Brexit #2

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 15 Dec 18 - 07:34 AM

This will continue to be the case while Ireland is partitioned - still a hangover from the glorious 'Empire Days'

Unlike Southern Ireland, which would become the Irish Free State in 1922, the majority of Northern Ireland's population were unionists, who wanted to remain within the United Kingdom

If they wish to vote to join the republic, they are free to call for a vote on the matter at any time.
Northern Ireland also costs the exchequer £7.2 billion. Is the south happy to continue such a subsidy?
Realistically northern Ireland is an expensive liability we would be far better off without, but they, and only they, can create a change to the status quo.
In 1973, the population of Northern Ireland was granted a referendum on whether Northern Ireland should remain part of the United Kingdom or join with the Republic of Ireland to form a united Ireland. ... The pro-UK vote did however represent 57.5%
As usual jimmie you bend and twist to display your anglophobia. Carillion used to blacklist objectionable people, a shame we do not do the same.

The DVLA statement was not a reference to illegality, as DMcG stated. If, as was indicated, the bus was covered in removable coloured material, I can't see any problem.
Well for a person that merely professes to be
a well educated scientist this does nor surprise me
A glaze is a removable material, as is paint, as is vinyl.
From the DVLA website: it is “paramount that the information stored on the vehicle register is accurate and up to date… Any changes to the vehicles details must be notified to DVLA by law.
Changes you need to update

You must update your V5C if you change any of the following:

    colour
    engine
    cylinder capacity (cc)
    fuel type
    chassis or bodyshell (replaced or modified)
    seating capacity
    weight of a large vehicle, eg goods vehicle or campervan

If you wish to argue why not check your facts first?

It is also advisable to inform the insurance company as well.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Dec 18 - 07:29 AM

The Ireland border issue is a classic example of a brexit problem that was swept under the carpet during the referendum campaign. An inconvenience to brexiteers kept out of the glare of investigation (and underplayed by remainers to boot). Brexiteers just hoping it would go away. We had all the lies about immigrants and taking back control and extra money for the NHS, but the border issue was possibly the most egregious example of all of sheer political irresponsibility and shortsightedness. It's impossible to overstate the drastic implications of no deal with a hard border, as Jim says. "We know more now than we knew then." Well the electorate does, but the brexiteers must have known all along, but they weren't telling us.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Dec 18 - 04:07 AM

I really think people should be aware of the significance of hard borders to Ireland, both in terms of economics and of peace and The Good Friday Agreement
I sometimes feel that even the best intentioned are not and regard it as just another obstacle, when in fat it is literally a life-and-death issue - a return to the killing-fields of the seventies
This will continue to be the case while Ireland is partitioned - still a hangover from the glorious 'Empire Days'
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 15 Dec 18 - 04:04 AM

I have always had a bit of a smile at the way Brexiteers are happy to trade on WTO rules. Rules, you note. Set by one of those unelected bodies. Here is a clipping from therir 'who are we?' page:

-----
At its heart are the WTO agreements, negotiated and signed by the bulk of the world’s trading nations. These documents provide the legal ground rules for international commerce. They are essentially contracts, binding governments to keep their trade policies within agreed limits.
------

Binding governments? - sounds like a loss of sovereignty to me. Contracts? - ruled over by a non-UK court? Surely that's exactly what the leavers are complaining about?

True, the UK signed up - just as it did to the EU rules....

Then there's Trump, who is not happy to abide by the WTO rules. He may or not break them, but there is no guarantee that the WTO rules are a firm foundation at all.

"Wild west territory" seems a good short hand to me for the state we would be in. I agree with Leavers to this extent - eventually the effects of leaving will settle down into some other stable configuration, just as the wild west did. Whether that is better or worse than now is debatable, but eventually a settlement will occur.

There will be some winners. Like the fall of the USSR, (or the Reformation, which someone compared Brexit to on the radio yesterday), it will mainly be those which enough resources and the right contacts now who will find themselves better off in 50 (or 500!) years. But there will also be some small fry who do quite well. I was buying some cheese last weekend and got chatting. This guy makes a small quantity of brie, gouda and similar style cheeses which he sells as premium products to the middle classes. Now, IF he isn't too affected by changes of subsidies and can get more land, and goats, and manage the expansion, and the middle class purchasers are themselves not too badly affected, a tariff or other barrier that makes foreign cheese more expensive can only help him. However, it is a total change of business to move from selling to a few hundred relatively wealthy customers to becoming a nationwide supplier of supermarkets - if it happens at all, it will take many years. It is not his aim either, doubling the number of cheeses he makes would be a reasonable ambition from his point of view.


He needs to be compared to a small scale haulier I know who is in fear and dread that even a month or two chaos will destroy her company. Waiting for a new long term stability to appear will not help her.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 15 Dec 18 - 03:46 AM

Strictly Karen the deal has not been rejected, May has been too cowardly to put it to a vote.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 11:53 PM

"We Are then into Wild West territory"

Wonder what the drunk-driver criminal ' Seaman' Staines thinks about it? I'm sure he'll have some balanced pearls of wisdom, maybe his brown-tongued bum-boy will be along shortly to share them with us. There's nothing better than a good laugh when the going gets difficult.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 07:43 PM

The backstop is an integral part of May's deal. It's a reluctant addendum both from the UK's and EU's point of view. If we crash out without a deal the backstop doesn't come into it. We are then into wild west territory.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: KarenH
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 07:27 PM

Thanks Steve. Nice summary. But the backstop is in the deal which is now rejected, to be used in case negotiations during the 'transition period' fail. So if we crash out, the backstop as I understand it, won't apply. Or am I wrong about this.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 07:17 PM

If we leave with a deal, we then have to negotiate a trade deal with the EU. If that goes well, there's no need for a backstop. But if it goes badly, which is fairly likely, then the backstop keeps the whole of the UK in a customs union. The trouble with that is that it could go on for a very long time. The upside is that the border arrangements between Northern Ireland and the Republic would carry on as they do now. There would be no return to those horrid border checkpoint skirmishes that so helped to define The Troubles. The downside is that only a bilateral agreement could end the backstop. We are not permitted to withdraw from it unilaterally. Quite right too, as we would be outside the EU, but the Republic, just as much affected by the backstop as the UK, would still be a member. A unilateral abandonment of the backstop would be unconscionable except to those people who think that we Empire-wallers shouldn't kowtow to these inferior Johnny Foreigners. It's all such an incredible bloody mess. The only answer is that, somehow, we have to ditch the insanity known as brexit.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: KarenH
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 06:57 PM

Ah, the Irish PM says a No Deal Brexit would be bad for Ireland. Still confused. And LBC says that worries about the Irish border question is nothing but remoaner project fear …..

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: KarenH
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 06:49 PM

It seems to be the Irish who have ensured that there has been no EU movement on the backstop. So if we crash out with 'no deal' what happens then in respect of the EU border between The Republic of Ireland and the UK? I suppose we have to pay the new fee to go to the Republic - except those of us who have passports for both countries?

Suppose the UK just decided to open the border and ignore it. How would this affect WTO negotiations?

Seriously confused by all this. But assuming the Irish Government has thought it through.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 03:11 PM

SURVEY OF THE GENII THAT BREXIT LET OUT OF THE BOTTLE
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 03:11 PM

SURVEY OF THE GENII THAT BREXIT LET OUT OF THE BOTTLE
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 02:14 PM

The poster was supposedly all about taking back control of migration into the UK. But it showed refugees, not migrants, and they were nowhere near Britain. And they largely had dark skins. There would have been absolutely no point in showing a picture of refugees in Slovenia in a brexit campaign in order to make some point or other about control of our borders. The sheer dishonesty of the thing was glaringly obvious.

As for the bus colour, I too did a lot of googling, and, like DMcG, the only reference I could find to any controversy was on Fawkes's website. The DVLA statement was not a reference to illegality, as DMcG stated. If, as was indicated, the bus was covered in removable coloured material, I can't see any problem. Lots of cars and vans have various painted company names added or removed, or have big orange stripes painted on the back. Gosh, we'll be outlawing stick-on L-plates next. Even the Boris bus had big letters daubed on it. Someone appears to be clutching at straws in order to concoct some fake news, I reckon.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 01:53 PM

You're right, of course Baccie
It's just extremely pleasurable allowing him to humiliate himself
He obviously hasn't enough self respect to stop himself
I'm afraid I find him like a dysfunctional child, difficult to ignore while he's crapping on the sofa
Must try harder
Jim

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 01:53 PM

You're right, of course Baccie
It's just extremely pleasurable allowing him to humiliate himself
He obviously hasn't enough self respect to stop himself
I'm afraid I find him like a dysfunctional child, difficult to ignore while he's crapping on the sofa
Must try harder
Jim

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 01:42 PM

Jim - one more time, ignore the troll! He makes no attempt to discuss, he just insults and provokes. He's winding you up, and getting a hard-on from doing it. He's a worthless waste of oxygen. Ignore him, FFS!!

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 01:41 PM

"And how many hours has it taken you to work out they were in Slovenia."
I was always aware that the poster was lying - which is the point
It is a fake representation of the refugee situation in Britain
The article, and many other similar have described the poster as an incitement to race hatred in order to push through a decisin that will almost certainly damage Britsin, which is what you are defending
Why am I not surprised
I poined out that what happens elsewhere has sfa to do with what happens in Britain
You lyingly suggested that I regarded what happens in Europe is perfect - the only lying here
THe poster was racist - it has been widely recognised as such
Why are you defending it (rhetorical question, of course)

Little Jimmie again - both insecure and unoriginal - something you lifted from Teribus
You really have nothing of your own to contribute - do you
Right or wrong, the contributors here offer their own thoughts without having to plagiarise them from elsewhere - Guido and Teribus - great sources to "learn from" eh what
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 01:41 PM

"And how many hours has it taken you to work out they were in Slovenia."
I was always aware that the poster was lying - which is the point
It is a fake representation of the refugee situation in Britain
The article, and many other similar have described the poster as an incitement to race hatred in order to push through a decisin that will almost certainly damage Britsin, which is what you are defending
Why am I not surprised
I poined out that what happens elsewhere has sfa to do with what happens in Britain
You lyingly suggested that I regarded what happens in Europe is perfect - the only lying here
THe poster was racist - it has been widely recognised as such
Why are you defending it (rhetorical question, of course)

Little Jimmie again - both insecure and unoriginal - something you lifted from Teribus
You really have nothing of your own to contribute - do you
Right or wrong, the contributors here offer their own thoughts without having to plagiarise them from elsewhere - Guido and Teribus - great sources to "learn from" eh what
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Raggytash
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 01:33 PM

So the country to being taken to hell in a hand cart by the Government, the Prime Minister is hanging on, just, and Iains thinks the MOST important topic is the colour of a bus.

My god we're in a real mess.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 01:17 PM

And how many hours has it taken you to work out they were in Slovenia.
It was in the article you linked to
I gave the same information.
No person at any time said anything about the photograph showing people coming into Britain. Your splattering of red paint merely indicates you are incapable of following an argument. As Arthur Askey would say:
Wakey Wakey!
As usual you spout demented rubbish. lying about who and where they are is utterly obscene racism of the inhumanly worst type, as is defending such behaviour The only one lying here is little demented jimmie.
I asked earlier why the Schengen zone reintroduced border controls and had a deathly hush in response. Do you think it was to impede Father Christmas, or perhaps to keep tabs on migrants in order to sift genuine refugees from returning Isis members and terrorists.
You may like living in your lefty delusion of the fiction they all are innocent refugees, the rest of us are more aware of the potential hazards of uncontrolled immigration.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 12:40 PM

"how can you be both employed and a refugee?"
Perhaps you should read the text yourself

THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWS REFUGEES IN SLOVENIA IN 2015,

It's a ****** fake - they are not refugees coming into Britain
Britain is morally bound to take refugees - lying about who and where they are is utterly obscene racism of the inhumanly worst type, as is defending such behaviour
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 12:36 PM

I did look online and Guido was the only one saying it was illegal

For the nit-pickers, that means - obviously - Guido was the only one I found saying that. There may be any number of others who did not show up in the search.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 12:32 PM

Go online and check it yourself.

No what else would you like to argue over?

I am not arguing - asking is not arguing, you know. But yes, I did look online and Guido was the only one saying it was illegal.

The DVLA update on April 10, 2014 said that they wanted to be notified:
===
The register maintained by the driver and vehicle licensing agency (DVLA) essentially exists to assist in revenue collection, road safety and law enforcement. The Police and other enforcement agencies rely on the DVLA record for all vehicles-related investigations. It is therefore paramount that the information stored on the vehicle register is accurate and up to date.

By covering the entire vehicle in a coloured adhesive/vinyl wrap, it is DVLA’s view that the colour change should be recorded.

===

However, that is the DVLA's view that it should be recorded may or may not be sufficient for it to be illegal. I would not know, which was why I asked.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 12:28 PM

" nwhere is the suggestion that they were "unemployed"

how can you be both employed and a refugee?
I despair! debating with you is like discussing metaphysics with cotton wool.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 12:23 PM

Well, Nitnigpick, let me put it this way. In Germany, Spain, France, Portugal and Italy, a goodly selection of EU big beasts there, we leave on the stroke of THEIR midnight. Oh, and not forgetting Brussels, of course. Never mind. We can take back control at one minute past. Oh, except for that pesky backstop, if we need it. Oh, and except for the trading standards that China and the US can impose on us and shrug if we demur. Excelsior!

And Iains, there is one glaringly simple reason why Corbyn hasn't called for a no-confidence vote. The Tories would win it. For now they have the DUP reluctantly onside. Maybe Jezza is a little more canny than you think. But watch that space.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 12:21 PM

Not only is the bus illegal...
Is it? No one apart from Guido seems to claim it is.

Go online and check it yourself.

No what else would you like to argue over?



under DVLA rules, it is “paramount that the information stored on the vehicle register is accurate and up to date… Any changes to the vehicles details must be notified to DVLA by law. By covering the entire vehicle in a coloured adhesive/vinyl wrap, it is DVLA’s view that the colour change should be recorded.”

However, a quick search on DVLA’s database reveals that the ‘Bollocks to Brexit’ bus is in fact registered as “white”, rather than “nauseating yellow”
I have checked it myself:

    Registration number FJ60 EGD
    Make VOLVO
    Colour WHITE

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 11:41 AM

"Oh Dear! If jimmie read his own links he would know who the refugees were "
I did - nwhere is the suggestion that they were "unemployed" and, unless they were in drag, I can spot a few women in there
The racist scare is that they are after our jobs and are a threat white women - racist stereotyping as old as The Windrush generation

You abusive attempts to talk down is a predictable sign that you have no decent responses to offer
Your mentor, Teribus, was bad enough (as has been shown of the last couple of days) but at least he got up off his arse and made an effort - - your postings are both unimaginative and lazy
And you clam to be an adept debater - in my hole you are
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 11:38 AM

Not only is the bus illegal...


Is it? No one apart from Guido seems to claim it is.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 11:34 AM

The People’s Vote’s luridly-coloured ‘Bollocks to Brexit’ bus has recently started its tour of the country, presumably to test out the theory of whether being as irritating as possible is a good way to win voters over.

From your media maestro GUIDO. Not only is the bus illegal but it regresses to the same gutter language as many remainiacs here. Call me old fashioned, but displaying such a sign in the streets, surrounded by impressionable children, is not a very clever thing to do.

I am sure Mrs Whtehouse would turn in her grave,.
Bad language coarsens the whole quality of our life. It normalises harsh, often indecent language, which despoils our communication.

    As quoted by Jonathan Brown in "Mary Whitehouse: To some a crank, to others a warrior",

https://order-order.com/2018/12/14/peoples-vote-driving-illegal-bollocks-brexit-bus/

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 11:33 AM

Look we used to have a fishing industry all the way round our coast . Thousands of people employed/ We didn't run it very well but little fishing boats used to come over from France, and there was no hassle. We overfished our waters , the pink shrimp disappeated frpm our waters off Boston, where I lived. By the time I grew up Albert Gostelow had the last shrimping boat out of Boston.

After the EU, came the Spnish facrory boiats. We didn't know it, but they had emptied the seas of fish off their own coasts.

The Remainers sneer and say, we should have had the factory boats - we were too backward looking.

Forward looking would be if we restocked our waters - planned by marine biologists. We licnced fishing boats - so that only boats of a size that would fish a sustainable amount were allowed.

We can't be forward looking in the EU. They just want to satisfy everybody. To look after our own future - we need to think for ourselves. We can't possibly sort out all Europe's problems. Our own are difficult enough.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 11:21 AM

A question of such national import should require a 2/3 majority at least, IMO. Barring that, in the case of a yes vote, a second vote on the exit details should be required. But of course, these requirements would have to have been established prior to the vote. As it stands it is incumbent that the results of the vote, such as it was, be accepted as representing the will of the voters.

Had we gone for a 2/3 majority first time, I would agree with you. But you seem to be saying that if there was a second referendum with say 62% for leave (when that vote is based on current information) that should not overturn on vote of 52% that was several years old (which was based on limited information and lies from both sides.) I would say that is a definite affront to democracy myself.   Having a 2/3 majority for such things make sense, but I don't think you can have different rules for what constitutes a majority for the two referendums.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 11:13 AM

Oh Dear! If jimmie read his own links he would know who the refugees were "The photograph shows refugees in Slovenia in 2015, many fleeing a murderous civil war in Syria."(Now Syria prides itself on religious tolerance but the dominant religion is Islam)
If you managesd to escape from your bog periodically you would be able to identify the people in the photograph as Middle Eastern by facial features and facial hair. Having lived and worked in swathes of the middle east over nearly 40 years such things are immediately apparent to me.
   If they were in gainful employment they would not be refugees ergo they are unemployed. Some of us can figure such things out. You apparently must be lead by the nose.
Not very good at this are you.


EU time. Heheh.

No such beast. The EU covers 3 time zones. You really do need to be more specific HeHehHeh

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 11:12 AM

SOME "LEFTIE" STATISTICS MORE

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 11:11 AM

The UK operates on GMT, Nigel. Not picked enough nits yet?

Sigh.

No, the UK operates on GMT for the present, but that is for the smaller part of the year. For approximately 7 months out of 12 it works on BST (British Summer Time)

I'll see your 'sigh' and raise you one.
Anyway, my comment was on what time zone(s) the EU works on.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 11:07 AM

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 10:30 AM

"arage's poster with (in)appropriate spin put on it by the lefty rag, the gruniard."
Outrage to this poster appeared in all the papers, including the Daily Mail and the Express
It would have been a credit to the left if they had been the only ones to pick it up, but it was so outrageously racist that they all did
More whataboutism again
Who on earth suggested that Europe is racist free ?
Stop making things up
The poster as racist and events immediately following Brexit showed it had the effect it was intended to have
You are the last person whose comments on racism are to be taken seriously given your own track record

"Predominantly young unemployed Moslem males."
Never realized the people in the poster were identified in any way - you are pretty consistent in your racist stereotyping, aren't you?
Your sole contribution to any discussion you take part in is to provide an example of what is happening to Britain and what is likely to happen - the only reason I (or, I presume, anybody) continues to respond to you (when they do)

"Try reading guido and become educated!"
It is pretty significant that you have no-one other than a criminal right wing blogger to rely on for 'information - a pretty clear indication that there is nobody else
Keep it coming
Good to know that thi is where you gain your education - it really does explain a lot
Jim Carroll

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-racism-religious-intolerance-united-nations-special-rapporteur-a8348021.html

https://discoversociety.org/2018/04/03/racism-work-brexit-empire/

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01419870.2017.1361544

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Stanron
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 10:14 AM

First thing I did was check the date of the Spring Equinox.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 09:05 AM

The UK operates on GMT, Nigel. Not picked enough nits yet?

Sigh.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 09:01 AM

From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 05:20 AM
"Roll on 11pm UK time on Friday, 29 March 2019."
Yup. And there's a nice little bit of irony that has gone over your head. The moment of our leaving is actually midnight.
EU time. Heheh.

How is 'EU time' defined? The EU (even excluding UK) does not operate within a single time zone. Of course, if you meant CET (Central European Time) you would be correct.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 08:56 AM

Farage's poster with (in)appropriate spin put on it by the lefty rag, the gruniard.
"This picture, filled with nonwhite faces, makes explicit the racism in Ukip’s vision of leaving the European Union"
Yeah right!
Predominantly young unemployed Moslem males.

Now let us cut to the chase. In the land of the free and unfettered of the grand european union why did so many members of the borderless Schengen zone find it necessary to reintroduce border checks?
If you wish to tell a story, try fleshing out all aspects of it, not a carefully selected fragment. Your argument is false in every respect.
You are spreading false news as usual. Try reading guido and become educated!


The true story of border controls

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 08:23 AM

"Some are older people brought up to believe in the greatness of Britain and its empire...."
These are the targets of populism K, not the instigators
The system I was educated under taught us everything you describe - we even sang hymns which proudly declared that to be foreign was to be - "In error's chain"
I had family and immediate friends to counteract what I was being taught in school and I was encouraged to find out for myself
Passive racism is rampant in Britain - a survey a few years ago suggested that one third of the British people held racist views and had openly stated them - but up to now, that's as far as it goes

The only openly public demonstration of racism, other than that of the racist parties, was when the East End dockers marched in support of Enoch Powell's 'Rivers of Blood' speech it was generally ignored and Powell was kicked out of his party as an embarrassment (even to the right)
I fear thisngs are changing; Brexit was pushed through as POWELL'S DREAM BROUGHT TO FRUITION
Not a Britain I'd hoped our children would inherit
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 08:10 AM

Because Mr Corbyn is a very intelligent and astute politician,

When was your last visit to specsavers?

A question for remainers.
If the clear mandate of the first referendum is betrayed by calling for a second one, what on earth gives you the confidence the outcome of a second, third, or fourth referendum would be honoured?

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: KarenH
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 08:04 AM

Not all Brexiteers are 'populists'. Some are older people brought up to believe in the greatness of Britain and its empire, and the superiority of the British/English and they believe this is somehow lost while we are in Europe. I had a lecture from one such yesterday about how in world war two there was no bug ridden housing in England as there were regulations and such places would have been closed down. According to the same person there was not poverty in Victorian England and the industrialists looked after their workmen like their own children. Domestic servants were never badly treated but were like one of the family. Appalling and depressing junk but not what you might call 'populists'.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: KarenH
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 07:35 AM

7 Euros for a visa, sounds cheap enough to me.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 07:07 AM

"Even clot corbyn cannot make up his mind, otherwise why has he not called for a no confidencein the government?"

Because Mr Corbyn is a very intelligent and astute politician, who realises that BrexShit is a poison-chalice that's seen off one PM, effectively currently seeing off a second PM, and seen off numerous BrexShit ministers and other sundry Cabinet members, and that to call for a no-confidence vote could result in the Labour Party in general, and himself in particular, drinking from it.

Your fuck-witted Tory Toffs landed the country in this steaming pile of ordure - I'm sure that Mr Corbyn's attitude is, "Let those whose arrogance and jaw-dropping selfishness dropped us in the shit pull us out of it".

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 06:58 AM

You can deny all you like, unless you come up with an alternative, that is what populism is and how it is now being used
Yours, and the goose-steppers in Britan who share your views take on democracy appears to be only that which they agree with - living proof is the baying of the rabid right that, despite having wone a parliamentary vote May should resign
You really can't get a clearer indication of how they/you regard democracy than that

The only way of Britain getting out of this appaling mess with a shered of decency is to put the vote to the people again and ask them is this what they actually voted for
Not one of you "'democrats' have explained why another vote should not take place - that's a pretty clear indication that you regard democracy as your own personal view put into action
Such views have caused wars and filled extermination camps in the past are are quite likely to do so again if allowed to
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 06:47 AM

You can call it populism if you wish. You merely use it as a stick to beat brexiteers with by constructing a case they voted leave for all the wrong reasons.
The sad reality today is that the political system in the UK is broken. The MPs of both parties are split between brexiteers and remainers and the tories have constructed a slow train wreck of our departure.
Even clot corbyn cannot make up his mind, otherwise why has he not called for a no confidencein the government?

This situation makes the outcome of the confidence vote for May a very precarious creature. Backbenchers largely voted for her to be ditched and whips have less control on the back benches. This struggle is by no means resolved, especially after her humiliation yesterday.
We are now in stormy seas in uncharted waters, while both parties rearrange deckchairs on the ship of state Titanic.

Hell is empty and all the devils are here.
William Shakespeare

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 06:03 AM

A reasonable definition of RIGHT WING POPULISM, which is what is under discussion here
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 05:58 AM

"Short answer: Rubbish
Long answer: RUBBISH"
As ever, your non-response certainly is
Only a megalomaniac would claim to speak on behalf of "most of the people" by saying what they think
Most of the British people did not vote for Britain to leave - only a small minority of those who voted did, and you and your "democratic" democrats are not willing to let any of the British people vote on what are the probable consequences of leaving, none of which was apparent when the vote took place - but that's right-wing democracy for you

Nice summing up on the Parliamentary shenanigans from this morning's Irish Times


CONFIDENCE VOTE HAS WEAKENED BOTH MAY AND BREXIT HARDLINERS        
Denis Staunnton, London Letter


As the smoke cleared around Westminster after Wednesday’s confidence vote in Theresa May, it became clear that the exercise had weak¬ened both the prime minister and the hardline Brexiteers who tried to bring her down. May’s acknowledgment that she cannot lead her party into the next general election was a statement of the obvious since few expected her to survive long beyond March 29th next year when Britain leaves theEU.
But by stating publicly that she has a sell-by date, she has given potential successors licence to campaign openly within the party and rendered herself a lame duck whose authority diminishes every day. And although she survived Wednesday’s vote, more than a third of her parliamentary party has no confidence in her leadership.
The prime minister’s assertion that a Brexit deal must have the support of the DUP if it is to win parliamenta¬ry approval reflects a belief in Downing Street that the DUP holds the key to reconciliation with hardline Brexiteers in the Conservative party. If May can negotiate changes to the terms of the backstop that satisfy the DUP, the theory goes, Conservative Brexiteers will have sufficient cover to fall into line behind it.

BACKSTOP CONCESSIONS
There are two problems with this strategy: nothing the EU would consider conceding on the backstop is likely to be sufficient to win over the DUP; and there is no evidence that the hardline Brexiteers are seeking an excuse to back the prime minister’s deal.
May’s would-be assassins emerged snarling into the morning on Thursday, with Dominic Raab suggesting that since they had failed to force her out of office she should now resign voluntarily.
“We will have to back her as best we can but the problem is that both in relation to Brexit and the wider sustainability of the government given the likelihood of any changes to the deal, given the likely scale of opposition it looks very difficult to see how this prime minister can lead us forward,” he said.
The Brexiteers had one shot at removing May from Downing Street before the end of the Brexit negotiations and they have blown it. She may be a lame duck but she is immune from a leadership challenge for 12 months.
The confidence vote further weakened the hardlin¬ers by revealing the limits of support in Parliament for a no-deal Brexit. Even if all 117 MPs who voted against the prime minister would also back a no-deal Brexit (a dubious assumption) they account for just over a fifth of the membership of the House of Commons.
May’s former policy adviser predicted on Thursday that she would have to bring her Brexit deal before the Com¬mons a number of times before it is approved.
“I think there will be at least one if not two or three defeats before opposition MPs and Conservative MPs start to realise that they’ve done their signalling and now it’s real. One of the reasons I think it’s important that the prime minister stayed is that whoever leads through this, I think, will be finished by it,” he said.

Legally binding
But unless the EU agrees to a legally binding text that renders the backstop inopera¬ble, neither the DUP nor Conservative Brexiteers are likely to support it. MPs will be able to introduce amend¬ments to the motion on the Brexit deal, telling the prime minister what course they want her to take.
Some ministers suggest¬ed at last week’s cabinet meeting that MPs should have an indicative vote to test support for various options on Brexit. If the House, as expected, rejects the idea of leaving the EU without a deal and it also rejects May’s deal, two options remain.

‘NORWAY PLUS'
One is "Norway plus' which would see Britain leave the EU but remain in the single market and the customs union, and the other is a second referendum. Support for “Norway plus” has evapo¬rated in recent weeks as former supporters grow confident that they could get a chance to reverse Brexit in a second referendum.
There may not be a majority in Parliament for a second referendum now but support is likely to grow as other options fall away.
And if May’s deal is rejected, she could be faced with a choice between a no-deal Brexit an sending the decision back to the people

Jim Carroll