Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

If it be your will · Post by **If it be your will** » Fri Jul 19, 2019 9:00 pm

This is ridiculous. All these posters I'd previously assumed were reasonably fair debaters seem intent on whacking a straw man.

Just to (try and) clear it up:

EU workers' rights are dire; US labor laws are dire. I'll leave you to argue amongst yourselves which are actually the most dreadful - it really doesn't matter because they're both patently awful. In my opinion, the UK electorate has repeatedly shown itself to be highly skilled in voting against its own interests. I see them doing it all the time. There's absolutely no need to keep telling me this - I've never claimed or thought otherwise.

Right, onto what my position actually is.

I think it highly unlikely that the UK electorate will vote for a party that will: cut maternity leave to less than 14 weeks, that will abolish the minimum wage (which they can do as EU members anyway), that will cut holiday entitlement below 20 days a year, and that will abolish discrimination laws in the workplace. In the unlikely event the UK electorate votes for a party that actually does these things, I consider it even more unlikely they will vote for them again at the following election. And - this bit is crucial - in the event the UK electorate wantonly, stupidly and repeatedly votes to eradicate their own workers' rights to such an extent they fall below those mandated by the EU, then this should be the choice of the UK electorate. I could never reasonably argue for staying in an institution in order to deny my own electorate the opportunity to be stupid. I would consider that an extremely anti-democratic, nay almost dictatorial, position to take.

If it be your will · Post by **If it be your will** » Fri Jul 19, 2019 9:02 pm

AndrewJB wrote:U.K. employment rights and legal rights were eroded by the Cameron government (specifically the right to terminate employment for any reason extended from one to two years, and the cuts to legal aid rights), and the electorate rewarded him with a majority. Older conservative minded people I know support fracking, while denigrating wind farms as “polluting the scenery. I thought that after the financial crash the pendulum would begin to swing the other way, but it hasn’t.

But still nowhere near to the extent they even vaguely threatened to breach the pitiful levels that are mandated by the EU.

If it be your will · Post by **If it be your will** » Fri Jul 19, 2019 9:14 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:This is pure fantasy.

People have been voting against their interests in this country and others for decades, and the way to get them to do that is pretty easy. Make them afraid. Why do you think Corbyn was so quickly smeared by Cameron as "a threat to national security" and by the Tory press as a terrorist sympathising Jew-hater? Because if the discussion is about his economic ideas and how right-wing economic ideas are failing, then people won't vote against their interests. But if they're frightened then they'll gladly vote for the party that sees workers rights as a bargaining chip when it comes to attracting new business when we shoot our economy in the face.

It's like you've not been paying any attention. The crown jewel of this country is the NHS and the Tories promised no more privatisation. The went back on that promise and then in 2015 they ******* gained MPs. How? By making people more afraid of Ed Miliband than they were afraid of losing their cheap or free healthcare.

Frankly you're delusional if you think people aren't going to vote away their own rights.

I mean, what is this IT? You open up with 'This is pure fantasy', then follow it up with an argument I never made, then flourished it with the accusation I must be delusional. This is just the sort of nonsense argument you're always having a go at others for.

(See my last but one post.)

If you really, genuinely have lost faith in the UK electorate to such an extent you seek to deny them the opportunity to vote for something stupid - repeatedly - then it's impossible to conclude anything other than you have completely turned your back on democracy as a means of political representation. Whether or not there is political structure that is superior to democracy is a debate I'm sure we can have. I expect it would be an interesting one. But it's not the one we're having here.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Fri Jul 19, 2019 9:24 pm

If it be your will wrote:I mean, what is this IT? You open up with 'This is pure fantasy', then follow it up with an argument I never made, then flourished it with the accusation I must be delusional. This is just the sort of nonsense argument you're always having a go at others for.

(See my last but one post.)

If you really, genuinely have lost faith in the UK electorate to such an extent you seek to deny them the opportunity to vote for something stupid - repeatedly - then it's impossible to conclude anything other than you have completely turned your back on democracy as a means of political representation. Whether or not there is political structure that is superior to democracy is a debate I'm sure we can have. I expect it would be an interesting one. But it's not the one we're having here.

"the chances of us electorally consenting to rights even worse than the EU's pitifully low benchmark are close to zero"

I demonstrated how this was nonsense.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Fri Jul 19, 2019 9:35 pm

If it be your will wrote:
If you really, genuinely have lost faith in the UK electorate to such an extent you seek to deny them the opportunity to vote for something stupid - repeatedly - then it's impossible to conclude anything other than you have completely turned your back on democracy as a means of political representation. Whether or not there is political structure that is superior to democracy is a debate I'm sure we can have. I expect it would be an interesting one. But it's not the one we're having here.

Oh p*ss off. This is bullshit. It's the kind of bullshit that was thrown at me when i said that the electorate is incapable of being adequately informed to make an informed decision on EU membership. I argued that we didn't have the trust in the journalists that we rely on to inform us. And what did we get? Possibly the most dishonest election campaign we've ever had inflicted upon us - which then ******* won. Back then i had ***** accusing me of being anti-democratic as a means to undermine my argument without actually engaging with the argument I was making, they were pro-brexit too. Back then I told them what they can go and do with themselves, and that attitude hasn't changed.

If it be your will · Post by **If it be your will** » Fri Jul 19, 2019 9:47 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:"the chances of us electorally consenting to rights even worse than the EU's pitifully low benchmark are close to zero"

I demonstrated how this was nonsense.

You merely demonstrated that the UK electorate was capable of being stupid, a statement I don't disagree with, so your entire post was countering an argument I never actually made. You haven't demonstrated - and UK historical evidence is very much against this notion - that the UK electorate is so unbelievably dim they would repeatedly vote to diminish workers' rights below those mandated by the EU. Off the top of my head, I can't think of a single example worldwide where a democracy has chosen to erode their workers' rights below those mandated by the EU. (Can you, out of interest? I might be wrong). Either way, evidence suggests this would be a very rare event indeed.

As such, holding my opinion has a decent basis in reality. Use of the words 'delusional' and 'fantasy' are ludicrous.

If it be your will · Post by **If it be your will** » Fri Jul 19, 2019 9:51 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Oh p*ss off. This is bullshit. It's the kind of bullshit that was thrown at me when i said that the electorate is incapable of being adequately informed to make an informed decision on EU membership. I argued that we didn't have the trust in the journalists that we rely on to inform us. And what did we get? Possibly the most dishonest election campaign we've ever had inflicted upon us - which then ******* won. Back then i had ***** accusing me of being anti-democratic as a means to undermine my argument without actually engaging with the argument I was making, they were pro-brexit too. Back then I told them what they can go and do with themselves, and that attitude hasn't changed.

Now you're just getting really cross for no reason at all. I have fully engaged with your argument.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Fri Jul 19, 2019 10:16 pm

If it be your will wrote:You merely demonstrated that the UK electorate was capable of being stupid, a statement I don't disagree with, so your entire post was countering an argument I never actually made. You haven't demonstrated - and UK historical evidence is very much against this notion - that the UK electorate is so unbelievably dim they would repeatedly vote to diminish workers' rights below those mandated by the EU. Off the top of my head, I can't think of a single example worldwide where a democracy has chosen to erode their workers' rights below those mandated by the EU. (Can you, out of interest? I might be wrong). Either way, evidence suggests this would be a very rare event indeed.

As such, holding my opinion has a decent basis in reality. Use of the words 'delusional' and 'fantasy' are ludicrous.

You claimed that the UK would almost certainly never vote to remove it's own workers rights. You offered nothing in the way of explanation, so i just assumed that you think that people wouldn't vote against their own interests. What i did was demonstrate to you that actually yes, people do regularly vote against their own interests and that one of the ways to get them to do that was to make them afraid of the alternative.

Of course you can't think of a single democracy that has chosen to erode their own rights to below EU minimum standards. How many countries do you think there are that have workers rights above the EU minimum in the first place, and who aren't in the EU? Name some.

The rights that the EU protect aren't nothing, by the way. That're well above and beyond what some of the smaller countries would have had they not been EU members, and yes, because of that the rights we currently have are greater than the minimum guaranteed by the EU, but not that much greater. The rights the EU guaranteed that we would keep if ever a Tory government tried to turn us into an ultra-capitalist United States-esque country meant that there was a solid floor below which we couldn't fall below, no matter how frightened the demagogue running the country had made us. But because of fear and lies about the EU we have voted to remove that floor. So if you want an example of a time a nations' voters voted to remove their own workers' rights? Well, this is a time. We voted to remove our own protection from a future Tory government.

They might not even need fear to sell it to us. They successfully sold austerity to us as "necessary for the economy and for jobs", and in return we gave them more MPs. What makes you think that, coupled with "Corbyn's a terrorist sympathiser who hates Jews", they're not going to be successful with convincing us that the only way to save our economy is with more cuts to services and regulations (inc. workers rights)? Recent history would seem to suggest otherwise.

And don't get me started on how absolutely certain it is that workers' rights will be heavily slashed if Scotland leave the UK which guarantees permanent Conservative governments under FPTP.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Jul 22, 2019 3:13 am

Further to my point, they're still lying about privatising the NHS. And why wouldn't they? They got away with it last time, and next time they can more easily make the pathetic people of this country frightened of a Labour government.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... ck-promise" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Mon Jul 22, 2019 6:51 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:Further to my point, they're still lying about privatising the NHS. And why wouldn't they? They got away with it last time, and next time they can more easily make the pathetic people of this country frightened of a Labour government.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... ck-promise" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It would carry on under Labour, because they were also at it.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/200 ... h.politics" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Mon Jul 22, 2019 9:20 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:Further to my point, they're still lying about privatising the NHS. And why wouldn't they? They got away with it last time, and next time they can more easily make the pathetic people of this country frightened of a Labour government.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... ck-promise" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That isn't privatisation. If you go to your doctor, does it upset you that he is making money out of seeing you? If you get your appendix taken out, does it concern you that the hospital has made a profit? When you are in an NHS hospital, does it matter that the firm who built it was privately owned? The point of the NHS is that it is free to the patients. Its purpose is not to provide employment; it exists to give public healthcare by whatever means is the most efficient.

By all means argue that this isn't the most efficient way to do it; but paying fees so that someone profits by providing services to the NHS is not breaking the principles behind it.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Mon Jul 22, 2019 9:31 am

dsr wrote:That isn't privatisation. If you go to your doctor, does it upset you that he is making money out of seeing you? If you get your appendix taken out, does it concern you that the hospital has made a profit? When you are in an NHS hospital, does it matter that the firm who built it was privately owned? The point of the NHS is that it is free to the patients. Its purpose is not to provide employment; it exists to give public healthcare by whatever means is the most efficient.

By all means argue that this isn't the most efficient way to do it; but paying fees so that someone profits by providing services to the NHS is not breaking the principles behind it.

Whatever your views on the pros and cons of the matter, it very much IS privatisation.

The problem is profit is the number one concern of the private sector. I prefer the NHS and all those working for it to have public health as their number one concern.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Mon Jul 22, 2019 9:38 am

martin_p wrote:Whatever your views on the pros and cons of the matter, it very much IS privatisation.

The problem is profit is the number one concern of the private sector. I prefer the NHS and all those working for it to have public health as their number one concern.

Do you think a doctor seeing a private patient is thinking about his pay, but a doctor seeing an NHS patient is thinking about the patient? I don't much care whether my hospital is owned by an NHS trust or a private body, if they are treating me right.

It's privatisation, but it's not "privatisation of the NHS" in any way that confounds the principle of the NHS. As I said, everyone in the NHS is doing it for money. Doctors and nurses get paid; so do beancounters. Whether they are paid directly by the government, or by private contractors, is detail.

SonofPog · Post by **SonofPog** » Mon Jul 22, 2019 9:39 am

martin_p wrote:Whatever your views on the pros and cons of the matter, it very much IS privatisation.

The problem is profit is the number one concern of the private sector. I prefer the NHS and all those working for it to have public health as their number one concern.

Exactly Martin, If there's someone taking a slice at every stage then of course its going to be more expensive and also lead to conflict of interests. Lets not forget that the NHS is far cheaper and more efficent than the fully privatised american system.

The NHS is the worlds BEST healthcare system,

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... nhs-health" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Dont believe the papers and Tory politicans (Most of whom have shares in Private health care) bashing the NHS is an easy story, but apart from the odd case it does a brilliant job.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Mon Jul 22, 2019 9:55 am

dsr wrote:Do you think a doctor seeing a private patient is thinking about his pay, but a doctor seeing an NHS patient is thinking about the patient? I don't much care whether my hospital is owned by an NHS trust or a private body, if they are treating me right.

It's privatisation, but it's not "privatisation of the NHS" in any way that confounds the principle of the NHS. As I said, everyone in the NHS is doing it for money. Doctors and nurses get paid; so do beancounters. Whether they are paid directly by the government, or by private contractors, is detail.

Private companies have shareholders who want their cut as well. It's not about the people being paid for doing the work, it's about those making money out of the NHS who are not.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Mon Jul 22, 2019 9:59 am

martin_p wrote:Private companies have shareholders who want their cut as well. It's not about the people being paid for doing the work, it's about those making money out of the NHS who are not.

I agree. And if the NHS is run efficiently, it would always be more expensive to use profit-making companies except for exceptional surges in demand. But there will always be people getting paid for running the NHS who don't do any medical work, and the idea should be to keep them to a minimum. I don't think that idea, whether internally or externally, is being put into practice.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Mon Jul 22, 2019 10:07 am

dsr wrote:I agree. And if the NHS is run efficiently, it would always be more expensive to use profit-making companies except for exceptional surges in demand. But there will always be people getting paid for running the NHS who don't do any medical work, and the idea should be to keep them to a minimum. I don't think that idea, whether internally or externally, is being put into practice.

Yes, you'll always need managers, etc to do the none medical stuff, although ironically the massive increase in non-medical staff in the NHS has been created by the desire to run it more like the private sector which is seen as more efficient. But you can't run organisations that by their very nature are going to make a loss like a profit making company, it doesn't make sense.

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Mon Jul 22, 2019 10:15 am

So according to the next PM, all we need to do to overcome the technical difficulties is believe a bit harder. No details, just guff.

What an insult to the nation's intelligence that man is.

AndrewJB · Post by **AndrewJB** » Mon Jul 22, 2019 12:02 pm

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:It would carry on under Labour, because they were also at it.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/200 ... h.politics" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Labour has changed policy direction on this since 2006.

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Mon Jul 22, 2019 12:24 pm

AndrewJB wrote:Labour has changed policy direction on this since 2006.

Yeah, because they're opposition

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Mon Jul 22, 2019 12:35 pm

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Yeah, because they're opposition

Yep, as soon as Corbyn gets in he'll be all over this privatisation of the NHS lark.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Mon Jul 22, 2019 12:36 pm

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Yeah, because they're opposition

In 2006? Don’t think so!

bfcjg · Post by **bfcjg** » Mon Jul 22, 2019 12:45 pm

If the EU reformed and became less centralised and was just a trading block with common standards on employment, environmental issues and quality of product with what is happening in the world at the moment I would vote to part of it, however I just cannot see it happening. TBH the Britain Rees Mogg and co want worries me greatly as working people would be chattel.

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Mon Jul 22, 2019 5:58 pm

martin_p wrote:In 2006? Don’t think so!

Sigh.

They are now and they've changed their stance accordingly.

Same when Major was PM Labour objected to the idea of PFI, yet when Blair became PM they were all up for the idea.

Political parties like to do that, both sides, object to something when out of power even if they like the idea.

CrosspoolClarets · Post by **CrosspoolClarets** » Mon Jul 22, 2019 7:31 pm

If it be your will wrote:EU workers' rights are dire

I’m a bit behind on this but a brief anecdote.

IIBYW’s point is demonstrated by the delivery guys I have knocking at my door 20 times a week.

It used to be the case that you can have a little 30 second chinwag with the delivery guy, but now it is nothing but Eastern Europeans racing to the door, ringing the bell, and dashing off like there is a fire alarm. Sometimes there is nobody there when I answer. Amazon are the worst culprits.

Then I get a Hermes guy yesterday who DOES have a chat, and he was explaining in detail the working rights of these delivery guys nowadays, and it is appalling. His own contract has been changed multiple times, for the worse.

It seems to me that the EU favour the huge companies and allow the workers to be exploited (one reason I am keen to leave, and one reason why I like some elements of Corbynomics).

AndrewJB · Post by **AndrewJB** » Tue Jul 23, 2019 6:34 am

Liam Fox has admitted that Britain's plan to keep tariffs low in the event of a no deal brexit has got in the way of agreeing a free trade deal with Canada (and probably other countries too). Of course all this could be overcome by staying in the single market and customs union.

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Tue Jul 23, 2019 8:37 am

AndrewJB wrote:Liam Fox has admitted that Britain's plan to keep tariffs low in the event of a no deal brexit has got in the way of agreeing a free trade deal with Canada (and probably other countries too). Of course all this could be overcome by staying in the single market and customs union.

Fox is an interesting one. For years he's been the typical Brexiter, winging his way through interviews, dismissing any concerns about Brexit seriously impacting the country, but over the last few weeks it's as though he's suddenly realised the consequences of Brexit, especially if we leave with no deal.

He's one of the last people I expected to suddenly wake up out of their zombie-like Brexit state. Better late than never, I suppose.

Elizabeth · Post by **Elizabeth** » Tue Jul 23, 2019 8:46 pm

Liam Fox has for a long time declared that the only thing preventing an amenable deal with the EU is politics.
He has been spot on.

Hang your heads in shame the Labour Party. Take a bow Caroline Flint, Kate Hoey and sadly only one or two other Labour MPs who have demonstrated to the rest of the Labour rabble what representative democracy is all about.

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Tue Jul 23, 2019 8:54 pm

The German car industry has finally rode to our rescue, just like all those Brexiters said they would!

Oh wait. No they haven't.

https://www.prnewswire.co.uk/news-relea ... 18860.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Elizabeth · Post by **Elizabeth** » Tue Jul 23, 2019 8:59 pm

I know, I'll talk about the German car industry instead

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Tue Jul 23, 2019 9:09 pm

Elizabeth wrote:Liam Fox has for a long time declared that the only thing preventing an amenable deal with the EU is politics.
He has been spot on.

Hang your heads in shame the Labour Party. Take a bow Caroline Flint, Kate Hoey and sadly only one or two other Labour MPs who have demonstrated to the rest of the Labour rabble what representative democracy is all about.

And the ERG?

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Tue Jul 23, 2019 10:25 pm

JohnMcGreal wrote:The German car industry has finally rode to our rescue, just like all those Brexiters said they would!

Oh wait. No they haven't.

https://www.prnewswire.co.uk/news-relea ... 18860.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Got any quotes from all those Brexiters? Or did you read it on the side of a bus?

I think you'll find that what Brexiters said was that if it becomes ruinously expensive to import cars, then we will have to make more of them in this country.

BennyD · Post by **BennyD** » Tue Jul 23, 2019 10:59 pm

Now we’ve got a go-getter at the helm, this Brexit sh!t will be done, dusted and ticked off. Then we can get this very tedious thread closed. Happy days.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Tue Jul 23, 2019 11:09 pm

BennyD wrote:Now we’ve got a go-getter at the helm, this Brexit sh!t will be done, dusted and ticked off. Then we can get this very tedious thread closed. Happy days.

Your optimism may not be entirely misplaced, - who knows?, but there's absolutely no evidence that Johnson has ever been a "go-getter". He has a reputation for laziness, tardiness and a poor grasp of detail. (This is acknowledge by colleagues who actually support him and have worked with him).

Swizzlestick · Post by **Swizzlestick** » Tue Jul 23, 2019 11:10 pm

BennyD wrote:Now we’ve got a go-getter at the helm, this Brexit sh!t will be done, dusted and ticked off. Then we can get this very tedious thread closed. Happy days.

If anything, that bumbling chancer has just given it a long extension.

Claret-On-A-T-Rex · Post by **Claret-On-A-T-Rex** » Tue Jul 23, 2019 11:22 pm

BennyD wrote:Now we’ve got a go-getter at the helm, this Brexit sh!t will be done, dusted and ticked off. Then we can get this very tedious thread closed. Happy days.

When you say things like that it becomes the best thread EVERRRRR!!!!!!!

The least capable person of being the leader of the country has just been made leader of the country

I can't wait to see what happens with Brexit now but it certainly won't be Brexit.

It's already Brexit 2 Prime Ministers 0 and you think that putting Baldrick in charge will sort it

Claret-On-A-T-Rex · Post by **Claret-On-A-T-Rex** » Tue Jul 23, 2019 11:24 pm

BennyD wrote:Now we’ve got a go-getter at the helm, this Brexit sh!t will be done, dusted and ticked off. Then we can get this very tedious thread closed. Happy days.

I gave you a "like". Genuine thanks

I have tears in my eyes from laughing at that one.

Elizabeth · Post by **Elizabeth** » Tue Jul 23, 2019 11:24 pm

At least the 30 odd ERG who refused to vote for the May deal did it with conviction.
Unlike the vast majority of Labour MPs who blatantly voted against it for the political reason of attempting to gain power.
How can an MP vote against a deal with the EU when over 70% of constituents voted to leave. This wasn't one MP, may I remind you it was dozens of MPs. And then you have Burnley's MP who had 66% of her constituents vote leave but when givthe chance to vote for a deal with the EU voted in a way that supported 34% of her constituents.

One of the biggest hypocritical stances is from the crowd who declare we couldn't possibly support No Deal because of the damage it will do to the country. The same crowd who refused to vote for a deal that would prevent No Deal.

The tide is turning towards Brexit I believe because the public are sick to death of the duplicity of MPs. I hope the missing piece of the jigsaw for a deal are the Labour MPs who are now questioning themselves over their previous votes.
Failing that let's have the vote of No Confidence and a General Election if the Tory remainer rebels are brave or stupid enough to vote down Johnson.
Then over to Farage and the Brexit Party.
All tickets covered for leaving.

Claret-On-A-T-Rex · Post by **Claret-On-A-T-Rex** » Tue Jul 23, 2019 11:29 pm

Swizzlestick wrote:If anything, that bumbling chancer has just given it a long extension.

I'm betting he ends up getting blagged into cancelling it somehow.
And that's only if he makes it through the Summer without something ridiculous wrecking his Prime Ministership.

tiger76 · Post by **tiger76** » Tue Jul 23, 2019 11:51 pm

Claret-On-A-T-Rex wrote:When you say things like that it becomes the best thread EVERRRRR!!!!!!!

The least capable person of being the leader of the country has just been made leader of the country

I can't wait to see what happens with Brexit now but it certainly won't be Brexit.

It's already Brexit 2 Prime Ministers 0 and you think that putting Baldrick in charge will sort it

At least Baldrick had a cunning plan,does Mr Johnson we''ll soon find out.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Tue Jul 23, 2019 11:51 pm

Elizabeth wrote:At least the 30 odd ERG who refused to vote for the May deal did it with conviction.
Unlike the vast majority of Labour MPs who blatantly voted against it for the political reason of attempting to gain power.

God forbid anyone doing that ever get into power!

Oh.....whoops!

Elizabeth · Post by **Elizabeth** » Tue Jul 23, 2019 11:53 pm

Silly comment lacking any substance

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Jul 24, 2019 9:57 am

Swinson vows to reverse Brexit even if Britain votes for it a second time!

NEW Lib Dem boss Jo Swinson admitted on Tuesday that even if Britain voted for Brexit in a second referendum she would still campaign to reverse the decision!

Speaking to BBC News yesterday , newly elected Liberal Democrat leader Jo Swinson (or should that be Joanna Swanson?) revealed she would only accept the result of a second referendum if Remain won! If Leave won she would continue to work to block the result in Parliament.

“Would you vote for [the result if Leave won] in Parliament?”

“No.”

"So even if the People spoke twice, and The People voted to leave the EU TWICE, you would still oppose that!!!!?"

"Yes"

Unbelievable.

Totally takes apart the People’s Vote campaign’s pledge that a hypothetical Second Referendum would be the ‘final say’…

The pure brazen democracy denial of this woman!

Totally takes apart the People’s Vote campaign’s pledge that a hypothetical Second Referendum would be the ‘final say’…

NEW Lib-Dem leader Jo Swinson has accidentally blown apart the case for her second, “final say” Brexit referendum.

She wouldn’t honour that result either, if Leave won again. So it’s not a “final say”, until we vote Remain. Then it is.

And there, exposed for all to see, is the Remoaners’ warped view of democracy.

This is what former Fib antidemocrats party leader said -

On referendum night before the results had come in, Paddy Ashdown made a solemn promise to the British public:

“I will forgive no one who does not respect the sovereign voice of the British people once it has spoken, whether it is a majority of one per cent or 20 per cent.

When the British people have spoken you do what they command. Either you believe in democracy or you don’t

https://youtu.be/1_YUCqiBxQg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

LeuvenClaret · Post by **LeuvenClaret** » Wed Jul 24, 2019 9:35 pm

If it happens I hope ref 2 gets to be a legal change without a parliament vote which ever side wins. This should have been done first time but the question was too broad.

In or out right now is becoming irrelevant ... this indecision is killing our country.

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Wed Jul 24, 2019 9:41 pm

LeuvenClaret wrote:If it happens I hope ref 2 gets to be a legal change without a parliament vote which ever side wins. This should have been done first time but the question was too broad.

In or out right now is becoming irrelevant ... this indecision is killing our country.

In or out was to broad a question for you?

LeuvenClaret · Post by **LeuvenClaret** » Wed Jul 24, 2019 10:27 pm

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:In or out was to broad a question for you?

Was it legal or illegal remind me?

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:31 am

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:In or out was to broad a question for you?

You couldn't get much broader.

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:33 am

Anyway, for those who've been complaining that remainers have been sabotaging the Brexit process I assume, given the makeup of the new cabinet, that it will all go swimmingly from now on.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Thu Jul 25, 2019 8:42 pm

Superb progress so far. Johnson and Junker have spoken and Junker has told him the WA is not up for negotiation, but they’ve swapped mobile numbers. At least they can Snapchat now.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:39 pm

I did mention before Germany was in trouble.

Today German manufacturing is in recession.

They are now going to reduce interest rates so if you lend Germany 10 million for 10 years they then pay you less back than you lent them.

EU is imploding.

Have a search for bee box and watch the 4 vids