Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

[Claret-On-A-T-Rex]

if you don't believe me go on FB and ask who's voting for the Brexit Party ?

I asked but all of my friends said they weren't, probably because they aren't halfwits.

[SmudgetheClaret]

I asked but all of my friends said they weren't, probably because they aren't halfwits.

all of your friends ? who is it Good old Nigel got the leftists in a panic again

[SmudgetheClaret]

Nice to see some people on here finally admitting it.

If you accept the result you are a democrat and if you didn’t your anti democratic it’s that easy innit ?

[hampsteadclaret]

Nice to see some people on here finally admitting it.

You really are low wattage aren't you?

What are you..14?

[aggi]

Although written by a Leave voter this is pretty much what my view is on the Brexit process https://twitter.com/AdrianYalland/statu ... 49057?s=19" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[elwaclaret]

Remainders who claim Facebook as proof of national feeling really need to spend a little less time on Facebook. Talk about living within your own political bubble.

[CombatClaret]

Although written by a Leave voter this is pretty much what my view is on the Brexit process https://twitter.com/AdrianYalland/statu ... 49057?s=19" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Seems to have a pretty good handle on things tbf, speaks to a very reasonable idea of Brexit but knows it's been hijacked and most of the claims were lies and bluffs.
https://twitter.com/AdrianYalland/statu ... 1403830272" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Tall Paul]

Remainders who claim Facebook as proof of national feeling really need to spend a little less time on Facebook. Talk about living within your own political bubble.

You know Smudge isn't a remainer?

[CrosspoolClarets]

Although written by a Leave voter this is pretty much what my view is on the Brexit process https://twitter.com/AdrianYalland/statu ... 49057?s=19" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I agree with parts of this, but in all sincerity, using this logic implies that a 50.1% Leave vote and a 49.9% Leave vote would have led to almost exactly the same type of compromise arrangement.

However, we all know that would not have been the case. It would have been full steam ahead. Winner takes all.

No Leave or Remain vote was ever going to be more than 60%, so it was always going to be close-ish. The (Remain) government or the (Remain) opposition had every chance in 2015/16 to lay out what would happen in either scenario. They chose to say that Leave would mean fully leaving (intending it to make people vote Remain). No surprise people are now holding out for that promise to be enacted with the same forcefulness that those same Remain politicians now lie about what they originally said.

It’s those Remain MPs that have led to this, no doubt. This is the tweet that I prefer:

https://twitter.com/change_britain/stat ... 27712?s=21

[elwaclaret]

You know Smudge isn't a remainer?

I didn’t Paul, but the point remains. People of both sides swallowed the same amount of ball clocks. I don’t keep up with the tittle tattle of daily politics but even watching the more serious review programming would give people a lot more grounding in the debate than some of the party line shite claimed by both sides. I prefer to look on in semi detachment and view it as a history thesis of the future.

[elwaclaret]

I can’t wait to see how much The EU appeals to remainers when the Nationalists of right and left are calling the shots after the EU elections. One of the reasons I voted leave... I so polarisation in mainland Europe and that is never a good thing.

[keith1879]

Although written by a Leave voter this is pretty much what my view is on the Brexit process https://twitter.com/AdrianYalland/statu ... 49057?s=19" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I don't agree with his expectation that we won't leave the EU.....I expect that we will ....the only issue is limiting the damage to our country and its reputation (and our society). Otherwise he has put into words almost exactly what I believe.

[martin_p]

In september / october pointed out that the announcement by Bercow , earlier that year that millions had been earmarked for eu parliamentary elections that we shouldn't be participating in was proof of an establishment and political class stitch up to stop Brexit. You said it was "Just contingency plans". I even think Lancaster claret said I was now on a establishment conspiracy tin foil hat rant.

I've been proven right.

How convenient you don't remember. You don't remember nitpicking over whether it was 850,000 or a million quid!? And you know, as well as I do that many brexit and politics related threads have been deleted. And knowing that, you insist on me digging for it.

Pathetic

If you want to join the long list of Remoaners who simply can't accept I was right about something by swallowing your pride and having the good grace to admit it, that's entirely up to you.

You haven’t been proven right at all. It was a contingency plan and the event for which the contingency was planned has happened. To create an ‘establishment conspiracy’ from that is very much tin foil hat stuff. Using the same argument there must be an establishment contingency for a no deal Brexit as substantially more has been spent by n contingency planning for that.

[TheFamilyCat]

You haven’t been proven right at all. It was a contingency plan and the event for which the contingency was planned has happened. To create an ‘establishment conspiracy’ from that is very much tin foil hat stuff. Using the same argument there must be an establishment contingency for a no deal Brexit as substantially more has been spent by n contingency planning for that.

The bear has been poked.

[SmudgetheClaret]

You know Smudge isn't a remainer?

I am a remainer! i remain democratic others not so much..

[aggi]

I agree with parts of this, but in all sincerity, using this logic implies that a 50.1% Leave vote and a 49.9% Leave vote would have led to almost exactly the same type of compromise arrangement.

However, we all know that would not have been the case. It would have been full steam ahead. Winner takes all.

No Leave or Remain vote was ever going to be more than 60%, so it was always going to be close-ish. The (Remain) government or the (Remain) opposition had every chance in 2015/16 to lay out what would happen in either scenario. They chose to say that Leave would mean fully leaving (intending it to make people vote Remain). No surprise people are now holding out for that promise to be enacted with the same forcefulness that those same Remain politicians now lie about what they originally said.

It’s those Remain MPs that have led to this, no doubt. This is the tweet that I prefer:

https://twitter.com/change_britain/stat ... 27712?s=21

I think there's two elements. Which side got the most votes which dictates whether we leave or remain and then the margin which dictates how it's done.

If Remain had got 52% and then said that was a mandate for joining schengen, the Euro, EU army, giving up vetos, etc then there would have been outrage from Leave voters. That's the equivalent position of Leave getting 52% and saying that's a mandate for a No Deal Brexit.

The Remain Campaign was pretty crap before the vote. The Leave campaign also promised plenty of stuff that never came to pass (the talk of no deal was minimal, all the talk was how good the deal was, how easy it would be, how they needed us more, etc). Neither side covered themselves in glory. For every video like the above there's Gove saying "The day after we vote to leave we hold all the cards and we can choose the path we want." or David Davis saying that there'd be no transition period where we'd have to follow EU rules (god knows how he then got the job of negotiating given his non-existent grasp of the realities).

If Leave had recognised they only had a slim margin and worked with Remain I believe that we would have left the EU by now. As it is they spent eighteen months going "We won, you lost, get over it" to virtually half the country and then wondered why there wasn't universal support.

[tiger76]

I think there's two elements. Which side got the most votes which dictates whether we leave or remain and then the margin which dictates how it's done.

If Remain had got 52% and then said that was a mandate for joining schengen, the Euro, EU army, giving up vetos, etc then there would have been outrage from Leave voters. That's the equivalent position of Leave getting 52% and saying that's a mandate for a No Deal Brexit.

The Remain Campaign was pretty crap before the vote. The Leave campaign also promised plenty of stuff that never came to pass (the talk of no deal was minimal, all the talk was how good the deal was, how easy it would be, how they needed us more, etc). Neither side covered themselves in glory. For every video like the above there's Gove saying "The day after we vote to leave we hold all the cards and we can choose the path we want." or David Davis saying that there'd be no transition period where we'd have to follow EU rules (god knows how he then got the job of negotiating given his non-existent grasp of the realities).

If Leave had recognised they only had a slim margin and worked with Remain I believe that we would have left the EU by now. As it is they spent eighteen months going "We won, you lost, get over it" to virtually half the country and then wondered why there wasn't universal support.

Pretty honest summary,the obvious compromise the day after the vote was a form of CU,even if this involves paying into the EU'S budget,that way we can still trade with the EU,but have a much looser relationship with the political side of their affairs,finally 3 years late the government has woken up to this reality.

[South West Claret.]

Tic toc, getting ever nearer for that Informed referendum now.

[LoveCurryPies]

Second referendum will be held early August.

[South West Claret.]

Second referendum will be held early August.

How very specific

[nil_desperandum]

Second referendum will be held early August.

According to Peston, (and some of the papers) it sounds like we'll be having it a lot earlier than that.
It appears that - assuming the EU elections go ahead - Labour will stand as "The Referendum Party", and Peston predicts that with Conservatives in total disarray, and many of their core voters making a tactical switch to either the Brexit Party or Labour, the Tories will be wiped out and Labour will romp home.
This in itself will probably lead to a massive re-think of Conservative policy.

[CrosspoolClarets]

I think there's two elements. Which side got the most votes which dictates whether we leave or remain and then the margin which dictates how it's done.

If Remain had got 52% and then said that was a mandate for joining schengen, the Euro, EU army, giving up vetos, etc then there would have been outrage from Leave voters. That's the equivalent position of Leave getting 52% and saying that's a mandate for a No Deal Brexit.

The Remain Campaign was pretty crap before the vote. The Leave campaign also promised plenty of stuff that never came to pass (the talk of no deal was minimal, all the talk was how good the deal was, how easy it would be, how they needed us more, etc). Neither side covered themselves in glory. For every video like the above there's Gove saying "The day after we vote to leave we hold all the cards and we can choose the path we want." or David Davis saying that there'd be no transition period where we'd have to follow EU rules (god knows how he then got the job of negotiating given his non-existent grasp of the realities).

If Leave had recognised they only had a slim margin and worked with Remain I believe that we would have left the EU by now. As it is they spent eighteen months going "We won, you lost, get over it" to virtually half the country and then wondered why there wasn't universal support.

We’re close to agreeing on this stuff but we are all swayed a touch by our own preferences so we remain in slight disagreement.

For example, I think that if Remain got 52%, that should have been the mandate for a Norway style relationship with a new style Customs Union added, in which we would get a vote. A new outer ring based on 48% wishing to leave. Your view seems to be that if Remain got 52% we should have had a standstill but not integrate further. I can see both arguments. Whereas I see a proper exit but with a FTA and protection in the interim as the 48% compromise we should now be seeking. It wasn’t long ago that wasn’t termed a hard Brexit, but now seemingly it is.

Regarding nil desp’s comment above - on that one I see an anti-Tory vote as coming from Brexiteers as much as anyone, so I don’t see how it can be viewed as a mandate for a referendum (e.g. I intend to vote Labour myself). Remainers will spin it that way, and it may work, but it would be as dodgy an interpretation as anything that has preceded it in recent years, and it wouldn’t just be lighting the fire, it would be throwing petrol on it.

[nil_desperandum]

Regarding nil desp’s comment above - on that one I see an anti-Tory vote as coming from Brexiteers as much as anyone, so I don’t see how it can be viewed as a mandate for a referendum (e.g. I intend to vote Labour myself). Remainers will spin it that way, and it may work, but it would be as dodgy an interpretation as anything that has preceded it in recent years, and it wouldn’t just be lighting the fire, it would be throwing petrol on it.

If as Peston claims Labour stand as "The Referendum Party" how can there be any ambiguity about what you are voting for? It wouldn't be open to interpretation / misinterpretation.
Basically if you were to vote Labour you would be casting a vote for a Confirmatory Vote, (doesn't mean of course that you would vote "remain" if a Confirmatory Vote / Referendum was subsequently held).
There would be clear water between this and the Brexit Party who would be fighting on a "no deal" ticket.
What the Conservatives would campaign for - who knows?
This now does appear to be a fairly logical direction for Labour to move into, and is basically in line with what was agreed at the Party Conference.

[dsr]

What the Conservatives would campaign for - who knows?

The Conservative party will probably fight on the same lines as at the general election - "I'm Theresa May - trust me". In which case they will surely, I hope, be wiped out, because it will surely have to be a complete disaster of an election to finally get into May's thick skull that she is achieving nothing. The Brexit party can stand for Brexit, the Change UK mob can stand for Remain, the Tories can stand for Theresa May, and Labour can stand for "none of the above".

[Jakubclaret]

The Conservative party will probably fight on the same lines as at the general election - "I'm Theresa May - trust me". In which case they will surely, I hope, be wiped out, because it will surely have to be a complete disaster of an election to finally get into May's thick skull that she is achieving nothing. The Brexit party can stand for Brexit, the Change UK mob can stand for Remain, the Tories can stand for Theresa May, and Labour can stand for "none of the above".

Which pretty much translates into what a shambles the debacle it is, it needs gutting top to bottom & inside & out, I can fully understand why some people don’t bother voting I won’t be bothering again, more & more people are just losing interest in the whole thing, as a preplanned idea it’s a masterstroke in the exercise of completely draining any enthusiasm & promising disappointment. It’s so divided & out of touch with everyday reality, it’s not working class democracy in any shape of form, it’s all designed & engineered to alienate the everyday man/woman on the street & promote London/westminister elitism & the pockets throughout the UK.

[Greenmile]

...For example, I think that if Remain got 52%, that should have been the mandate for a Norway style relationship with a new style Customs Union added, in which we would get a vote. A new outer ring based on 48% wishing to leave.

“If Remain got 52%, we should have left”

What a **** you are.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

According to Peston, (and some of the papers) it sounds like we'll be having it a lot earlier than that.
It appears that - assuming the EU elections go ahead - Labour will stand as "The Referendum Party", and Peston predicts that with Conservatives in total disarray, and many of their core voters making a tactical switch to either the Brexit Party or Labour, the Tories will be wiped out and Labour will romp home.
This in itself will probably lead to a massive re-think of Conservative policy.

Can't see the Tories being wiped out.
They've got a core group of voters, like Labour, who'll vote for them no matter what they do.

[Claret-On-A-T-Rex]

HAPPY BREXIT DAY!

[beddie]

if a second referendum takes place and the swing goes the other way it will be interesting to see if Mrs May then goes, if she does I can see Boris being the next P.M. That would make it very interesting.

[martin_p]

Regarding nil desp’s comment above - on that one I see an anti-Tory vote as coming from Brexiteers as much as anyone, so I don’t see how it can be viewed as a mandate for a referendum (e.g. I intend to vote Labour myself). Remainers will spin it that way, and it may work, but it would be as dodgy an interpretation as anything that has preceded it in recent years, and it wouldn’t just be lighting the fire, it would be throwing petrol on it.

A comment worth remembering the next time someone claims that x% of MPs were elected on manifestos that supported leaving the EU.

[Lancasterclaret]

Whether you want Brexit or not, Boris Johnson would be an appalling PM

[Lancasterclaret]

The reason Brexiteers don't want another referendum remains exactly the same now as it always has been.

Once they can't trot out the "will of the people" line, they'd have to go into specifics and if this thread is anything to go with those who vary from plain wrong to outright fantasy

[BleedingClaret]

The reason Brexiteers don't want another referendum remains exactly the same now as it always has been.

Once they can't trot out the "will of the people" line, they'd have to go into specifics and if this thread is anything to go with those who vary from plain wrong to outright fantasy

Or it could be that a referendum is quite useless unless the sitting Parliament reflects it.
Therefore a general election is required, where MPs, this time, won’t get away with lies.
Why are the sitting MPs not wanting this option, I wonder

[BleedingClaret]

“If Remain got 52%, we should have left”

What a **** you are.

What your saying is that if Remain got 52% we should have stayed as we were.
FPTP meaning the 48% leave voters would be unrepresented
Strange that 52% Leave Win is met with a what about the 48% dilution.
Can’t have it both ways
No actually you’re right I’m being silly for a moment I forgot about the Status Quo
Whatever you want

[nil_desperandum]

if a second referendum takes place and the swing goes the other way it will be interesting to see if Mrs May then goes, if she does I can see Boris being the next P.M. That would make it very interesting.

Can't see how that would make any sense for the Conservative Party.
They've just had the "problem" of a "Remain" PM with a "mandate" to exit the EU, and then they would be electing a "leave" PM with a "mandate" to keep us in.
It's all hypothetical, of course, but most of the failed brexit project has been - to quote Jess Phillips, a "Tory psycho drama" designed to hold a divided party together, so It would be a massive gamble for the Tories to vote to extend the chaos.
Of course there is an alternative scenario: Boris is an opportunist and has only ever been motivated by becoming PM. Should he become PM with a "mandate" for remain, he would most likely just change sides. Don't forget he wrote two letters - one for remain and one for leave, so he has no principles at all.

[Greenmile]

What your saying is that if Remain got 52% we should have stayed as we were.
FPTP meaning the 48% leave voters would be unrepresented
Strange that 52% Leave Win is met with a what about the 48% dilution.
Can’t have it both ways
No actually you’re right I’m being silly for a moment I forgot about the Status Quo
Whatever you want

I’m saying if Remain won the referendum (without cheating) we should remain. Nothing more or less than that. I’m not suggesting we should join Schengen or adopt the Euro or anything.

As Leave won, I think we should leave, just not on a no deal basis as that would be a ridiculous act of self-harm, and there’s no mandate for it unless we have another referendum which is won by “no deal”.

Edit - I’m also saying Crosspool is a ****, of course, but that’s like saying the sky is blue.

[martin_p]

Or it could be that a referendum is quite useless unless the sitting Parliament reflects it.
Therefore a general election is required, where MPs, this time, won’t get away with lies.
Why are the sitting MPs not wanting this option, I wonder

Not if the referendum is made legally binding (unlike the last one).

[CrosspoolClarets]

If as Peston claims Labour stand as "The Referendum Party" how can there be any ambiguity about what you are voting for? It wouldn't be open to interpretation / misinterpretation.
Basically if you were to vote Labour you would be casting a vote for a Confirmatory Vote, (doesn't mean of course that you would vote "remain" if a Confirmatory Vote / Referendum was subsequently held).
There would be clear water between this and the Brexit Party who would be fighting on a "no deal" ticket.
What the Conservatives would campaign for - who knows?
This now does appear to be a fairly logical direction for Labour to move into, and is basically in line with what was agreed at the Party Conference.

Because (I think) you are referring to the European elections, which some of us view as null and void given that we should have left, so we'll be voting to punish the Tories as much as possible. Turnout will be about 35% so it won't be a mandate for anything.

If, however, you apply your logic to a general election in the coming months, then I totally agree. That one could indeed be interpreted as such, providing Labour make it very clear in their manifesto.

[CrosspoolClarets]

What your saying is that if Remain got 52% we should have stayed as we were.
FPTP meaning the 48% leave voters would be unrepresented
Strange that 52% Leave Win is met with a what about the 48% dilution.
Can’t have it both ways
No actually you’re right I’m being silly for a moment I forgot about the Status Quo
Whatever you want

Thank you for responding to the attack on my post. You're absolutely right, it is rampant hypocrisy which does nothing to repair divisions. I don't mind numpties like Greenmile being hypocritical (whose post, despite me hiding it, I saw when you quoted it), but what I do mind is our elected MPs being shamefully hypocritical to our faces.

[dsr]

Not if the referendum is made legally binding (unlike the last one).

It can't be made legally binding. No government can bind its successors, and as we know, it is possible to run a bill through both houses in 24 hours. This could overturn the so-called "legally binding" bit of the previous bill.

[TheFamilyCat]

No doubt smudge will have fapped himself into a frenzy over this....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47907350" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[aggi]

We’re close to agreeing on this stuff but we are all swayed a touch by our own preferences so we remain in slight disagreement.

For example, I think that if Remain got 52%, that should have been the mandate for a Norway style relationship with a new style Customs Union added, in which we would get a vote. A new outer ring based on 48% wishing to leave. Your view seems to be that if Remain got 52% we should have had a standstill but not integrate further. I can see both arguments. Whereas I see a proper exit but with a FTA and protection in the interim as the 48% compromise we should now be seeking. It wasn’t long ago that wasn’t termed a hard Brexit, but now seemingly it is.

Regarding nil desp’s comment above - on that one I see an anti-Tory vote as coming from Brexiteers as much as anyone, so I don’t see how it can be viewed as a mandate for a referendum (e.g. I intend to vote Labour myself). Remainers will spin it that way, and it may work, but it would be as dodgy an interpretation as anything that has preceded it in recent years, and it wouldn’t just be lighting the fire, it would be throwing petrol on it.

I think we're in agreement that without an overwhelming victory either way the other side of the vote shouldn't have just been ignored and that has resulted in a lot of the current issues. The "You lost, get over it" attitude has certainly hindered not helped (and ironically has hindered the Leave side more).

I don't really get where you're coming from in terms of if Remain won we should leave the EU. I think that has certainly been swayed by your own preferences.

[aggi]

No doubt smudge will have fapped himself into a frenzy over this....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47907350" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The website is impressive https://thebrexitparty.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Burnley Ace]

It can't be made legally binding. No government can bind its successors, and as we know, it is possible to run a bill through both houses in 24 hours. This could overturn the so-called "legally binding" bit of the previous bill.

Implementing the result can be made legally binding - for example see s8 Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Act 2001 - which states the Minister must make an order. A future Parliament would have to revoke the Act.

This “must make” provision wasn’t in the EU Referendum Act as it was advisory which is why Leavers put so much emphasis on a pamphlet.

[martin_p]

It can't be made legally binding. No government can bind its successors, and as we know, it is possible to run a bill through both houses in 24 hours. This could overturn the so-called "legally binding" bit of the previous bill.

Why would it be a different government?

[dsr]

Implementing the result can be made legally binding - for example see s8 Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Act 2001 - which states the Minister must make an order. A future Parliament would have to revoke the Act.

This “must make” provision wasn’t in the EU Referendum Act as it was advisory which is why Leavers put so much emphasis on a pamphlet.

I can see how it could have been written into the Act that the Prime Minister must invoke Article 50 within a very short time of the result being declared, but even then it couldn't be immediate to allow for recounts or investigations into potential malpractice. So even then, it couldn't be instant, and even if Article 50 had been invoked immediately, it couldn't have stopped all the legal shenanigans that we have had.

There is no way that making the referendum "legally binding" would have made the outcome any different. We would still have had all the arguments and we would still be in the EU.

[RMutt]

If there is one thing this whole sorry debacle has shown, it is what a sham our so-called democracy actually is. And I’m not talking from the position of a brexiteer, although I can see why they are angry. I’m talking about the imbalance of newspapers that have swung ( decided the outcome of) elections for years. Career politicians saying whatever keeps them in their job. Politicians helping their friends to milk and steal from the public. The House of Lords. The first past the post system. I know people will defend it, saying it’s the best we can do. But, really, it’s a mess and brexit has proved it.

[SmudgetheClaret]

Labour leaflet just landed on the mat ...

Labour.jpg (48.46 KiB) Viewed 1482 times

[RingoMcCartney]

What can I say, I don't remember it. With other posters I'd be willing to give them the benefit of the doubt but with you it's like the boy who cried wolf; you've misrepresented far too many posts previously to take you at face value.

Yet another Remoaner who simply cannot do the honorable thing and eat a tiny slice of humble pie!

Selective amnesia now being the latest tactic!

Aggi - the message boards cheap carpet. He lies very badly.

[RingoMcCartney]

Labour MPs VOTED on the second reading of the Bill on 9th June 2015 (544-53) however they withdrew their support on the FINAL decisive vote on the 7th September (326-53).

1. Does a Bill go for Royal Assent after the second vote?
2. Does a Bill go for Royal Assent after the third vote?

All you have is Labour VOTING to start the Parliamentary process of determining whether to make legal provisions for a pre-legislative referendum.

The question was

" Did the vast majority of labour MPs vote to have an eu referendum ?" 

You previously incorrectly answered- "no"

Look at your very own words. I've highlighted the key words for you!

You're actually saying "Yes"

But you're trying your level best to simultaneously continue to say "no"