|
Post by Deleted on Nov 8, 2016 12:25:32 GMT
It's just odd that we don't see the fierce anger from some of the resident Tory Brexiteers on here, yet they've been charging around spewing their venom against all sorts of other people who have said no such thing. The constituents will make their descision known Here we have the leader. Yes the leader of the Labour Party threatening to oppose Brexit. Hell of a difference. One could argue that ken is sticking with his personal beliefs and jezza is blowing like the wind but that's a different debate Ken Clarke's constituents voted to remain.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Nov 8, 2016 12:28:12 GMT
The constituents will make their descision known Here we have the leader. Yes the leader of the Labour Party threatening to oppose Brexit. Hell of a difference. One could argue that ken is sticking with his personal beliefs and jezza is blowing like the wind but that's a different debate Ken Clarke's constituents voted to remain. There you go then. He justifies himself In my opinion though regardless of personal opinion I believe parliament has to vote article 50 in line with the referendum result. And for good or bad make it work
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Nov 8, 2016 12:28:51 GMT
Corbyn, Clegg, Farron, Milliband etc, etc, etc have all either said they will vote down Article 50 if their terms/conditions/bottom lines are not met ....
Or, they have nonsensically demanded the Government disclose their negotiating strategy to the Hose of Commons.
It's a "I wont vote Article 50 down......... but...."
Yet another smokescreen.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Nov 8, 2016 12:42:28 GMT
Ken Clarke's constituents voted to remain. There you go then. He justifies himself In my opinion though regardless of personal opinion I believe parliament has to vote article 50 in line with the referendum result. And for good or bad make it work Surely this is the biggest u - turn of all. Only a couple of weeks ago. www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/12/theresa-may-accepts-need-for-brexit-debate-in-parliamentNow more debate is suddenly 'absolute folly' and 'dangerous' according to David Davis. They haven't got a fucking clue but are demanding carte blanche both before and after article 50 triggers. Makes the EU sound like a democratic paradise!
|
|
|
Post by Titan Uranus on Nov 8, 2016 12:54:42 GMT
Yes it did. It was a major factor for the rank and file. Boris said it was their winning slogan and brought many undecided people onto the leave vote. I have some magic beans going cheap. PM me if interested. It's that serious that the CPS are now looking into the matter. FACT. Boris and his cronies could be in real legal doo-doo. (Sorry mate)
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Nov 8, 2016 12:59:35 GMT
I have some magic beans going cheap. PM me if interested. It's that serious that the CPS are now looking into the matter. FACT. Boris and his cronies could be in real legal doo-doo. (Sorry mate)
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Nov 8, 2016 13:03:33 GMT
There you go then. He justifies himself In my opinion though regardless of personal opinion I believe parliament has to vote article 50 in line with the referendum result. And for good or bad make it work Surely this is the biggest u - turn of all. Only a couple of weeks ago. www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/12/theresa-may-accepts-need-for-brexit-debate-in-parliamentNow more debate is suddenly 'absolute folly' and 'dangerous' according to David Davis. They haven't got a fucking clue but are demanding carte blanche both before and after article 50 triggers. Makes the EU sound like a democratic paradise! May said in a statement in the House of Commons that..... "The government will make time available for a series of general debates on the UK’s future relationship with the EU” Under parliamentary standing orders, a general debate doesn’t require a vote. Why didn't Starmer and Thornberry 'demand' answers to their 170 questions BEFORE the vote? Didn't have any questions? Didn't think Leave would win? Anyway, it's too late now. The rest of that article is a bit laughable isn't !? "[Milliband speaking at] an event in London to relaunch the New Economics Foundation (Nef) thinktank" "Nef is now being run by Marc Stears, a former Miliband adviser, and aims to produce practical proposals that would amount to a leftwing reading of the vote-winning Brexit campaign slogan “take back control”. Horse, door, bolted, stable, after ....... can you see where I'm going with this?
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Nov 8, 2016 13:13:26 GMT
May said in a statement in the House of Commons that..... "The government will make time available for a series of general debates on the UK’s future relationship with the EU” Under parliamentary standing orders, a general debate doesn’t require a vote. Why didn't Starmer and Thornberry 'demand' answers to their 170 questions BEFORE the vote? Didn't have any questions? Didn't think Leave would win? Anyway, it's too late now. The rest of that article is a bit laughable isn't !? "[Milliband speaking at] an event in London to relaunch the New Economics Foundation (Nef) thinktank" "Nef is now being run by Marc Stears, a former Miliband adviser, and aims to produce practical proposals that would amount to a leftwing reading of the vote-winning Brexit campaign slogan “take back control”. Horse, door, bolted, stable, after ....... can you see where I'm going with this? Hahaha thats some re-writing of history right there, Rog. Labour are fair game for a lot of things but for the preposterously poorly thought through question on the ballot, designed ENTIRELY to protect the interests of the Tory Party, I think fucking not old son! This chaos is down to Cameron primarily and leading liars and gobshites of the campaign like Boris and Gove.
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Nov 8, 2016 13:17:20 GMT
|
|
|
Post by stayingupfor GermanStokie on Nov 8, 2016 13:17:31 GMT
Sturgeon stands for nationalism and to hell with democratic process. Her baiting and cajoling of the establishment has no bearing on what Scotland voted for, and that was to remain in the United Kingdom knowing that a referendum on the EU was coming up. Just like the establishment, because the vote did not go how they all wanted suddenly there is this gnashing of teeth and faux sense of injustice. Farage is definitely an opportunist and openly so, but Sturgeon is exactly the same but far more dangerous. Her plan for the SNP is to be as publically disruptive to UK politics within Westminster no matter what... and has proven to be so. Farage was not unprepared for Brexit, he wasn't able to be prepared for Brexit as UKIP has no political power. As a bad effect of the first past the post election process. despite polling the third highest number of votes, they only have 1 seat. Furthermore, the referendum was a cross party process, not a single party vote. You could tell by the fact that the Remain campaign treated the result as a forgone conclusion letting charismatic and comedic individuals represent the leave campaign (Note how Boris who was more of a Cameron supporter than many realised suddenly hopped onto the leave campaign once it started). It was the Government's fault that they had no real plan for a Brexit result so confident that they were of a remain result. It is the Government's responsibility to prepare for any eventuality and the reason why parliamentary MP's are reacting like they are is because they have been caught with their pants down and horribly exposed. Sturgeon has been pretty clear in the aftermath of the independence referendum - there would be no second independence referendum unless something dramatically changed in the make-up of the UK. It's fair to say leaving the EU was something dramatic, so it was obvious Brexit might lead to more clamour from the SNP for a second independence referendum. By disrupting the political system, what you mean is voting in the interests of Scotland - who are continuing to look more and more like a different country over the past couple of years. And also remember that the UK has spent years disrupting the political process of the EU, and we've cheered it from a far. Lets not start crying when someone tries doing the same in our political system. It makes us all look like right madarse bastards. Farage has more political power now than he has for the past five years when he has been on TV almost daily doing an effective job of setting the agenda. And now.....silence. No doubt he will walk back into the spotlight if Trump is elected, as the mainstream media can't get enough of him. Similar to Harry Redknapp, he makes the media's job easier so they give him more attention. Farage is a tub-thumper not a political powerhouse. He was plainly ignored then dismissed by the main political establishment until they realised that the electorate was reiterating what Farage was saying and using him as a sound piece. A political sound board and a great orator but not true power without a place within Parliament. Government reacted in an act of self preservation; notice how many votes they received when they adopted a number of points that UKIP proposed (the referendum being one). I would also disagree that he has been silent as he has been in the media within UK politics quite a lot. He has just not been heard as the clamour of the result has just killed anything else. More so recently when it is obvious that whilst it good political process to have a parliamentary vote, it is being used as another stalling stagepost to try and deter Brexit. I have never cheered from the sidelines and although I wish the UK to leave (so it ignites the process in Germany), it is the political interference in National politics (Internal) that has caused irritation. I am a great fan of integrated processes as I like the matrix system, however when it starts to degrade and not celebrate cultural heritage then i start to ask questions... Is this change really necessary or is someone trying to reinvent the wheel for reinventing sake. That is what a large number of policies were doing, admittedly not as many as the good changes, but they were increasing. As for Sturgeon, she has no political right to another independence referendum despite what she says and she knows it. She is using the situation to cover for SNPs failures with Scotland and she is slowly losing the vote to win. If the vote was held immediately after the referendum she would have gained a healthy majority to leave although she would have no mandate to remain in the EU as an Independent nation. She would have to apply in line with due process.... A seemingly growing number of supporters are now getting tired of the same rhetoric when there is a drop in income, services and opportunities within Scotland. You can only blame "Westminster" so many times, especially when it is Holyrood who control the budgets and policies for a number of failing areas.
|
|
|
Post by stayingupfor GermanStokie on Nov 8, 2016 13:23:58 GMT
She has no constitional power to demand anything from the UK government!
|
|
|
Post by thebet365 on Nov 8, 2016 13:28:46 GMT
Then you should be applauding him if you think it was a lie as well The 350 million slogan was offered by the Vote Leave campaign. Boris, Gove, Stewart etc. Farage wasn't part of that and actually there was mistrust and tension between the two. Farage was part of Grassrootsout.co.uk
Keep up now. Absolutely. I never said that he said it. He said it was a lie. Told by the lying toads Boris and Gove. It still fooled most of the Brexiteers though didn't it. For every fool that fell for it and voted Brexit because of it there'll be a remain vote who was fooled by the Armageddon economics forecast/Cut a great new deal with the EU speeches. Both sides lied but then anyone with a genuine interest new that.
|
|
|
Post by stayingupfor GermanStokie on Nov 8, 2016 13:36:51 GMT
Yes it did. It was a major factor for the rank and file. Boris said it was their winning slogan and brought many undecided people onto the leave vote. Strange, a number of people I have spoken to and read blogs and articles from have never mentioned the "slogan" unless it was in response to the £350 million argument. Admittedly, it is not thousands and but in my opinion (as much as it counts) it wasn't a factor. In fact I believe that it was actually the "project fear" premise of crashing markets and words of doom and pettiness that political MPs were coming out with that swayed the voter... They simply had enough and only served to reinforce their want for change in the establishment of which the EU was engrained!
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Nov 8, 2016 13:37:10 GMT
May said in a statement in the House of Commons that..... "The government will make time available for a series of general debates on the UK’s future relationship with the EU” Under parliamentary standing orders, a general debate doesn’t require a vote. Why didn't Starmer and Thornberry 'demand' answers to their 170 questions BEFORE the vote? Didn't have any questions? Didn't think Leave would win? Anyway, it's too late now. The rest of that article is a bit laughable isn't !? "[Milliband speaking at] an event in London to relaunch the New Economics Foundation (Nef) thinktank" "Nef is now being run by Marc Stears, a former Miliband adviser, and aims to produce practical proposals that would amount to a leftwing reading of the vote-winning Brexit campaign slogan “take back control”. Horse, door, bolted, stable, after ....... can you see where I'm going with this? Hahaha thats some re-writing of history right there, Rog. Labour are fair game for a lot of things but for the preposterously poorly thought through question on the ballot, designed ENTIRELY to protect the interests of the Tory Party, I think fucking not old son! This chaos is down to Cameron primarily and leading liars and gobshites of the campaign like Boris and Gove. Mate there's only one side who's trying to re-write history. An example. The campaigning went on for weeks and months and the Remain campaign kept on and on about a vote for Brexit would mean a vote to leave the single market. It was shouted from the rooftops. It was the repeated mantra of the doom mongers battle cry. Osbourne said we'd have to have an emergency budget. The BoE issued grave concerns. We voted to Leave. Now the line is "they didn't know what they were voting for" or "no one made their decision based on leaving the single market"
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Nov 8, 2016 13:43:19 GMT
She has no constitional power to demand anything from the UK government! Correct. But that wont stop her standing on the steps of Holyrood talking bollocks and threatening to spend UK taxpayers money challenging the democratically elected UK Government who are trying to implement the majority's wish as evidenced in a democratic referendum. Not to mention the licence fee funded BBC giving it airtime. Unfortunately this seems to be the norm nowadays.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Nov 8, 2016 13:43:52 GMT
Hahaha thats some re-writing of history right there, Rog. Labour are fair game for a lot of things but for the preposterously poorly thought through question on the ballot, designed ENTIRELY to protect the interests of the Tory Party, I think fucking not old son! This chaos is down to Cameron primarily and leading liars and gobshites of the campaign like Boris and Gove. Mate there's only one side who's trying to re-write history. An example. The campaigning went on for weeks and months and the Remain campaign kept on and on about a vote for Brexit would mean a vote to leave the single market. It was shouted from the rooftops. It was the repeated mantra of the doom mongers battle cry. Osbourne said we'd have to have an emergency budget. The BoE issued grave concerns. We voted to Leave. Now the line is "they didn't know what they were voting for" or "no one made their decision based on leaving the single market" All the more reason for full and thorough debate Rog, no? There's a very strong suspicion that concessions for bankers and the single market will be sought by May. As a Leaver surely you want to know about this betrayal before its handed to you as a fait accompli? Why should their be a two speed brexit for different sectors. How many Nissan style letters 'of comfort' must be kept away from democratic scrutiny? Brexit means Brexit means a million different things to different people. There is no constitutional reason why May should keep this away from MP's
|
|
|
Post by stayingupfor GermanStokie on Nov 8, 2016 13:47:35 GMT
Mate there's only one side who's trying to re-write history. An example. The campaigning went on for weeks and months and the Remain campaign kept on and on about a vote for Brexit would mean a vote to leave the single market. It was shouted from the rooftops. It was the repeated mantra of the doom mongers battle cry. Osbourne said we'd have to have an emergency budget. The BoE issued grave concerns. We voted to Leave. Now the line is "they didn't know what they were voting for" or "no one made their decision based on leaving the single market" All the more reason for full and thorough debate Rog, no? There's a very strong suspicion that concessions for bankers and the single market will be sought by May. As a Leaver surely you want to know about this betrayal before its handed to you as a fait accompli? Why should their be a two speed brexit for different sectors. Brexit means Brexit means a million different things to different people. There is no constitutional reason why May should keep this away from MP's I agree, this should be open to all to discuss, as long as it is under NDA T&Cs. I understand the fears of dubious characters informing the EU of our every "want" so to counter this get the NDA signed by all involved. You can therefore have a debate without releasing information before it is needed.
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Nov 8, 2016 13:50:00 GMT
Yes it did. It was a major factor for the rank and file. Boris said it was their winning slogan and brought many undecided people onto the leave vote. Strange, a number of people I have spoken to and read blogs and articles from have never mentioned the "slogan" unless it was in response to the £350 million argument. Admittedly, it is not thousands and but in my opinion (as much as it counts) it wasn't a factor. In fact I believe that it was actually the "project fear" premise of crashing markets and words of doom and pettiness that political MPs were coming out with that swayed the voter... They simply had enough and only served to reinforce their want for change in the establishment of which the EU was engrained! I think you're right. The more we were threatened with Armageddon the more we pushed back.
|
|
|
Post by Titan Uranus on Nov 8, 2016 13:57:26 GMT
Absolutely. I never said that he said it. He said it was a lie. Told by the lying toads Boris and Gove. It still fooled most of the Brexiteers though didn't it. For every fool that fell for it and voted Brexit because of it there'll be a remain vote who was fooled by the Armageddon economics forecast/Cut a great new deal with the EU speeches. Both sides lied but then anyone with a genuine interest new that. The remain camp hasn't lied. There will be an economic and social consequence of this vote. The only grey area is how bad it will be. It makes me laugh how you Brexiteers are saying "these forecasts were all bollocks" etc "see.... nothing has happened" We haven't even started yet. You will reap what you have sown.
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Nov 8, 2016 14:07:13 GMT
Mate there's only one side who's trying to re-write history. An example. The campaigning went on for weeks and months and the Remain campaign kept on and on about a vote for Brexit would mean a vote to leave the single market. It was shouted from the rooftops. It was the repeated mantra of the doom mongers. Their battle cry. Osbourne said we'd have to have an emergency budget. The BoE issued grave concerns. We voted to Leave. Now the line is "they didn't know what they were voting for" or "no one made their decision based on leaving the single market" All the more reason for full and thorough debate Rog, no? There's a very strong suspicion that concessions for bankers and the single market will be sought by May. As a Leaver surely you want to know about this betrayal before its handed to you as a fait accompli? Why should their be a two speed brexit for different sectors. How many Nissan style letters 'of comfort' must be kept away from democratic scrutiny? Brexit means Brexit means a million different things to different people. There is no constitutional reason why May should keep this away from MP's Er... no. The debate raged for months before the vote. It's finished. I know for a fact what the referendum question didn't ask "Do you want Parliament to begin debating the pros and cons of Brexit?" There are always fait accompli deals done during a parliament. We get to use 'democratic scrutiny' at the next GE. "Brexit means Brexit" was a perfectly understandable phrase at the time because of the uproar, denial, open debates, protests and petitions to reverse the result. May was a new PM who drew a line under the thrashing and wailing. The constitutional reason is that you and I both know full well that it will be debated back and forth with no acceptance until the concessions that appease every Nick, Ed and Jeremy will be fully known to the EU negotiators and we will effectively be back to where we were before the referendum. The wishes of the majority filibustered by snide Westminster suits, ego maniacal regional Leaders and greedy Multi Nationals.............. hang on...... shouldn't you be writing that.....
|
|
|
Post by thebet365 on Nov 8, 2016 14:07:53 GMT
For every fool that fell for it and voted Brexit because of it there'll be a remain vote who was fooled by the Armageddon economics forecast/Cut a great new deal with the EU speeches. Both sides lied but then anyone with a genuine interest new that. You will reap what you have sown. Well then that will make a lovely change from having to reap what other people have sown.
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Nov 8, 2016 14:09:49 GMT
For every fool that fell for it and voted Brexit because of it there'll be a remain vote who was fooled by the Armageddon economics forecast/Cut a great new deal with the EU speeches. Both sides lied but then anyone with a genuine interest new that. The remain camp hasn't lied.There will be an economic and social consequence of this vote. The only grey area is how bad it will be. It makes me laugh how you Brexiteers are saying "these forecasts were all bollocks" etc "see.... nothing has happened" We haven't even started yet. You will reap what you have sown. Seriously mate they're proper magic beans. All the way from Hogwarts.
|
|
|
Post by Titan Uranus on Nov 8, 2016 14:11:25 GMT
You will reap what you have sown. Well then that will make a lovely change from having to reap what other people have sown. Fair point.
|
|
|
Post by Titan Uranus on Nov 8, 2016 14:14:23 GMT
The remain camp hasn't lied.There will be an economic and social consequence of this vote. The only grey area is how bad it will be. It makes me laugh how you Brexiteers are saying "these forecasts were all bollocks" etc "see.... nothing has happened" We haven't even started yet. You will reap what you have sown. Seriously mate they're proper magic beans. All the way from Hogwarts. I know I'm a thick old fart .... but I really don't get what you mean.... Just explain to me matey please. Not being funny honest.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 8, 2016 14:23:09 GMT
What a complete shit storm. Nicola is smart and doing the right thing for the people she represents who by 24 points voted to remain. Good on her I say. As for the legality of it....i have no idea but will be interested to read the legal press. They seem to think the government will lose in the Supreme Court without new arguments but I wonder what the view will be about Scotland. But what a utter shit storm May and her cronies are embarking upon and what a monumental waste of tax payers money.
|
|
|
Post by Titan Uranus on Nov 8, 2016 14:34:10 GMT
What a complete shit storm. Nicola is smart and doing the right thing for the people she represents who by 24 points voted to remain. Good on her I say. As for the legality of it....i have no idea but will be interested to read the legal press. They seem to think the government will lose in the Supreme Court without new arguments but I wonder what the view will be about Scotland. But what a utter shit storm May and her cronies are embarking upon and what a monumental waste of tax payers money. Yes agree. It's a clusterfuck of magnificent proportions. Very sad.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Nov 8, 2016 14:44:56 GMT
All the more reason for full and thorough debate Rog, no? There's a very strong suspicion that concessions for bankers and the single market will be sought by May. As a Leaver surely you want to know about this betrayal before its handed to you as a fait accompli? Why should their be a two speed brexit for different sectors. How many Nissan style letters 'of comfort' must be kept away from democratic scrutiny? Brexit means Brexit means a million different things to different people. There is no constitutional reason why May should keep this away from MP's Er... no. The debate raged for months before the vote. It's finished. I know for a fact what the referendum question didn't ask "Do you want Parliament to begin debating the pros and cons of Brexit?" There are always fait accompli deals done during a parliament. We get to use 'democratic scrutiny' at the next GE. "Brexit means Brexit" was a perfectly understandable phrase at the time because of the uproar, denial, open debates, protests and petitions to reverse the result. May was a new PM who drew a line under the thrashing and wailing. The constitutional reason is that you and I both know full well that it will be debated back and forth with no acceptance until the concessions that appease every Nick, Ed and Jeremy will be fully known to the EU negotiators and we will effectively be back to where we were before the referendum. The wishes of the majority filibustered by snide Westminster suits, ego maniacal regional Leaders and greedy Multi Nationals.............. hang on...... shouldn't you be writing that..... Brexit clearly doesn't mean Brexit for Nissan. They've already had their secret assurances of protection. I presume you're against this as it's very much against the Spirit of Brexit.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Nov 8, 2016 14:49:27 GMT
There you go then. He justifies himself In my opinion though regardless of personal opinion I believe parliament has to vote article 50 in line with the referendum result. And for good or bad make it work Surely this is the biggest u - turn of all. Only a couple of weeks ago. www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/12/theresa-may-accepts-need-for-brexit-debate-in-parliamentNow more debate is suddenly 'absolute folly' and 'dangerous' according to David Davis. They haven't got a fucking clue but are demanding carte blanche both before and after article 50 triggers. Makes the EU sound like a democratic paradise! The concession does not go as far as specifying that MPs should get a formal vote on article 50 or any Brexit deal.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Nov 8, 2016 14:56:01 GMT
The concession does not go as far as specifying that MPs should get a formal vote on article 50 or any Brexit deal. The law of the land does
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Nov 8, 2016 15:04:41 GMT
The concession does not go as far as specifying that MPs should get a formal vote on article 50 or any Brexit deal. The law of the land does until the appeal
|
|