Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Tue Oct 22, 2019 11:52 pm

martin_p wrote:Yeah, that’s why you keep replying to my posts denying things.

I'll deny myself the opportunity to mock Marty!

Your a constant source of tap-ins !

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Tue Oct 22, 2019 11:52 pm

martin_p wrote:It’s far from passed, it’s just got through to a second reading. A number of Labour MPs who voted for it are saying they’ll only vote for again if it’s amended.

Simple box ticking, slight adjustments, to vote for it in the first place should indicate no major barriers are present.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Tue Oct 22, 2019 11:55 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:Simple box ticking, slight adjustments, to vote for it in the first place should indicate no major barriers are present.

As Laura Kuenssberg said on the news today, a major milestone, but a million miles off being passed.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Tue Oct 22, 2019 11:58 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:I'll deny myself the opportunity to mock Marty!

Your a constant source of tap-ins !

It’s lifelong Labour supporter Burnley Paul who thinks anyone who isn’t a conservative by the age of 40 doesn’t have a brain.

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 12:01 am

martin_p wrote:As Laura Kuenssberg said on the news today, a major milestone, but a million miles off being passed.

In normal circumstances I’d disagree, but you could actually have a point, the process so far as been beset with problems so it is actually believable that a rebellious handful of MPs could throw a few spanner’s into the works & prolong the process, it’s not rubber stamped fully yet.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 12:12 am

martin_p wrote:

It’s lifelong Labour supporter Burnley Paul who thinks anyone who isn’t a conservative by the age of 40 doesn’t have a brain.

BY THE AGE OF 20, IF YOU'RE NOT A SOCIALIST, YOU HAVE NO HEART.

BY THE AGE OF 40, IF YOURE NOT CONSERVATIVE, YOU HAVE NO BRAIN......

martin_p wrote: Says the self confessed life long Labour supporter.

I only say I'm a labour supporter to the production team of various radio stations.

And by the way, the Labour party stopped be a Socialist party years ago.

Once they were the working class party now there an Islington dinner party

As I've said to the nation more than once!

(Its funny what you can get away with on national radio if you tell people what they want hear!)

AndyClaret · Post by **AndyClaret** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 5:31 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:What are the polls compared to pre-2017 Andy?

Kate, think he did!

Boris is not May, Professor Matthew Goodwin says that the polls show Boris will get a good majority.

AndyClaret · Post by **AndyClaret** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 5:33 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Latest poll

Remain 55%

Leave 45%

I don't mind Andy posting polls, but he's very selective

Irrelevant, we will be having an election, not a second referendum.

AndyClaret · Post by **AndyClaret** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 5:39 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Dec 12th

Good luck with that in the middle of a post strike.

evensteadiereddie · Post by **evensteadiereddie** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 6:14 am

Andy seems both rattled and desperate this morning.
I wonder why.

KateR · Post by **KateR** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 7:25 am

all signs seem to be pointing to the GE and not the WA itself now regardless of it passing, time to roll the dice and see who is really wanting to play or who has been telling prokies, plus just for some curve balls, unusually the EU will play a pivotal role in the GE happening or not.

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 7:26 am

How can we have an election in December when it still has to get through the Commons and the Lords and back again before the first/second week in November?

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 7:27 am

RingoMcCartney wrote:BY THE AGE OF 20, IF YOU'RE NOT A SOCIALIST, YOU HAVE NO HEART.

BY THE AGE OF 40, IF YOURE NOT CONSERVATIVE, YOU HAVE NO BRAIN......

I only say I'm a labour supporter to the production team of various radio stations.

And by the way, the Labour party stopped be a Socialist party years ago.

Once they were the working class party now there an Islington dinner party

As I've said to the nation more than once!

(Its funny what you can get away with on national radio if you tell people what they want hear!)

Pants on fire!!

Bordeauxclaret · Post by **Bordeauxclaret** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 7:27 am

RingoMcCartney wrote:Its funny what you can get away with on national radio if you tell people what they want hear!

Ringo has just inadvertently summed up Brexit.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 7:29 am

Spijed wrote:How can we have an election in December when it still has to get through the Commons and the Lords and back again before the first/second week in November?

If Johnson calls for an election under the fixed term parliament act and gets two thirds voting for it he can dissolve parliament immediately. There then has to be 25 working days before an election. So December is doable at the moment.

Burnley Ace · Post by **Burnley Ace** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 7:30 am

Lowbankclaret wrote:I have given up with polls.

I joined yougov.

For the first couple of months they sent me lots of polls on voting intentions.

I put Brexit Party and leave every time.

Not had a yougov poll on voting intention for three months.

Having brought this up on a Brexit party it appears there is a theme.

If you say BP and leave they stop sending you polls to answer.

Great way to get the Polls what you want to say.

No wonder they keep getting actual results wrong.

It’s meant to be a reflection of the electorate- they have an algorithm that identifies those people who joined to vote BNP and leave. You should have mixed it up a bit!

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 7:33 am

Burnley Ace wrote:It’s meant to be a reflection of the electorate- they have an algorithm that identifies those people who joined to vote BNP and leave. You should have mixed it up a bit!

I’ve never been polled and didn’t realise that you had to actually join yougov to be polled by them. Seems to take the ‘random sample’ element away from polling and I’ll be treating their results with a pinch of salt in future.

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 7:34 am

martin_p wrote:If Johnson calls for an election under the fixed term parliament act and gets two thirds voting for it he can dissolve parliament immediately. There then has to be 25 working days before an election. So December is doable at the moment.

Point I was making is we csnt leave the EU And have an election this year

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 7:35 am

Paul Waine wrote:Hi Lancs, I saw earlier today that you were concerned about the "length" of the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill.

Yes, it's 115 pages from front cover to back cover. There's lots and lots of repetitive stuff, as is the nature of Bills (and Acts when they are enacted) referencing all the specific areas that need to be referenced.

The Bill itself starts (on page 5): BE IT ENACTED by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—

After section 1 of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (repeal of the European Communities Act 1972) insert—

Full doc link:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... __Bill.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So, first thing we learn is that there is already the EU (Withdrawal) Act 2018..... so, we aren't starting with a "blank sheet of paper."

My second point, a contract of 115 pages, if it was in the area I worked all the time would take me max 3 hours to know and understand what was in there - and be ready to debate/negotiate what I agreed with and what I felt I'd like to change. (I did this sort of stuff - of course, not in politics, but other contractual areas regularly up to 9-10 years ago).

MPs have all their legal support staff to do all the "leg work" with them. They would already know and understand what all the associated documents say. They would split up the new EUWAB and could gather together their views overnight. The political parties will already know what their "target" amendments are.

Of course, the political debates can be very lengthy...... and, that's got nothing to do with the word count of the Bill..... and, everything to do with the intentions of the debaters. I'm sure we will hear the same arguments made that we've heard before. That's the nature of the beast.

I'm shocked to find out that you haven't has experience in this Paul to be honest.

It needs proper scrutiny, because its something that will affect us for a couple of generations at least.

Look, if you think three days is more than enough time, then that is completely up to you but its, to put it into simple terms, quite, quite insane.

There will be stuff in there that will change the way MPs vote, and it won't be found out in a cursory glance to a timetable based 100% on making Johnson look strong to the electorate.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 7:37 am

Spijed wrote:Point I was making is we csnt leave the EU And have an election this year

Yes, that’s true. My misunderstanding.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 7:39 am

AndyClaret wrote:Boris is not May, Professor Matthew Goodwin says that the polls show Boris will get a good majority.

You are right

May hasn't got a track record for lying to people to avoid taking responsibility.

In a GE campaign, that will be rammed home by everyone at every opportunity.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 7:40 am

AndyClaret wrote:Irrelevant, we will be having an election, not a second referendum.

Just posting an opinion poll.

There is another poster on here who does that. You might know him?

KateR · Post by **KateR** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:00 am

Spijed wrote:Point I was making is we csnt leave the EU And have an election this year

I think the real point is the majority believe we can't leave this year, right now the WA is sleeping and going nowhere. Therefore the worm has turned and it will be push for a GE (earliest already stated) while the WA continues to sleep, they are to all intents and purposes mutually separate and will not be pursued together The bigger question is will HOC allow it, will be a lot of recriminations regardless of that outcome

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:02 am

Being pointed out this morning that there still is a "No Deal" threat.

So until that is taken away, no incentive for an election.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:08 am

KateR wrote:I think the real point is the majority believe we can't leave this year, right now the WA is sleeping and going nowhere. Therefore the worm has turned and it will be push for a GE (earliest already stated) while the WA continues to sleep, they are to all intents and purposes mutually separate and will not be pursued together The bigger question is will HOC allow it, will be a lot of recriminations regardless of that outcome

I still think, having got the basis for a deal through the HoC, Johnson may decide to push on with a short extension and get Brexit agreed before Christmas. I think it’s to his advantage in a general election for it to be out of the way for a couple of reasons, it finishes the Brexit Party and he can go to the country saying he’s delivered.

But who knows what will happen when it comes to Johnson. What he says and what he does are completely different things so trying to read his intentions is difficult to say the least.

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:11 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Being pointed out this morning that there still is a "No Deal" threat.

So until that is taken away, no incentive for an election.

That no deal threat it’s always been in existence however unlikely, I get the impression certain people think it’s suddenly sprung up or it disappears & then re-emerges, it’s always been in a constant mode.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:19 am

martin_p wrote: Pants on fire!!

Half past 7 in the morning and you've been reduced to this!

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:22 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Fascinating insight into your mind there Ringo

Quick question if you don't mind

Why is Farage against this deal? (genuine question as I can't see why he would be)

TWO POINTS

1 The deal is , probably, not a clean enough brexit for Farage.

2 My mind reflects -

given this weeks ComRes poll , (majority want to leave)

the 2016 People's Vote, (majority voted leave)

the 2017 genera election result (where 84% of the People voted for referendum respecting parties)

and the 2019 EU parliamentary election (brexit party won)

What the majority think. (Bad news for Remainiacs)

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:29 am

Now you asked me a question. I answered it .

My turn Lancasterclaret.

You said, youd be willing to vote for the libdems.

You said youd accept that they , were they to form a government, unlikely as it may be, tear up Article 50 without a referendum.

You also said that if elected on a manifesto pledge, if any party wins an election or forms a government, they can implement whatever they had in their manifesto.

As we could be heading to a general election, this question has become increasingly pertinent.

How would you feel if a future government is formed after including it in their manifesto, they take us out of the European union, without a referendum?

I answered you genuine question.

Please answer my genuine question

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:31 am

RingoMcCartney wrote:Half past 7 in the morning and you've been reduced to this!

It’s genuinely all it deserves Wrongo. You’ve admit to lying to get onto a radio show because it’s what they want to hear. The trouble is you’ve so many ‘personas’ you’re getting them mixed up and are forgetting which one believes in what. If you came on here as just yourself (whoever you are) you’d probably get a lot more respect.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:45 am

Labour’s Richard Burgon reiterating that Labour will agree to an election once an extension is confirmed.

android · Post by **android** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 9:19 am

martin_p wrote:And if Johnson genuinely wanted it done he would have carried on the debate on the bill over the next couple of days even if he can’t have a vote about it on Thursday. They could understand what the amendments might be and understand what the extension might need to be. Instead they’re debating the Queen’s speech which will irrelevant if there is a snap election.

Just so you know Martin, the bill is now officially in "limbo" (confirmed by Bercow). It cannot be debated again until another timetable for debate is put forward and approved by parliament. Johnson could not put forward a new timetable that takes us beyond 31 October because the law says we leave on 31 October (date chosen by EU not Johnson). Therefore, we now have to wait until the EU decide whether to grant us an extension and for how long. Do you see?

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 9:31 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:I'm shocked to find out that you haven't has experience in this Paul to be honest.

It needs proper scrutiny, because its something that will affect us for a couple of generations at least.

Look, if you think three days is more than enough time, then that is completely up to you but its, to put it into simple terms, quite, quite insane.

There will be stuff in there that will change the way MPs vote, and it won't be found out in a cursory glance to a timetable based 100% on making Johnson look strong to the electorate.

Hi Lancs, ok, you may find it shocking that someone without direct experience of drafting parliamentary Bill's is posting on this thread. I'm grateful that the rest of the posters are giving me the chance. In my quieter, reflective moments, I can also admit to a sense of personal pride that I'm able to take part in this important debate.

It appears that you only gave my post a "cursory glance"

I didn't claim 3 days was sufficient. The political debate will require as much time as the politicians require.

What I said was that whether the bill is 115 pages, 15 pages or even 500 pages does make any difference to how long parliament requires.

I hope the "experts" on here can allow me that.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 9:34 am

android wrote:Just so you know Martin, the bill is now officially in "limbo" (confirmed by Bercow). It cannot be debated again until another timetable for debate is put forward and approved by parliament. Johnson could not put forward a new timetable that takes us beyond 31 October because the law says we leave on 31 October (date chosen by EU not Johnson). Therefore, we now have to wait until the EU decide whether to grant us an extension and for how long. Do you see?

Nope. Parliament can debate what it wants, it was the government’s decision to pause the bill and put it ‘in limbo’. All the rejection of the timetable did was stop the passage of the bill in three days. Ken Clarke questioned why the bill had been paused rather than continue the debate and given his time in parliament you’ve got to assume he has a pretty good grasp of what is and isn’t allowed.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 9:36 am

Paul Waine wrote:Hi Lancs, ok, you may find it shocking that someone without direct experience of drafting parliamentary Bill's is posting on this thread. I'm grateful that the rest of the posters are giving me the chance. In my quieter, reflective moments, I can also admit to a sense of personal pride that I'm able to take part in this important debate.

It appears that you only gave my post a "cursory glance"

I didn't claim 3 days was sufficient. The political debate will require as much time as the politicians require.

What I said was that whether the bill is 115 pages, 15 pages or even 500 pages does make any difference to how long parliament requires.

I hope the "experts" on here can allow me that.

You’re right it does make a difference.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 9:42 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Being pointed out this morning that there still is a "No Deal" threat.

So until that is taken away, no incentive for an election.

The "No Deal" "threat" can never be taken away. The EU insisted from early days, and Theresa May stupidly agreed, that trade negotiations couldn't start until after the withdrawal agreement was agreed. So they can't rule "no deal", or anything else, in or out until after the Withdrawal Agreement is signed. (Unless, of course, the UK is to somehow confirm by irrevocable law that we will accept whatever terms the EU chooses to offer. Which obviously would be stupid.)

android · Post by **android** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 9:42 am

martin_p wrote:Nope. Parliament can debate what it wants, it was the government’s decision to pause the bill and put it ‘in limbo’. All the rejection of the timetable did was stop the passage of the bill in three days. Ken Clarke questioned why the bill had been paused rather than continue the debate and given his time in parliament you’ve got to assume he has a pretty good grasp of what is and isn’t allowed.

You are wrong. Parliament voted to put it into limbo.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 9:45 am

android wrote:You are wrong. Parliament voted to put it into limbo.

Go and do some research. Parliament rejected the timetable, but the government paused the debate. It can still be debated.

android · Post by **android** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 9:53 am

No thanks. I am going to trust that our hero Super Johnny Bercow was telling the truth and he is never wrong!

Even if I accepted that Bercow was wrong (God forbid!), there is zero urgency over debating the bill now that parliament has decided we cannot leave with a deal by 31 October. If the EU grants parliament's wish for a 31 January extension then all the parties have said we will have a general election.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 10:01 am

There’s 46 pages worth of amendments to the bill put forward so far. The major themes seem to be a customs union, parliament being able to instruct the government to extend the transition period (although there’s one amendment that says we just extend by default if there’s no trade agreement by 1st June 2020) and producing impact assessments for the bill. Sure there’s more themes but I only got half way through!

android · Post by **android** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 10:35 am

Does that mean you now accept that parliament voted to put the bill into limbo?

Curiously, I understand the Labour party ran out of speakers an hour before the end of yesterday's debate on the bill that they did not have sufficient time to debate.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 10:39 am

Paul Waine wrote:Hi Lancs, ok, you may find it shocking that someone without direct experience of drafting parliamentary Bill's is posting on this thread. I'm grateful that the rest of the posters are giving me the chance. In my quieter, reflective moments, I can also admit to a sense of personal pride that I'm able to take part in this important debate.

It appears that you only gave my post a "cursory glance"

I didn't claim 3 days was sufficient. The political debate will require as much time as the politicians require.

What I said was that whether the bill is 115 pages, 15 pages or even 500 pages does make any difference to how long parliament requires.

I hope the "experts" on here can allow me that.

I don't know how much scrutiny this deal needs, but it need proper parliamentary scrutiny so we all know what we are voted for here.

No one who is genuinely interested in what happens going forward can possibly have a problem with that.

fatboy47 · Post by **fatboy47** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 11:02 am

Watching last nights news items I just felt saddened that it seems a significant group of supposed Labour MP's voted to help keep a right wing maverick in number 10 in order to protect their jobs for a wee while longer.

Not really why I've supported them over the years.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 11:12 am

android wrote:Does that mean you now accept that parliament voted to put the bill into limbo?

No, why would it?

Interestingly Laura Kuenssberg is asking on the BBC website ‘why did Boris Johnson pause the Brexit Bill?’. You need to tell her it wasn’t him it was parliament.

AlargeClaret · Post by **AlargeClaret** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 11:15 am

fatboy47 wrote:Watching last nights news items I just felt saddened that it seems a significant group of supposed Labour MP's voted to help keep a right wing maverick in number 10 in order to protect their jobs for a wee while longer.

Not really why I've supported them over the years.

Boris about the softest of softest of Tory “ right wing” in all fairness

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 11:17 am

AlargeClaret wrote:Boris about the softest of softest of Tory “ right wing” in all fairness

He says he is.

What he actually does doesn't back that up at all.

Which is my problem with Johnson in a nutshell

AlargeClaret · Post by **AlargeClaret** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 11:18 am

Just want Labour /Libs wanted an election fought on Brexit which has Farage doing a wrecking ball job on the Tories and insanely even gives Corbyn a small chance as opposed to the Boris whitewash if the soft Brexit deal has passed

ClaretAndJew · Post by **ClaretAndJew** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 11:21 am

UK leaving the EU

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 11:27 am

AlargeClaret wrote:Just want Labour /Libs wanted an election fought on Brexit which has Farage doing a wrecking ball job on the Tories and insanely even gives Corbyn a small chance as opposed to the Boris whitewash if the soft Brexit deal has passed

I don't see why Labour want an election fought on Brexit. After all, the Tories will get votes due to their policy of leaving with a deal; Liberals will get votes because of their policy of remaining at all costs; Brexit party will get votes because of their policy of leaving at all costs.

Are Labour hoping to get votes from people who don't really know what to think so the Labour party perfectly represents them?

AlargeClaret · Post by **AlargeClaret** » Wed Oct 23, 2019 11:33 am

dsr wrote:I don't see why Labour want an election fought on Brexit. After all, the Tories will get votes due to their policy of leaving with a deal; Liberals will get votes because of their policy of remaining at all costs; Brexit party will get votes because of their policy of leaving at all costs.

Are Labour hoping to get votes from people who don't really know what to think so the Labour party perfectly represents them?

If the mp’s had passed the deal that would have been seen as a reasonable success by Tory voters . It would have more importantly ( for Boris ) have finished Farage,and Corbyn would have been routed in a GE . The vote will now be splattered all over the place