic bullying, and stick their heads in the sand when it comes to the EU's stated aim of a federal Europe.

 

In the 1930s, remainers would have been in the appeasment camp, blithely glossing over the bigger issues for the sake of short-term economic and political stability.

 

The Brexiteers and Trump fanatics are the same types that inadvertently voted Hitler to power in the 1930's ... they meant well, they thought they were doing the right thing ... until it all went wrong. History is rhyming ... Trump tweeting today about upping the nuclear arsenal and playing games with the Chinese ... pathetic.

[Laughing Gravy]

6 hours ago, Khun Han said:

My view of any trade deal we do with Europe is that it should not restrict us from doing independent deals with the rest of the world. A big lesson learned from our experience with the EU is to never again get so tied in with such an organisation. It's one of the oldest and most basic unwritten rules of business: don't put all your eggs in one basket.

That is it exactly. I was very glad we didn't join the Euro and by the way it is going many other countries wish they hadn't.

7 hours ago, Grouse said:

What is your view on the single market and customs union for example?

My view is that we would benefit from it but certainly not being told it comes with strings such as you will take x amount of immigrants etc etc.

 

21 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

The Brexiteers and Trump fanatics are the same types that inadvertently voted Hitler to power in the 1930's ... they meant well, they thought they were doing the right thing ... until it all went wrong. History is rhyming ... Trump tweeting today about upping the nuclear arsenal and playing games with the Chinese ... pathetic.

Not that old rhetoric, populist vote so lets compare it with Hitler. you can compare with many situations in History. It was /is an anti establishment vote. There is more access to information than ever. people can make their own informed choice. History is not rhyming at all. There have always been conflicts and global power struggle, suing the 'old chestnut' of Hitler is now becoming tedious.

[Laughing Gravy]

5 hours ago, melvinmelvin said:

Getting the UK out of this negos in good style and with OK results will not be an easy walk.

It would seem you are right on this and sadly this seems to be a reasoning for many to stay in. In fact it should be the opposite and the reason we need to get out. Considering the EU is supposedly about democracy and sharing it is clearly the exact opposite and a club entangling countries into submission.

[Laughing Gravy]

9 hours ago, Grouse said:

 

I think May's interpretation was not exactly the same as yours and your mates'?

 

I don't think anyone is angry; just reconciled. (It was the wrong decision though)

It was directed at sandyf but if you are his spokesperson? I think he and others are angry. In fact at times furious that the UK majority voted leave and since then have tried every way possible to stop, slow down and overturn the decision of the people. There are no terms such as soft or hard brexit. Every one knew what it meant as DC and GO said it countless times (it is easily found). Saying that it never said it on the ballot paper is futile and  demeaning, showing a lack of understanding or just plain 'sour grapes.' The argument since on here, this thread and in the UK press is exactly the shouting down of the result in anyway possible. people should stop being negative, support the prime minister and the country and start respecting democracy. Linking brexit to the rise of Hitler by some posters is ridiculous and should stop. At least people got a vote.

 

The way the EU has reacted and responded so far is like a child who is playing cricket and has just been called LBW. They stop the game and take their bat and ball home sulking.

 

I still think the government with DC and GO should be held accountable for spending 9 million pound on sending leaflets out to every household supporting remain. It should have been a 2 sided argument but they way they acted in the campaign, it would never happen.Hopefully one day they will be held accountable.

Edited December 22, 2016 by Laughing Gravy

[SheungWan]

Friday London Times: HM Queen's frustration with May over Brexit secrecy: If Winston Churchill could give me a running commentary, so can you. PM 'disappointed' Royals during Balmoral visit. No briefing about preparations for EU exit.

Edited December 23, 2016 by SheungWan

[Laughing Gravy]

I am sure her majesty will get over it. With the queens press offices various leaks and blunders I can understand why TM didn't tell her as they probably would be in the hands of Junker, Merkel et al.

 

What is this obsession with the remain camp to see the plans before we give them to the EU. Most want them to fail, so they can say "we told you leaving the EU was bad". As each week goes on leaving the EU looks a better and better prospect.

Edited December 23, 2016 by Laughing Gravy

[sandyf]

15 hours ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Oh dear sandyf still bitter it would seem.  It has been said time and time again. Go and see what David Cameron said about the referendum as Prime Minister. It has been killed to death. You really still seem angry. I suggest you should come to terms with what the people voted for. I am not going to spell it out again as it is becoming repetitive.

 

You should refrain from posting personal opinion in respect of other members, it is against the rules and speculative on your part.

 

About half of those that went to vote were in favour of leaving the EU, hardly overwhelming. They didn't vote for what has come to pass or maybe I am wrong and you are in favour of the sinking pound and rising hate crime. There is  one absolute certainty, they didn't know what they were getting themselves into or the outcome. Of course brexit means brexit whatever the damage.

[sandyf]

1 hour ago, Laughing Gravy said:

I am sure her majesty will get over it. With the queens press offices various leaks and blunders I can understand why TM didn't tell her as they probably would be in the hands of Junker, Merkel et al.

 

What is this obsession with the remain camp to see the plans before we give them to the EU. Most want them to fail, so they can say "we told you leaving the EU was bad". As each week goes on leaving the EU looks a better and better prospect.

" Most want them to fail,"

 

And what would be considered successful?

Complete separation with all the associated problems?  or

Remaining in the single market with associated benefits and free movement?

 

The fundamental problem is that those of us that voted were not given that choice, I suspect that had the options been attached to the question on the ballot paper then the result would have been a lot more definitive.

David Cameron has a lot to answer for but it never crossed his mind that the vote would go the way it did

[SheungWan]

2 hours ago, SheungWan said:

Friday London Times: HM Queen's frustration with May over Brexit secrecy: If Winston Churchill could give me a running commentary, so can you. PM 'disappointed' Royals during Balmoral visit. No briefing about preparations for EU exit.

 

The Hard Brexiteers don't trust the UK Legal System, they don't trust the UK Parliament and now they don't trust the UK Head of State, HM The Queen. Triple Whammy of Clownishness.

Edited December 23, 2016 by SheungWan

[AlexRich]

11 hours ago, Laughing Gravy said:

That is it exactly. I was very glad we didn't join the Euro and by the way it is going many other countries wish they hadn't.

My view is that we would benefit from it but certainly not being told it comes with strings such as you will take x amount of immigrants etc etc.

 

Not that old rhetoric, populist vote so lets compare it with Hitler. you can compare with many situations in History. It was /is an anti establishment vote. There is more access to information than ever. people can make their own informed choice. History is not rhyming at all. There have always been conflicts and global power struggle, suing the 'old chestnut' of Hitler is now becoming tedious.

 

It was used in reference to KH "appeasement" quote - likening remainers to appeasers of the National Socialists in Germany. A pathetic analogy. The EU has been one major reason why the EU countries have not engaged in conflict with each other. To describe people who want to maintain those relations as appeasers is pathetic. Instead people have increasingly turned to extreme politicians ... like the "useful idiots" who voted for Hitler, believing they were doing the "right thing" for their country.

[AlexRich]

4 hours ago, SheungWan said:

 

The Hard Brexiteers don't trust the UK Legal System, they don't trust the UK Parliament and now they don't trust the UK Head of State, HM The Queen. Triple Whammy of Clownishness.

 

I think it reflects Theresa May's control freakery ... I think she has always been this way.

[dick dasterdly]

6 hours ago, SheungWan said:

 

The Hard Brexiteers don't trust the UK Legal System, they don't trust the UK Parliament and now they don't trust the UK Head of State, HM The Queen. Triple Whammy of Clownishness.

To be more accurate, it boils down to not trusting the 'establishment'.

 

IMO obviously.

[Grouse]

I would like to wish all my interlocutors a very merry Christmas (even the ones who ignore me!)

 

You find me supping crap champagne at the United lounge at LHR on my way back! Hic! ?

[7by7]

On ‎22‎/‎12‎/‎2016 at 11:05 AM, Laughing Gravy said:

Again we disagree. It is the remain camp still marching, demonstrating and trying every way possible (through the courts) to stop what the people wanted. Me and my mates were exactly right.

Yes Mays interpretation is the same. If it is not then she will be political history.

 

Some Remainers have demonstrated against the decision to leave, the last ones being, I believe, in early September. But that is their democratic right in a free country; even if such demonstrations are pointless.

 

The court case is not an attempt to overturn the referendum result. It is an attempt to force the government to obtain Parliament's approval before triggering Article 50.

 

The argument being that in the UK Parliament is sovereign and so any referendum result must be approved by Parliament.

 

If the government lose, it will not, however, effect the result; the UK will trigger Article 50, will leave the EU as Parliament will accept the will of the people, as it did in 1975 and 2011. It will, though, delay the process as an Act of Parliament will be required so a Bill will need to wend it's way through both Houses.

 

No idea what you mean by "Me and my mates were exactly right." If you mean your and your mates were exactly right in voting to leave then you were, in my opinion, exactly wrong; as I'm sure will become more and more clear to all over the coming decades.

 

 

Edited December 23, 2016 by 7by7

[nontabury]

12 hours ago, SheungWan said:

 

The Hard Brexiteers don't trust the UK Legal System, they don't trust the UK Parliament and now they don't trust the UK Head of State, HM The Queen. Triple Whammy of Clownishness.

 

 Can you provide a link to any Hard Brexiteers( is there such a body?) who have said they don't trust the Queen, or is this another remainers made early up story.

[nontabury]

[CharlieK]

4 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 

Some Remainers have demonstrated against the decision to leave, the last ones being, I believe, in early September. But that is their democratic right in a free country; even if such demonstrations are pointless.

 

The court case is not an attempt to overturn the referendum result. It is an attempt to force the government to obtain Parliament's approval before triggering Article 50.

 

The argument being that in the UK Parliament is sovereign and so any referendum result must be approved by Parliament.

 

If the government lose, it will not, however, effect the result; the UK will trigger Article 50, will leave the EU as Parliament will accept the will of the people, as it did in 1975 and 2011. It will, though, delay the process as an Act of Parliament will be required so a Bill will need to wend it's way through both Houses.

 

No idea what you mean by "Me and my mates were exactly right." If you mean your and your mates were exactly right in voting to leave then you were, in my opinion, exactly wrong; as I'm sure will become more and more clear to all over the coming decades.

 

 

Surely that is a contradiction. If the Government are forced to introduce a bill into Parliament to trigger article 50 and Parliament and the Lords reject the triggering of said article then brexit is over. It has everything to do with stopping brexit. That was the whole point of bringing the case to court.

[SheungWan]

Must smile re: ' Love the fact of Theresa May wanting to make full use of royal prerogative whilst refusing to explain things to Queen'.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[SheungWan]

2 hours ago, CharlieK said:

Surely that is a contradiction. If the Government are forced to introduce a bill into Parliament to trigger article 50 and Parliament and the Lords reject the triggering of said article then brexit is over. It has everything to do with stopping brexit. That was the whole point of bringing the case to court.

 

'Forced'  to introduce a bill into Parliament. Says it all really.

[Laughing Gravy]

9 hours ago, 7by7 said:

No idea what you mean by "Me and my mates were exactly right."

You are right on this. I was referring to another poster about a comment.

[bkkcanuck8]

9 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 

The court case is not an attempt to overturn the referendum result. It is an attempt to force the government to obtain Parliament's approval before triggering Article 50.

 

 

 

Which is rather stupid to be quite honest.  The referendum law was passed by the house and it basically deferred the decision to stay or go to a popular vote and the people said no.... apparently the English don't really understand what referendums are....  I personally think that once the deal has been negotiated that a better method would be to hold a second referendum on the two options....  but then that was not what was passed at the time.