EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

Status
Not open for further replies.

Groningen

Established Member
Joined
14 Jan 2015
Messages
2,868
Rightwing listens/hears only Fox News. If they say that Nigel Farage is opposition leader in UK, than they believe that.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Johnuk123

Established Member
Joined
19 Mar 2012
Messages
2,802
Who is to blame is irrelevant (so is Farage). The fact is the current administration is all at sea about the biggest change to the UK for 50 years but they still keep plodding on.
What do you mean "they still keep plodding on" are you saying as they have no plan they should simply give up and forget Brexit.
To be fair to May although she's a committed Remainer she can't be blamed for there being no plan.
 

Railops

Member
Joined
14 Apr 2016
Messages
352
Cameron said more than once if he lost the vote he would remain as pm so he thought he could be in charge of a Brexit Govt.

So to deliberately do nothing is a dereliction of duty.

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/constitution/european-integration/news/76968/top-tory-mp-slams-gross-negligence-david

Mr Blunt let rip at the minister, arguing the lack of planning “contrasts” with efforts made by the Bank of England in the run up to the vote, and that Mr Letwin had been left “picking up the pieces” of Mr Cameron's mistake.

“How much is it an act gross negligence that this contingency planning was not undertaken before the referendum?” he asked.

“It was frankly a dereliction of duty for there to be no contingency planning.

“Since there were only two options it might have been an idea to plan for both, don’t you think?”

Mr Letwin repeated that the task would be one for the next prime minister, but an outraged Mr Blunt noted Mr Cameron had insisted he would not stand down regardless of the vote.

“The Prime Minister says he’s staying and orders there to be no contingency planning, thereby making it quite impossible for him to stay in those circumstances since he would then be seen as negligent,” he railed.
 

TheKnightWho

Established Member
Joined
17 Oct 2012
Messages
3,185
Location
Oxford
Yet again you've refused to answer why the Leave side had no coherent plan.

Like I said: personal responsibility seems to be something you apply selectively.
 

Railops

Member
Joined
14 Apr 2016
Messages
352
Yet again you've refused to answer why the Leave side had no coherent plan.

Like I said: personal responsibility seems to be something you apply selectively.
For the second time any responsible Govt. should have done equal work on both possible outcomes.
Are you saying mp's on the Leave side had the full use of the home office civil servants like Cameron did ? because they didn't.Any work they could have done would have been minimal.
The Govt's job was to plan properly and it didn't because it was arrogant in assuming it was going to win.
 

TheKnightWho

Established Member
Joined
17 Oct 2012
Messages
3,185
Location
Oxford
For the second time any responsible Govt. should have done equal work on both possible outcomes.
Are you saying mp's on the Leave side had the full use of the home office civil servants like Cameron did ? because they didn't.Any work they could have done would have been minimal.
The Govt's job was to plan properly and it didn't because it was arrogant in assuming it was going to win.
Why? It wasn't their position.

Leave MPs were capable of strategising, because they had the resources to do so and also the capability of meeting up and setting out a coherent, believable plan.

I also don't see why you're bothered about what the Home Office would do: when they supported remain you rubbished all of their work. By that logic, anything they came up with for Leave would be equally biased and useless.

Your position is simply incoherent, and is a blatant attempt to buck responsibility for failure to have a plan.
 

miami

Established Member
Joined
3 Oct 2015
Messages
2,530
Location
UK
A plan is simple.

Question why people voted leave. Massive census style questionnaire
Take the top few items
Fix them (e.g. Don't let turkey or Syria join the Eu)
Offer two options
1) the great repeal ban (with the usual WTO tariffs on exit as we flush dozens of trade agreements down the toilet)
2) the option to back out now and not actually leave


I suspect leave won't like that, and that's why it's up to leave to come up with a plan they can all live by.
 

Blamethrower

Member
Joined
13 Oct 2014
Messages
384
Location
Bedfordshire
Why? It wasn't their position.

Leave MPs were capable of strategising, because they had the resources to do so and also the capability of meeting up and setting out a coherent, believable plan.

I also don't see why you're bothered about what the Home Office would do: when they supported remain you rubbished all of their work. By that logic, anything they came up with for Leave would be equally biased and useless.

Your position is simply incoherent, and is a blatant attempt to buck responsibility for failure to have a plan.
It's the government's job to invoke the will of the people. Who was on what side is irrelevant.

Are you saying that the PM (who was a remainer) should just pass the buck and say "well you guys voted for it so you can implement it"?

They are the government, they should do the job that they are paid for, regardless of whether you agree with it or not. It is simply a fact of life for anyone with a job, which clearly isn't you
 

Johnuk123

Established Member
Joined
19 Mar 2012
Messages
2,802
Why? It wasn't their position.

Leave MPs were capable of strategising, because they had the resources to do so and also the capability of meeting up and setting out a coherent, believable plan.

I also don't see why you're bothered about what the Home Office would do: when they supported remain you rubbished all of their work. By that logic, anything they came up with for Leave would be equally biased and useless.

Your position is simply incoherent, and is a blatant attempt to buck responsibility for failure to have a plan.

"It wasn't their position" you say so they had no reason to plan for the Leave outcome, what an inane and ridiculous thing to say.
Every decent general going into a battle always has plans for possible outcomes, it's simply common sense.
Trying to claim because Cameron thought he'd win he had no reason to plan for the opposite is blatantly stupid.

Junker was the same when he said-
If I would say now that we have a plan B, this would indicate a kind of willingness of the Commission to envisage seriously that Britain could leave the European Union,” Juncker said.“We don’t have a plan B, we have a plan A. Britain will stay in the European Union as a constructive and active member of the Union.”
 

TheKnightWho

Established Member
Joined
17 Oct 2012
Messages
3,185
Location
Oxford
It's the government's job to invoke the will of the people. Who was on what side is irrelevant.

Are you saying that the PM (who was a remainer) should just pass the buck and say "well you guys voted for it so you can implement it"?

They are the government, they should do the job that they are paid for, regardless of whether you agree with it or not. It is simply a fact of life for anyone with a job, which clearly isn't you
And it's parliament's job to represent the people. There are plenty of Leave MPs and Lords who could have got together to come up with a unified plan. They didn't.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
"It wasn't their position" you say so they had no reason to plan for the Leave outcome, what an inane and ridiculous thing to say.
Every decent general going into a battle always has plans for possible outcomes, it's simply common sense.
Trying to claim because Cameron thought he'd win he had no reason to plan for the opposite is blatantly stupid.

Junker was the same when he said-
So why didn't the Leave members of parliament do that themselves? They're still our representatives. The government is not the only institution with responsibilities here.

What is blatantly stupid is watching Leavers flail to blame everyone but themselves for the mess we're in. If you wanted Britain to prosper in a position the government did not believe in, do the leg-work yourself. Otherwise, how can you hope for things to work out?
 
Last edited:

TheKnightWho

Established Member
Joined
17 Oct 2012
Messages
3,185
Location
Oxford
Keep digging and digging you may get somewhere eventually.
You have no response to a question I've posed several times. Why did no Leave MPs get together and come up with a unified plan? It's not my fault you don't know the difference between the government and parliament.

The only person digging here is you, as you keep attempting to buck responsibility for jumping into the unknown with no plan.
 

Howardh

Established Member
Joined
17 May 2011
Messages
5,327
Everyone seemst to be talking about hard and soft Brexit and all stations inbetween. However, if the pressure business is putting on the government is correct, then we will have TWO Brexits. One for business, ie. a non-Brexit where they can trade freely with the minimum of barriers, and a hard Brexit for the rest of us.

Somewhere along the line someone has to be brave enough and shout "stop". Might be against the public mandate - and even that might have changed now everything's becoming cl...no, everything's coming anything but clearer.

There's stuff out there that politicians should prioritise, the NHS, education, infrastructure, our ageing population etc etc and Brexit is taking the attention away from them, devouring hours upon hours of civil servants time and money. Stop. Put A50 aside for five years, get an elite group together to spend time to make a plan and let's see where we are then. At that point the EU may be imploding on itself and we have the upper hand, or it might have (might) seen the light and offer migration controls, be a less gigantic operation and all that.
 

Railops

Member
Joined
14 Apr 2016
Messages
352
You have no response to a question I've posed several times. Why did no Leave MPs get together and come up with a unified plan? It's not my fault you don't know the difference between the government and parliament.

The only person digging here is you, as you keep attempting to buck responsibility for jumping into the unknown with no plan.
For the third time they didn't have the massive resources the Govt. have, what they could have done is tiny and would have been insignificant.
I remember at the time they were complaining that they couldn't get hold of any figures and information and the Tories were being deliberately awkward.
The Govt. should have planned for both outcomes, you think they should have buried their head in their hands and hoped for the best which is ridiculous.

What you're saying is a responsible Govt. has no need to plan for any eventuality if they don't think it will happen.
I think you'll find that view wouldn't be shared by many people with any basic intelligence.
 

Baxenden Bank

Established Member
Joined
23 Oct 2013
Messages
1,704
As a campaign strategy, to say that there is only one outcome (Plan A), and that there are no sensible alternatives (Plan B etc) is fine. That's how to campaign.

But to actually have no Plan B (and more) is simply incompetent. As someone posted much earlier, you expect the government to have contingency plans for every scenario somewhere (gathering dust in a drawer). They rehearse the Queen's death often enough. They spent a fortune on Bird Flu scenario planning and contingencies. Why not the referendum result? Bury your head in the sand and go 'la la la' because it's not going to happen.

What if one of our few power stations spectacularly fails today with a long term failure, how will we get electricity, is there not a contingency plan worked out to suck more juice from France through the channel interconnector? software in place to ration supply to key installations, emergency generators and the like.

If London's water supply is contaminated, is there not a plan (and a warehouse full of hoses) to run a hose down the A1 and guard it with troops?
 

TheKnightWho

Established Member
Joined
17 Oct 2012
Messages
3,185
Location
Oxford
For the third time they didn't have the massive resources the Govt. have, what they could have done is tiny and would have been insignificant.
I remember at the time they were complaining that they couldn't get hold of any figures and information and the Tories were being deliberately awkward.
The Govt. should have planned for both outcomes, you think they should have buried their head in their hands and hoped for the best which is ridiculous.

What you're saying is a responsible Govt. has no need to plan for any eventuality if they don't think it will happen.
I think you'll find that view wouldn't be shared by many people with any basic intelligence.
And as I have already said, you rubbished the results of those "resources" when they worked for Remain. Why would anything they produced for Leave suddenly become reliable? As I also said earlier: your position is incoherent.

If Leave want a good plan, they should have got their elected representatives who support their position to have come up with one. Just as is the case for absolutely everything else. The idea that it's the responsibility of the executive, and not dissenting areas of the legislature, to plan for eventualities the executive don't support is just pure ignorance.

What continues to amaze me is how little the most ardent Leave members of this forum are about how our parliamentary democracy actually functions. It doesn't bode well for their understanding of the UK's relationship with the EU.

You brought this upon yourselves. Lie in your bed and take responsibility for it.
 
Last edited:

Baxenden Bank

Established Member
Joined
23 Oct 2013
Messages
1,704
He's never bothered turning up for work and it seems people like him for it. This is your "man of the people", everyone. He gets a ~£6,537 per month salary, and is happy to make full use of the expenses system too, yet has participated in less than half of the parliament's votes.
Farage is not a man of the people.

Trump is not a man on the people.

That is quite clear and it does not take much deep thinking to work that out.

However, Farage had his uses by getting an unwilling government (and opposition) to give us a referendum. Now it is time to ditch the UKIPpers to the obscurity that they deserve.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Problem is, Farage is like Trump, seemingly immune to criticism that would destroy a lot of moderate politicans.

I suspect a lot of people who voted for Trump and Farage/UKIP didn't necessarily like the men, but supported the message and see them as the only people prepared to stand up and say it.
They were supported because they are the only people to stand and and say anything.
 

AM9

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
8,081
Location
St Albans
What do you mean "they still keep plodding on" are you saying as they have no plan they should simply give up and forget Brexit.
To be fair to May although she's a committed Remainer she can't be blamed for there being no plan.
How much has even been defined* in the four months since the new lot claimed to be the government? Sounds like feet of clay to me.
We'll see in March 2017 when they still don't know what they are aiming at, - it'll be like watching them wade through treacle. I doubt that the public will have that much patience and the rants of the anti-immigration voters will slowly be dampened down.

* as in more than three leading ministers agree with each other
 

Domh245

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2013
Messages
5,352
Location
Nottingham
By leave not tying themselves to a plan, they were able to sell a leave vote. Hate immigrants? Vote leave. Think the NHS is broken? Vote leave. Want to stick it to the establishment? Vote leave. Etc. If they had to tie themselves to a plan, they'd have started to lose votes
 

NSEFAN

Established Member
Joined
17 Jun 2007
Messages
3,318
Location
Southampton
If it wasn't the government's intention to leave the EU then the referendum should not have been promised and then actually called, or at least it should have been made clear to the public from the outset that it was not legally binding. The only force now that will make us Brexit is a political one, but how exactly it pans out is anyone's guess at this point.
 

TheKnightWho

Established Member
Joined
17 Oct 2012
Messages
3,185
Location
Oxford
By leave not tying themselves to a plan, they were able to sell a leave vote. Hate immigrants? Vote leave. Think the NHS is broken? Vote leave. Want to stick it to the establishment? Vote leave. Etc. If they had to tie themselves to a plan, they'd have started to lose votes
Of course this was the real reason they came up with no plan. Almost like it was a giant, contradictory con...

No wonder the papers are throwing fits because the courts rule parliament should have a say on Brexit: they wanted to sell it on a million different, mutually exclusive platforms, and then force through the one that suited them the most, all in the name of democracy.

It'd be funny if it wasn't so dangerous.
 

Johnuk123

Established Member
Joined
19 Mar 2012
Messages
2,802
To say that a Government of the day with a view on the referendum should only plan for that outcome because they think it will go their way is the most rank stupid idea I've ever heard.
I wonder how many people would say a Govt. should only ever plan for what it thinks will happen and never be prepared for what might happen, very few I would imagine.
 
Last edited:

Baxenden Bank

Established Member
Joined
23 Oct 2013
Messages
1,704
The reason that Leave have no coherent plan is because they were entirely surprised to win.
Did the leave camp actually want to win? Or do they just want to be a pain in the governments side, jockey for position and play student style politics. Boris Johnson, it would seem, campaigned falsely. As a result he gets rewarded by becoming Foreign Secretary!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
And as I have already said, you rubbished the results of those "resources" when they worked for Remain. Why would anything they produced for Leave suddenly become reliable? As I also said earlier: your position is incoherent.
Because civil servants are supposed to be politically neutral. They should consider all outcomes. They offer impartial advice to government, not simply produce a report in favour of what the minister wants to hear. That means options analysis and contingency planning.


If Leave want a good plan, they should have got their elected representatives who support their position to have come up with one.
Neither camp had a decent plan. Hard or soft exit. Hard or soft remain. The remain campaign consisted of terrify the electorate and then muddle on as now with no clear strategy of what we (the nation) actually wants from its membership of Europe.

You brought this upon yourselves. Lie in your bed and take responsibility for it.
So, you finally accept the given will of the people and we should go for exit? Ignore the non-voters - they had the choice to give their opinion and chose not to do so. Of those that voted, they voted for exit. End of.
 

EM2

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
7,523
Location
The home of the concrete cow
For the third time they didn't have the massive resources the Govt. have, what they could have done is tiny and would have been insignificant.
I remember at the time they were complaining that they couldn't get hold of any figures and information and the Tories were being deliberately awkward.
Well, they had enough information to want to give £350m a week to the NHS, and to cut immigration to tens of thousands, and loudly proclaim it on buses and posters.
 

TheKnightWho

Established Member
Joined
17 Oct 2012
Messages
3,185
Location
Oxford
To say that a Government of the day with a view on the referendum should only plan for that outcome because they think it will go their way is the most rank stupid idea I've ever heard.
I wonder how many people would say a Govt. should only ever plan for what it thinks will happen and never be prepared for what might happen, very few I would imagine.
Do you understand the difference between the government about our elected MPs? You do realise our elected representatives who supported Leave could have come up with a plan?
 

miami

Established Member
Joined
3 Oct 2015
Messages
2,530
Location
UK
You couldn't make it up

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...britain-will-now-help-turkey-join-eu-despite/
Boris Johnson has announced that Britain will support Turkey's bid to join the EU despite putting warnings about the prospect at the heart of the Brexit campaign in the run up to the referendum.

During the EU referendum Mr Johnson warned that the accession of Turkey would give millions of migrants the right to live and work in the UK. The claim was one of the most controversial of the referendum campaign and led to accusations by senior Remain campaigners that Mr Johnson had lied.

But yesterday, during his first official visit to Turkey, Mr Johnson said that Britain will "help Turkey in any way" now that it is leaving the EU. He also declined to apologise for previously writing a limerick about the "love that flowers" between the Turkish President and a goat.
 

gareth950

Member
Joined
3 Nov 2013
Messages
1,009
Of course this was the real reason they came up with no plan. Almost like it was a giant, contradictory con...

No wonder the papers are throwing fits because the courts rule parliament should have a say on Brexit: they wanted to sell it on a million different, mutually exclusive platforms, and then force through the one that suited them the most, all in the name of democracy.

It'd be funny if it wasn't so dangerous.
On BBC Wales Today last night, their political editor was 'out and about' with 3 politicians on the streets of Ebbw Vale, the part of Wales that voted most heavily in favour of leave, despite the number of immigrants up there being virtually nil and receiving the most money in Wales from the EU, to get the views of the people. What they recorded was frightening.

From the clips that were played, the people interviewed just repeated the lies and rubbish that has been fed to them by the Express, the Mail and the Sun. There was no chance of remain winning up there when nearly everyone got their news and information from a lying and corrupt press.

Reporter: What's your main concern?
Person: Well it's the immigrants, they're coming over 'ere on holidays and bleeding our NHS dry. They're having operations on the NHS and not being charged for them and then go home. They're the reason our NHS is collapsing.
Politician: You know that there are a lot of immigrants who are working in the NHS?
Person: Yes but they come over 'ere.....................

Another clip, of a nice old lady

Old lady: I know it's going to be difficult, what, maybe for a year is it? (looks intently at the reporter and politicians to back her up by they just look expressionless back at her) but if we all 'cut our cloth' like my mam used to do, then we'll all be alright and it will be worth it.

The newspapers and their persistent campaigns of lies and hate over many years are the main reason why Leave 'won' the referendum. The general public were so ill informed it's beyond frightening.
 

Johnuk123

Established Member
Joined
19 Mar 2012
Messages
2,802
Do you understand the difference between the government about our elected MPs? You do realise our elected representatives who supported Leave could have come up with a plan?
Give it a rest, anybody without your agenda can easily see your argument is rubbish, you simply cannot leave it alone you'll be in Australia soon with the speed of your shovel.

To say the Govt. had a position and so they had no need to plan for the other position is even by your standards quite a ridiculous statement but no doubt you believe it so carry on believing it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top