Brexit discussion thread VII (Please read OP before posting)

fash · 27-02-2019 8:31pm

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

My outside bet is the HoC will cop out of making a decision and hand that decision back to the people in the form of a second referendum. It gets everyone off the hook, but its a huge cop out. The EU have done what they are very good at, making it impossible for anyone to walk away. They really are similar to the mafia in that regard.

So what you want is for the EU to collude with the UK to breach the GFA and install a hard border in Ireland - against the wishes of the people on both sides of the border?
And you call the EU a “mafia” for not colluding with the UK?

It sounds like your definition of “mafia” is quite different to mine.

The only entity in this fiasco which has acted with reckless and willful disregard as regards its legal obligations is the UK. Hence only it should be compared to an organisation engaging in illegal activity.

ambro25 · 27-02-2019 8:31pm

Akrasia wrote: »

What about if they withdrew A50 (due to lack of time for a referendum) and legally committed to holding another referendum in 12 months based on a concrete proposal that is workable and deliberable with the EU?

That course of action would not meet the legal test of good faith required to get the withdrawal of Article 50 approved by the EU27, so it's a non-starter.

Sam Russell · 27-02-2019 8:31pm

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

As for referendum lies turns out the Remain side weren't blameless either.

https://m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/matthew-ellery/leave-lies-remainers-need_b_12191462.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmllLw&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAALp24Sz79D012i6YV5bUiv0UdQBuD9iPg114zGoF0PtYOM2j-fF4GHJYhg5wLx-jahTGhc9tacNOqh39AO72daU5kbK2_iDvCivIXXY5Nw9ZYap-4NqynYHAIbzufHUMHb2Lvvqz-S2GpG6Kb9RnhHmsfzLGpW5IlxeNEZnemc4F

Just one quote from the above artice, which is nearly 18 months old, before Brexit has happened.

We were told companies would leave the UK in their droves, especially in the car industry. There is no sign of this, and UK car manufacturing achieving its 12th successive month of growth in July, with production passing one million units in seven months for the first time in 12 years. Lie number 7.

Now you might check out Honda, Nissan, JLR, Ford, BMW, etc. and see how much any of them are investing on future models and how many expect to be in the UK in five years. Honda will be gone in two years. BMW have shut their Mini production line for April 2019 in anticipation of Brexit crash out.

Lots of other lies in the article - lots.

[Edit: beaten by the Prof!]

Christy42 · 27-02-2019 8:35pm

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Christy42 wrote: »

Honestly at a certain point you have to realise that people voting to jump off a cliff is just a bad idea.

It is also not helped by the vagueness of the vote. Our SSM and abortion referendum clearly showed what was going to be in effect before the referendum.

With this what was the wishes of those voting leave? Did they soft or hard or no deal? Did they want a Norway style arrangement (as promised during the referendum) or did they want a referendum on the final choices (again promised by the leave side).

People keep saying to go with the wishes of 17m people but they only have a vague idea of what those people voted for.

So politicians and Eurocrats know best?

Sometimes you also have to give the people a choice. They had their say, they now need to own their decision.

If one good thing comes from this its that people will engage with politics more closely in future and inform themselves of all the details.

To revoke A50 means another referendum imo.

Well I didn't say the first line. I was more referring to every serious body showing no deal as a doomsday scenario for the economy.

I am all in favour of giving people a choice. Reread my post and you will see that. A referendum between a choice and a mystery box is stupid as it does not give them a real choice. Let people vote on the outcomes.

Again I ask. How do you know people did not vote for a Norway style arrangement? Or have something like the WA in mind? I am saying since we don't know what they want bloody well ask them instead of claiming you know more than a vague "leave" for 17 million voters.

Give them a real choice and if they go for a no deal then I will wave them off the cliff happily or accept whatever decision they make.

Akrasia · 27-02-2019 8:35pm

ambro25 wrote: »

That course of action would not meet the legal test of good faith required to get the withdrawal of Article 50 approved by the EU27, so it's a non-starter.

It depends on whether the UK was upfront with the EU before they started. That would be a matter for the courts to decide but given all the available outcomes, the EU has already said that they would give the UK time to hold a 2nd referendum. If doing it that way was the only way to get it past the house, and they were honest about it, then I don't see how it could be described as acting in bad faith.

An Ciarraioch · 27-02-2019 8:36pm

SNP amendment defeated by 36 votes, and Costa accepted by House, so voting now on Cooper amendment.

Akrasia · 27-02-2019 8:40pm

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

It really is frustrating to be offered a link as proof of something only to follow it and realise that the poster probably hasn't read the linked article. I'm guessing you didn't realise that it was written 18 months ago either? Let me give you an example as to why it is so ludicrously wrong. From the article:

We were told companies would leave the UK in their droves, especially in the car industry. There is no sign of this, and UK car manufacturing achieving its 12th successive month of growth in July.

Just for context, recent reports are that Car manufacturing output is at a 5 year low, down 10% over 2018 in total, and down 20% in November and December and investment in the industry has fallen by about 50%

https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/car-news/105846/uk-car-manufacturing-and-investment-hit-by-deeply-depressing-decline

But never mind, the Remain side lied when they said Brexit would be bad for Industry in the UK

Strazdas · 27-02-2019 8:41pm

Akrasia wrote: »

To take your point on it's face, That would make it worse, not better.

A referendum where both sides are lying is even less democratic than one where only one side is lying.

How are the people supposed to make an informed choice when all the information is fundamentally tainted?

Indeed, lying by both sides would make the referendum twice as tainted and twice as discredited.

It's astonishing that nobody in the UK can admit the referendum was a complete shambles and probably the most flawed one ever held in Europe. It does show how the British hard right are driving forward the political narrative.....anyone who even dares to suggest this is dismissed as a traitor and and an anti-democrat.

Professor Moriarty · 27-02-2019 8:42pm

Akrasia wrote: »

Just for context, recent reports are that Car manufacturing output is at a 5 year low, down 10% over 2018 in total, and down 20% in November and December and investment in the industry has fallen by about 50%

https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/car-news/105846/uk-car-manufacturing-and-investment-hit-by-deeply-depressing-decline

But never mind, the Remain side lied when they said Brexit would be bad for Industry in the UK

It's annoying when posters simply google a sentence and if a headline matches the sentence then they just link to it. Anyway and sadly, the Remoaners are being proved right.

fly_agaric · 27-02-2019 8:46pm

France will block Brexit delay without 'new choice' by UK

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

This just plays right into the hands of hardline brexiteers who claim the EU never give anything back to the UK.

If the agreement is voted down again, no new workable ideas/plans emerge & a last minute request for extension of Article 50 period is not agreed by the EU, Brexit "Freedom Day" celebrations can proceed on the 29th as scheduled.
Brexiteer politicians and the leave-voting UK public should be happy.

Akrasia · 27-02-2019 8:52pm

Cooper won 502 - 20

Narrow win there

Not that it makes a difference, it's not binding and fits in with what TM has already proposed

An Ciarraioch · 27-02-2019 9:02pm

Appears ERG is split:

http://twitter.com/BenPBradshaw/status/1100843044117639169

Laois_Man · 27-02-2019 9:06pm

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Like I said if article 50 is withdrawen its unlikely to happen without a second referendum which adds another year to this absolute nightmare. Does anyone want to see the Brexit debates rehashed again for another year.

You're off your head if you think this isn't going to continue for another year regardless (plus possibly another 5 at least - depending on the outcome)

Christy42 wrote: »

Again I ask. How do you know people did not vote for a Norway style arrangement? Or have something like the WA in mind? I am saying since we don't know what they want bloody well ask them instead of claiming you know more than a vague "leave" for 17 million voters.

So then should hey be presented with a ballot paper that has no "Remain" option on it, just 2 or 3 forms of exiting?

gooch2k9 · 27-02-2019 9:13pm

Nice line about the ERG split in The Guardian!

Continuity ERG versus the Provisional ERG, if you like.

ToBeFrank123 · 27-02-2019 9:40pm

Seth Brundle wrote: »

I'm well used to referenda.
Firstly, no other country would provide a referendum on something so huge as leaving the EU. It's too big a change to place in one binary choice.
The levels of misinformation from the political parties was unprecedented. We have a good referendum commission who provide facts impartially. The UK have no such body which was a massive issue.
We don't have the fraud involved in the Brexit referendum but I believe that we're it to happen it would have been investigated and actions.
The UK electorate didn't make a mistake IMO. They were sold a lemon by those who they trusted. They were lied to.
I'm used to referenda. I'm not used to the likes of the Brexit ref with its stupid choice and illegal manipulationif the electorate.

Nonetheless, I'm correct in that approx 50 million UK citizens did not choose Brexit so stop with your crap about how the "wishes" of 17million peopke cannot be ignored

Your point is utter nonsense. The population of Ireland is 4.8 million. 1.4 million voted to repeal the 8th. If we follow your rarionale, 3.4 million or the vast majority didn't choose to repeal the 8th. Should the referendum result be ignored because of that? Of course it shouldn't!

oscarBravo · 27-02-2019 9:45pm

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Your point is utter nonsense. The population of Ireland is 4.8 million. 1.4 million voted to repeal the 8th. If we follow your rarionale, 3.4 million or the vast majority didn't choose to repeal the 8th. Should the referendum result be ignored because of that? Of course it shouldn't!

Not a single one of those 3.4 million will ever, ever have to have an abortion against their will. In practical terms, there are no negative consequences (other than butthurt) to them.

Can you say the same about those who didn't vote for Brexit?

ToBeFrank123 · 27-02-2019 9:50pm

Akrasia wrote: »

To take your point on it's face, That would make it worse, not better.

A referendum where both sides are lying is even less democratic than one where only one side is lying.

How are the people supposed to make an informed choice when all the information is fundamentally tainted?

There will always be fear mongering on both sides of a referendum and inaccuracies and lies. The truth is the Remain side ran a poor campaign in 2016 and completely undersold EU benefits and also the difficulty of leaving. They were afraid to debate with Farage and put up Nick Clegg whose stock was at an all time low at the time. Tony Blair also didn't help the remain side. He turns off voters in droves.
It was up to the Remain side to convince voters to remain and they couldn't.

Spanish Eyes · 27-02-2019 9:57pm

Was I dreaming or did I read somewhere that the Cooper amendment was being withdrawn since May's statement covered it anyway?

I hope she sprung it on them in the HoC and they didn't know what to do lol.

ToBeFrank123 · 27-02-2019 9:58pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

Not a single one of those 3.4 million will ever, ever have to have an abortion against their will. In practical terms, there are no negative consequences (other than butthurt) to them.

Can you say the same about those who didn't vote for Brexit?

Nope sorry. I'm not going down this frankly idiotic route. Because where does it end? Scottish referendum result? Every democratic referendum result in history? A referendum result is a referendum result. As for those over 18 at the time, were fit and able, and didn't vote, tough sh1t. They had their chance. People can complain all they want but if they are eligible to vote and don't they've missed their chance.

fash · 27-02-2019 10:00pm

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

SNP amendment defeated by 36 votes, and Costa accepted by House, so voting now on Cooper amendment.

The Costa amendment is actually a pretty decent chess move by the UK- putting pressure on the EU to reciprocate as regards not holding Brits abroad "hostage" to a no deal and splitting the WA. Imagine how things would have been different if the UK had actual competent "chess players" from the start.

Leroy42 · 27-02-2019 10:04pm

except isn't it down to each country how they will treat 3rd country residents after Brexit rather than an EU decision?

And even if not, if one of the main factors in Brexit was FOM then how does guaranteeing EU citizens rights keep with that?

can eu nationals currently living in the UK stay and work forever? what about their family? they they leave and come back?

Strazdas · 27-02-2019 10:05pm

Fortright stuff from Dominic Grieve saying he has been getting hundreds of emails from people demanding the UK go for No Deal in order to get away from the "evil EU":

https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1100816362291806208

Akrasia · 27-02-2019 10:05pm

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Your point is utter nonsense. The population of Ireland is 4.8 million. 1.4 million voted to repeal the 8th. If we follow your rarionale, 3.4 million or the vast majority didn't choose to repeal the 8th. Should the referendum result be ignored because of that? Of course it shouldn't!

How can anyone say the brexit referendum result has been ignored?

fash · 27-02-2019 10:12pm

Leroy42 wrote: »

except isn't it down to each country how they will treat 3rd country residents after Brexit rather than an EU decision?

True for those citizens going forward - it doesn't necessarily apply to those who moved as EU citizens - especially if the UK does it for all EU citizens and says "we've done it for you- now you do it for us". I agree it is a simpler task for the UK to do - but it creates an interesting moral pressure.

And even if not, if one of the main factors in Brexit was FOM then how does guaranteeing EU citizens rights keep with that?

Again the distinction is between those now marooned behind a new border and those who look to move afterwards.

Leroy42 wrote: »

can eu nationals currently living in the UK stay and work forever? what about their family? they they leave and come back?

I don't know the full details proposed.

ToBeFrank123 · 27-02-2019 10:13pm

Strazdas wrote: »

Indeed, lying by both sides would make the referendum twice as tainted and twice as discredited.

It's astonishing that nobody in the UK can admit the referendum was a complete shambles and probably the most flawed one ever held in Europe. It does show how the British hard right are driving forward the political narrative.....anyone who even dares to suggest this is dismissed as a traitor and and an anti-democrat.

Good luck organising the perfect referendum where nobody lies. Its never happened before.
The bull**** spouted by the SNP for the scottish referendum was a sight to behold. They nearly convinced people they could keep the pound.

ToBeFrank123 · 27-02-2019 10:15pm

Akrasia wrote: »

How can anyone say the brexit referendum result has been ignored?

Read back the posts I was responding to and the point made by Seth. I never said it was ignored.

A Dub in Glasgo · 27-02-2019 10:18pm

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

The bull**** spouted by the SNP for the scottish referendum was a sight to behold. They nearly convinced people they could keep the pound.

Why exactly could an independent Scotland not keep the pound?

Christy42 · 27-02-2019 10:21pm

Laois_Man wrote: »

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Like I said if article 50 is withdrawen its unlikely to happen without a second referendum which adds another year to this absolute nightmare. Does anyone want to see the Brexit debates rehashed again for another year.

You're off your head if you think this isn't going to continue for another year regardless (plus possibly another 5 at least - depending on the outcome)

Christy42 wrote: »

Again I ask. How do you know people did not vote for a Norway style arrangement? Or have something like the WA in mind? I am saying since we don't know what they want bloody well ask them instead of claiming you know more than a vague "leave" for 17 million voters.

So then should hey be presented with a ballot paper that has no "Remain" option on it, just 2 or 3 forms of exiting?

Just 2 or 3 forms of leave on the ballot I could understand and would respect as better than this mess (though should have been done months ago). Then people could say the people for this option instead of people saying 17m voted leave and therefore anything but my specific version of leave is undemocratic.

However I would have remain on there and use a PR system to ensure multiple leave options don't split the vote. Someone may want a Norway style arrangement but prefer to remain over no deal or someone may have realised what they voted for is not possible and decide remain is the best option.

ToBeFrank123 · 27-02-2019 10:29pm

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Why exactly could an independent Scotland not keep the pound?

I doubt you will accept my opinion. So maybe a professor will do?

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/25/snp-currency-proposals-disastrous-independent-scotlands-economy/amp

That's not to mention the SNP want to join the EU in the event of brexit which would raise the prospect of a hard border with England if a deal can't be done between them.

Apart from the rapidly depleting resource of North Sea oil, Scotland is heavily dependent on staying in the UK.

prawnsambo · 27-02-2019 10:29pm

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Why exactly could an independent Scotland not keep the pound?

Well since Ireland kept the pound until 1978, i'd say it was very possible.

Brexit discussion thread VII (Please read OP before posting)

Comments