2.7 Million Brexiteers Have Changed to Remain

[tiger76]

This outcome was always a danger,if the cabinet couldn't find collective agreement,then it was hard to see the UK Parliament,European Parliament and the 27 heads of Government finding common ground.

What happens next,difficult to predict,there are options available,the most sensible one is to extend Article 50,but even in that scenario the problems of the Irish border and any potential customs union arrangements will still remain.

I can only see either another General Election or another referendum,whether any of those would break the current impasse is doubtful.

The public may get some answers at the Conservative party conference,popcorn will be essential anyway.

All the current issues stem from the fact that Cameron's government had no workable plan in the event of leave carrying a referendum.

[RingoMcCartney]

Ringo regularly refers to someone he disagrees with as a drunk (he's got a clever nickname and everything). When people refer to Ringo as drunk (I think it may have first come up when he was adamant that all European immigrants are referred to as Polish in Burnley) he gets very annoyed about it. In Ringo's eyes there is nothing hypocritical about this.

As previously explained. When I refer to Jean Claude Drunker it's because it's widely accepted that he is an alcoholic.

When desperate clowns claim I'm drunk it's because they've lost the argument.

[RingoMcCartney]

All the current issues stem from the fact that Cameron's government had no workable plan in the event of leave carrying a referendum.

You could argue that all the current issues stem from the fact that, when Cameron went off on his tour of Europe, prior to the referendum. Asking for some of the most least controversial of requests. The EU, Merkels and Sarkozys of this world were just as obstinate with him then, as they've been with May today.

[tiger76]

You could argue that all the current issues stem from the fact that, when Cameron went off on his tour of Europe, prior to the referendum. Asking for some of the most least controversial of requests. The EU, Merkels and Sarkozys of this world were just as obstinate with him then, as they've been with May today.

This is true the EU have too share the blame if a deal isn't agreed,of course back in early 2016 nobody thought the UK electorate would possibly vote to leave,hence Cameron coming home with a watered down agreement,even now the Maltese and Czech Republic leaders claim they would like the UK to remain,but neither they or the other EU leaders can offer any reasons for reversing such an historic decision by millions of UK voters.

If the EU went back primarily to a trading bloc arrangement with a looser regulatory framework,most people would tolerate this,alas further federalism seems unstoppable.

[hampsteadclaret]

You could argue that all the current issues stem from the fact that, when Cameron went off on his tour of Europe, prior to the referendum. Asking for some of the most least controversial of requests. The EU, Merkels and Sarkozys of this world were just as obstinate with him then, as they've been with May today.

'Asking for some of the most least controversial of requests'


WTF can this nonsense possibly mean..?

[RingoMcCartney]

Our net contribution to the EU is around £165m per week. Keep quoting the gross figure if you like though, it's as disingenuous as most of your arguments.

I thought your 20% of businesses stat had already been debunked but I'll have a go if you like.
Can you give some background to it? Are you giving every milkman, window cleaner and newsagent parity with companies that employ 1000s of people? What proportion of the economy does that 20% represent? When you claim that 20% operate in the EU you imply that the other 80% have no reliance on it. Does this mean their supply chain, customers, staffing etc are completely outside of the EU sphere of influence and don't benefit from it in any way?

I'll engage with you on Netflix etc when you can explain to me how us leaving the EU will suddenly result in global American businesses suddenly paying huge amounts of tax in this country.

EU elites, lavish lifestyles, blah blah. Shame they aren't all scraping by like Farage, Johnson, Rees-Mogg, Banks & the like isn't it? Any chance of you completing a post without packing it with simplistic gibberish and empty bluster?

I'll stick to my main point. I really cannot be bothered re-running the referendum debate as to whether the taxes that we recoup from EU based companies negates our membership fee. There are figures on both sides that support the benefits or conversly the disadvantages, of EU membership on typical families. You'll say it does I'll say it doesn't. Let's park it.

Nil_desparandum said
" overwhelming evidence of EU investment in the local economy and jobs."

I pointed out that any EU "investment" was simply our own money coming back. Given the UK is a net contributor to the EU.

Lancaster claret disagreed.

So let's look at the tangible, measurable facts that are on the accounts.

The following was taken DIRECTLY from the ONS website

"In 2016, the UK’s gross contribution to the EU amounted to £19 billion. However, this amount of money was never actually transferred to the EU"

"In 2016, the UK received a rebate of £5 billion. This means £13.9 billion was transferred from the UK government to the EU in official payments."

"But this only accounts for the money that the UK pays to the EU – some of this £13.9 billion is credited back to the UK public sector, of which a proportion is then paid to the private sector. ONS reports that £4.4 billion came back to the UK public sector and private sector in credits in 2016."

"This included £359 million that CAME BACK through the European Regional Development Fund and £2.4 billion through the Agricultural Guarantee Fund."

"Some have argued that there are other payments that should be taken into account. Money from the EU also COMES BACK directly to the UK private sector (for example, to fund research in UK universities). ONS data does not separately identify direct flows from the EU to the UK private sector."

I've altered nothing from the original text. Apart from highlighting through use of capitals two key words.

COMING BACK.

So, when Nil_desparandum said? "overwhelming evidence of EU investment in the local economy and jobs."

Was the EU "investment" that has been given to Burnley in the form of Eupean Regional Development Fund, EU money? Or was it, to quote the ONS, our money COMING BACK?

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governme ... 2017-10-31" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[RingoMcCartney]

Correct me if I'm wrong but to play the man not the ball. Surely you have to be adressing him directly No. You're attempting to disparage his role by focusing on other traits. I don't really care either way, it's just strange that you're so hypocritical about it.

I don't really get your point. You complained about the EU and low rates of tax, I showed you what the EU was doing (even in reference to your examples) and how leaving the EU would have a negative impact and suddenly that's not important any more.

It's also good that you acknowledge that the UK can trade with many other countries, lots of Brexit voters seem to be under the impression that it's terribly difficult due to being part of the EU.

Your issue is obviously that you want to couch this in absolute monetary terms that you can understand. For example, the UK has a lot of inward investment from Japanese firms due, in part, to being a gateway to the EU (a number of these are threatening to leave post-Brexit) but obviously you won't count this.

This paper suggests that UK GDP has had a significant growth due to EU membership https://voxeu.org/article/how-rich-nati ... membership" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and there are plenty of others suggesting similar

You're trying to reduce complex issues to simple numbers, that's not the way life works.

I said I'd get back.

As I've said above, I don't want to re-run the referendum debate. The benefits or otherwise, of brexit, have been argued for at least 4 years now if you count the years after the vote and 18 months prior. It's all open to varying opinion. However, sorry if you think it's "reducing complex issues to simple numbers" but at least "simple numbers" are accountable, tangible and if you're using ONS figures, should be neutral and inarguable.

I hope the above will suffice as an answer and an explanation of the point I was making regards UK tax payers money COMIMG BACK in the form of Eu
pean Regional Development Fund.

(Full Fact, the uk's independent fact finding charity, also quote the following- "The UK gets MONEY BACK
The government then gets some of that MONEY BACK, mainly through payments to farmers and for poorer areas of the country such as Wales and Cornwall.)

[tybfc]

Well after 805 replies and 8392 views I will finish my glass of Pino Grighio and go to bed.

I only read the last one.

[RingoMcCartney]

Well after 805 replies and 8392 views I will finish my glass of Pino Grighio and go to bed.

I only read the last one.

Now why didn't I think of that!

UTC

[Spiral]

If the EU went back primarily to a trading bloc arrangement with a looser regulatory framework,most people would tolerate this,alas further federalism seems unstoppable.

You know what, eight hundred-odd posts in on the umpteenth thread on Brexit over the last three years and I've not once heard a leave voter ask or ponder or even enter into a debate about why regulatory framework exists. It's a failing of the remain side to get this point across, no doubt; it seems to be taken for granted that rules=bad, but at the same time folk do have a duty and responsibility to themselves to stay informed and that's especially helpful when posting with a sense of assuredness (not mentioning any names cough cough) so you don't sound like a complete fruit loop. Perhaps it's for another thread but if anyone who genuinely might have thought the EU is just innately c.untish and enforcing seemingly dumb rules just for a laugh was up for a sincere and calm (HA!) discussion it might be one worth having. Not sure a single post on a partisan thread such as this can reasonably cover artificial barriers to trade/competition and suchlike though, I dunno. Might be wasted on this thread.

[Jakubclaret]

You could argue that all the current issues stem from the fact that, when Cameron went off on his tour of Europe, prior to the referendum. Asking for some of the most least controversial of requests. The EU, Merkels and Sarkozys of this world were just as obstinate with him then, as they've been with May today.

No workable plan was in place prior as Cameron & his cohorts were so self assured & arrogant leave actually winning wasn't even a possibility, hence the lack of a cohesive structured plan & the divisive nature of the politicians/electorate has only exacerbated the EU issue more.

[Greenmile]

As previously explained. When I refer to Jean Claude Drunker it's because it's widely accepted that he is an alcoholic.

So it’s funny to take the p1ss out of people suffering from alcoholism now?

Stay classy Ringo.

[Imploding Turtle]

So it’s funny to take the p1ss out of people suffering from alcoholism now?

Stay classy Ringo.

There's not really anything to substantiate it. Except that it makes a convenient malapropism. But then you've got to remember that people like Ringo aren't concerned with letting facts get in the way of their arguments, so why would they let them get in the way of their smears? This is why i consider people like him to be a bigger threat to our democracy than people who blow themselves up. His lies are acceptable to too many people in a way that suicide bombing will never be, and lies and propaganda, and a willingness to accept them to gain a political edge are cancerous to democracy.

[claretandy]

There's not really anything to substantiate it. Except that it makes a convenient malapropism. But then you've got to remember that people like Ringo aren't concerned with letting facts get in the way of their arguments, so why would they let them get in the way of their smears? This is why i consider people like him to be a bigger threat to our democracy than people who blow themselves up. His lies are acceptable to too many people in a way that suicide bombing will never be, and lies and propaganda, and a willingness to accept them to gain a political edge are cancerous to democracy.

The actions of a stone cold sober man

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1hl83Jpd_OI" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Lancasterclaret]

But not enough to call him a "drunkard" though

That's stupid, if true. All other border crossings into this country have fixed cameras AND people taking names and checking passports. There's nothing special about cameras nowadays.

But that is why I asked Crosspool if he'd ever been to the border. I have, I crossed it numerous times with work in the 90s. Cameras were everywhere and are seen as part of the UK Govt and part of the militarisation of the border as it was then. Its a very important point if the border is as sensitive as the Irish one.

If you have never been to the border, especially when it was a militarised border, you wouldn't think it was that important.

Until you've seen a Police Station in NI, then I don't think you appreciate what is fundamentally different about NI to the rest of the UK. That has to be factored in by both the UK and the EU (and to be fair, both are keen to avoid it, but the workable solution is the issue)

[nil_desperandum]

So, when Nil_desparandum said? "overwhelming evidence of EU investment in the local economy and jobs."

Was the EU "investment" that has been given to Burnley in the form of Eupean Regional Development Fund, EU money? Or was it, to quote the ONS, our money COMING BACK?

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governme ... 2017-10-31" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ok, I'm out for today, (genuinely) - just about to leave, but just to point out that the initial point I was making was different to the one that you have been trying to make.
My point was that the EU money, (or our money if you like), was being diverted to this region, and there had been enormous economics benefits for the Burnley area, that we would not have got from central government, and that (IMO of course), we will not get after Brexit.
My argument wasn't over the complex issue of calculating net benefits to the UK of our EU membership, merely to highlight that this region has done very well when it comes to funding.
Regional funding from the EU has made a significant contribution to the regeneration of Burnley, (described in the media this week as a "booming economy, and leading the UK in technological industries" ), and, like many people, I doubt that we would have had even a fraction of that money allocated by Westminster.
So, yes, by all means argue about it being UK taxpayers money coming back, but my underlying point is that it has come to the North West, and has been very welcome. I would much prefer to see money going to Brussels and coming back to this region than us getting nothing - as has historically been the case.
Have a good day. I intend to do. UTC.

[JohnMcGreal]

No workable plan was in place prior as Cameron & his cohorts were so self assured & arrogant leave actually winning wasn't even a possibility, hence the lack of a cohesive structured plan & the divisive nature of the politicians/electorate has only exacerbated the EU issue more.

You'd think that all those Eurosceptics who've been campaigning to leave the EU for decades would have had some kind of plan, wouldn't you? When Cameron resigned the opportunity was there for a prominent Leave campaigner to become PM and form their own cabinet. They could have led the UK out of the EU, but the likes of Johnson and Gove soiled themselves and ran away as soon as it all got real.

[Lancasterclaret]

Just want to echo Nils point.

We've been saying exactly that for two years and everytime the one who annoys everyone comes back with the same stuff.

If you can guarantee a Conservative government will be fair in the cash distribution for the needy areas of the UK (currently some of the worst economically hit areas in Western Europe) then yes, we will gain money.

If it goes in tax breaks for the well off (which lets be honest with ourselves here, it will) then we won't and its better for a organisation which is dolling it out on need rather than votes to be doing it. I've no problem at all with that being in another EU country.

[Lancasterclaret]

And again, more reality

https://www.ft.com/content/53467da4-bce ... b72926558f" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Irish border reality

https://www.ft.com/video/33264c1e-c744- ... 9b09716517" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Lancasterclaret]

And worth mentioning again that the when the chequers plan was announced, the EU said it wouldn't work.

All this time since the UK Govt have been promoting it even though everyone who knew what they were talking about that it breached too many EU "red lines".

Essentially we've just wasted a lot more time and time is running out.

[Lancasterclaret]

Thing is, no one in the political circles (certainly journalists) were expecting the EU to boot out chequers straight away.

Essentially I think it means that the EU have called our bluff, and boy, are we so ****** unless we can come up with something new asap.

[Lancasterclaret]

This is very good from an expert on this on twitter

2016
Brexiteers: Brexit means Brexit!
EU27: UK will be treated as a Third Country.

2018
Brexiteers: UK is being treated like a Third Country?
EU27: Brexit means Brexit.

[Imploding Turtle]

The actions of a stone cold sober man

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1hl83Jpd_OI" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He slapped a fascist. I'm half-surprised you're not describing him as a "violent leftist antifa thug terrorist".

But isn't it funny? When a right-wing moron like Trump or Boris discard with diplomatic norms they're held up by you lot as heroes, but when someone you don't like discards them then it's because they're drunk. Odd, isn't it? (Spoiler: no, it's hypocritical. As usual)

[AndrewJB]

I read yesterday that the rejection of May’s plan also had to do with the fact Tory MEPs voted with the far right on Orbán.

[Paul Waine]

OK 1: My proposal to make everyone comfortable to re-run the referendum....

We have a vote with 3 choices: 1) remain; 2) Brexit with no deal; 3) Brexit with any deal that the EU will allow the UK to have.

Every member of the electorate (we stick to our usual GE electorate) has 2 votes and MUST use those two votes to make two different selections.

So, those that favour LEAVE can select options (2) and (3) - or place one of their votes against option (1) if they wish.

Similarly, those who favour REMAIN can place one of their votes against option (1) - and must also place their second vote against either option (2) or option (3).

Any ballot paper that only shows 1 vote is treated as a spoilt ballot paper. Similarly, an ballot paper that allocates two votes to the same option is a spoilt ballot. (For clarity, all spoilt ballot papers are rejected and excluded from the count).

The votes cast for the three options are summed and the option with the highest number of votes is the winner. No transferable votes, just pick your highest two preferences

If the original 52:48 has stayed the same, then this new ballot will allow everyone to determine which has the majority between leaving with no deal and leaving with whatever deal the EU will agree to.

This manner avoids any suggestion that re-running the referendum is designed to split the LEAVE vote and give REMAIN the advantage.

Has anyone already put forward this proposal?

Of course, if we have 4 choices on the ballot paper then we would have to place 3 votes and so on.

[Jakubclaret]

You'd think that all those Eurosceptics who've been campaigning to leave the EU for decades would have had some kind of plan, wouldn't you? When Cameron resigned the opportunity was there for a prominent Leave campaigner to become PM and form their own cabinet. They could have led the UK out of the EU, but the likes of Johnson and Gove soiled themselves and ran away as soon as it all got real.

A hard Brexit is the only way out of this mess & for may to step down, regarding Johnson & gove I think they became marginalised in a sense disregarding position when may got the keys to 10 downing Street, although as of late gove seems to be snaking his way back in & seems to have may onside.

[Paul Waine]

OK 2: How to sort the border between the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland - without breaking up the United Kingdom...

This came to me when I read that the 4 Home Nations F.A.s are considering bidding for the 2030 World Cup jointly with the Republic of Ireland.

The Republic of Ireland joins the UK in leaving the EU.

Those who are old enough will know that RoI joined the EU (formerly EEC) at the same time as the UK joined (and younger generations can research this fact). We all know that most of RoIs trade is with the UK - and some of the farming exports meat to Middle East. I'm not sure where we classify the "Dublin Financial Centre" - though that is only there to benefit from the favourable tax deals offered by the RoI government.

Free movement between the UK and RoI has existed from the foundation of RoI in 1920s. Passports are not required to move between the two countries. I believe all Irish citizens who have moved to the UK are also eligible to vote in the UK's general elections. (Maybe one of our "fact checkers" can inform us whether their voting rights extended to voting in the Leave/Remain referendum).

So, UK and RoI leave EU together and the Irish border "problem" is solved - and the "hit" to the RoI economy that some reference is avoided.

[android]

No doubt SWC

Doesn't change the fact that he's going to make money out of Brexit, whilst the millions who voted the same way will lose money.

Thanks Lancaster but that's another flop and SWC has it right. I know Crispin Odey, he is a hedge fund gambler who makes or loses money by taking punts on how the markets will react to events. His personal view on Brexit is irrelevant. His fund made massive losses last year so you may as well have posted about elites making tons of losses from Brexit. Odey might take the view that Corbyn will win the next election and bet accordingly so would you then post about elites making tons of money from a Corbyn government?

Aggi had a go and Nil linked some stories which turned out to be rubbish (including the old utter nonsense about Rees Mogg relocating to Ireland).

But still nothing of any use to help me join the elites in making a ton of money following Brexit!

And now you are going to have Imploding Turtle all over you for not letting facts get in the way of a good story...cancer to democracy and all that. Over to you IT.

[JohnMcGreal]

A hard Brexit is the only way out of this mess & for may to step down, regarding Johnson & gove I think they became marginalised in a sense disregarding position when may got the keys to 10 downing Street, although as of late gove seems to be snaking his way back in & seems to have may onside.

No it isn't. A hard Brexit would lead us out of this mess into an even bigger one. The most logical way out is to refer this back to the general public.

Don't forget that the only reason May got the keys to 10 Downing Street is because Boris Johnson and Michael Gove both ruled themselves out of the leadership contest. They're both cowards.

[Devils_Advocate]

A hard Brexit is the only way out of this mess & for may to step down, regarding Johnson & gove I think they became marginalised in a sense disregarding position when may got the keys to 10 downing Street, although as of late gove seems to be snaking his way back in & seems to have may onside.

Far simpler way out of this mess is to just scrap the disaster that is Brexit and go back to as we were. Yep a few idiots might have to suck it up and might moan and cry a little but you cant sacrifice the good of this country for a load of ill informed snowflakes.

Time our political leaders got a backbone showed some courage and restored what was great about our country and its partnership with the other EU countrys

[Lancasterclaret]

Android

My point was that elites made lots of money out of Brexit. You replied that most elites wanted us to remain. Clearly that isn't the case if you have a hedge fund!

Don't get me wrong, I recognise that its his job to make money for his hedge fund but that doesn't change the point that people with lots of money will make money out of Brexit (and as you correctly point out, even more if JC takes over*)

I asked you for evidence of elites not making money out of Brexit or even that the elites didn't want it and you haven't got that information (being fair neither have I, and I suspect our definitions of elites is totally different.

Sticking to one very specific point in an discussion about the whole Brexit debate (and I appreciate that you know more about this particular part then me) is fine, but I'm trying to be as fair as I can over the whole shitshow.

If I'm wrong about specifics, then by all means point it out btw!

Regarding you making money, why are you asking me? You have already told me how hedge funds make money out of Brexit. Why are you not joining in?

*If JC takes over, the crashing of the currency markets will be just the beginnings of our problems!

[fidelcastro]

Brexit - Taking back control of what we never lost, in order to lose what we already have.

[Lancasterclaret]

Not going to work that Paul

As has already been said, you might as well have a STV system in which you rank your choices. And you can't have one remain option and two leave options I don't think.

Probably the only way to do it would be a straight leave/remain, and then a second vote if leave win on "No deal" or "some sort of deal".

Either way I'd prefer to avoid another vote entirely, but unless someone has a plan that can get universal support its the only way out of this mess.

[dsr]

OK 1: My proposal to make everyone comfortable to re-run the referendum....

We have a vote with 3 choices: 1) remain; 2) Brexit with no deal; 3) Brexit with any deal that the EU will allow the UK to have.

Every member of the electorate (we stick to our usual GE electorate) has 2 votes and MUST use those two votes to make two different selections.

So, those that favour LEAVE can select options (2) and (3) - or place one of their votes against option (1) if they wish.

Similarly, those who favour REMAIN can place one of their votes against option (1) - and must also place their second vote against either option (2) or option (3).

Any ballot paper that only shows 1 vote is treated as a spoilt ballot paper. Similarly, an ballot paper that allocates two votes to the same option is a spoilt ballot. (For clarity, all spoilt ballot papers are rejected and excluded from the count).

The votes cast for the three options are summed and the option with the highest number of votes is the winner. No transferable votes, just pick your highest two preferences

If the original 52:48 has stayed the same, then this new ballot will allow everyone to determine which has the majority between leaving with no deal and leaving with whatever deal the EU will agree to.

This manner avoids any suggestion that re-running the referendum is designed to split the LEAVE vote and give REMAIN the advantage.

Has anyone already put forward this proposal?

Of course, if we have 4 choices on the ballot paper then we would have to place 3 votes and so on.

The problem being that as number 3 is plainly the worst possible option, most of its votes will be tactical votes from people who hate options 1 or 2. This will distort the figures.

[dsr]

I notice that Jospeh Muscat of Malta says he and most of the other EU PMs believe that the UK should have a second referendum to see what our opinions on leaving the EU are now. But he makes no mention of whether they believe their own countries should have a first referendum to see if they want to leave. Funny, that.

[CrosspoolClarets]

But not enough to call him a "drunkard" though



But that is why I asked Crosspool if he'd ever been to the border. I have, I crossed it numerous times with work in the 90s. Cameras were everywhere and are seen as part of the UK Govt and part of the militarisation of the border as it was then. Its a very important point if the border is as sensitive as the Irish one.

If you have never been to the border, especially when it was a militarised border, you wouldn't think it was that important.

Until you've seen a Police Station in NI, then I don't think you appreciate what is fundamentally different about NI to the rest of the UK. That has to be factored in by both the UK and the EU (and to be fair, both are keen to avoid it, but the workable solution is the issue)

I don’t think I answered the question.

No, I have never crossed the NI border. But I agree with people who say we can never put up checkpoints and cameras.

My solution has always been doing it at the company end - spot checks etc. Most flows across are big business, easy to audit, the little business stuff is immaterial to the U.K. or Ireland. There are risks of abuse, but both sides could put punitive laws in place to deter it. A special solution to a special problem.

I just don’t get why (for example) the EU are refusing to discuss a free trade deal UNTIL the border is resolved, when the border needs resolving anyway regardless of the type of deal or no deal (if we truly leave). If we set our stall out and say it is No Deal or Canada (with optional pluses based on services) the border issue can then be resolved separately. It seems to me that if it is Canada that makes it easier because tariffs and money don’t come into play.

Unequivocally going for Canada+++ is the way forward. Win for the U.K. - avoids no deal, delivers Brexit and gives us the chance to see if it works for us for a few years. If not, by all means have another referendum in a decade. Win for the EU - preserves their integrity of the SM/CU. They’ll agree a border arrangement in that context.

[Lancasterclaret]

its not funny at all dsr, there isn't an appetite for leaving the EU in the other 26 nations. Everything you find online backs that up.

You have to get used to the idea that your ideas are yours, and not shared by everyone, certainly not in the rest of the EU.

One of the most annoying things about this whole show is listening to Brexit MPs saying "this would be so much easier if Ireland just left as well".

The fact that its one of the strongest advocates of the EU because we've been such shits to them in history and therefore they don't trust us as far as they can throw us just passes them by.

[CrosspoolClarets]

Re: Paul and Lancaster’s debate, the poll I attached in post 799 last night shows why a Leave/Remain poll would be a betrayal of democracy - people are quite clear by at least a 10% margin that they want either EEA, Chequers, Canada or No Deal. Remain are only in the 30s.

These are the same people who slightly favour Brexit=Wrong. So, this farce has made some people think it is the wrong thing to have done, but many of those still think we now have to leave.

P.s. as I have said many times, the “betrayal” bit is because the establishment in the EU have form for asking the question until they get the right answer, using all kinds of threats and inducements. Just because Remain would eventually win doesn’t make it fair or democratic.

[RingoMcCartney]

So it’s funny to take the p1ss out of people suffering from alcoholism now?

Stay classy Ringo.

Stay desperate. It's reassurigly amusing.

[Lancasterclaret]

How does that stop smuggling through the 600 plus roads though?

And it would be absolutely rife, not a "risk of abuse"

Rest of your post is sensible, but again the Canada ++ isn't ideal (though I concede its better than a No deal)

The problem is that the Canada ++ was not what was sold to the British Public, and you know that as well as I do.

Essentially we are going around in circles here!

Does anyone know if Canada ++ (with no hard border in Ireland) is acceptable to the UK Govt and the EU?

[RingoMcCartney]

There's not really anything to substantiate it. Except that it makes a convenient malapropism. But then you've got to remember that people like Ringo aren't concerned with letting facts get in the way of their arguments, so why would they let them get in the way of their smears? This is why i consider people like him to be a bigger threat to our democracy than people who blow themselves up. His lies are acceptable to too many people in a way that suicide bombing will never be, and lies and propaganda, and a willingness to accept them to gain a political edge are cancerous to democracy.

I'm a "bigger threat to democracy than people who blow themselves up, and my views are "cancerous to democracy. What in the name of!!!!?...

I'm worried that there is something toxic in the Turtle Bunker air conditioning system that's clearly having an effect on you.

Send for an engineer ASAP.

[RingoMcCartney]

Loved Question time last night.

Vince "exotic spasm" cable- " there as obviously been a shift in opinion for a 2nd referendum"

Camilla Tomney - " I spoke to Patrick Minford today, the country's leading expert on opinion pollls. He confirms there has been zero shift in opinion for a so called people's vote"

The look on the anti democratic party leader Cables boat race was priceless!

Comedy gold!

[JohnMcGreal]

One of the most annoying things about this whole show is listening to Brexit MPs saying "this would be so much easier if Ireland just left as well".

Who said that? I must have missed it.

[RingoMcCartney]

'Asking for some of the most least controversial of requests'


WTF can this nonsense possibly mean..?

It means, he was asking for nothing.

He returned, with most of that left.......

[Lancasterclaret]

Think I posted the link

Andrew Bridgen MP

[android]

Lancs - I was just pointing out that you accuse Ringo and other Brexiteers of making stuff up and not basing opinions on facts but sometimes that is what you do (not deliberately I'm sure...and I don't really want to have a go...but then you are always having a pop at Ringo).

You said that elites were going to make a ton of money out of Brexit. I asked you for evidence but you have not provided any. You attached a link to Odey which didn't help for the reasons I explained (and as it happens he has lost of ton of money since the referendum). I'm not going to start betting on the markets like he does it's just a gamble.

We may have a different view on elites. For me it included the government, MPs, Bank Governor (pro Remain) and wealthy business leaders (widely accepted to be mainly pro Remain I thought but I don't have conclusive proof).

Regardless of how you define 'em - just tell me how anyone is going to make tons of money following Brexit so that I might be able to join in!

[RingoMcCartney]

Ok, I'm out for today, (genuinely) - just about to leave, but just to point out that the initial point I was making was different to the one that you have been trying to make.
My point was that the EU money, (or our money if you like), was being diverted to this region, and there had been enormous economics benefits for the Burnley area, that we would not have got from central government, and that (IMO of course), we will not get after Brexit.
My argument wasn't over the complex issue of calculating net benefits to the UK of our EU membership, merely to highlight that this region has done very well when it comes to funding.
Regional funding from the EU has made a significant contribution to the regeneration of Burnley, (described in the media this week as a "booming economy, and leading the UK in technological industries" ), and, like many people, I doubt that we would have had even a fraction of that money allocated by Westminster.
So, yes, by all means argue about it being UK taxpayers money coming back, but my underlying point is that it has come to the North West, and has been very welcome. I would much prefer to see money going to Brussels and coming back to this region than us getting nothing - as has historically been the case.
Have a good day. I intend to do. UTC.

The point I was making, and it's, factually, inarguable. Is that, money that the UK receives from the EU, is part of the, officially, accountable difference, between the UK net contribution and it's gross contribution to the EU.

It's our money coming back.

[dsr]

its not funny at all dsr, there isn't an appetite for leaving the EU in the other 26 nations. Everything you find online backs that up.

You have to get used to the idea that your ideas are yours, and not shared by everyone, certainly not in the rest of the EU.

What about anecdotal evidence? A friend was in Germany last week and he said that the people he had dinner with expected that a German referendum would be a vote to leave.

You need a word with Wikipedia about your idea that there is nothing online that suggests there is an appetite for leaving in the other 26 (?) nations. Wikipedia reports the Five-Star movement as getting 32.7% of the vote in the Italian elections; they report the French National Front as getting 21.3% of the French presidential election; the Austrian Freedom Party 26% in the latest Austrian elections. They are all parties with many reasons not to vote for them, but they are also the only home for anti-EU voters. You can imagine them away if you wish, but just because you imagine they aren't there doesn't mean that they actually aren't there.

[Lancasterclaret]

Okay Android

I accuse Ringo of making things up because he makes things up.

When he makes a fair point I acknowledge it.

He makes far more things up then he makes fair points.

And he's improved massively since he actually started to read stuff rather than just spouting ******** he heard down the pub.

But his refusal to see anything outside his comfort zone is why everyone who disagrees with him on here either ignores him (me now sadly as i've had enough), take the **** or answers him less than politely.

Can I ask what sort of evidence you need to see that backs up my point please?

I mean, Brexit backing (massively different from Brexit supporting btw as he's using money to influence the vote) hedge fund manager who made a fortune on Brexit day is quite a big hint in my book (though he's lost money on currency speculation overall doesn't change the fact that he made a tidy sum on Brexit day surely?)

This is the one that got me the most to be honest.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features ... -the-crash" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And it sounds like you are like me, enough to make Burnley games and stuff but thats it. Looks like we will both be hit after Brexit.

[If it be your will]

.