BS: Brexit again

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Teribus
Date: 11 Nov 16 - 11:25 AM

"Not exactly a groundswell (yet?), but the LibDems, the SDLP and a good few Labour MPs are willing to vote against Article 50 unless there's going to be a referendum on the final exit terms agreed with the EU."

Well of course there are a number of things wrong with that little scheme if we play according to what is stated in the Treaty of Lisbon and what Jean-Claude Juncker has clearly stated:

1: No negotiations or talks BEFORE Article 50 has been triggered. So our lads in Parliament have got the cart before the horse

2: So no final exit terms will be known until Article 50 has been triggered.

3: Once article 50 has been triggered the process is irreversible so what have our chaps got to talk about? What prats we have been to throw away our rebate and currency to shackle ourselves to the Euro?

4: If the referendum we've just had was not binding, why go through the rather expensive and apparently pointless exercise again? Salve consciences, or just the desire to waste taxpayers money?

So the Government have got to formulate in detail what we want out of our departure, then that must be debated at length in the House of Commons and reported fully in the world's press. Once that lot has been decided upon, if Article 50 is given the OK (Not a hope in Hell really - Our professional politicians have a vested interest in keeping their pathway open to the greatest "gravy train" in the world), our team then toddle over to negotiate with the EU Commission who have by now had months to counter all our points and gain maximum advantage. If our elected members of Parliament vote against Article 50 then basically Parliament has just told 17,410,742 members of the electorate to basically go fuck themselves - hope they enjoy that, because they will only have until 2020 at the outside to savour it as those 17,410,742 voters will take their revenge at the next General Election.

The vote in Parliament will be on Party lines and the Conservatives have stated that post referendum they are for Brexit respecting the result, now all the LibDems with their 8 seats + the 3 SDLP + all 56 SNP members + all 232 Labour members will not outvote 330 Conservative MPs.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 11 Nov 16 - 10:37 AM

If it quacks like a duck....

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Raggytash
Date: 11 Nov 16 - 10:34 AM

Ignore it Steve, it's really not worth it.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Nov 16 - 10:13 AM

Jaysus, chaps, is it me or him? 😂

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Nov 16 - 09:58 AM

Information regarding the terms of our leaving, of course.

What new information do we have on that?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Nov 16 - 09:44 AM

God, Keith, what's the matter with you? Information regarding the terms of our leaving, of course. What kind of deals on the single market, free movement, etc. we will have. What tariff barriers. What laws we will have to unpick. You know, unimportant stuff like that.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Raggytash
Date: 11 Nov 16 - 09:29 AM

The possibly pitfalls have obviously not been mentioned in the Daily Mail Steve.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Nov 16 - 09:07 AM

What new information?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Nov 16 - 05:29 AM

Not exactly a groundswell (yet?), but the LibDems, the SDLP and a good few Labour MPs are willing to vote against Article 50 unless there's going to be a referendum on the final exit terms agreed with the EU. The SNP may well join them. While the blocking of Article 50 is as likely as a duff bottle of Hirondelle, I'm with them. And I vehemently disagree with people who bleat that were being "undemocratic" in going after a "second referendum." It would be a different referendum altogether, with a different question, and there's nothing undemocratic in asking people to reconsider a decision in the light of new information.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Raggytash
Date: 10 Nov 16 - 02:44 PM

True to form I see.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Nov 16 - 11:27 AM

How can I not take personally being called ignorant, cunt, not truthful and suffering OCD, and all without a single challenge to anything I have actually said?
It is just personal and nasty.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Raggytash
Date: 10 Nov 16 - 08:57 AM

The only individual who makes everything personal is yourself professor.

You take everything personally, it's one of your many faults.

Don't bother to respond, I really have much better things to do with my time.













PS I know you will respond.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Iains
Date: 10 Nov 16 - 08:24 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Oor7fAmmiQ

WHAT HAS THE EU DONE FOR US? monty python

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Nov 16 - 07:43 AM

Good one Steve, but you admit you are unable to find anything to challenge in what I have actually said.
It is just personal with some of you.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Nov 16 - 07:36 AM

Don't tell 'im, Pike...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Nov 16 - 07:07 AM

well we now know that it wasn't entitled to make that promise. Drop it, Keith. You have nowhere to go.

Yes we do know now, but we did not then.
It formed no part of the debate.
Look at our Brexit thread on 24th June.
Lots of you bemoaning the result, but not one of you said not to worry because it has to go to Parliament first.

And, we still do not know for sure. The decision is disputed will go to appeal.

What must I drop?
What have I said in this thread that is wrong?
What specifically do you challenge?

BWM, you very unfairly called me a cunt for pointing out, with Kevin, that your link was to the start of the Bill.
Now you say insulting things about me and OCD.
Why are you being so personal and nasty?
Again, what have I ever said here that is wrong?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 04:39 PM

It's his OCD. He can't help himself, that's why I've stopped arguing with him.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 04:27 PM

Yebbut you can't tell Keith that, Dick. And we've tried. God, how we've tried!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 03:22 PM

"No. Although referenda are only advisory the government made it clear to everyone that this referendum would be implemented immediately."
If the government did that they were misleading people.
The government knew that it could not be implemented immediately because it had to be approved by parliament.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 03:04 PM

There was a lot of hot air, grandstanding, exaggeration, fearmongering, racism and outright lying. That might be your idea of a basis for "discussion" but it wasn't mine. As for the government undertaking to enact brexit the very next day, well we now know that it wasn't entitled to make that promise. Drop it, Keith. You have nowhere to go.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 03:01 PM

How can you tell when a politician is lying?

His lips move.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 02:06 PM

Not only was it's true status glossed over(advisory)

No. Although referenda are only advisory the government made it clear to everyone that this referendum would be implemented immediately.
Next day in fact.

but also the implications of a leave vote were not even up for discussion.

There was lots of discussion about implications and likely effects of voting leave.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Iains
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 01:44 PM

Had dodgy dave any inkling that the peasants would revolt, I have no doubt the referendum would have been kicked into very long grass.
As had been said by many the referendum was very poorly explained.
Not only was it's true status glossed over(advisory) but also the implications of a leave vote were not even up for discussion. The media merely regurgitated a bunch of fairy tales/horror stories put out by the Powers that Be. No analysis just bullsh**t.
Just like the pre election coverage in the States constantly demonising Trump and putting angel wings on Clinton.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 01:36 PM

A pretty good analogy, Dick. As I said earlier, my only surprise is that people seem shocked that they were lied to. Is it a question of just believing the things they wanted to be true I wonder?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 01:12 PM

As I understand the situation, PARLIAMENT obtained extra power as a result of Oliver Cromwell.
The irony here is that some Brexit supporters objected to European Parliamentary power[ perhaps they were right], but now object when The Westminster parliament exercises its power.
The Westminster parliament has every legal and moral right to exercise that power, Cameron pulled a fast one, in the true manner of Dodgy Dave, he did not explain that the referendum was not binding but advisory dependent on parliaments approval, rather like a second hand car salesman who doesnt tell you that he interfered with the mileages on the speedometer.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Teribus
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 12:53 PM

Greg F. - 09 Nov 16 - 09:54 AM

Hmm --- "unelected bureaucrats" Professor? How does one become a member of the House of Lords?

Care to tell us how any member of the House of Lords can introduce any legislation in the UK Greg F. Fact is he or she cannot - it is impossible. It is impossible for the House of Lords to prevent any Bill from becoming Law after it's third reading.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 12:39 PM

Yes, Keith. I did tell you that, didn't I, straight after the bit I quoted. I put that down to the right wing Eurosceptics in Cameron's cabinet. Just my theory. Go on, prove me wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 12:35 PM

States will be outvoted only if they vote differently to everyone else in a process in which they have had their say. We have been outvoted in 2% of the EU laws passed since 1999. That's democracy for you. I've been outvoted in every general election since I was 18 in the constituencies I've lived in. Democracy. Get real, Keith. "Unelected bureaucrats making our laws" has been a lie for over forty years. Shed the little Englander stuff for once.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 12:29 PM

Steve, your ITV page goes on to say,

"But in recent years the UK has been more often on the losing side of these votes.

Between 2009 and 2015 the UK voted against the majority 12.3% of the time, compared to 2.6% of the time between 2004 and 2009.

That made it the country most likely to be on the losing side during the later period—the closest competitors were Germany and Austria, which were on the losing side 5.4% of the time.


The UK is outvoted at the Council of Ministers more than any other country - we also win 95% of the time."

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 12:22 PM

Our laws are made either by our parliament or by the elected European Parliament in which we have members.

Any single state is heavily outvoted by the other states in both the Council of Ministers and the EU Parliament.

There is no sovereign right for any state to reject laws dictated by Brussels.
Many of us do not care, but many find that unacceptable.

The British electorate were never consulted on this diminution in national sovereignty.

Some care, some don't.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 10:33 AM

From the ITV website.

Official EU voting records show that the British government has voted 'No' to laws passed at EU level on 56 occasions, abstained 70 times, and voted 'Yes' 2,466 times since 1999.

In other words, UK ministers were on the "winning side" 95% of the time, abstained 3% of the time, and were on the losing side 2%.

This is counting votes in the EU Council of Ministers, which passes most EU laws jointly with the European Parliament.

("Being on tbe losing side" has increased in frequency since we got a bunch of Eurosceptics in power in 2010).

The EU is a collaboration of 28 states. I reckon that record reflects a good deal of harmony. There are people here railing against the EU who don't care much for some of our own domestic laws that have nothing to do with the EU, such as the one making referendums advisory only. 😂😂😂

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 10:04 AM

Does anyone have any examples of laws currently applicable in the UK that have been not been agreed by our own government or our own elected representatives?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 10:04 AM

Total rubbish. Our laws are made either by our parliament or by the elected European Parliament in which we have members. A democratic say. EU laws are enshrined in our domestic laws and the overwhelming majority of them are accepted without demur. When we leave the EU we will still have to abide by many EU rules and laws if we wish to trade with the EU. And have no say in those rules and laws. Don't talk such bloody twaddle.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 09:54 AM

Hmm --- "unelected bureaucrats" Professor? How does one become a member of the House of Lords?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 09:43 AM

We have our laws made for us by unelected bureaucrats, and our Parliament has no say in them.
It is no kind of sovereignty, and many people found it unsatisfactory.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 07:46 AM

Sorry! ...of EU rules if we wish to to trade with the EU, rules in which we will no longer have a say.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 07:44 AM

Silly, Keith. First, we have accepted without demur all but a handful of EU laws, enshrining them into our own domestic laws. Second, it isn't us versus 27 of them. That's just you being a little Englander. It a collaboration among 28 states in which we have a significant voice. Third, our "sovereignty" is permanently compromised by big corporations which have a massive hold over us. Fourthly, we will still have to abide by a huge tranche

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 07:16 AM

"Those "politicians from each member state" would be the EU Parliament."
Sort of like Britain being ruled from London - by elected representatives from all parts of the Country (or in the case of the E.U., from the continent)
Can't see anything wrong with either
One thing's certain - we'll have s.f.a. say in what goes on in Europe now we're and the ordinary person will have as much say in what goes on in Britain as we've always had - precisely none.
Once their elected, they're untouchable for five years, and so on, ad infinitum.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 07:01 AM

Dave,
"The shorthand description of these as "laws from Brussels" is slightly misleading: the bureaucrats of the European Commission may well set many laws in motion by promulgating new directives; but they still need to be agreed by politicians from each member state, even if some are outvoted under the rules. "

Those "politicians from each member state" would be the EU Parliament.
Our members could not outvote all the others, so in what sense does that give us sovereignty?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Iains
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 04:18 AM

D the G
I will beg to differ with you. However should Brexit ever occur(that I doubt) I will accept your argument.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 03:57 AM

I presume you did actually read the article, Iains? If so you must have noticed this very significant sentence early on

The shorthand description of these as "laws from Brussels" is slightly misleading: the bureaucrats of the European Commission may well set many laws in motion by promulgating new directives; but they still need to be agreed by politicians from each member state, even if some are outvoted under the rules.

To answer the question posed in the article header. Yes, Britain is still a sovereign state.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Iains
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 03:48 AM

D the G

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/6198513/EU-is-Britain-still-a-sovereign-state.html


Another point of view.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 03:21 AM

That old chestnut has been done to death Iains. Magna Carta and all that. No parliament has given up any rights.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Iains
Date: 09 Nov 16 - 03:17 AM

There is much discussion about Parliament having to ratify any proposed legislation. It is also said that Parliament cannot give up any of these rights or bind future Parliaments.
I would ask are we actually in the EU. IF so those that voted us in are guilty of treason and bound the future to legislation that should have been challenged at the time.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Nov 16 - 08:04 PM

And Jim, it was not an election pledge.
The referendum was an election and both the winners and the loses set out their stalls as to why they should get the people's vote - those who voted for a change proposed to control the incoming of foreigners - it was an election pledge.
Unfortunastely, they forgot to mention the fact that, by law, that pledge has to be passed by parliament and since that has now been made clear the Government and the media have attempted to ride roughshod over British law - and have been forced to back down.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Nov 16 - 07:50 PM

But the thing is, we just don't know. We know that some people would have had this, that or the other in mind when they voted, but we don't know how many. I think that it's valid to argue for another referendum once the this, that and the other have been clarified in the negotiations. Mind you, I don't agree with referendums anyway under any circumstances at all, but, as Julius Caesar might have said, we do find ourselves in medias res...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Nov 16 - 07:36 PM

I wasn't suggesting that it might be accurate to read more into the vote than the vote actually said. It was that it is not justifiable to claim that "the British people" have voted for those things.

There will undoubtedly have been people who voted for Brexit because of sovereignty and democracy issues, without necessarily having any particular concerns about immigrattion and so forth.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Nov 16 - 07:16 PM

So how much responsibility should each individual voter have for recognising the complications underlying that simple question? I do agree with you, but I'm being devil's advocate in saying that because it's a point that has been vehemently made by the leave camp. Yes it was a simple yes-no question, but, they say, only a complete numpty wouldn't understand that the arguments underlying it were not black and white. My own view is in accord with yours, that we shouldn't read any more into the electorate's response to that question than the simple yes-no. I think that it was the responsibility of the campaign to inform people (both sides being in complete dereliction of that duty, in my view). Many people have claimed that the result reflected in large part a racist campaign agenda, or that the immigration issue was key. I think that they are valid claims, but, as you maintain, we simply can't say for sure because those questions were not asked.

What a mess.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Nov 16 - 05:03 PM

Whether before or after election, government pledges are equally disposable. They keep them because it's convenient, break them if that's convenient. No different from the way most people behave when it comes to promises or pledges, even when those were sincerely meant at the time. Consider the divorce statistics...

But the actual point isn't whether the referendum outcome will be treated as binding. It's whether that should be taken as meaning anything more than was actually contained in that referendum question.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Nov 16 - 02:48 PM

You're an exceptionally gracious man, Mike, and I'm over the moon to tell you that you're 110% correct! 😊