Labour betray their leave voters..

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 2:12 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Surely even you don't believe things like "the minister for stockpiling food and medicines" won't be mentioned, along with all the other things that are there.

Plus all the governments own No deal brexit forecasts that are uniformly bad?

I'd be amazed if leave went down that road to be honest, there is a lot of stuff that kills them.

Like I said, you want Brexit, you've got to find a way to get it through parliament. Which means a deal that enough can vote for that satisfies the referendum result AND satisfies those who worry for the economic future (and not just economic if we are being honest)

Norway option looks the best bet to be honest.

Lots of things will be mentioned. But if the people who have been saying "doom and gloom is coming" for years are still saying it, and there are no signs of it coming, then they won't be believed. Prophets of doom in times of plenty have never done well.

And there will be plenty of people like me, who believe that the paperwork can be handled, or if it can't be handled then it will be skipped. You won't find many takers for the idea that there will be food in plenty just sitting there while the government refuses to let it be sold.

As for getting it through parliament, parliament as I understand it has the final say on the deal to leave the EU. If it votes it down, it doesn't mean there is no leaving the EU - just that we leave without a deal. They could of course vote for another general election.

(And don't bring up the airways again. However much the EU wants to spite the UK, they won't do it by decimating their own airlines and destroying their own aeroplane manufacturers.)

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 2:15 pm

Right, again, you are doing it again. You always do this.

There are plans in place in the government of the UK for all the events you just dismiss as an irrelevance.

There are people who know what they are talking about saying even more, about just about everything, and you just dismiss it as an irrelevance.

With a 52/48 split, you are being remarkably cavalier in your estimations that plenty of people will just ignore that.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 2:23 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Right, again, you are doing it again. You always do this.

There are plans in place in the government of the UK for all the events you just dismiss as an irrelevance.

You say that as if it was a bad thing. Are you suggesting that the Remain campaign would be not so much "there will be food shortages" but "there would have been food shortages if the government had not made plans to ensure there won't"? Because that's definitely not going to strike fear.

Greenmile · Post by **Greenmile** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 2:25 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:Fair enough.

But as confirmed on last week's question time , the leading pollster in the UK said opinions had not budged an inch since the referendum.

There can't be a 2nd referendum as the result of the first one has not been enacted yet. If there was, and it over turned the result of the first one, apart from some premature jubilation on the part of Remainers. ( Because there'd be a demand for a best of 3 from leavers ) If it was final, the disconnect and mistrust of the political Establishment and the democratic process itself would be permanently and generational shattered for milllions of leave voters. They'd either refuse to vote ever again ( why bother voting it doesn't change a thing ?) Or they be tempted to vote for a party that they feel represents them. And you may not like that party one little bit. Either way it wouldn't bode well for an already divided country.

Sounds like a win-win to me. A sort of democratic Darwinism, if you will.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 2:29 pm

Of course it is good that the government are planning for it.

But the only reason they are planning for it is because of Brexit.

You try spinning that as a positive!

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 2:40 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Of course it is good that the government are planning for it.

But the only reason they are planning for it is because of Brexit.

You try spinning that as a positive!

Most people recognise that if rules change, you need to make plans for the new rules. I suppose a slogan of "Vote for no change, it will save us making plans" might win a few votes for your lot.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 2:43 pm

Crikey DSR, that is certainly one way of looking at it.

Another way is "don't have Brexit, and we don't have to plan for food and medicine shortages"

You know that thread about sleepwalking into the EU super state without a vote?

This is looking exactly the same.

Once the Brexit arguments are out in the open, and reality kicks in, there isn't a lot there.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 2:49 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Crikey DSR, that is certainly one way of looking at it.

Another way is "don't have Brexit, and we don't have to plan for food and medicine shortages"

You know that thread about sleepwalking into the EU super state without a vote?

This is looking exactly the same.

Once the Brexit arguments are out in the open, and reality kicks in, there isn't a lot there.

Most food importers will easily grasp the new rules anyway. If they import from outside the EU now, it's just that "outside the EU" has got bigger - and they already know about food preservation etc. Paperwork will not be an issue - UK companies are well versed in how to change their systems after the last few years, so one more relatively minor change won't break any hearts. No wheels to be reinvented here.

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 3:05 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here.

Rationing ended sixty four years ago, and most of the rationing ended before that.

Recap time, I'm sure you don't read other peoples post you seem to have a predetermined answer regardless of the content posted, you mentioned having no time for slightly older people who hadnt fought in the war & these people drawing conclusions from that, it didn't make any sense then & now it still doesn't despite me strongly hinting for you to explain. It would help if you could remember what you've posted & even more helpful to explain things clearly.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 3:28 pm

dsr wrote:Most people recognise that if rules change, you need to make plans for the new rules. I suppose a slogan of "Vote for no change, it will save us making plans" might win a few votes for your lot.

Well its better than 'vote for change, even if it will make things less efficient and will end up costing lots of money'.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 3:30 pm

I haven't got a lot of time for old people who didn't fight in the war but go on about it and draw the wrong conclusions from it.

I've already said that though on here.

Are you sure you've read my post?

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 3:32 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:I haven't got a lot of time for old people who didn't fight in the war but go on about it and draw the wrong conclusions from it.

I've already said that though on here.

Are you sure you've read my post?

What wrong conclusions??? God give me strength

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 3:48 pm

Greenmile wrote:Sounds like a win-win to me. A sort of democratic Darwinism, if you will.

I'm not surprised you'd see it as "win win!"

You'd have a democracy that had finally given you the answer you wanted.

Unfortunately, democracy means sometimes you lose lose.......

Bordeauxclaret · Post by **Bordeauxclaret** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 3:59 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:In a moment of, pure self awareness lacking, arrogance. He said

I’ll cherish this forever.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 4:54 pm

What conclusions have you drawn from the war jakub then?

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 6:45 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:What conclusions have you drawn from the war jakub then?

Well seen as I've never experienced a conflict & I never mentioned wars & conclusions initially it's not for me to answer it was a question directed to you. I do actually value your opinion even though sometimes don't agree, I can only understand your/or anybody's opinion by asking questions to aid understanding & usually it's the norm thing to explain thoroughly to facilitate the full understanding process.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 8:19 pm

Fair enough, I'm exactly the same as you as my military service is limited to one year in the cadets!

And I listen and read all opinions on here, however frustrating that can be.

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 8:40 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Fair enough, I'm exactly the same as you as my military service is limited to one year in the cadets!

And I listen and read all opinions on here, however frustrating that can be.

Basically that's not the answer to the question, pointless further engagement on that basis, the only "conclusion" I've ascertained is futility.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 9:05 pm

I would have thought my feelings on that would have been fairly obvious from my stance on the EU.

Its better to be in a situation where Europe is united in economic prosperity, and that we are all friends with shared values.

By and large, that is what we have now.

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 9:55 pm

Your deep fundamental beliefs derive from ageism because of the EU vote, lots of leavers are xenophobic allegedly, the same must apply, the young remainers hate the older generation.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 10:36 pm

My deep fundamental belief is pretty simple to be honest.

Try to be nice to everyone and not be a ****.

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 10:37 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:My deep fundamental belief is pretty simple to be honest.

Try to be nice to everyone and not be a ****.

I'll second that, as evasive as ever.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 10:47 pm

Unless I've missed a question, you are not being very clear to be honest.

And I'm pretty sure one thing I'm not on here is evasive.

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 10:54 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Unless I've missed a question, you are not being very clear to be honest.

And I'm pretty sure one thing I'm not on here is evasive.

My "conclusion" to that comment is to be nice to everyone & not be a ****.

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:42 pm

From the BBC website tonight. A deal is not far off imo. If one is basd on Canada plus plus plus and a solution to the Irish Border, then Labour would be mad to block it. More importantly, the likes of Morgan, Sourbry and Woolaston would never be forgiven by the tories if they block it. It's getting time to back the UK and forget party politics. We need all party to get behind the Government, although I don't give one about the Scottish Nagging party.

"The UK is due to leave the EU in March, but the two sides have not yet reached a deal on how this will work.

Mr Tusk said that now the Conservative Party conference had ended, "we should get down to business".

And in a remark that was welcomed by some Eurosceptics who want to scrap Theresa May's proposed trade plans, he said the EU remained open to a "Canada plus plus plus" deal - a reference to the EU's free trade deal with Canada.

This would be "much further reaching on trade, on internal security and on foreign policy cooperation" than Canada's arrangement, he said.

Reality Check: Red lines on the Irish border

Theresa May has said a deal like Canada's would not prevent a visible, physical border being needed in Northern Ireland - a key commitment of both sides - because of the extra checks that would be needed on goods.

The EU has proposed a "backstop" plan to keep the border open - under which Northern Ireland would remain aligned to some EU rules.

But this has been rejected by Mrs May who says the arrangement would carve up the UK and create a new border in the Irish sea.

UK ministers have suggested new proposals for a border backstop are being prepared.

BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg said UK officials were understood to be working on plans for a "hybrid backstop" with light-touch regulatory checks between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the possibility of some kind of democratic oversight from Stormont and a temporary extension of the customs union to the whole of the UK in the event that a free trade deal has not been completed.

There is no official confirmation of the plans or when the proposals will be presented to the EU, she added.

The deputy leader of Northern Ireland's Democratic Unionist Party, Nigel Dodds, told the BBC his party could not accept a "separate hybrid model" in which Northern Ireland is in the EU single market but out of its customs union.

And asked about the prospect of "light touch regulatory checks" between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Mr Dodds asked why such techniques could not be used on the land frontier in Ireland. "

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Thu Oct 04, 2018 10:17 pm

Because that breaks the Good Friday agreement, which the DUP opposed because it meant the days of the "B-Specials" and gerrymandering NI were over.

Again, what is more important here? The DUP are quite happy for a hard border, and don't care if the GFA falls. It suits them down to the ground.

Nothing that risks a flare up in NI is worth even considering.

The only reason they are not being completely ignored as a bunch of complete nutjobs is because of balance of seats at Westminster.

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Fri Oct 05, 2018 5:33 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Because that breaks the Good Friday agreement, which the DUP opposed because it meant the days of the "B-Specials" and gerrymandering NI were over.

Again, what is more important here? The DUP are quite happy for a hard border, and don't care if the GFA falls. It suits them down to the ground.

Nothing that risks a flare up in NI is worth even considering.

The only reason they are not being completely ignored as a bunch of complete nutjobs is because of balance of seats at Westminster.

There are enough Labour MP's who would vote for Canada + in order to nullify the DUP voting against it.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Oct 05, 2018 7:40 am

Yeah, which does mean what would get through parliament?

One thing is for sure, Labour will probably vote down anything that will result in a General Election (though there are bound to be some rebel MPs)

burnleymik · Post by **burnleymik** » Fri Oct 05, 2018 11:31 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Yeah, which does mean what would get through parliament?

One thing is for sure, Labour will probably vote down anything that will result in a General Election (though there are bound to be some rebel MPs)

Exactly. party politics above all else, including the democratic choice of the electorate. Tories would do exactly the same, all self-serving.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Oct 05, 2018 11:38 am

But would you say that about the ERG using its 40 members to stop any attempt to negotiate a Brexit that isn't "No Deal"?

burnleymik · Post by **burnleymik** » Fri Oct 05, 2018 12:01 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:But would you say that about the ERG using its 40 members to stop any attempt to negotiate a Brexit that isn't "No Deal"?

Where have they done that? As far as I have seen they have always been for a Canada style of deal or something along those lines.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Oct 05, 2018 12:08 pm

But that isn't the point, they will use their 40 MPs to vote for what they want, not the will of the people.

They are all the same surely?

burnleymik · Post by **burnleymik** » Fri Oct 05, 2018 12:11 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:But that isn't the point, they will use their 40 MPs to vote for what they want, not the will of the people.

They are all the same surely?

They are pushing for what was voted for. Chequers doesn't fulfill what was voted for and neither does remaining.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Oct 05, 2018 12:18 pm

No they are not.

You are mistaken that all the leave voters want what you want.

its one of the more annoying things to come out of this.

There are different opinions on leave even on these threads on here!

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Fri Oct 05, 2018 12:20 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:No they are not.

You are mistaken that all the leave voters want what you want.

its one of the more annoying things to come out of this.

There are different opinions on leave even on these threads on here!

Leave means leave (apart from when it's not the type of leave that I want).

burnleymik · Post by **burnleymik** » Fri Oct 05, 2018 12:42 pm

Not at all. Chequers isn't leaving and has been proven so.

As long as we leave the EU, as per the vote in 2016, I have no issue, with or without a deal.

It's a shame that is so difficult for some remain supporters to understand.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Oct 05, 2018 12:46 pm

Proven by who?

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Fri Oct 05, 2018 1:48 pm

burnleymik wrote:Not at all. Chequers isn't leaving and has been proven so.

As long as we leave the EU, as per the vote in 2016, I have no issue, with or without a deal.

It's a shame that is so difficult for some remain supporters to understand.

The question was:

Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?

Chequers is indisputably leaving the European Union.

burnleymik · Post by **burnleymik** » Fri Oct 05, 2018 2:01 pm

aggi wrote:The question was:

Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?

Chequers is indisputably leaving the European Union.

Yet still controlled by the EU. It is quite literally in name only.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Oct 05, 2018 2:06 pm

Hi Norway!

Are you in the EU?

No?

Are you sure?

Yes

Oh

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Fri Oct 05, 2018 2:13 pm

burnleymik wrote:Yet still controlled by the EU. It is quite literally in name only.

So not in the EU?

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Fri Oct 05, 2018 2:56 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:No they are not.

You are mistaken that all the leave voters want what you want.

its one of the more annoying things to come out of this.

There are different opinions on leave even on these threads on here!

All the leavers on here are in favour of a Canada + type deal, none are in favour of a Norway type deal.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Oct 05, 2018 3:00 pm

Really?

I have to be honest Andy, I don't think that is the case, simply because no one knows for sure what a Canada + deal is.

As an aside, I've seen it described as a Canada +, a Canada ++, and even a Canada +++ today, which is not helpful!

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Fri Oct 05, 2018 3:20 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Really?

I have to be honest Andy, I don't think that is the case, simply because no one knows for sure what a Canada + deal is.

As an aside, I've seen it described as a Canada +, a Canada ++, and even a Canada +++ today, which is not helpful!

Just one example of a brexiteer on here dissing Canada, and favouring Norway ?

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Oct 05, 2018 3:25 pm

No, I think you are grasping the wrong end of the stick here.

I think we might end up with a norway + (on another thread). I've never said that anyone on here favours a Norway from a brexit point of view, but certainly there are a lot of options for leave that have been considered.

And again, no one yet knows for sure what a Canada + is, so you couldn't have voted for it in 2016.

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Fri Oct 05, 2018 3:48 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:No, I think you are grasping the wrong end of the stick here.

I think we might end up with a norway + (on another thread). I've never said that anyone on here favours a Norway from a brexit point of view, but certainly there are a lot of options for leave that have been considered.

And again, no one yet knows for sure what a Canada + is, so you couldn't have voted for it in 2016.

Yes we do, it's a free trade deal + security and Foreign policy co-operation.

SmudgetheClaret · Post by **SmudgetheClaret** » Fri Oct 05, 2018 10:19 pm

If we get the Canada deal what actually has been the point of the last 2 very confusing years ?