EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

[anme]

This attitude I just can't understand. Surely *no one* should be actively hoping for a disastrous outcome. I suggest the above is quite revealing into the mentality of parts of the remain side.

No! I want to opposite of a disastrous outcome. It's just that the best way to achieve that may be via a short term disaster.

 

[Greg Read]

This attitude I just can't understand. Surely *no one* should be actively hoping for a disastrous outcome. I suggest the above is quite revealing into the mentality of parts of the remain side.

Agree, seems an odd thing to say, I didnt vote leave, but thats what the rest of the Country voted for, so there we have it, but we did survive for 1975 years without being in the EU and we were OK, and of course we never actually voted to join the EU, we sort of just slippedin quietly ! we DID however vote to join the common market, which was a totally different beast !

 

[Bletchleyite]

Agree, seems an odd thing to say, I didnt vote leave, but thats what the rest of the Country voted for, so there we have it, but we did survive for 1975 years without being in the EU and we were OK, and of course we never actually voted to join the EU, we sort of just slippedin quietly ! we DID however vote to join the common market, which was a totally different beast !

Yes, but extricating oneself from something like that is not the same as not being in it in the first place. Demerging a company from a large parent, for instance, is far more complex than running a small business that has never been part of a larger whole.

 

[edwin_m]

What’s wrong with that? They’re simply employing Identical tactics to those that have been proven successfully over the years by organisations like the RMT etc, in the absence of strong leadership on the opposite side.

Two wrongs don't make a right - and the main argument used, of the people's will in 2016, doesn't stand up if what you are demanding now is something different.

Although I do agree that the resistance to Brexit has been pretty feeble, whether from the Cameroons that kicked the whole thing off or from the Corbynites. And the recent spats between the anti-Brexit factions haven't been encouraging - given the alternative I'm actually becoming relatively open to the idea of a short period of Corbyn government.

 

[edwin_m]

Agree, seems an odd thing to say, I didnt vote leave, but thats what the rest of the Country voted for, so there we have it, but we did survive for 1975 years without being in the EU and we were OK, and of course we never actually voted to join the EU, we sort of just slippedin quietly ! we DID however vote to join the common market, which was a totally different beast !

Actually we were at rock bottom in the mid-seventies, having to go to the IMF for loans.

And if the EU of 2016 is different from Common Market of 1975, then the terms of being outside the EU in 2019 are very different from those promised in 2016. If one justifies going back to the people then so does the other.

 

[Esker-pades]

This attitude I just can't understand. Surely *no one* should be actively hoping for a disastrous outcome. I suggest the above is quite revealing into the mentality of parts of the remain side.

I really don't think so. This is the first place I've come across such a view. If you've got evidence, I'd really like to see it. Mainly so I can explain to them why it's such a thick idea.

 

[HSTEd]

Actually we were at rock bottom in the mid-seventies, having to go to the IMF for loans.

The UK wasn't actually doing that bad in the Mid-1970s, despite what a lot of people like to claim when they have an axe to grind.
Economic growth in the 70s was comparable to what we achieve today.
Living standards are better, but that is just the onward march of technology, not any magical benefits from adopting Blatcherism.

The economic shocks of the 70s were also far worse than what we have suffered more recently.

 

[edwin_m]

Just thinking about this.

If Boris can close Parliament down after only three more days of business, then there must be very little "mopping up" to do of legislation in the current session. This is consistent with Parliament having done very little in the last few months. This also means that if he loses a vote of no confidence during those three days, he can't claim that there is a vast amount of mopping up that justifies pushing the election into November.

Would a successful vote of no confidence cancel the prorogation?

 

[edwin_m]

The UK wasn't actually doing that bad in the Mid-1970s, despite what a lot of people like to claim when they have an axe to grind.
Economic growth in the 70s was comparable to what we achieve today.
Living standards are better, but that is just the onward march of technology, not any magical benefits from adopting Blatcherism.

The economic shocks of the 70s were also far worse than what we have suffered more recently.

20% inflation? Three day week?

 

[HSTEd]

20% inflation?

That rate of inflation is not actually high enough to cause the serious problems caused by inflation.
As interest rates were well above 10% for much of the decade, it was a long way from the catastrophic problems seen in Venezuela or ZImbabwe.

Three day week?

Three day week was hardly a cataclysm that traumatised the people who suffered it.
EDIT:
And it only went on for about nine weeks......
So not really many days off....

 

[mmh]

I really don't think so. This is the first place I've come across such a view. If you've got evidence, I'd really like to see it. Mainly so I can explain to them why it's such a thick idea.

It's not the first time the sentiment's been expressed on this forum. Personally, I've come across it on here, on Twitter, at work, in the pub...

 

[Esker-pades]

It's not the first time the sentiment's been expressed on this forum. Personally, I've come across it on here, on Twitter, at work, in the pub...

What a twisted way of thinking. Safe to say I disagree fundamentally with that point of view. There are prize turds everywhere.

 

[nidave]

"part-funded by the state" or in the case of nurses and doctors, part funded by another state. I have reservations about the UK luring trained nurses for example from countries where pay is far lower than here. Depleting other countries' health services as a cheap way of staffing the NHS without paying for training is morally questionable. Taking in nurses from other EU countries is not a damaging to those donor societies than it will be when the recruiting focus turns to much poorer third world nations.

So again your reason for leaving the EU is because of your concern of other countries problems. Yea right.

 

[anme]

What a twisted way of thinking. Safe to say I disagree fundamentally with that point of view. There are prize turds everywhere.

I think this might be aimed at me, and I don't get the righteous indignation.

I want the best possible outcome. The problem is, the current direction is towards a disaster. I would prefer that the direction is changed now, but if that's not possible then I hope we hit the disaster as quickly as possible so that we can change course as quickly as possible. The disaster is inevitable, the question is how to minimise the long term damage.

It's like removing a plaster from your skin - better to rip it off quickly than peel it off slowly.

 

[EM2]

Here's the thing. We know it's 'perfectly normal' to prorogue Parliament. What is not normal is to do it for four-and-a-half weeks, at a time of monumental national crisis, by a Prime Minister that has so far faced the Commons for one day in their Premiership.
Imagine if Remain had won and a minority Labour government was shutting down Parliament to force the UK into the Eurozone and Schengen, claiming “this is what everyone *really* voted for”.

 

[DarloRich]

As it stands though, there is no proposal, and nothing to amend. I think it's awful that, three years later, that's the state of affairs but it is. Right now the only meaningful challenge would be to abort or delay leaving, which is a reasonable stance to take; if only people could be more honest about it. The heavily Remain leaning Commons has taken three years to fail to stop Brexit. I'm very cynical that they're all of a sudden going to do anything constructive.

I want Brexit stopped. It is a mistake and it will cost all of us. It isnt going to be so lets try and sort out the least painful exit possible and reduce the risk of impact on our national life and our personal lives as much as possible. Lets not just run, full pelt, over a cliff.

The problem is not just remainers in Parliament who are to blame for the 3 years we have wasted trying to sort this mess out. The problem is also the ERG nut jobs like Mogg who wont compromise on their no deal fantasy. They are just as equally to blame for the current impasse. I am cynical THEY would allow any deal through.

Johnson didn't set the 31st October deadline, May, Tusk and other EU heads did.

Apologies you are quite right. What he did do was nail himself very firmly to that mast when he could have sought more time to try and agree a better deal. That would have been hard but with a mature approach of compromise and communication on both sides it may have been possible.

Sadly old de Piffle didn't try ( and I suspect didn't want to try) to sort things out. He went for a quick no deal hoping that he and his chums can make a fast buck and that he can use his brexit saviour tag to win back the Brexit party crackpots to the Tory side and win an election called after brexit day but before the pain really bites.

No thanks, there is really no need to be rude. I don't understand why you're being rude, but hey ho.

I am not being rude. The rules don't allow it. I notice many here complain about rudeness when they are challenged directly. I wonder why?

Thanks for proving my point. It sounds like it's been a tiring and emotional day.

Sigh. You are the one who sees our democratically elected and sovereign parliament as "wreaking" brexit. That is really worrying for the future of our society and a sad indictment of the way leave voters and their media champions have carried on. Parliament and judges and not enemies of the people or traitors or wreckers. They are doing their jobs!

I agree with you that this is an entirely proper constitutional mechanism for ending the sitting of one parliament and starting the next one. The issue I have , and the one you seem unable (or perhaps unwilling), to acknowledge is that the timing of this decision looks completely wrong and is very divisive.

It looks like an anti democratic activity, it looks like an attempt to prevent scrutiny, it looks like an attempt ( which it is) to reduce the time available for Parliament to legislate on no deal and it looks like an un elected PM behaving like a tin pot dictator afraid of criticism.

If you believe, as Johnson suggests, that this decision has nothing to do with Brexit you will believe anything!

 

[ainsworth74]

Keep it civil. No one has gone over the line yet but we're not far off. We've done so well in this thread on not going after each other on a personal level so let's try and keep it that way

 

[Esker-pades]

I think this might be aimed at me, and I don't get the righteous indignation.

I want the best possible outcome. The problem is, the current direction is towards a disaster. I would prefer that the direction is changed now, but if that's not possible then I hope we hit the disaster as quickly as possible so that we can change course as quickly as possible. The disaster is inevitable, the question is how to minimise the long term damage.

It's like removing a plaster from your skin - better to rip it off quickly than peel it off slowly.

Leaving with a deal in place will not be a disaster. It will be worse than the original, and it will be bad, but not an absolute stonking disaster (as no deal will be). No deal is to be avoided at pretty much all costs.

There is no certainty that, once a no-deal Brexit happens, we will re-enter the EU. There is no certainty that we would get a trade deal once we left without an exit deal. At best, at best, we'd be looking at 5-10 years of hell before we crawled back into the EU.

Remember, we wouldn't have all the opt outs so selling re-joining would be very, very difficult. Probably impossible. So, this "best case no deal" scenario is not going to happen. Rather, we'd have all the worst bits of leaving, plus a significant recession. So, we'd go begging to the US for a trade deal, which we'd get, and then we become slaves of US multi-nationals.


Re. the plaster analogy:
No deal is like ripping it off quickly when you're still pouring blood. Some form of deal is akin to one peeling it off slowly one a weak scab has formed. Staying in is letting the plaster falling off of its own accord.

 

[Carlisle]

Indeed - hence why I'm disappointed she was asked. The Queen is merely a vessel of power rather than someone who actively wields it.

True, however if she cares about preserving the UK as much as we were led to believe in the recent Scottish independence vote , then it’s almost impossible to envisage her believing Boris forcing through a no deal Brexit would in any way be a good idea.

 

[anme]

Let's be clear on something - unfettered free movement of labour results in a large number of people (mostly from the former Eastern bloc) living in horrendous conditions, often in illegal homes in multiple occupation. Of them, quite a number become victims of modern slavery or live on the periphery of becoming such. Few of them can avail of worker's rights. They live terrible, precarious existences. This happens here, in this country, and is a problem caused by the free movement of labour that many people champion.

Given that simply policing a problem is never enough to ensure that it goes away (think about things like CSE or drug crime), will anyone be bold enough to try and address the root cause?

Or will we simply shrug and say "hey, lower prices...what can you do?". Please don't tell me everyone's an ultra-liberal free marketeer now; it's only when it suits them.

Even though this post makes no sense, it has convinced me to become a leave supporter. So that's what I am from now.

 

[Struner]

Not being an expert on the UK constitution (for what it’s worth), how easy is it to extend such a prorogation?

 

[Struner]

Even though this post makes no sense, it has convinced me to become a leave supporter. So that's what I am from now.

Lol

 

[anme]

Re. the plaster analogy:
No deal is like ripping it off quickly when you're still pouring blood. Some form of deal is akin to one peeling it off slowly one a weak scab has formed. Staying in is letting the plaster falling off of its own accord.

No deal is like ripping the yolk off the British people and setting them free. Any form of deal is as bad as slavery. Maybe worse.

 

[mmh]

Not being an expert on the UK constitution (for what it’s worth), how easy is it to extend such a prorogation?

That just wouldn't happen. The Queen is now booked for the State Opening of Parliament, and you don't play games with her tour diary!

 

[Esker-pades]

No deal is like ripping the yolk off the British people and setting them free. Any form of deal is as bad as slavery. Maybe worse.

And there, rational debate has departed.

 

[anme]

Two wrongs don't make a right - and the main argument used, of the people's will in 2016, doesn't stand up if what you are demanding now is something different.

The people's will was clearly expressed in 2016 via a simple question. Of course, the real world is more complex, so the instruction of the people must be interpreted by those we democratically elect, such as Boris Johnson. He is quite right to shut down parliament when try to get in the way of democracy.

 

[Struner]

That just wouldn't happen. The Queen is now booked for the State Opening of Parliament, and you don't play games with her tour diary!

But that’s the only problem? Doesn’t she have to do as told by the pm?

 

[najaB]

Despite being a committed remainer I do feel a sense of relief that something is finally happening. Whatever you think of Johnson he is doing something and accepts that he will be held responsible for the outcome.

I'm not so sure about that.... He's already been floating the idea the either the EU as a whole or Ireland in particular are responsible for No Deal.

 

[Struner]

The people's will was clearly expressed in 2016 via a simple question. Of course, the real world is more complex, so the instruction of the people must be interpreted by those we democratically elect, such as Boris Johnson. He is quite right to shut down parliament when try to get in the way of democracy.

& this charlatan Johnson is the UK’s elected pm?

 

[anme]

I'm not so sure about that.... He's already been floating the idea the either the EU as a whole or Ireland in particular are responsible for No Deal.

It is the EU and Ireland's fault! The UK democratically voted to leave the EU. The EU and Ireland must accept that and give us what we voted for! That's democracy!