FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > The Phoney Brexit
The Phoney Brexit
Jump to: Newest in thread
Gina Miller ruling really has put the Kibosh on the Brexiteers and Mrs May has double sixed everyone with this Brilliant way of getting a second referendum under the auspices of Parliament. She can chuck a load of shit at Corbyn and Co saying it was them that Killed the deal and put their own political ends before the people. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"The people voted for brexit. May has delivered brexit. What’s not to like ? " It she has not as it’s still an open ended deal with no sight of the end | |||
"It is a bloody mess! When we had the vote nobody said anything about 2 year negotiations and then another 2+ years of transition. " I wonder how many people thought that we'd be out on 24th? Stupidity has no boundaries! | |||
"This is only the start, do the public really have faith however they voted in any political party delivering anything that will carry the country.. Fudge and a shambles.. " I hope you are wrong because a lot of jobs are going to go if they don't make their minds up. One of my friends who works in manufacturing lost his job the other day and I am very fearful for mine which is in domestic construction and tanking at the moment. | |||
"It is a bloody mess! When we had the vote nobody said anything about 2 year negotiations and then another 2+ years of transition. " But we are out of the EU. The rest is just details. We only voted to get out of the EU. And so we accepted any and all flavours of this. Be it shambles, “in name only” or whatever. | |||
"It is a bloody mess! When we had the vote nobody said anything about 2 year negotiations and then another 2+ years of transition. But we are out of the EU. The rest is just details. We only voted to get out of the EU. And so we accepted any and all flavours of this. Be it shambles, “in name only” or whatever. " Are you sure about that Ted . Go on have another cup of tea. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"It is a bloody mess! When we had the vote nobody said anything about 2 year negotiations and then another 2+ years of transition. " In fairness, they did talk extensively about two years is the time limit after triggering article 50. And lengthy reporting and discussion about how this is far too little time to sort all this shit out. | |||
| |||
"I am really really hoping it has all been a prelude to a 2nd referendum if only because the last two years or so may actually have made people sit up and take notice and realise how fucking lucky we have been to have had peace and relative prosperity over the last 50 odd years. "  | |||
"It is a bloody mess! When we had the vote nobody said anything about 2 year negotiations and then another 2+ years of transition. But we are out of the EU. The rest is just details. We only voted to get out of the EU. And so we accepted any and all flavours of this. Be it shambles, “in name only” or whatever. Are you sure about that Ted . Go on have another cup of tea."Which bit do you disagree with ? | |||
"This is only the start, do the public really have faith however they voted in any political party delivering anything that will carry the country.. Fudge and a shambles.. I hope you are wrong because a lot of jobs are going to go if they don't make their minds up. One of my friends who works in manufacturing lost his job the other day and I am very fearful for mine which is in domestic construction and tanking at the moment." I hope I am wrong also, I was undecided till just before the vote and one of my overiding concerns was that we lacked the politicians of any party that gave confidence in sorting out something very complex.. I still think that and the last 30 months have hardly been a success, in fact we have only highlighted the massive splits that are a gift to those with whom we hope to deal with in the future.. | |||
| |||
"I am really really hoping it has all been a prelude to a 2nd referendum if only because the last two years or so may actually have made people sit up and take notice and realise how fucking lucky we have been to have had peace and relative prosperity over the last 50 odd years. " I doubt you’re right. Just read what the leavers post on here. None of them appear to have changed their opinions. Another referendum would have a similar result. And that’s if is a repeat in/out question, who knows what bonkers options we’d be presented with on the paper. | |||
"I am really really hoping it has all been a prelude to a 2nd referendum if only because the last two years or so may actually have made people sit up and take notice and realise how fucking lucky we have been to have had peace and relative prosperity over the last 50 odd years. " We've had peace because of Nato, fuck all to do with the EU. | |||
"I am really really hoping it has all been a prelude to a 2nd referendum if only because the last two years or so may actually have made people sit up and take notice and realise how fucking lucky we have been to have had peace and relative prosperity over the last 50 odd years. I doubt you’re right. Just read what the leavers post on here. None of them appear to have changed their opinions. Another referendum would have a similar result. And that’s if is a repeat in/out question, who knows what bonkers options we’d be presented with on the paper. " A Deltapoll survey that came out a couple of days ago confirmed your opinion. It showed a no deal brexit on 52% compared to remain on 48%. Exactly the same result we saw in 2016. | |||
"I am really really hoping it has all been a prelude to a 2nd referendum if only because the last two years or so may actually have made people sit up and take notice and realise how fucking lucky we have been to have had peace and relative prosperity over the last 50 odd years. " Apart from Would a sensible human take the risk with the UK electorate. ? The stakes are to high to let the UK have any chance of voting for no deal | |||
"Who agrees with me that the last 2 years have just been a phoney brexit. It seems inevitable to me that a 2nd referendum will be called for all the reasons and arguments that we've all endured. 2.5 years ago the referendum of 2016 asked Britain if they would should leave the EU and the answer came back, fairly inconclusively that yes we want to go. People thought there would be negotiations and a proper divorce settlement sorted but it would seem that all they've done is sat in a room now and again and gone through the motions. So we really are at the end game and know the options. Mrs May deal clearly is a clever way to get parliament, which is our own sovereign safety valve to put forward a motion for another referendum with 2 clear choices on the table. Boris Johnson's and co no deal WTO option which they are entitled to say is the way forward. They can argue that it is what the country needs to do. But who is up for the long hard years that lie ahead. It always was the option that people voted for back in 2016 but perhaps didn't realise it. Or we can remain in the EU and expect quite a lot of Humble pie and humiliation to be endured. But who is up for the long hard years ahead
Gina Miller ruling really has put the Kibosh on the Brexiteers and Mrs May has double sixed everyone with this Brilliant way of getting a second referendum under the auspices of Parliament. She can chuck a load of shit at Corbyn and Co saying it was them that Killed the deal and put their own political ends before the people."I think it’s funny that brexiteers made Gina Miller out to be the bogeyman.... you lot wanted your sovereignty back, all she did was make sure that parliament was sovereign and the decisions couldn’t be made without going through them! You should be thanking the lady!!!!!  | |||
"Who agrees with me that the last 2 years have just been a phoney brexit. It seems inevitable to me that a 2nd referendum will be called for all the reasons and arguments that we've all endured. 2.5 years ago the referendum of 2016 asked Britain if they would should leave the EU and the answer came back, fairly inconclusively that yes we want to go. People thought there would be negotiations and a proper divorce settlement sorted but it would seem that all they've done is sat in a room now and again and gone through the motions. So we really are at the end game and know the options. Mrs May deal clearly is a clever way to get parliament, which is our own sovereign safety valve to put forward a motion for another referendum with 2 clear choices on the table. Boris Johnson's and co no deal WTO option which they are entitled to say is the way forward. They can argue that it is what the country needs to do. But who is up for the long hard years that lie ahead. It always was the option that people voted for back in 2016 but perhaps didn't realise it. Or we can remain in the EU and expect quite a lot of Humble pie and humiliation to be endured. But who is up for the long hard years ahead
Gina Miller ruling really has put the Kibosh on the Brexiteers and Mrs May has double sixed everyone with this Brilliant way of getting a second referendum under the auspices of Parliament. She can chuck a load of shit at Corbyn and Co saying it was them that Killed the deal and put their own political ends before the people.
I think it’s funny that brexiteers made Gina Miller out to be the bogeyman.... you lot wanted your sovereignty back, all she did was make sure that parliament was sovereign and the decisions couldn’t be made without going through them!
You should be thanking the lady!!!!!"I’d be much more likely to choose a lamp post to hang her from. Fucking bitch!! | |||
"Who agrees with me that the last 2 years have just been a phoney brexit. It seems inevitable to me that a 2nd referendum will be called for all the reasons and arguments that we've all endured. 2.5 years ago the referendum of 2016 asked Britain if they would should leave the EU and the answer came back, fairly inconclusively that yes we want to go. People thought there would be negotiations and a proper divorce settlement sorted but it would seem that all they've done is sat in a room now and again and gone through the motions. So we really are at the end game and know the options. Mrs May deal clearly is a clever way to get parliament, which is our own sovereign safety valve to put forward a motion for another referendum with 2 clear choices on the table. Boris Johnson's and co no deal WTO option which they are entitled to say is the way forward. They can argue that it is what the country needs to do. But who is up for the long hard years that lie ahead. It always was the option that people voted for back in 2016 but perhaps didn't realise it. Or we can remain in the EU and expect quite a lot of Humble pie and humiliation to be endured. But who is up for the long hard years ahead
Gina Miller ruling really has put the Kibosh on the Brexiteers and Mrs May has double sixed everyone with this Brilliant way of getting a second referendum under the auspices of Parliament. She can chuck a load of shit at Corbyn and Co saying it was them that Killed the deal and put their own political ends before the people.
I think it’s funny that brexiteers made Gina Miller out to be the bogeyman.... you lot wanted your sovereignty back, all she did was make sure that parliament was sovereign and the decisions couldn’t be made without going through them!
You should be thanking the lady!!!!!
I’d be much more likely to choose a lamp post to hang her from. Fucking bitch!!"What did she do which deserved lynching ? | |||
" We've had peace because of Nato, fuck all to do with the EU. " NATO was formed to deter external threats to peace in Europe, the EU was formed to deter internal threats to peace in Europe. | |||
"Who agrees with me that the last 2 years have just been a phoney brexit. It seems inevitable to me that a 2nd referendum will be called for all the reasons and arguments that we've all endured. 2.5 years ago the referendum of 2016 asked Britain if they would should leave the EU and the answer came back, fairly inconclusively that yes we want to go. People thought there would be negotiations and a proper divorce settlement sorted but it would seem that all they've done is sat in a room now and again and gone through the motions. So we really are at the end game and know the options. Mrs May deal clearly is a clever way to get parliament, which is our own sovereign safety valve to put forward a motion for another referendum with 2 clear choices on the table. Boris Johnson's and co no deal WTO option which they are entitled to say is the way forward. They can argue that it is what the country needs to do. But who is up for the long hard years that lie ahead. It always was the option that people voted for back in 2016 but perhaps didn't realise it. Or we can remain in the EU and expect quite a lot of Humble pie and humiliation to be endured. But who is up for the long hard years ahead
Gina Miller ruling really has put the Kibosh on the Brexiteers and Mrs May has double sixed everyone with this Brilliant way of getting a second referendum under the auspices of Parliament. She can chuck a load of shit at Corbyn and Co saying it was them that Killed the deal and put their own political ends before the people.
I think it’s funny that brexiteers made Gina Miller out to be the bogeyman.... you lot wanted your sovereignty back, all she did was make sure that parliament was sovereign and the decisions couldn’t be made without going through them!
You should be thanking the lady!!!!!
I’d be much more likely to choose a lamp post to hang her from. Fucking bitch!!"The UK Supreme Court made a ruling that ensured Parliamentary sovereignty. No EU anywhere in sight. You do not like this?  | |||
"I am really really hoping it has all been a prelude to a 2nd referendum if only because the last two years or so may actually have made people sit up and take notice and realise how fucking lucky we have been to have had peace and relative prosperity over the last 50 odd years. I doubt you’re right. Just read what the leavers post on here. None of them appear to have changed their opinions. Another referendum would have a similar result. And that’s if is a repeat in/out question, who knows what bonkers options we’d be presented with on the paper. A Deltapoll survey that came out a couple of days ago confirmed your opinion. It showed a no deal brexit on 52% compared to remain on 48%. Exactly the same result we saw in 2016. " Persistent aren't you? Still not reading the actual survey data? 18% of those asked don't know. Makes nonsense of a 4% margin. Statistical error is usually taken as 3%  | |||
"I am really really hoping it has all been a prelude to a 2nd referendum if only because the last two years or so may actually have made people sit up and take notice and realise how fucking lucky we have been to have had peace and relative prosperity over the last 50 odd years. I doubt you’re right. Just read what the leavers post on here. None of them appear to have changed their opinions. Another referendum would have a similar result. And that’s if is a repeat in/out question, who knows what bonkers options we’d be presented with on the paper. A Deltapoll survey that came out a couple of days ago confirmed your opinion. It showed a no deal brexit on 52% compared to remain on 48%. Exactly the same result we saw in 2016. Persistent aren't you? Still not reading the actual survey data? 18% of those asked don't know. Makes nonsense of a 4% margin. Statistical error is usually taken as 3% "That's like saying you must factor in those who didn't vote in the referendum in 2016. They're irrelevant, same as the 18% don't knows are irrelevant. 52 + 48 = 100 There is no 18% factored in there, so they're pointless the same as those who don't bother to vote. | |||
"Who agrees with me that the last 2 years have just been a phoney brexit. It seems inevitable to me that a 2nd referendum will be called for all the reasons and arguments that we've all endured. 2.5 years ago the referendum of 2016 asked Britain if they would should leave the EU and the answer came back, fairly inconclusively that yes we want to go. People thought there would be negotiations and a proper divorce settlement sorted but it would seem that all they've done is sat in a room now and again and gone through the motions. So we really are at the end game and know the options. Mrs May deal clearly is a clever way to get parliament, which is our own sovereign safety valve to put forward a motion for another referendum with 2 clear choices on the table. Boris Johnson's and co no deal WTO option which they are entitled to say is the way forward. They can argue that it is what the country needs to do. But who is up for the long hard years that lie ahead. It always was the option that people voted for back in 2016 but perhaps didn't realise it. Or we can remain in the EU and expect quite a lot of Humble pie and humiliation to be endured. But who is up for the long hard years ahead
Gina Miller ruling really has put the Kibosh on the Brexiteers and Mrs May has double sixed everyone with this Brilliant way of getting a second referendum under the auspices of Parliament. She can chuck a load of shit at Corbyn and Co saying it was them that Killed the deal and put their own political ends before the people.
I think it’s funny that brexiteers made Gina Miller out to be the bogeyman.... you lot wanted your sovereignty back, all she did was make sure that parliament was sovereign and the decisions couldn’t be made without going through them!
You should be thanking the lady!!!!!
I’d be much more likely to choose a lamp post to hang her from. Fucking bitch!!"You've absolutely no fucking clue have you, you don't even realise she's made it so you get your bloody sovereignty when May was trying to take it away. | |||
"Who agrees with me that the last 2 years have just been a phoney brexit. It seems inevitable to me that a 2nd referendum will be called for all the reasons and arguments that we've all endured. 2.5 years ago the referendum of 2016 asked Britain if they would should leave the EU and the answer came back, fairly inconclusively that yes we want to go. People thought there would be negotiations and a proper divorce settlement sorted but it would seem that all they've done is sat in a room now and again and gone through the motions. So we really are at the end game and know the options. Mrs May deal clearly is a clever way to get parliament, which is our own sovereign safety valve to put forward a motion for another referendum with 2 clear choices on the table. Boris Johnson's and co no deal WTO option which they are entitled to say is the way forward. They can argue that it is what the country needs to do. But who is up for the long hard years that lie ahead. It always was the option that people voted for back in 2016 but perhaps didn't realise it. Or we can remain in the EU and expect quite a lot of Humble pie and humiliation to be endured. But who is up for the long hard years ahead
Gina Miller ruling really has put the Kibosh on the Brexiteers and Mrs May has double sixed everyone with this Brilliant way of getting a second referendum under the auspices of Parliament. She can chuck a load of shit at Corbyn and Co saying it was them that Killed the deal and put their own political ends before the people.
I think it’s funny that brexiteers made Gina Miller out to be the bogeyman.... you lot wanted your sovereignty back, all she did was make sure that parliament was sovereign and the decisions couldn’t be made without going through them!
You should be thanking the lady!!!!!
I’d be much more likely to choose a lamp post to hang her from. Fucking bitch!!"Why? Apart from I think this is your usual hot air, wind and piss just why would you be upset about a citizen using our laws within our statutes to have our Sovereign Parliament act in the very way its meant to.. Do you not understand the very thing that a lot of brexit is about? | |||
"I am really really hoping it has all been a prelude to a 2nd referendum if only because the last two years or so may actually have made people sit up and take notice and realise how fucking lucky we have been to have had peace and relative prosperity over the last 50 odd years. I doubt you’re right. Just read what the leavers post on here. None of them appear to have changed their opinions. Another referendum would have a similar result. And that’s if is a repeat in/out question, who knows what bonkers options we’d be presented with on the paper. A Deltapoll survey that came out a couple of days ago confirmed your opinion. It showed a no deal brexit on 52% compared to remain on 48%. Exactly the same result we saw in 2016. Persistent aren't you? Still not reading the actual survey data? 18% of those asked don't know. Makes nonsense of a 4% margin. Statistical error is usually taken as 3%
That's like saying you must factor in those who didn't vote in the referendum in 2016. They're irrelevant, same as the 18% don't knows are irrelevant. 52 + 48 = 100
There is no 18% factored in there, so they're pointless the same as those who don't bother to vote. "If 18% of voters are undecided now and then make a decision at the election their vote is irrelevant? I really cannot fathom how your mind works. You really will reconstruct any set of information to suit your view. You do understand that over the last half century or so the entire election process has become focused on undecided voters don't you? Well done on your addition though | |||
"Who agrees with me that the last 2 years have just been a phoney brexit. It seems inevitable to me that a 2nd referendum will be called for all the reasons and arguments that we've all endured. 2.5 years ago the referendum of 2016 asked Britain if they would should leave the EU and the answer came back, fairly inconclusively that yes we want to go. People thought there would be negotiations and a proper divorce settlement sorted but it would seem that all they've done is sat in a room now and again and gone through the motions. So we really are at the end game and know the options. Mrs May deal clearly is a clever way to get parliament, which is our own sovereign safety valve to put forward a motion for another referendum with 2 clear choices on the table. Boris Johnson's and co no deal WTO option which they are entitled to say is the way forward. They can argue that it is what the country needs to do. But who is up for the long hard years that lie ahead. It always was the option that people voted for back in 2016 but perhaps didn't realise it. Or we can remain in the EU and expect quite a lot of Humble pie and humiliation to be endured. But who is up for the long hard years ahead
Gina Miller ruling really has put the Kibosh on the Brexiteers and Mrs May has double sixed everyone with this Brilliant way of getting a second referendum under the auspices of Parliament. She can chuck a load of shit at Corbyn and Co saying it was them that Killed the deal and put their own political ends before the people.
I think it’s funny that brexiteers made Gina Miller out to be the bogeyman.... you lot wanted your sovereignty back, all she did was make sure that parliament was sovereign and the decisions couldn’t be made without going through them!
You should be thanking the lady!!!!!
I’d be much more likely to choose a lamp post to hang her from. Fucking bitch!!
Why?
Apart from I think this is your usual hot air, wind and piss just why would you be upset about a citizen using our laws within our statutes to have our Sovereign Parliament act in the very way its meant to..
Do you not understand the very thing that a lot of brexit is about?
"Don't worry he will act his age one day - instead of his shoe size  | |||
"Who agrees with me that the last 2 years have just been a phoney brexit. It seems inevitable to me that a 2nd referendum will be called for all the reasons and arguments that we've all endured. 2.5 years ago the referendum of 2016 asked Britain if they would should leave the EU and the answer came back, fairly inconclusively that yes we want to go. People thought there would be negotiations and a proper divorce settlement sorted but it would seem that all they've done is sat in a room now and again and gone through the motions. So we really are at the end game and know the options. Mrs May deal clearly is a clever way to get parliament, which is our own sovereign safety valve to put forward a motion for another referendum with 2 clear choices on the table. Boris Johnson's and co no deal WTO option which they are entitled to say is the way forward. They can argue that it is what the country needs to do. But who is up for the long hard years that lie ahead. It always was the option that people voted for back in 2016 but perhaps didn't realise it. Or we can remain in the EU and expect quite a lot of Humble pie and humiliation to be endured. But who is up for the long hard years ahead
Gina Miller ruling really has put the Kibosh on the Brexiteers and Mrs May has double sixed everyone with this Brilliant way of getting a second referendum under the auspices of Parliament. She can chuck a load of shit at Corbyn and Co saying it was them that Killed the deal and put their own political ends before the people.
I think it’s funny that brexiteers made Gina Miller out to be the bogeyman.... you lot wanted your sovereignty back, all she did was make sure that parliament was sovereign and the decisions couldn’t be made without going through them!
You should be thanking the lady!!!!!"I think Gina Miller needs to make her mind up. She supports a people's vote now doesn't she? She wanted Parliament to have the final say and that's what her court case was about. Now she doesn't like the way Parliament has voted on things like triggering article 50 and passing the EU Withdrawal bill, so now she doesn't want parliament to have the final say and she wants another referendum so the people can have the final say. She's up and down like a yo-yo she really should make her mind up. | |||
"I am really really hoping it has all been a prelude to a 2nd referendum if only because the last two years or so may actually have made people sit up and take notice and realise how fucking lucky we have been to have had peace and relative prosperity over the last 50 odd years. We've had peace because of Nato, fuck all to do with the EU. " And your friend the Donald wants to make other NATO members pay more because he thinks that we should stand on our own two feet instead of holding our hands. Funny how similar you sound! I guess his desire to make us pay our way may have had an effect on the EU making their own moves towards independence from the USA sphere of influence by which I mean an alternative gps and the flagging up of an EU military force or is that a bit of a stretch for your imagination. The world is changing and the Russian threat is of much greater significance now that Putin is likely to have naval bases in Syria allowing him to threaten the Suez Canal. You really need to look at long term strategy here or perhaps you are employed by the Russians Centy?  | |||
"I am really really hoping it has all been a prelude to a 2nd referendum if only because the last two years or so may actually have made people sit up and take notice and realise how fucking lucky we have been to have had peace and relative prosperity over the last 50 odd years. We've had peace because of Nato, fuck all to do with the EU. And your friend the Donald wants to make other NATO members pay more because he thinks that we should stand on our own two feet instead of holding our hands. Funny how similar you sound! I guess his desire to make us pay our way may have had an effect on the EU making their own moves towards independence from the USA sphere of influence by which I mean an alternative gps and the flagging up of an EU military force or is that a bit of a stretch for your imagination. The world is changing and the Russian threat is of much greater significance now that Putin is likely to have naval bases in Syria allowing him to threaten the Suez Canal. You really need to look at long term strategy here or perhaps you are employed by the Russians Centy? "The Donald wants other Nato members to pay their way because they've been failing to meet their Nato commitments (not the UK though as we've met our Nato targets). When countries joined Nato they agreed to spend at least 2% of GDP on defence every year but free loaders like Germany have not been doing that. Germany (and other EU members as it happens) have been consistently failing to meet the 2% pledge on defence, they've failed to meet their Nato commitments which they signed upto when they joined Nato, while the USA has been picking up the slack and spending over 2%. Americans are rightly fed up of EU countries free loading in Nato. Spineless yellow bellies like Obama never had the balls to say it and it's taken someone like Trump to spell it out to them in plain terms which they might just understand. As for your EU army if it's anywhere near as underfunded as EU countries have been falling short in their Nato contributions then Putin has nothing to worry about. | |||
"The people voted for brexit. May has delivered brexit. What’s not to like ? " It's the wrong colour BREXIT... or something. | |||
"It is a bloody mess! When we had the vote nobody said anything about 2 year negotiations and then another 2+ years of transition. " Yes they did. Many BREXITERS said that, after we vote Leave and trigger Article 50, we would negotiate a better trade deal with the EU than the one we currently have, because we would hold all the cards. What the Leave campaign didn't say is that we would leave the EU with a worse trade deal than we currently have or even no deal at all. | |||
"Who agrees with me that the last 2 years have just been a phoney brexit. It seems inevitable to me that a 2nd referendum will be called for all the reasons and arguments that we've all endured. 2.5 years ago the referendum of 2016 asked Britain if they would should leave the EU and the answer came back, fairly inconclusively that yes we want to go. People thought there would be negotiations and a proper divorce settlement sorted but it would seem that all they've done is sat in a room now and again and gone through the motions. So we really are at the end game and know the options. Mrs May deal clearly is a clever way to get parliament, which is our own sovereign safety valve to put forward a motion for another referendum with 2 clear choices on the table. Boris Johnson's and co no deal WTO option which they are entitled to say is the way forward. They can argue that it is what the country needs to do. But who is up for the long hard years that lie ahead. It always was the option that people voted for back in 2016 but perhaps didn't realise it. Or we can remain in the EU and expect quite a lot of Humble pie and humiliation to be endured. But who is up for the long hard years ahead
Gina Miller ruling really has put the Kibosh on the Brexiteers and Mrs May has double sixed everyone with this Brilliant way of getting a second referendum under the auspices of Parliament. She can chuck a load of shit at Corbyn and Co saying it was them that Killed the deal and put their own political ends before the people.
I think it’s funny that brexiteers made Gina Miller out to be the bogeyman.... you lot wanted your sovereignty back, all she did was make sure that parliament was sovereign and the decisions couldn’t be made without going through them!
You should be thanking the lady!!!!!
I think Gina Miller needs to make her mind up. She supports a people's vote now doesn't she?
She wanted Parliament to have the final say and that's what her court case was about. Now she doesn't like the way Parliament has voted on things like triggering article 50 and passing the EU Withdrawal bill, so now she doesn't want parliament to have the final say and she wants another referendum so the people can have the final say. She's up and down like a yo-yo she really should make her mind up. "What contorted paths you have to go through to justify your anger 
Parliament decides on the acceptability of the withdrawal agreement.
That is the sovereignty of Parliament affirmed by a UK Supreme Court ruling.
Do you approve of this?
Parliament then decides or recommends what to do next. Anyone can campaign to persuade them to take a specific course.
Renegotiation, hard Brexit, referendum, no Brexit.
Do you disagree with that?  | |||
"It is a bloody mess! When we had the vote nobody said anything about 2 year negotiations and then another 2+ years of transition. Yes they did. Many BREXITERS said that, after we vote Leave and trigger Article 50, we would negotiate a better trade deal with the EU than the one we currently have, because we would hold all the cards. What the Leave campaign didn't say is that we would leave the EU with a worse trade deal than we currently have or even no deal at all. " As remainers have been telling us over, and over, and over again over the last 2 years though....'none of that was on the ballot paper, all it said on the ballot paper was leave the EU or remain in the EU'. The people voted to Leave the EU. | |||
"It is a bloody mess! When we had the vote nobody said anything about 2 year negotiations and then another 2+ years of transition. Yes they did. Many BREXITERS said that, after we vote Leave and trigger Article 50, we would negotiate a better trade deal with the EU than the one we currently have, because we would hold all the cards. What the Leave campaign didn't say is that we would leave the EU with a worse trade deal than we currently have or even no deal at all. As remainers have been telling us over, and over, and over again over the last 2 years though....'none of that was on the ballot paper, all it said on the ballot paper was leave the EU or remain in the EU'. The people voted to Leave the EU. " Then get on with it and Leave. May's deal and EEA+ are still open to you. | |||
| |||
"There are some facts about brexit that are clear, as well as hot aor and manipulation of the public, to a major degree. The conservatives chose to have a brexit referendum and following this to completely undertake a departure programme that was 100% under their own control. They chose what the negotiating positions were, the date they triggered Article 50 and it was them who negotiated it. Whoever the specific people were is less important than that it was the conservatives who have done the whole thing. That they never had key decisions settled upon the major aspects that have delayed us, such as the Irish border, and exhausted the limited time period is only a reflection on a party that is not fit to govern. They would have been dismissed in the real world of work. They have shamed the office of government. The country needs mainly to focus on this - the clear instruction they gave to that party and the near total failure in their duty to complete its undertaking. The better question for the country now is at a general election, upon who should serve the people. The EU should be requested for an extension or told to cancel Article 50, if they won't. The general election should then be the means of determining what people now want, based upon their knowledge of what's feasible, at what cost, in addition to the fuller potential costs of likely losses to people's wealth and displacement from fuller involvement with and influence of European infrastructure, such as medical licensing/standards,security, nuclear technology, transport as well as all goods and services. 2 poor prime ministers in a row, 2 years of financial losses exploring leaving Europe the wrong way, whilst the conservative party has primarily focused on keeping their internal disputes somewhat placated, all the while keeping their snouts in the trough of power. " What does labour want ? Do they want in or out ? What’s there plan ? | |||
"It is a bloody mess! When we had the vote nobody said anything about 2 year negotiations and then another 2+ years of transition. Yes they did. Many BREXITERS said that, after we vote Leave and trigger Article 50, we would negotiate a better trade deal with the EU than the one we currently have, because we would hold all the cards. What the Leave campaign didn't say is that we would leave the EU with a worse trade deal than we currently have or even no deal at all. As remainers have been telling us over, and over, and over again over the last 2 years though....'none of that was on the ballot paper, all it said on the ballot paper was leave the EU or remain in the EU'. The people voted to Leave the EU. " And as leavers have been telling us again and again, both sides made the same “promises” about what this would involve. How many remainers don’t agree that Mays deal is something they voted against? How many leavers feel this isn’t the brexit they voted for? | |||
"It is a bloody mess! When we had the vote nobody said anything about 2 year negotiations and then another 2+ years of transition. Yes they did. Many BREXITERS said that, after we vote Leave and trigger Article 50, we would negotiate a better trade deal with the EU than the one we currently have, because we would hold all the cards. What the Leave campaign didn't say is that we would leave the EU with a worse trade deal than we currently have or even no deal at all. As remainers have been telling us over, and over, and over again over the last 2 years though....'none of that was on the ballot paper, all it said on the ballot paper was leave the EU or remain in the EU'. The people voted to Leave the EU. And as leavers have been telling us again and again, both sides made the same “promises” about what this would involve. How many remainers don’t agree that Mays deal is something they voted against? How many leavers feel this isn’t the brexit they voted for? " From the remain point all it does is make life more difficult for someone living in the EU. More expense and regulation and nothing gained! | |||
| |||
| |||
"It is a bloody mess! When we had the vote nobody said anything about 2 year negotiations and then another 2+ years of transition. Yes they did. Many BREXITERS said that, after we vote Leave and trigger Article 50, we would negotiate a better trade deal with the EU than the one we currently have, because we would hold all the cards. What the Leave campaign didn't say is that we would leave the EU with a worse trade deal than we currently have or even no deal at all. As remainers have been telling us over, and over, and over again over the last 2 years though....'none of that was on the ballot paper, all it said on the ballot paper was leave the EU or remain in the EU'. The people voted to Leave the EU. " I see your back on your hypocritical merry go round yet again Centy. You really need to choose which side of the argument you are on and stick to it, not choose one side for 2 years then decide to change to the other side and back again and again to suit your agenda. You accused Gina Miller of not knowing what she wanted like a yo yo. You have said dozens of times on here that promises made during the referendum did NOT need to be on the ballot paper as we all knew the rhetoric that went with each option of leave or remain. Your prime example was a vote to leave was a vote to leave the Single Market & Customs Union, though the Customs Union actually wasn't mentioned that much compared to the Single Market during that time. So you're holding the Government to their rhetoric regarding the leaving of the Single Market & a lesser extent the Customs Union as well so you can't complain when your own arguments are applied on the reverse side, Leave campaign was promising better deals etc which also wasn't on the ballot paper but we all knew the rhetoric that went with the vote to leave. So it's only right & fair this should also be upheld if the leave side of the rhetoric cannot be delivered, we can't vote for someone that isn't what was voted for can we ? | |||
"It is a bloody mess! When we had the vote nobody said anything about 2 year negotiations and then another 2+ years of transition. Yes they did. Many BREXITERS said that, after we vote Leave and trigger Article 50, we would negotiate a better trade deal with the EU than the one we currently have, because we would hold all the cards. What the Leave campaign didn't say is that we would leave the EU with a worse trade deal than we currently have or even no deal at all. As remainers have been telling us over, and over, and over again over the last 2 years though....'none of that was on the ballot paper, all it said on the ballot paper was leave the EU or remain in the EU'. The people voted to Leave the EU. I see your back on your hypocritical merry go round yet again Centy. You really need to choose which side of the argument you are on and stick to it, not choose one side for 2 years then decide to change to the other side and back again and again to suit your agenda. You accused Gina Miller of not knowing what she wanted like a yo yo. You have said dozens of times on here that promises made during the referendum did NOT need to be on the ballot paper as we all knew the rhetoric that went with each option of leave or remain. Your prime example was a vote to leave was a vote to leave the Single Market & Customs Union, though the Customs Union actually wasn't mentioned that much compared to the Single Market during that time. So you're holding the Government to their rhetoric regarding the leaving of the Single Market & a lesser extent the Customs Union as well so you can't complain when your own arguments are applied on the reverse side, Leave campaign was promising better deals etc which also wasn't on the ballot paper but we all knew the rhetoric that went with the vote to leave. So it's only right & fair this should also be upheld if the leave side of the rhetoric cannot be delivered, we can't vote for someone that isn't what was voted for can we ? "The problem is the referendum was "overly simplified" a straight "yes" or "no". That has only lead to greater problems because everyone has a different take on what they want! The 17.4m leavers voted for different reasons - they all voted leave but some wanted £350m, freedom of movement etc etc So May has delivered we are leaving the EU on 29/3 - fulfilled the referendum! She is a clever lady! What hasn't been achieved and what is unachievable is a "cake and eat it" brexit! Apparently we didn't hold all the cards! | |||
"Who agrees with me that the last 2 years have just been a phoney brexit. It seems inevitable to me that a 2nd referendum will be called for all the reasons and arguments that we've all endured. 2.5 years ago the referendum of 2016 asked Britain if they would should leave the EU and the answer came back, fairly inconclusively that yes we want to go. People thought there would be negotiations and a proper divorce settlement sorted but it would seem that all they've done is sat in a room now and again and gone through the motions. So we really are at the end game and know the options. Mrs May deal clearly is a clever way to get parliament, which is our own sovereign safety valve to put forward a motion for another referendum with 2 clear choices on the table. Boris Johnson's and co no deal WTO option which they are entitled to say is the way forward. They can argue that it is what the country needs to do. But who is up for the long hard years that lie ahead. It always was the option that people voted for back in 2016 but perhaps didn't realise it. Or we can remain in the EU and expect quite a lot of Humble pie and humiliation to be endured. But who is up for the long hard years ahead
Gina Miller ruling really has put the Kibosh on the Brexiteers and Mrs May has double sixed everyone with this Brilliant way of getting a second referendum under the auspices of Parliament. She can chuck a load of shit at Corbyn and Co saying it was them that Killed the deal and put their own political ends before the people."The big problem with a second referendum giving 3 choices as suggested is this,supose the votes come out approximately 30/30/30% where are we then? | |||
"Who agrees with me that the last 2 years have just been a phoney brexit. It seems inevitable to me that a 2nd referendum will be called for all the reasons and arguments that we've all endured. 2.5 years ago the referendum of 2016 asked Britain if they would should leave the EU and the answer came back, fairly inconclusively that yes we want to go. People thought there would be negotiations and a proper divorce settlement sorted but it would seem that all they've done is sat in a room now and again and gone through the motions. So we really are at the end game and know the options. Mrs May deal clearly is a clever way to get parliament, which is our own sovereign safety valve to put forward a motion for another referendum with 2 clear choices on the table. Boris Johnson's and co no deal WTO option which they are entitled to say is the way forward. They can argue that it is what the country needs to do. But who is up for the long hard years that lie ahead. It always was the option that people voted for back in 2016 but perhaps didn't realise it. Or we can remain in the EU and expect quite a lot of Humble pie and humiliation to be endured. But who is up for the long hard years ahead
Gina Miller ruling really has put the Kibosh on the Brexiteers and Mrs May has double sixed everyone with this Brilliant way of getting a second referendum under the auspices of Parliament. She can chuck a load of shit at Corbyn and Co saying it was them that Killed the deal and put their own political ends before the people.The big problem with a second referendum giving 3 choices as suggested is this,supose the votes come out approximately 30/30/30% where are we then?"Ask the 10% what they want | |||
"Who agrees with me that the last 2 years have just been a phoney brexit. It seems inevitable to me that a 2nd referendum will be called for all the reasons and arguments that we've all endured. 2.5 years ago the referendum of 2016 asked Britain if they would should leave the EU and the answer came back, fairly inconclusively that yes we want to go. People thought there would be negotiations and a proper divorce settlement sorted but it would seem that all they've done is sat in a room now and again and gone through the motions. So we really are at the end game and know the options. Mrs May deal clearly is a clever way to get parliament, which is our own sovereign safety valve to put forward a motion for another referendum with 2 clear choices on the table. Boris Johnson's and co no deal WTO option which they are entitled to say is the way forward. They can argue that it is what the country needs to do. But who is up for the long hard years that lie ahead. It always was the option that people voted for back in 2016 but perhaps didn't realise it. Or we can remain in the EU and expect quite a lot of Humble pie and humiliation to be endured. But who is up for the long hard years ahead
Gina Miller ruling really has put the Kibosh on the Brexiteers and Mrs May has double sixed everyone with this Brilliant way of getting a second referendum under the auspices of Parliament. She can chuck a load of shit at Corbyn and Co saying it was them that Killed the deal and put their own political ends before the people.The big problem with a second referendum giving 3 choices as suggested is this,supose the votes come out approximately 30/30/30% where are we then?"2nd Preference would sort out that conundrum. | |||
"It is a bloody mess! When we had the vote nobody said anything about 2 year negotiations and then another 2+ years of transition. Yes they did. Many BREXITERS said that, after we vote Leave and trigger Article 50, we would negotiate a better trade deal with the EU than the one we currently have, because we would hold all the cards. What the Leave campaign didn't say is that we would leave the EU with a worse trade deal than we currently have or even no deal at all. As remainers have been telling us over, and over, and over again over the last 2 years though....'none of that was on the ballot paper, all it said on the ballot paper was leave the EU or remain in the EU'. The people voted to Leave the EU. I see your back on your hypocritical merry go round yet again Centy. You really need to choose which side of the argument you are on and stick to it, not choose one side for 2 years then decide to change to the other side and back again and again to suit your agenda. You accused Gina Miller of not knowing what she wanted like a yo yo. You have said dozens of times on here that promises made during the referendum did NOT need to be on the ballot paper as we all knew the rhetoric that went with each option of leave or remain. Your prime example was a vote to leave was a vote to leave the Single Market & Customs Union, though the Customs Union actually wasn't mentioned that much compared to the Single Market during that time. So you're holding the Government to their rhetoric regarding the leaving of the Single Market & a lesser extent the Customs Union as well so you can't complain when your own arguments are applied on the reverse side, Leave campaign was promising better deals etc which also wasn't on the ballot paper but we all knew the rhetoric that went with the vote to leave. So it's only right & fair this should also be upheld if the leave side of the rhetoric cannot be delivered, we can't vote for someone that isn't what was voted for can we ? "Why are you not calling out other remainers for their hypocritical merry go round then Andy? Oh yeah, thats because you are a remainer yourself aren't you. Maybe remainers need to stick to which side of the argument they are on and stick to it, not choose one side for 2 years then decide to change to the other side and back again and again to suit their agenda. When i've said on here dozens and dozens of times (as you point out) that a vote to leave meant leaving the single market and the customs union because of promises made, then remainers have replied dozens and dozens of times that it wasn't on the ballot paper, the only thing on the ballot paper was Leave or remain. Now, remainers like Craken have changed that to saying promises were made during the campaign which are not now being kept, changed the argument to suit his own agenda, so it should come as little surprise to him, you or any other remainer frankly when i throw their line back in remainers faces that they've been throwing at me for the last 2 years, that it wasn't on the ballot paper, all it said on the ballot paper was leave or remain and the country chose leave. So remainers can't complain when their own arguments are applied on the reverse side can they. So its only right and fair that this should be upheld, that people voted for what was on the ballot paper and people voted for Leave. | |||
"It is a bloody mess! When we had the vote nobody said anything about 2 year negotiations and then another 2+ years of transition. Yes they did. Many BREXITERS said that, after we vote Leave and trigger Article 50, we would negotiate a better trade deal with the EU than the one we currently have, because we would hold all the cards. What the Leave campaign didn't say is that we would leave the EU with a worse trade deal than we currently have or even no deal at all. As remainers have been telling us over, and over, and over again over the last 2 years though....'none of that was on the ballot paper, all it said on the ballot paper was leave the EU or remain in the EU'. The people voted to Leave the EU. I see your back on your hypocritical merry go round yet again Centy. You really need to choose which side of the argument you are on and stick to it, not choose one side for 2 years then decide to change to the other side and back again and again to suit your agenda. You accused Gina Miller of not knowing what she wanted like a yo yo. You have said dozens of times on here that promises made during the referendum did NOT need to be on the ballot paper as we all knew the rhetoric that went with each option of leave or remain. Your prime example was a vote to leave was a vote to leave the Single Market & Customs Union, though the Customs Union actually wasn't mentioned that much compared to the Single Market during that time. So you're holding the Government to their rhetoric regarding the leaving of the Single Market & a lesser extent the Customs Union as well so you can't complain when your own arguments are applied on the reverse side, Leave campaign was promising better deals etc which also wasn't on the ballot paper but we all knew the rhetoric that went with the vote to leave. So it's only right & fair this should also be upheld if the leave side of the rhetoric cannot be delivered, we can't vote for someone that isn't what was voted for can we ?
Why are you not calling out other remainers for their hypocritical merry go round then Andy? Oh yeah, thats because you are a remainer yourself aren't you.
Maybe remainers need to stick to which side of the argument they are on and stick to it, not choose one side for 2 years then decide to change to the other side and back again and again to suit their agenda. When i've said on here dozens and dozens of times (as you point out) that a vote to leave meant leaving the single market and the customs union because of promises made, then remainers have replied dozens and dozens of times that it wasn't on the ballot paper, the only thing on the ballot paper was Leave or remain. Now, remainers like Craken have changed that to saying promises were made during the campaign which are not now being kept, changed the argument to suit his own agenda, so it should come as little surprise to him, you or any other remainer frankly when i throw their line back in remainers faces that they've been throwing at me for the last 2 years, that it wasn't on the ballot paper, all it said on the ballot paper was leave or remain and the country chose leave. So remainers can't complain when their own arguments are applied on the reverse side can they.
So its only right and fair that this should be upheld, that people voted for what was on the ballot paper and people voted for Leave. "I'm risking a ban here but:https://youtu.be/0xGt3QmRSZY Seems some of the main campaigners were up for staying in the single market! | |||
"It is a bloody mess! When we had the vote nobody said anything about 2 year negotiations and then another 2+ years of transition. Yes they did. Many BREXITERS said that, after we vote Leave and trigger Article 50, we would negotiate a better trade deal with the EU than the one we currently have, because we would hold all the cards. What the Leave campaign didn't say is that we would leave the EU with a worse trade deal than we currently have or even no deal at all. As remainers have been telling us over, and over, and over again over the last 2 years though....'none of that was on the ballot paper, all it said on the ballot paper was leave the EU or remain in the EU'. The people voted to Leave the EU. I see your back on your hypocritical merry go round yet again Centy. You really need to choose which side of the argument you are on and stick to it, not choose one side for 2 years then decide to change to the other side and back again and again to suit your agenda. You accused Gina Miller of not knowing what she wanted like a yo yo. You have said dozens of times on here that promises made during the referendum did NOT need to be on the ballot paper as we all knew the rhetoric that went with each option of leave or remain. Your prime example was a vote to leave was a vote to leave the Single Market & Customs Union, though the Customs Union actually wasn't mentioned that much compared to the Single Market during that time. So you're holding the Government to their rhetoric regarding the leaving of the Single Market & a lesser extent the Customs Union as well so you can't complain when your own arguments are applied on the reverse side, Leave campaign was promising better deals etc which also wasn't on the ballot paper but we all knew the rhetoric that went with the vote to leave. So it's only right & fair this should also be upheld if the leave side of the rhetoric cannot be delivered, we can't vote for someone that isn't what was voted for can we ?
Why are you not calling out other remainers for their hypocritical merry go round then Andy? Oh yeah, thats because you are a remainer yourself aren't you.
Maybe remainers need to stick to which side of the argument they are on and stick to it, not choose one side for 2 years then decide to change to the other side and back again and again to suit their agenda. When i've said on here dozens and dozens of times (as you point out) that a vote to leave meant leaving the single market and the customs union because of promises made, then remainers have replied dozens and dozens of times that it wasn't on the ballot paper, the only thing on the ballot paper was Leave or remain. Now, remainers like Craken have changed that to saying promises were made during the campaign which are not now being kept, changed the argument to suit his own agenda, so it should come as little surprise to him, you or any other remainer frankly when i throw their line back in remainers faces that they've been throwing at me for the last 2 years, that it wasn't on the ballot paper, all it said on the ballot paper was leave or remain and the country chose leave. So remainers can't complain when their own arguments are applied on the reverse side can they.
So its only right and fair that this should be upheld, that people voted for what was on the ballot paper and people voted for Leave. "That's exactly your problem Centaur, I "have" previously said to fellow Remainers many times on here when this argument comes up that WE ALL KNOW what a vote to leave meant and EVERYONE KNEW the rhetoric that went with it. I've posted this many times yet just because I'm now calling YOU out for double standards on this issue you're not happy about it and you make up lies to support your unfounded statement about me. You don't seem to have a good memory on here otherwise you wouldn't post such rubbish, or I wouldn't expect you to post like you do unless your double standards , inconsistencies and lies are just your natural game. | |||
| |||
"It is a bloody mess! When we had the vote nobody said anything about 2 year negotiations and then another 2+ years of transition. Yes they did. Many BREXITERS said that, after we vote Leave and trigger Article 50, we would negotiate a better trade deal with the EU than the one we currently have, because we would hold all the cards. What the Leave campaign didn't say is that we would leave the EU with a worse trade deal than we currently have or even no deal at all. As remainers have been telling us over, and over, and over again over the last 2 years though....'none of that was on the ballot paper, all it said on the ballot paper was leave the EU or remain in the EU'. The people voted to Leave the EU. I see your back on your hypocritical merry go round yet again Centy. You really need to choose which side of the argument you are on and stick to it, not choose one side for 2 years then decide to change to the other side and back again and again to suit your agenda. You accused Gina Miller of not knowing what she wanted like a yo yo. You have said dozens of times on here that promises made during the referendum did NOT need to be on the ballot paper as we all knew the rhetoric that went with each option of leave or remain. Your prime example was a vote to leave was a vote to leave the Single Market & Customs Union, though the Customs Union actually wasn't mentioned that much compared to the Single Market during that time. So you're holding the Government to their rhetoric regarding the leaving of the Single Market & a lesser extent the Customs Union as well so you can't complain when your own arguments are applied on the reverse side, Leave campaign was promising better deals etc which also wasn't on the ballot paper but we all knew the rhetoric that went with the vote to leave. So it's only right & fair this should also be upheld if the leave side of the rhetoric cannot be delivered, we can't vote for someone that isn't what was voted for can we ?
Why are you not calling out other remainers for their hypocritical merry go round then Andy? Oh yeah, thats because you are a remainer yourself aren't you.
Maybe remainers need to stick to which side of the argument they are on and stick to it, not choose one side for 2 years then decide to change to the other side and back again and again to suit their agenda. When i've said on here dozens and dozens of times (as you point out) that a vote to leave meant leaving the single market and the customs union because of promises made, then remainers have replied dozens and dozens of times that it wasn't on the ballot paper, the only thing on the ballot paper was Leave or remain. Now, remainers like Craken have changed that to saying promises were made during the campaign which are not now being kept, changed the argument to suit his own agenda, so it should come as little surprise to him, you or any other remainer frankly when i throw their line back in remainers faces that they've been throwing at me for the last 2 years, that it wasn't on the ballot paper, all it said on the ballot paper was leave or remain and the country chose leave. So remainers can't complain when their own arguments are applied on the reverse side can they.
So its only right and fair that this should be upheld, that people voted for what was on the ballot paper and people voted for Leave. "You're logical somersaults are truly a sight to behold, yet you think you are making a coherent argument
You always run away from a direct question and try to get one of your micro-victories. Every thread that you are currently on in fact
"What contorted paths you have to go through to justify your anger
Parliament decides on the acceptability of the withdrawal agreement.
That is the sovereignty of Parliament affirmed by a UK Supreme Court ruling.
Do you approve of this?
Parliament then decides or recommends what to do next. Anyone can campaign to persuade them to take a specific course.
Renegotiation, hard Brexit, referendum, no Brexit.
Do you disagree with that?" | |||
"There are some facts about brexit that are clear, as well as hot aor and manipulation of the public, to a major degree. The conservatives chose to have a brexit referendum and following this to completely undertake a departure programme that was 100% under their own control. They chose what the negotiating positions were, the date they triggered Article 50 and it was them who negotiated it. Whoever the specific people were is less important than that it was the conservatives who have done the whole thing. That they never had key decisions settled upon the major aspects that have delayed us, such as the Irish border, and exhausted the limited time period is only a reflection on a party that is not fit to govern. They would have been dismissed in the real world of work. They have shamed the office of government. The country needs mainly to focus on this - the clear instruction they gave to that party and the near total failure in their duty to complete its undertaking. The better question for the country now is at a general election, upon who should serve the people. The EU should be requested for an extension or told to cancel Article 50, if they won't. The general election should then be the means of determining what people now want, based upon their knowledge of what's feasible, at what cost, in addition to the fuller potential costs of likely losses to people's wealth and displacement from fuller involvement with and influence of European infrastructure, such as medical licensing/standards,security, nuclear technology, transport as well as all goods and services. 2 poor prime ministers in a row, 2 years of financial losses exploring leaving Europe the wrong way, whilst the conservative party has primarily focused on keeping their internal disputes somewhat placated, all the while keeping their snouts in the trough of power. What does labour want ? Do they want in or out ? What’s there plan ? " Wrong question/focus : The conservatives should have known precisely what they wanted, before they triggered Article 50. This would have prevented almost 2 years of the debacle that the UK has had, where it's reached almost to the end, without having an EU negotiation off that even the conservative party doesn't agree to and won't vote to support. The cost to the UK since the referendum has likely run into the £billions - money that's been avoidably wasted, if the conservative party was coherent and had made an effective plan and internal agreement upon. Plus they had to have Ministers in negotiations who were competent as well as working hard at it: they seemed to fail at these too. As it stands, it's 100% an episode in UK life/political life, that was started and fully contained by Conservative-only ownership. They would not include any other political parties to integrate the political spectrum into its undertaking. Looking at other parties to consider where the blame may lie, is missing the point - the UK has had the conservative party fully impose this cluster-fuck upon it. We're at a potential turning point now, as it appears that no current proposal has the political appetite for it. I'm of the opinion that a general election would be the ideal next step, so that all parties could set out their arguments and proposals for what the UK should do next. To get a general election isn't a simple next-step but I see the current catastrophe as so potentially severe in its potential impact, brought about by governments who have created and fostered such a festering mess, that something different needs to be done soon. | |||
"There are some facts about brexit that are clear, as well as hot aor and manipulation of the public, to a major degree. The conservatives chose to have a brexit referendum and following this to completely undertake a departure programme that was 100% under their own control. They chose what the negotiating positions were, the date they triggered Article 50 and it was them who negotiated it. Whoever the specific people were is less important than that it was the conservatives who have done the whole thing. That they never had key decisions settled upon the major aspects that have delayed us, such as the Irish border, and exhausted the limited time period is only a reflection on a party that is not fit to govern. They would have been dismissed in the real world of work. They have shamed the office of government. The country needs mainly to focus on this - the clear instruction they gave to that party and the near total failure in their duty to complete its undertaking. The better question for the country now is at a general election, upon who should serve the people. The EU should be requested for an extension or told to cancel Article 50, if they won't. The general election should then be the means of determining what people now want, based upon their knowledge of what's feasible, at what cost, in addition to the fuller potential costs of likely losses to people's wealth and displacement from fuller involvement with and influence of European infrastructure, such as medical licensing/standards,security, nuclear technology, transport as well as all goods and services. 2 poor prime ministers in a row, 2 years of financial losses exploring leaving Europe the wrong way, whilst the conservative party has primarily focused on keeping their internal disputes somewhat placated, all the while keeping their snouts in the trough of power. What does labour want ? Do they want in or out ? What’s there plan ? Wrong question/focus : The conservatives should have known precisely what they wanted, before they triggered Article 50. This would have prevented almost 2 years of the debacle that the UK has had, where it's reached almost to the end, without having an EU negotiation off that even the conservative party doesn't agree to and won't vote to support. The cost to the UK since the referendum has likely run into the £billions - money that's been avoidably wasted, if the conservative party was coherent and had made an effective plan and internal agreement upon. Plus they had to have Ministers in negotiations who were competent as well as working hard at it: they seemed to fail at these too. As it stands, it's 100% an episode in UK life/political life, that was started and fully contained by Conservative-only ownership. They would not include any other political parties to integrate the political spectrum into its undertaking. Looking at other parties to consider where the blame may lie, is missing the point - the UK has had the conservative party fully impose this cluster-fuck upon it. We're at a potential turning point now, as it appears that no current proposal has the political appetite for it. I'm of the opinion that a general election would be the ideal next step, so that all parties could set out their arguments and proposals for what the UK should do next. To get a general election isn't a simple next-step but I see the current catastrophe as so potentially severe in its potential impact, brought about by governments who have created and fostered such a festering mess, that something different needs to be done soon." Do you think Labour would do a better job? Labour are not going to get a better deal out of the EU. A GE wouldn't solve the problem, a people's vote - maybe, but now is the time when parliamentarians need to stand up and earn their salary - make a decision! | |||
" The conservatives should have known precisely what they wanted, before they triggered Article 50. ." The Conservative Party did not want Brexit. But Cameron handed it to them by mistake and they have claimed ownership of it ever since. No, they had no plan. They still don't. The EU27 saw them coming from a mile off. "Tell us what you want," every leader kept saying to Mrs May when she met them. Other than some platitudes about colours in red, white and blue or whatever, she had no answer. Hence she has to grab at what is in offer. Primarily because she, nor anyone else in her party, has worked out how to square the circle in Northern Ireland. It was one of the fatal flaws with Brexit. But England and Wales seemed not to care. | |||
