Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 7:58 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:Yes, I think that things have moved on to this position now, but it was being "challenged" / questioned due to some legal loopholes.

The commons are arguing that you might get a few weeks, but it might not get it at all.

It might get tested as a view, you never know.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 8:02 pm

This will end up as a 2nd ref.

Remain

Or nearly remain with no benefits.

So remain win.

Bring on the Brexit Party to then do a real leave deal.

CombatClaret · Post by **CombatClaret** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 8:06 pm

Colburn_Claret wrote:But those young are getting older, and as they get older they'll get wiser. I said to my brother when he referred to the young, that if they beheld the referendum in 30 years time, most of those young would appreciate what they are doing a lot more.
They are young, idealistic, and in some ways naive. Most of us were when we were young.

The youth of today are growing up in a globally connected world with no experience of island Britain and a tendency not to bang on about WWII and the blitz spirit. They're embracing gay right, environmentalism and many more social issues which encourage a form of color/gender/race blind humanism.

I wouldn't be too confident they're going to swing so far right.

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 8:14 pm

CombatClaret wrote:The youth of today are growing up in a globally connected world with no experience of island Britain and a tendency not to bang on about WWII and the blitz spirit. They're embracing gay right, environmentalism and many more social issues which encourage a form of color/gender/race blind humanism.

I wouldn't be too confident they're going to swing so far right.

Would it not be more prudent to exercise a modicum of understanding of how the elderly actually feel instead of the assumptions. I'd rather have a fella onside in the trenches than 1 back at home avoiding conscription due to manly enough. Different era then nobody shirked.

CombatClaret · Post by **CombatClaret** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 8:22 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:Would it not be more prudent to exercise a modicum of understanding of how the elderly actually feel instead of the assumptions. I'd rather have a fella onside in the trenches than 1 back at home avoiding conscription due to manly enough. Different era then nobody shirked.

Go back, read the post I was replying to and then my reply. Add something to that point If you like instead of weird nostalgic tangents.

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 8:28 pm

CombatClaret wrote:Go back, read the post I was replying to and then my reply. Add something to that point If you like instead of weird nostalgic tangents.

Don't have to, i think things were pretty clear in the post i responded to, similar to the lack of acknowledgement when a requisition of countless stories prompted & also a warped distortion away from a mention regarding a multiple choice answer consisting of only 2 possible answers.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 8:35 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:Busy right now, I'll compose a more comprehensive post answering this in due course.

You had a question to answer Jakub

CombatClaret · Post by **CombatClaret** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 8:36 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:Don't have to, i think things were pretty clear in the post i responded to, similar to the lack of acknowledgement when a requisition of countless stories prompted & also a warped distortion away from a mention regarding a multiple choice answer consisting of only 2 possible answers.

I can't respond to that as you literally make no sense, I don't understand what you are trying to say in any kind of grammatical sense.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 8:38 pm

On a positive note.
City are winning 2-0.

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 8:40 pm

CombatClaret wrote:I can't respond to that as you literally make no sense, I don't understand what you are trying to say in any kind of grammatical sense.

It wouldn't retrospectively with amnesia overload or you simply cannot support what you've said previously.

Greenmile · Post by **Greenmile** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 8:44 pm

CombatClaret wrote:I can't respond to that as you literally make no sense, I don't understand what you are trying to say in any kind of grammatical sense.

I’m beginning to think Jakub does this on purpose to avoid addressing a point he has no answer for. His word soup is almost like a kind of sh1t beat poetry at times.

TheFamilyCat · Post by **TheFamilyCat** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 8:45 pm

martin_p wrote:You had a question to answer Jakub

Leave him be, he’s still busy gibbering.

CombatClaret · Post by **CombatClaret** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 8:47 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:It wouldn't retrospectively with amnesia overload or you simply cannot support what you've said previously.

I get that your referencing my tenancy to post this quote from you

Jakubclaret wrote:It's leave with a deal or not, it's a multiple choice question consisting of 2 answer whichever way you look at it

Showing how stupid it was to ask a YES/NO question when the question was in fact multiple choice; a choice that parliament is now in deadlock over.
Beyond that I'm not sure the point your making about old people, when I was talking primarily about youth and how they will not become today's older generation just because time.

CrosspoolClarets · Post by **CrosspoolClarets** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 8:56 pm

Going online for my daily catchup, it seems we have the farcical situation where John McDonell’s dodgy hip may have saved Brexit and there is a bill being put through Parliament by a bunch of amateur legislators that makes us look like a banana republic.

This bill is a farce, rushed through in record time with MPs only allowed 2 minutes speaking on something that will change the law of the land. Other “one day bills” were not controversial and not as tight, this is very different, it is an affront to the legal framework of the country, and Bercow should never have allowed it. The Lords will throw it out unless they hate Brexit more than they love the law.

The only bit of sanity seems to be an interview with Geoffrey Cox. I’m not in favour of voting for a CU, but he is a bright chap, and his interview is very convincing.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47806920

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 8:59 pm

TheFamilyCat wrote:Leave him be, he’s still busy gibbering.

Maybe I'm thinking you've asked a good question & deserve a decent reply, you are not as easy to bat off as some, i guess patience isn't 1 of your strong points.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 9:02 pm

CrosspoolClarets wrote:Going online for my daily catchup, it seems we have the farcical situation where John McDonell’s dodgy hip may have saved Brexit and there is a bill being put through Parliament by a bunch of amateur legislators that makes us look like a banana republic.

This bill is a farce, rushed through in record time with MPs only allowed 2 minutes speaking on something that will change the law of the land. Other “one day bills” were not controversial and not as tight, this is very different, it is an affront to the legal framework of the country, and Bercow should never have allowed it. The Lords will throw it out unless they hate Brexit more than they love the law.

The only bit of sanity seems to be an interview with Geoffrey Cox. I’m not in favour of voting for a CU, but he is a bright chap, and his interview is very convincing.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47806920

Cox isn't daft, even if he sounds like a sober Brian Blessed. He knows that if this doesn't work, then Brexit is over.

Still might have to agree a 2nd ref though to get it through

Claret-On-A-T-Rex · Post by **Claret-On-A-T-Rex** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 9:48 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:This will end up as a 2nd ref.

Remain

Or nearly remain with no benefits.

So remain win.

Bring on the Brexit Party to then do a real leave deal.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Nigel Farage's Brexit Party?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Spiral · Post by **Spiral** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 11:31 pm

Cooper bill passes by a single vote and Mark Francois' head explodes before he quotes Jesus!!! "Forgive the father etc etc."

Devils_Advocate · Post by **Devils_Advocate** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 11:34 pm

Spiral wrote:Cooper bill passes by a single vote and Mark Francois' head explodes before he quotes Jesus!!! "Forgive the father etc etc."

Was a beautiful sight to behold

Spiral · Post by **Spiral** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 11:35 pm

I love him. He's Ringo. I know it. I just know it.

* Forgive them

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 11:41 pm

Spiral wrote:Cooper bill passes by a single vote and Mark Francois' head explodes before he quotes Jesus!!! "Forgive the father etc etc."

Just to clarify, it’s been passed to the Lords for them to debate and amend.

I just learnt all a,endments are accepted and debated and voted on.

That’s going to be a long day and night.

I am sure there will be lots of amendments to hold it up.

CrosspoolClarets · Post by **CrosspoolClarets** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 11:46 pm

That a backbencher can seize control of the Commons, table a bill (not a motion, but a bill to actually change the law of the land), on an issue of massive importance, then get the bill passed by 1 vote after a few hours of debate (these things normally take weeks or months)....

Only 1 or 2 people changed their minds for the third reading - that shows us the effect the Committee Stage had......virtually none. Too rushed.

It may not capture the imagination of those with only a passing interest in politics, but this will be a major shift in the UK’s international standing in democratic self government. Before any Remainers leap on this, the PM has already done several things to try to obtain a Brexit that also disgust me in this regard. Bills cannot be rushed through in this way, it will create issues for lawyers to exploit for years to come.

The Economist Intelligence Unit do a “Democracy Index” every year. The U.K. is 14th. Only the top 20 are “full democracies”. We have to be very careful. By the way, Scandinavia countries are the top 4. Leftie countries. So this isn’t a right wing rant, nothing like. It’s a rant at how many in the Commons see staying in the EU as more important than our democracy.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 12:03 am

CrosspoolClarets wrote:That a backbencher can seize control of the Commons, table a bill (not a motion, but a bill to actually change the law of the land), on an issue of massive importance, then get the bill passed by 1 vote after a few hours of debate (these things normally take weeks or months)....

Only 1 or 2 people changed their minds for the third reading - that shows us the effect the Committee Stage had......virtually none. Too rushed.

Oh come on, every aspect of Brexit has been debated to death! It may have gone through all the stages it needs to get to the Lords in one day, but I doubt there was anything new to say about it anyway.

Spiral · Post by **Spiral** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 12:30 am

A bit melodramatic by CrosspoolClarets, but not especially unsurprising considering the tendency for a lot or brexiteers to use the language of 'protecting democratic integrity' as a means of halting the entire process; paralysis being the most (only?) effective way of bringing about the no-deal brexit they fetishise. The strength and rigour of parliamentary procedure, to say nothing of your overblown 'concerns' about democracy as a whole, isn't judged by how many minds are changed between readings of a bill. It could equally be viewed that the fact so few minds were changed attests to the soundness of the initial bill. I'm not necessarily making that claim, but pointing out the flaw in your measure for rigour. There are quite a few other metrics that need to be considered before writing the UK off as sliding towards a banana republic. Considering the unique time constraints, it's not difficult for a rational observer to see why a sovereign parliament acted to give itself a bit more breathing space.

Spiral · Post by **Spiral** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 12:37 am

To add, official secrets act 1911 passed through in a day. There's precedent for expediting bills. There are one or two more examples but I'm struggling to remember where I read about them.

Pstotto · Post by **Pstotto** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 12:41 am

Spiral's going round in circles doing the hokey cokey on his own ass backwards. Oh , got to leave the 4th Reich of Eurasia in an orderly fashion yah...

Greenmile · Post by **Greenmile** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 6:50 am

CrosspoolClarets wrote:The Economist Intelligence Unit do a “Democracy Index” every year. The U.K. is 14th. Only the top 20 are “full democracies”. We have to be very careful. By the way, Scandinavia countries are the top 4. Leftie countries. So this isn’t a right wing rant, nothing like. It’s a rant at how many in the Commons see staying in the EU as more important than our democracy.

I wonder how many of those top 20 are part of the undemocratic EU.

Burnley Ace · Post by **Burnley Ace** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 7:08 am

Greenmile wrote:I wonder how many of those top 20 are part of the undemocratic EU.

12

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 7:26 am

CrosspoolClarets wrote:That a backbencher can seize control of the Commons, table a bill (not a motion, but a bill to actually change the law of the land), on an issue of massive importance, then get the bill passed by 1 vote after a few hours of debate (these things normally take weeks or months)....

Only 1 or 2 people changed their minds for the third reading - that shows us the effect the Committee Stage had......virtually none. Too rushed.

It may not capture the imagination of those with only a passing interest in politics, but this will be a major shift in the UK’s international standing in democratic self government. Before any Remainers leap on this, the PM has already done several things to try to obtain a Brexit that also disgust me in this regard. Bills cannot be rushed through in this way, it will create issues for lawyers to exploit for years to come.

The Economist Intelligence Unit do a “Democracy Index” every year. The U.K. is 14th. Only the top 20 are “full democracies”. We have to be very careful. By the way, Scandinavia countries are the top 4. Leftie countries. So this isn’t a right wing rant, nothing like. It’s a rant at how many in the Commons see staying in the EU as more important than our democracy.

Problem is, if this had been done to make sure s "No Deal" Brexit had passed, you'd have said nowt.

Is it good? No

Is it necessary? Unfortunately yes, as no one in govt is prepared to make sure a disastorous "No deal" doesn't happen

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 7:50 am

CrosspoolClarets wrote:It may not capture the imagination of those with only a passing interest in politics, but this will be a major shift in the UK’s international standing in democratic self government.

You don't need to have more than a passing interest in politics. A blind man on a galloping horse can see what an international joke the UK has made of itself over the last 3 years. Still, it's nice to see that you care about that all of a sudden, though.

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:29 am

Its amazing how some senior labour MPs are trying to interpret the conference motion on a second ref. As Rebecca Long Bailey correctly said yesterday the policy is to have one to prevent a no deal/damaging brexit. So if Corbyn was to agree to something, neither of those things wouod be in play. So why would a second ref be needed?

TheFamilyCat · Post by **TheFamilyCat** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:36 am

summitclaret wrote:Its amazing how some senior labour MPs are trying to interpret the conference motion on a second ref. As Rebecca Long Bailey correctly said yesterday the policy is to have one to prevent a no deal/damaging brexit. So if Corbyn was to agree to something, neither of those things wouod be in play. So why would a second ref be needed?

Because the last one was just so much fun. We should have one every year.

claretspice · Post by **claretspice** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:40 am

CrosspoolClarets wrote:That a backbencher can seize control of the Commons, table a bill (not a motion, but a bill to actually change the law of the land), on an issue of massive importance, then get the bill passed by 1 vote after a few hours of debate (these things normally take weeks or months)....

Only 1 or 2 people changed their minds for the third reading - that shows us the effect the Committee Stage had......virtually none. Too rushed.

It may not capture the imagination of those with only a passing interest in politics, but this will be a major shift in the UK’s international standing in democratic self government. Before any Remainers leap on this, the PM has already done several things to try to obtain a Brexit that also disgust me in this regard. Bills cannot be rushed through in this way, it will create issues for lawyers to exploit for years to come.

The Economist Intelligence Unit do a “Democracy Index” every year. The U.K. is 14th. Only the top 20 are “full democracies”. We have to be very careful. By the way, Scandinavia countries are the top 4. Leftie countries. So this isn’t a right wing rant, nothing like. It’s a rant at how many in the Commons see staying in the EU as more important than our democracy.

The way in which the political discourse in the UK has shifted towards demonising MPs doing a difficult job to the best of their ability, is undoubtedly of greater relevance to the standing of the UK in the wider world than the accelerated passage of a piece of emergency legislation.

Steve-Harpers-perm · Post by **Steve-Harpers-perm** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:53 am

Claret-On-A-T-Rex wrote:HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Nigel Farage's Brexit Party?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

‘Man of the people’ Nige is on Question Time tonight for his 33rd appearance. Hope Mark Francois is on as well to rally the troops.

Devils_Advocate · Post by **Devils_Advocate** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:56 am

Steve-Harpers-perm wrote:‘Man of the people’ Nige is on Question Time tonight for his 33rd appearance. Hope Mark Francois is on as well to rally the troops.

Least it will give the crying brexiteers an alternative use for their Kleenex tissues

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 9:02 am

summitclaret wrote:Its amazing how some senior labour MPs are trying to interpret the conference motion on a second ref. As Rebecca Long Bailey correctly said yesterday the policy is to have one to prevent a no deal/damaging brexit. So if Corbyn was to agree to something, neither of those things wouod be in play. So why would a second ref be needed?

Rebecca Long Bailey needs to read it again then. The motion does talk about preventing a damaging Brexit and no deal but then goes on to say;

‘If we cannot get a general election Labour must support all options remaining on the table, including campaigning for a public vote. If the Government is confident in negotiating a deal that working people, our economy and communities will benefit from they should not be afraid to put that deal to the public.’

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 9:07 am

Steve-Harpers-perm wrote:‘Man of the people’ Nige is on Question Time tonight for his 33rd appearance. Hope Mark Francois is on as well to rally the troops.

Let's hope Fiona Bruce is able to control him better than Dimbleby could. She's done well so far IMO, but it will be a real test to see if she can prevent him from hectoring, talking over the rest of the panel and dictating the direction of the debate as he was allowed to do by DD.
She's also been good so far at quickly coming up with quotes / stats etc. that expose "lies" and contradictory statements by panelists. It could be an interesting programme.

Steve-Harpers-perm · Post by **Steve-Harpers-perm** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 9:23 am

nil_desperandum wrote:Let's hope Fiona Bruce is able to control him better than Dimbleby could. She's done well so far IMO, but it will be a real test to see if she can prevent him from hectoring, talking over the rest of the panel and dictating the direction of the debate as he was allowed to do by DD.
She's also been good so far at quickly coming up with quotes / stats etc. that expose "lies" and contradictory statements by panelists. It could be an interesting programme.

No one can control Nige.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 9:27 am

Steve-Harpers-perm wrote:No one can control Nige.

I'm sure the inquiry that is coming will be able to control him.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 9:32 am

Thought Hammond was very good on TV last night.

Appealed to both sides and implicity told the ERG that if they want their fantasy Brexit, then a referendum is the way to go.

But if they don't think the country shares their convictions (spoiler, they don't), then they had better sign up for the PMs deal.

CrosspoolClarets · Post by **CrosspoolClarets** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 9:37 am

Those celebrating Letwin’s bill without examining the constitutional impact should revisit their thoughts on this in a few years time. I suspect the impact would be massive and as I tried to stress last night, I would feel the same if it was pro Brexit legislation being passed outside the government and against the manifestos of the party members putting it forward.

This isn’t emergency legislation as required during a natural disaster or such like. This is to circumvent no deal, making us reliant on the Eu to allow us to leave which many could legitimately say is the best option due to this. More voters choose no deal than any other option currently. Taking it off the table in this manner at the same time as May talks to Corbyn (the man who correctly called her a stupid woman) will fragment what trust remains in politicians.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 9:42 am

CrosspoolClarets wrote:Those celebrating Letwin’s bill without examining the constitutional impact should revisit their thoughts on this in a few years time. I suspect the impact would be massive and as I tried to stress last night, I would feel the same if it was pro Brexit legislation being passed outside the government and against the manifestos of the party members putting it forward.

This isn’t emergency legislation as required during a natural disaster or such like. This is to circumvent no deal, making us reliant on the Eu to allow us to leave which many could legitimately say is the best option due to this. More voters choose no deal than any other option currently. Taking it off the table in this manner at the same time as May talks to Corbyn (the man who correctly called her a stupid woman) will fragment what trust remains in politicians.

But its not a majority. And it helpfully didn't include NI and Scotland.

Do all leavers get an e-mail every morning to make sure they don't mention that?

You are perfectly correct on the constitutional stuff, but think about this for a second.

How often do we have a situation like this, with a country splitting issue, and no majority in the house to sort it out?

Someone has to make sure we don't fall out with a "No Deal" by accident, and this at least makes that if we decide to go for a "No Deal", then its done at a time that suits us and allows us to prepare for it properly.

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 9:44 am

I'd say there are still enough safeguards in place for this not to be a huge worry. First of all you actually have to convince enough MPs (the people we elected) to vote for it and secondly it has to go through the lords.

It's not as if one member railroaded the whole thing through.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 9:47 am

CrosspoolClarets wrote:Those celebrating Letwin’s bill without examining the constitutional impact should revisit their thoughts on this in a few years time. I suspect the impact would be massive and as I tried to stress last night, I would feel the same if it was pro Brexit legislation being passed outside the government and against the manifestos of the party members putting it forward.

This isn’t emergency legislation as required during a natural disaster or such like. This is to circumvent no deal, making us reliant on the Eu to allow us to leave which many could legitimately say is the best option due to this. More voters choose no deal than any other option currently. Taking it off the table in this manner at the same time as May talks to Corbyn (the man who correctly called her a stupid woman) will fragment what trust remains in politicians.

Not leaving without a deal is entirely in line with the manifesto Yvette Cooper was elected under.

This isn’t some sort of huge game changing precedent, it’s the result of what has effectively become a minority, unmanageable government. In normal times something like this, raised by an opposition MP, would be whipped against and voted down at the first reading. Desperate times call for desperate measures, hats off to Yvette Cooper for having the bottle to see it through (although she is the woman who literally has Balls by the balls

)

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 10:13 am

Spiral wrote:A bit melodramatic by CrosspoolClarets, but not especially unsurprising considering the tendency for a lot or brexiteers to use the language of 'protecting democratic integrity' as a means of halting the entire process; paralysis being the most (only?) effective way of bringing about the no-deal brexit they fetishise. The strength and rigour of parliamentary procedure, to say nothing of your overblown 'concerns' about democracy as a whole, isn't judged by how many minds are changed between readings of a bill. It could equally be viewed that the fact so few minds were changed attests to the soundness of the initial bill. I'm not necessarily making that claim, but pointing out the flaw in your measure for rigour. There are quite a few other metrics that need to be considered before writing the UK off as sliding towards a banana republic. Considering the unique time constraints, it's not difficult for a rational observer to see why a sovereign parliament acted to give itself a bit more breathing space.

The "strength and rigour of parliamentary procedure" was dependent on the single vote of the shamed Peterbrough MP who, fresh out of jail, went into the voting lobby , still wearing her tag.

Looks like it's too late to stop the slide....

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 10:20 am

Loving the irony of jubilant Remoaners going on an open top bus tour. Celebrating on the back of elected British MPs being able to draft and implement laws. Where as, in the institution they live and breath for, the European Parliament . It's MEPs can do not such thing. Laws and legislation is all drafted and thought up, by unelected Brussels bureaucrats and Commissioners.

This will be entirely lost on your typical unthinking Remoaner.

TheFamilyCat · Post by **TheFamilyCat** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 10:27 am

Ace, Ringo’s back. I hope you stay longer than you did yesterday. It was a shame that you disappeared after such a promising start to the day.

Devils_Advocate · Post by **Devils_Advocate** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 10:27 am

Sorry Ringo, you've lost me with that last comment??????

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 10:32 am

RingoMcCartney wrote:Loving the irony of jubilant Remoaners going on an open top bus tour. Celebrating on the back of elected British MPs being able to draft and implement laws. Where as, in the institution they live and breath for, the European Parliament . It's MEPs can do not such thing. Laws and legislation is all drafted and thought up, by unelected Brussels bureaucrats and Commissioners.

This will be entirely lost on your typical unthinking Remoaner.

Colburn_Claret · Post by **Colburn_Claret** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 10:39 am

CombatClaret wrote:The youth of today are growing up in a globally connected world with no experience of island Britain and a tendency not to bang on about WWII and the blitz spirit. They're embracing gay right, environmentalism and many more social issues which encourage a form of color/gender/race blind humanism.

I wouldn't be too confident they're going to swing so far right.

I embrace all those things as well, what is eye opening is that you don't need to be part of the EU to achieve them.
The idea that people who voted Brexit are little Englanders, harking on about WWII. It's people like you who are blinkered. It is perfectly feasible to be pro Europe and Globalisation, and anti EU. The very fact that you can't see it, just shows that you are missing the whole point of this referendum, pinning your beliefs on all the remainers who claim we leavers are all racists. Very sad.