384 million extra a week for NHS after Brexit.

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 6:22 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:And Leave didn't campaign on a hard brexit. So if the government tries to have a hard brexit, or remain, then we should have another vote. You can't win a campaign promising a soft brexit and then tell us to get ****** when the government can only get a hard brexit. That's not how democracy works.

We all know why you're scared of another vote if the only thing the government can get is No Deal, and it's that you'll lose.

If you wanted a hard brexit then that's what your side should have campaigned and won on.

I aint scared of another vote, bring it on.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 6:33 pm

claretandy wrote:I aint scared of another vote, bring it on.

Good. That's how it should be. For two years every time remain voters have tried to remind Leave voters that there's only a mandate for a soft brexit we've had to put up with viceral nonsence about how we're trying to subvert democracy and the "will of the people", but all we've been doing is trying to keep the government in line and obeying the will of the people, and there's only one way to interpret the vote result, which is that it's the will of the people that we have a very soft Brexit. If that's not possible then we should have a new referendum based on what is possible.

It makes sense, doesn't it? If the government can't deliver on what we wanted from the first referendum then they shouldn't be guessing and choosing either a Hard Brexit or to remain. Right?

ClaretMoffitt · Post by **ClaretMoffitt** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 6:36 pm

claretandy wrote:I aint scared of another vote, bring it on.

Same mate.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 6:43 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:And Leave didn't campaign on a hard brexit. So if the government tries to have a hard brexit, or remain, then we should have another vote. You can't win a campaign promising a soft brexit and then tell us to get ****** when the government can only get a hard brexit. That's not how democracy works.

We all know why you're scared of another vote if the only thing the government can get is No Deal, and it's that you'll lose.

If you wanted a hard brexit then that's what your side should have campaigned and won on.

Stop pretending the 1st referendum was only about trade. It was also about ending the jurisdiction of the ECJ, not paying in billions each year, ending free movement of people and the ability to strike deals with countries independently. These can still be achieved by Leaving the EU. So this must still happen if you want to respect the will of the People. Terms of trade are dependent on negotiations.

There isn't, and never was any such thing as a "hard" or "soft" brexit. It's a term adopted by the losing side following the referendum result.

The ballot paper asked for a choice of leave or Remain.

18 months of campaigning by both sides, made it clear what either choice meant. As an extreme EU nationalist, I expect you to trot out the tired old "your side didn't know what you were voting for" . That's what Remoaners do best.

However, I'm up for a 2nd vote. As long as it respects the 1st which decided to leave the EU.

So the wording on the ballot paper should be.

"Do you accept the deal with the EU, that her Majesty's government has achieved. Or do you want to Leave on WTO rules?

The deal and leave ?

Or

WTO and leave ?

You get your 2nd vote. You're happy.

We respect the biggest single expression of democracy the UK has witnessed, and still Leave.

Everybody's happy. What's not to like?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 6:52 pm

If it was about those things then the Leave campaign should have campaigned on those things instead of being at pains to stress to the rest of us that we can stay in the single market and have all the same laws and ****. But they didn't.

I've got absolutely no problem with the government delivering on what the Leave campaign campaigned for. None at all. But i have lots of problems with them trying to deliver something else. If they want to do that then we should have another vote.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 7:12 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:If it was about those things then the Leave campaign should have campaigned on those things.

They did. You were obviously lost somewhere in the darkest depths of the Bunker.

So the 2nd vote you want. The choice.

Leave on the deal?

Or Leave on WTO?

Yes? Or are you sticking to the duplicitous ploy of the losing side of trying to overturn the 1st EU referendum?

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 7:37 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote: 18 months of campaigning by both sides, made it clear what either choice meant. As an extreme EU nationalist, I expect you to trot out the tired old "your side didn't know what you were voting for" . That's what Remoaners do best.

I’ve asked you before and you failed to deliver, so since you brought it up I’ll ask again. Can you point me to anything produced by the Leave campaign that describes what ‘leave’ meant.

Tall Paul · Post by **Tall Paul** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 8:03 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:No "misquote" from me aggi.

Here's the misquote, you dummy:

aggi wrote:a bit conflicted.

RingoMcCartney wrote:"A but conflicted"

Tall Paul · Post by **Tall Paul** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 8:09 pm

In before "Slack Paul", "pedantry" etc etc

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 8:19 pm

martin_p wrote:I’ve asked you before and you failed to deliver, so since you brought it up I’ll ask again. Can you point me to anything produced by the Leave campaign that describes what ‘leave’ meant.

Were you in the Bunker with Turtles Head 18 months prior to the vote?

Desperate Marty, just utterly desperate.

While you're hear, I listened to an interview with a highly respected guy (name fails me) on talkradio yesterday. It was between 10 and 1. He's part of a group or charity or something like that, that's trying to put pressure on the government to crack down on modern day slavery. He said that there's been a massive increase in children coming in from Romania and Albania on fake passports, showing they were EU citizens (easily obtained by highly organised people traffickers ) to get into the UK thanks to the EU free movement of people rules.

Some of the things he had discovered were horrendous and have no place in the 21st century or any century for that matter.

Now this guy had first had knowledge of what kind of chilling and nauseating practices are going on right now. Under our very noses. He had first hand accounts from social workers, police, border security and children's charities.

I agreed with his opinion that free movement of people rules were part of the problem. My view is, that by ending free movement of people it will go some way to making it more difficult for the People traffickers and modern day slavery gangs.

I was hoping you'd ring in and tell him about the evidence that you had. Evidence that ending free movement of people would not help to stop exploitation and people trafficking.

Where were you Marty? You were so keen to brag about it previously. It could have been a golden opportunity to go to a wider audience. A national audience Marty think about It!

Alas, just like on the UTC message board, we were left waiting.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 8:21 pm

Tall Paul wrote:In before "Slack Paul", "pedantry" etc etc

Pedantry like that is two a penny.

Two a penny pedantry, from Tenna Man Paul.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 8:26 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:Were you in the Bunker with Turtles Head 18 months prior to the vote?

Desperate Marty, just utterly desperate.

While you're hear, I listened to an interview with a highly respected guy (name fails me) on talkradio yesterday. It was between 10 and 1. He has set up a group that's trying to put pressure on the government to crack down on modern day slavery. He said that there's been a massive increase in children coming in from Romania and Albania on fake passports, showing they were EU citizens (easily obtained by highly organised people traffickers ) to get into the UK thanks to the EU free movement of people rules.

Some of the things he had discovered were horrendous and have no place in the 21st century or any century for that matter.

Now this guy had first had knowledge of what kind of chilling and nauseating practices are going on right now. Under our very noses. He had first hand accounts from social workers, police, border security and children's charities.

I agreed with his opinion that free movement of people rules were part of the problem. My view is, that by ending free movement of people it will go some way to making it more difficult for the People traffickers and modern day slavery gangs.

I was hoping you'd ring in and tell him about the evidence that you had. Evidence that ending free movement of people would not help to stop exploitation and people trafficking.

Where were you Marty? You were so keen to brag about it previously. It could have been a golden opportunity to go to a wider audience. A national audience Marty think about It!

Alas, just like on the UTC message board, we were left waiting.

It would have been quicker just to say ‘no’. As you well know there wasn’t a definition of ‘leave’ before the referendum (much as there isn’t really one now). If there was it should be easy enough to find on the internet. Believe me I’ve looked! Of course if I’m missing something The I’m sure a committed Brexiteer like you will be able to find it and link it.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 8:51 pm

martin_p wrote:It would have been quicker just to say ‘no’. As you well know there wasn’t a definition of ‘leave’ before the referendum (much as there isn’t really one now). If there was it should be easy enough to find on the internet. Believe me I’ve looked! Of course if I’m missing something The I’m sure a committed Brexiteer like you will be able to find it and link it.

It would have been quicker to admit you have zero evidence that ending free movement of people would not help to stop exploitation and people trafficking!

As you know, ceaseless Remoaners like you, who, tonight after today's Commons climb down by Dominic "he marched them up to the top of the hill, and he marched them down again" Grieve are crying inside. Like to trot out this "you didn't know what you were voting for" garbage don't you! It's really unedifying and shows you lack the ability to accept defeat with any dignity.

Don't be like the guy in the pub. Years later, still going on about a dodgy offside decision that lead to us getting beat by a single goal.

I flicked over at half time in the Spain game to the bbc parliament channel for a laugh (contradiction in terms I know) It was the Lords and Andrew Adonis was still bleating on. His disappointment was written all over his tortoise-like face. There was a man, regularly being shouted down by his Peers, but shamelessly grinding on about what he perceived as a national injustice.

Dont be that man on UTC message board Marty. Just like the referee in that match, the decisions been made

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 8:57 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:It would have been quicker to admit you have zero evidence that ending free movement of people would not help to stop exploitation and people trafficking!

As you know, ceaseless Remoaners like you, who, tonight after today's Commons climb down by Dominic "he marched them up to the top of the hill, and he marched them down again" Grieve are crying inside. Like to trot out this "you didn't know what you were voting for" garbage don't you! It's really unedifying and shows you lack the ability to accept defeat with any dignity.

Don't be like the guy in the pub. Years later, still going on about a dodgy offside decision that lead to us getting beat by a single goal.

I flicked over at half time in the Spain game to the bbc parliament channel for a laugh (contradiction in terms I know) It was the Lords and Andrew Adonis was still bleating on. His disappointment was written all over his tortoise-like face. There was a man, regularly being shouted down by his Peers, but shamelessly grinding on about what he perceived as a national injustice.

Dont be that man on UTC message board Marty. Just like the referee in that match, the decisions been made

Difference is Ringo, whether you agreed with the evidence or not, I did provide a link to the information on which I was basing my argument, you’ve provided jack s**t. All you do when asked is deflect and change the subject. So come on then, where is it defined what ‘leave’ meant in the referendum?

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 9:44 pm

martin_p wrote:Difference is Ringo, whether you agreed with the evidence or not, I did provide a link to the information on which I was basing my argument, you’ve provided jack s**t. All you do when asked is deflect and change the subject. So come on then, where is it defined what ‘leave’ meant in the referendum?

There was no evidence! That is, and was the point!

There can't be till we leave.!

You were keen to point out that all I had was a "view" an "opinion". I agreed.

It's my view/opinion that ending free movement of people would help stop exploitation, modern day slavery and people trafficking.

I pointed out that, like me, all you had was an opinion. But no, you had "evidence". If you provided the link to the evidence then. It'll not be too much trouble to provide it again will it Marty!? Will it?

As for a definition of what Leave meant. You're just trotting out the desperate, desperate mantra of all Remoaners. Watch the news tonight Marty. Your utterly pointless claim that there was no definition of what Leave meant. Will look silly because whether you like it or not, it really doesn't matter. Legislation for the UK to leave the EU, is passing through Westminster. Do you think they're going to say, "hang on everybody! Marty has a point! Stop everything! Go no further!?"

It's happening Marty, you're calling for VAR after the refs blown up for full time. That Marty, is the definition of a sore loser.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 9:50 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:There was no evidence! That is, and was the point!

There can't be till we leave.!

You were keen to point out that all I had was a "view" an "opinion". I agreed.

It's my view/opinion that ending free movement of people would help stop exploitation, modern day slavery and people trafficking.

I pointed out that, like me, all you had was an opinion. But no, you had "evidence". If you provided the link to the evidence then. It'll not be too much trouble to provide it again will it Marty!? Will it?

As for a definition of what Leave meant. You're just trotting out the desperate, desperate mantra of all Remoaners. Watch the news tonight Marty. Your utterly pointless claim that there was no definition of what Leave meant. Will look silly because whether you like it or not, it really doesn't matter. Legislation for the UK to leave the EU, is passing through Westminster. Do you think they're going to say, "hang on everybody! Marty has a point! Stop everything! Go no further!?"

It's happening Marty, you're calling for VAR after the refs blown up for full time. That Marty, is the definition of a sore loser.

It’s you that made the claim it was clear what both options meant. I’ve done nothing more than to ask you to back that up. You can’t. Because it’s a lie.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:11 pm

martin_p wrote:It’s you that made the claim it was clear what both options meant. I’ve done nothing more than to ask you to back that up. You can’t. Because it’s a lie.

I'm signing off now to flick through the various news channels to catch footage of your side with faces with sheer indignation written all over them.

Ill be looking for Soubrey, Grieve, Starmer, Benn et al, to provide me with the visual defination of, pain, of exasperation, of irritation, and down right heartbreak.

While you Marty are left with -

Still no evidence.

Still humourless.

Still trolling.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:14 pm

Hilary benn- "what did you do!?" Hysterical!!!

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:16 pm

A weary looking Grieve being interviewed as the Bill literally passed from parliament to the Lords!

And Faisal Islam crying inside!

Quality!

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:17 pm

This is hilarious. Toodle pip Marty!

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:20 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:I'm signing off now to flick through the various news channels to catch footage of your side with faces with sheer indignation written all over them.

Ill be looking for Soubrey, Grieve, Starmer, Benn et al, to provide me with the visual defination of, pain, of exasperation, of irritation, and down right heartbreak.

While you Marty are left with -

Still no evidence.

Still humourless.

Still trolling.

If you think asking you to back up a statement you repeatedly make is trolling then you probably should stay off the internet as you’ll be ‘trolled’ a lot!

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:27 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Manufacturing isn't in decline, it's just the jobs that are. The Brexiteers have this romantic notion that once we're free of the EU that all these jobs will come back, but we're not losing jobs to the EU. Manufacturing jobs are being lost to automation.

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kin ... production" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hi IT, I think reducing jobs in manufacturing while maintaining manufacturing output is called productivity. I also hear that Jeremy Corbyn has got some plans on how we can further grow productivity.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:30 pm

Paul Waine wrote:Hi IT, I think reducing jobs in manufacturing while maintaining manufacturing output is called productivity. I also hear that Jeremy Corbyn has got some plans on how we can further grow productivity.

True. But people seem to think manufacturing is in decline when really it's just the jobs that are in decline. And it's not because of immigrants, or the EU, it's because robots are taking the jobs.

I'm just countering this delusion that leaving the EU will mean manufaturing jobs are going to come back. They're not.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:32 pm

martin_p wrote:If you think asking you to back up a statement you repeatedly make is trolling then you probably should stay off the internet as you’ll be ‘trolled’ a lot!

He never seems to back up his statements, but that's what we should expect from people whose arguments are based on lies. The willingness to believe comforting lies over uncomfortable truths is probably the biggest threat western democracy faces right now.

android · Post by **android** » Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:51 am

Come off it IT! If you are talking about backing up statements guess who made these conflicting statements:

1. No one knew what Leave meant
2. Leave won by campaigning for the softest of Brexits, which included staying in the Single Market

It's bizarre that you are now asking us to believe that free movement of people was not part of the referendum. Vote Remain and keep free movement and vote Leave to also keep free movement of people! Can you honestly say that is what you thought in June 2016?

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:55 am

You've got to prove that all the leavers wanted the Brexit that you wanted.

You can't, no one can. All the leavers leaders are on tv and radio saying different things, that is completely unarguable.

Which is why we are where we are.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Jun 21, 2018 10:08 am

android wrote:Come off it IT! If you are talking about backing up statements guess who made these conflicting statements:

1. No one knew what Leave meant
2. Leave won by campaigning for the softest of Brexits, which included staying in the Single Market

It's bizarre that you are now asking us to believe that free movement of people was not part of the referendum. Vote Remain and keep free movement and vote Leave to also keep free movement of people! Can you honestly say that is what you thought in June 2016?

Those aren't conflicting statements, they're describing two different things.
People who voted leave didn't vote for one specific type of Brexit. There will have been some who voted Leave because they wanted an extreme kind of Brexit and there'll have been some who voted Leave because they wanted a soft Brexit. Neither of these two knew what kind of Brexit they were actually voting for because no one knew what a Leave vote actually meant.

But now the Leave voters who wanted the extreme version are trying to force that down our throats when it's not what the Leave camp was campaigning on.

To be clear, I'm not saying that Leave voters didn't know what they each wanted, I'm saying that they had no idea that what they voted for was actually what they wanted. If Leave turns out to mean a No Deal Brexit do you honestly believe that voters who were convinced to vote Leave because brexiteers said we could still have single market access (for example) are getting the Leave they wanted?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Jun 21, 2018 10:10 am

Duplicate

android · Post by **android** » Thu Jun 21, 2018 10:44 am

Don't understand your point Lancaster - why would I or anyone want to even attempt to prove that all leavers got what they wanted. An impossible and pointless task as you then seem to acknowledge. The vote was In or Out, and although I was once a reluctant remainer, Leave won so all I have wanted is for my government to get on with negotiating the best deal possible. Instead, we have had 2 years of the losing side trying to reverse the result and for me that is the biggest reason for why we are where we are - that and the botched election putting the govt in a weaker position as I said before.

IT - I think if the boot was on the other foot and I gave you that answer you would rip into it - especially as you did not answer my free movement question (but I know the answer obviously)! But fair play for some more measured comments - yes, the talk at the time would have been more about single market access with emphasis on trade. As far as I can remember the terms hard and soft did not exist before the referendum. For me and a lot of people those terms are irrelevant and we should just be focussing on negotiating the best deal instead of this endless faffing about whether it can be stopped or not.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Thu Jun 21, 2018 10:56 am

Because its all linked to the points you keep making about the government being weak, because its got an imperfect mandate and no clear message about what it need to do (and this is where I agree with you). It went to the country to destroy the Labour party (and maybe, just maybe thought beyond petty party politics for a change and wanting a comprehensive democratic mandate for their vision of Brexit) and from the results of that decision it became clear to two ways

- get Brexit wrong, and Labour wins
- after the election, just what type of Brexit does everybody want? Its not clear at all

We've been weak since Day One, not helped by the debate before and after not being about specifics but being about "they need us more than we need them", "taking back control" and "will of the people". So whenever an actual point comes up (ie the Irish border), people are very keen to know what all that means, and then people get annoyed when it suddenly becomes really important because it actually is, but no one really mentioned it. And then that is magnified by the lack of solutions to just about anything from anybody.

Thats our weakness, its a pretty potent combination for a disaster in waiting.

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Thu Jun 21, 2018 11:15 am

What's happened to my Brexit dividend?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44555400" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ClaretMoffitt · Post by **ClaretMoffitt** » Thu Jun 21, 2018 7:02 pm

Lancaster,

Be honest pal, you organised this, didn't you?

https://www.facebook.com/redpillfactory ... 0rKktEbCTU" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Devils_Advocate · Post by **Devils_Advocate** » Thu Jun 21, 2018 7:05 pm

I see the govt. Brexit team have now turned to Monty Python for some inspiration

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWS8Mg-JWSg

South West Claret. · Post by **South West Claret.** » Fri Jun 22, 2018 1:02 pm

More negative comments from a big UK employer.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44570931" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Bfcboyo · Post by **Bfcboyo** » Sat Jun 23, 2018 7:13 am

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44575929" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sad sad people.

SmudgetheClaret · Post by **SmudgetheClaret** » Sat Jun 23, 2018 4:43 pm

Remainers have been spotted walking aimlessly around towns and city's walking into walls mumbling " there is no Brexit dividend there is no Brexit dividend" ....

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Sat Jun 23, 2018 5:04 pm

SmudgetheClaret wrote:Remainers have been spotted walking aimlessly around towns and city's walking into walls mumbling " there is no Brexit dividend there is no Brexit dividend" ....

I believe that Nigel Farage is now among them and putting out the same message.

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Sat Jun 23, 2018 9:57 pm

A country very much divided

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44586638" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

tiger76 · Post by **tiger76** » Sat Jun 23, 2018 10:42 pm

Until there is a major shift in either direction,the country will stay divided.Just as the main political parties are split,would another referendum solve this impasse,on current polling numbers this looks unlikely anytime soon.

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Sun Jun 24, 2018 8:30 am

It's a good job the loony, anti-business Labour Party didn't get into power last year, isn't it?

EU diplomats have claimed that during a Foreign Office reception to celebrate the Queen’s birthday last week, the Foreign Secretary was asked about the fears of some business leaders over Brexit and replied: “f*** business.”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... -concerns/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Sun Jun 24, 2018 8:34 am

JohnMcGreal wrote:It's a good job the loony, anti-business Labour Party didn't get into power last year, isn't it?

EU diplomats have claimed that during a Foreign Office reception to celebrate the Queen’s birthday last week, the Foreign Secretary was asked about the fears of some business leaders over Brexit and replied: “f*** business.”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... -concerns/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He won't be sacked. May is too weak to sack him without collapsing her government.

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Sun Jun 24, 2018 9:10 am

That's absolutely true. I just think it's ironic that it's the Conservative party, the self-proclaimed party of business and prosperity, that's now attacking businesses by seeking to destroy the conditions under which they operate.

Can you imagine the uproar if Jeremy Corbyn or John McDonnell had told senior EU diplomats to 'f*** business'? The press would beat them to death with a comment like that.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Sun Jun 24, 2018 9:37 am

JohnMcGreal wrote:That's absolutely true. I just think it's ironic that it's the Conservative party, the self-proclaimed party of business and prosperity, that's now attacking businesses by seeking to destroy the conditions under which they operate.

Can you imagine the uproar if Jeremy Corbyn or John McDonnell had told senior EU diplomats to 'f*** business'? The press would beat them to death with a comment like that

"attacking businesses by seeking to destroy the conditions under which they operate."

Is one way to describe leaving the EU.

Another is to say the government has been given a mandate, from the referendum result, (And the 84% of people that voted for parties whose manifesto stated they would leave the EU andit's associated bodies at the most recent general election further confirmed approval) to seek to secure deals, independently of the Brussel eurocrats, that could open up business to , yet untapped global markets.....

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Sun Jun 24, 2018 9:41 am

RingoMcCartney wrote:"attacking businesses by seeking to destroy the conditions under which they operate."

Is one way to describe leaving the EU.

Another is to say the government has been given a mandate, from the referendum result, (And the 84% of people that voted for parties whose manifesto stated they would leave the EU andit's associated bodies at the most recent general election further confirmed approval) to seek to secure deals, independently of the Brussel eurocrats, that could open up business to , yet untapped global markets.....

Maybe, but how does that explain or defend your mate Boris Johnson's policy - "F*** Business"?

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Sun Jun 24, 2018 9:45 am

RingoMcCartney wrote:And the 84% of people that voted for parties whose manifesto stated they would leave the EU andit's associated bodies at the most recent general election further confirmed approval) to seek to secure deals, independently of the Brussel eurocrats, that could open up business to , yet untapped global markets.....

That 84% is totally irrelevant - and you know it.

Many of the estimated 100k who marched in London yesterday to stay in the EU voted for the same Labour party and will continue to do so. There were also many people from the Conservative party at yesterday's march.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Sun Jun 24, 2018 12:06 pm

Spijed wrote:That 84% is totally irrelevant - and you know it.

Many of the estimated 100k who marched in London yesterday to stay in the EU voted for the same Labour party and will continue to do so. There were also many people from the Conservative party at yesterday's march.

84% is not as you want it to be. It's relevant. But more importantly is the result of the referendum. Democracy - it means sometimes you lose.

The march in London? Just a Saturday afternoon stroll for middle class metropolitans.

17,400,000 took to the streets on 23rd June, to participate in the biggest single expression of democracy the UK has witnessed. They voted Leave.

"The Peoples Vote" - the metropolitan Remoaner hissy fit, that democracy forgot.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Sun Jun 24, 2018 12:08 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:Maybe, but how does that explain or defend your mate Boris Johnson's policy - "F*** Business"?

He should engage brain before opening his gob.

Off to the footy now nil desperandum.

Enjoy the game

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Sun Jun 24, 2018 12:28 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:"attacking businesses by seeking to destroy the conditions under which they operate."

Is one way to describe leaving the EU.

Another is to say the government has been given a mandate, from the referendum result, (And the 84% of people that voted for parties whose manifesto stated they would leave the EU andit's associated bodies at the most recent general election further confirmed approval) to seek to secure deals, independently of the Brussel eurocrats, that could open up business to , yet untapped global markets.....

Lol. Those markets weren't untapped. We had trade deals with almost everyone. When we leave we'll have trade deals with almost no one.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Sun Jun 24, 2018 12:34 pm

I'm loving the idea that there are untapped global markets out there.

Just for interest Ringo, how many countries in the world are in no trade agreements with their nearest neighbours, while having trade agreements with ones all over the rest of the world?

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Sun Jun 24, 2018 7:33 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote: 17,400,000 took to the streets on 23rd June, to participate in the biggest single expression of democracy the UK has witnessed.

I thought you might stop using this expression once someone had pointed out it wasn’t true (and it was months ago!).