Non - Brexit

too many people are trying to define what leavers wanted though ..particularly on the remain side they seem to think they really have their finger on the pulse of what leavers we’re voting for

The Leavers won the referendum but seem to have run scared of delivering the outcome, probably by not helped by the factions within pro remain having different priorities as to how post29 march UK will trade and cooperate internationally.

Seems to be an attempt to replace its all the EUs fault with its all the remainers fault.
 
JIMNNINA said:
too many people are trying to define what leavers wanted though ..particularly on the remain side they seem to think they really have their finger on the pulse of what leavers we’re voting for

The Leavers won the referendum but seem to have run scared of delivering the outcome, probably by not helped by the factions within pro remain having different priorities as to how post29 march UK will trade and cooperate internationally.

Seems to be an attempt to replace its all the EUs fault with its all the remainers fault.
Click to expand...

The conservatives have run scared of delivering .
It was never the EU’s fault ,they’re doing what of course they are only naturally going to do which is look after they’re own interests ..of course they’re not looking after The average Europeans best interests the same as our bunch are not thinking about the average bloke .just the EU equivalent pigs at the trough .
 
The problem is that we voted for an idea not a plan. This means we're going into Brexit without a bloody clue how to implement it. Once we have a plan, we should let the people decide if they like it or not. I realise this won't go down well with those that think democracy ended in 2016 but it really is the best option (in my narrow minded view).
 
JIMNNINA said:
It all comes down to politics now

which is where it all started when Mr Cameron made an ill thought out commitment to a referendum.

Do personal politics trump party politics which trump the national interest ?
Click to expand...
I suspect you are a remainer and because the remain vote didn't win your suggesting it was an ill thought out referendum after more than 40 years, yet you would want another one after only 3 years.
 
wallmth said:
Cmon SDD there was no nuance in that governement flyer . So yes it could be construed as as mandated governement policy considering the same governement were handling the negotiations ...albeit after the prols had voted the wrong way .

Then those people should have voted remain .To leave the EU you have to leave the single market ...Your right that too many people are trying to define what leavers wanted though ..particularly on the remain side they seem to think they really have their finger on the pulse of what leavers we’re voting for
Click to expand...

So you've decided what constitutes mandated government policy and precisely what people were voting for when they voted leave, notwithstanding the major players like Hannan who clearly advocate effective single market membership or EEA membership.

Are you Denying my assertion that there were enough pro single market leave voters to have swung the vote? You say they should have voted remain but I'm afraid it's not for you to say what other people base their votes on. It's a matter of fact that your preferred brexit does not cover the entirety of the leave vote.
 
redharry said:
I think you are right SDD.
IMO (which is worth nothing I admit) the likelihood of the backstop being invoked is minimal, and if it was then it should be fairly straightforward to demonstrate that the EU was not playing ball if they tried to thwart a subsequent deal.
But I don't think it will go through as there are too many over inflated ego's at play.
Click to expand...
Yes, I would vote for it now but as you say I don't think it will go through. Labour will have lost a lot of votes because staying in the customs union or single market isn't Brexit, nowadays.
 
stanthevan said:
Crazy isn't it. Some people are demanding a general election after 2 years. Democracy, eh?
Click to expand...
Not me I can assure you, conservative party for as real a Brexit as we're likely to get, not labour as I've previously voted.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
So you've decided what constitutes mandated government policy and precisely what people were voting for when they voted leave, notwithstanding the major players like Hannan who clearly advocate effective single market membership or EEA membership.

Are you Denying my assertion that there were enough pro single market leave voters to have swung the vote? You say they should have voted remain but I'm afraid it's not for you to say what other people base their votes on. It's a matter of fact that your preferred brexit does not cover the entirety of the leave vote.
Click to expand...

I’ve not decided anything . I’m just saying that if the governement of the day says we have to leave the single market if we vote leave it shouldn’t be that big a shock that when we leave we shouldn’t be treating leaving the single market as a complete non starter .

Not sure why you’ve got Dan Hannan in your head today or why he’s a major player .Hes just another talking head amongst the myriad of talking heads .

I know my personal ideas are not the same as every other leave voter obviously .... but there is very obviously a “leave” the EU which isn’t grey or nuanced in any way .

I’m getting a lot of questions but you haven’t answered the one I asked which is , if this WA is agreeded what benefit is it for the EU to ever agree a fair trade agreement with us .
 
Sky

ERG legal team advises member to reject deal tonight

Finally, the ERG's legal team known as the "Star Chamber" say they will call on MPs to vote down the deal.

Sir Bill Cash says: “In the light of our own legal analysis and others we do not recommend accepting the government’s motion today.”
 
stanthevan said:
The problem is that we voted for an idea not a plan. This means we're going into Brexit without a bloody clue how to implement it. Once we have a plan, we should let the people decide if they like it or not. I realise this won't go down well with those that think democracy ended in 2016 but it really is the best option (in my narrow minded view).
Click to expand...

It's not a narrow minded view, it's the view of many other people. It's also the only strategy that forces people to actually think about the bigger picture of what they are voting for at the point of leaving. Those that say they knew what they were voting for originally are the most narrow minded as they do not care for the vast changes and clarifications that have happened since 2016 and are not prepared to reevaluate on the negotiated terms. They are also dismissive of other people who want to make a final decision based on a plan. A decision which would not affect their own desire to vote the same way if desired.

Also If we don't need a plan ahead of a decision on such a major political turning point then why do parties bother putting out manifestos ahead of general elections?
 
the bottom line is the word Leave.

is a bottom line soundbite, who can explain what it means in the real world post 29 march.
Brexit means Brexit, Leave means Leave, omnishambles means omnishambles.
 
wallmth said:
I’ve not decided anything . I’m just saying that if the governement of the day says we have to leave the single market if we vote leave it shouldn’t be that big a shock that when we leave we shouldn’t be treating leaving the single market as a complete non starter .

Not sure why you’ve got Dan Hannan in your head today or why he’s a major player .Hes just another talking head amongst the myriad of talking heads .

I know my personal ideas are not the same as every other leave voter obviously .... but there is very obviously a “leave” the EU which isn’t grey or nuanced in any way .

I’m getting a lot of questions but you haven’t answered the one I asked which is , if this WA is agreeded what benefit is it for the EU to ever agree a fair trade agreement with us .
Click to expand...

Well we'll have to disagree on that because it's just another element of the remain campaign as far as I'm concerned. I don't buy the remainer argument that "the leave campaign said XYZ, which is not true therefore the referendum was based on lies" and I don't agree that a remain leaflet constitutes part of the leave mandate, especially as there were significant leave groups that did not advocate that.

Hannan was a founder member of Vote Leave along with Matthew Elliot, Dominic Cummings and Douglas Carswell - he's a globalist who wants a decent trading agreement with the EU and is happy with anything that allows the UK to persue it's own trading agreements with third countries - including EEA (because he doesn't give a toss about free movement one way or another).

The point I'm making is that there are significant proportions of leave voters that don't necessarily agree with leaving the SM - and as we know it doesn't take many to swing the majority.

To answer your question - I maybe too simple to understand these things but as redharry has said I can't see what prevents us from walking away during the discussions on the future relationship if we think the EU is trying to deliberately frustrate a FTA. We've surely kicked up enough of a stink on the issue that we can claim bad faith and threaten a no-deal walk-out. My understanding is that concerns over our international reputation would prevent this according to some but surely a breakdown in communications would harm both parties' reputations.
 
Last edited:
JIMNNINA said:
the bottom line is the word Leave.

is a bottom line soundbite, who can explain what it means in the real world post 29 march.
Brexit means Brexit, Leave means Leave, omnishambles means omnishambles.
Click to expand...

How about “Britain stronger in “ or “ open Britain “ yes those sound bites make so much more sense .
 
Red Sky said:
It's not a narrow minded view, it's the view of many other people. It's also the only strategy that forces people to actually think about the bigger picture of what they are voting for at the point of leaving. Those that say they knew what they were voting for originally are the most narrow minded as they do not care for the vast changes and clarifications that have happened since 2016 and are not prepared to reevaluate on the negotiated terms. They are also dismissive of other people who want to make a final decision based on a plan. A decision which would not affect their own desire to vote the same way if desired.

Also If we don't need a plan ahead of a decision on such a major political turning point then why do parties bother putting out manifestos ahead of general elections?
Click to expand...

A bit disingenuous when it was quite clearly stated by all parties that the original vote would be implemented. It's just trying to reverse the decision whatever way you dress it up.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
A bit disingenuous when it was quite clearly stated by all parties that the original vote would be implemented. It's just trying to reverse the decision whatever way you dress it up.
Click to expand...

The original vote for..... (drum roll) brexit. Of which there have been at least 5 or 6 different interpretations. And both parties have said that they would do everything to avoid a 'catastrophic' (their words not mine) no deal brexit. And many people have said that a 'soft' brexit is not what the people voted for (without actually asking them). And lo and behold the northern ireland backstop is still an issue (don't remember that being in the parties' original pledges)
 
Red Sky said:
The original vote for..... (drum roll) brexit. Of which there have been at least 5 or 6 different interpretations. And both parties have said that they would do everything to avoid a 'catastrophic' (their words not mine) no deal brexit. And many people have said that a 'soft' brexit is not what the people voted for (without actually asking them). And lo and behold the northern ireland backstop is still an issue (don't remember that being in the parties' original pledges)
Click to expand...

Yes, which is why a compromise needs to be reached that satisfies the definition of leaving the EU and also allows people to campaign for further movement towards their preferred outcome moving forward. There is also no clear definition of what 'remain' means either so your point doesn't really work.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
Well we'll have to disagree on that because it's just another element of the remain campaign as far as I'm concerned. I don't buy the remainer argument that "the leave campaign said XYZ, which is not true therefore the referendum was based on lies" and I don't agree that a remain leaflet constitutes part of the leave mandate, especially as there were significant leave groups that did not advocate that.

Hannan was a founder member of Vote Leave along with Matthew Elliot, Dominic Cummings and Douglas Carswell - he's
To answer your question - I maybe too simple to understand these things but as redharry has said I can't see what prevents us from walking away during the discussions on the future relationship if we think the EU is trying to deliberately frustrate a FTA. We've surely kicked up enough of a stink on the issue that we can claim bad faith and threaten a no-deal walk-out. My understanding is that concerns over our international reputation would prevent this according to some but surely a breakdown in communications would harm both parties' reputations.
Click to expand...
SlowDownDerek said:
Well we'll have to disagree on that because it's just another element of the remain campaign as far as I'm concerned. I don't buy the remainer argument that "the leave campaign said XYZ, which is not true therefore the referendum was based on lies" and I don't agree that a remain leaflet constitutes part of the leave mandate, especially as there were significant leave groups that did not advocate that.

Hannan was a founder member of Vote Leave along with Matthew Elliot, Dominic Cummings and Douglas Carswell - he's a globalist who wants a decent trading agreement with the EU and is happy with anything that allows the UK to persue it's own trading agreements with third countries - including EEA (because he doesn't give a toss about free movement one way or another).

The point I'm making is that there are significant proportions of leave voters that don't necessarily agree with leaving the SM - and as we know it doesn't take many to swing the majority.

To answer your question - I maybe too simple to understand these things but as redharry has said I can't see what prevents us from walking away during the discussions on the future relationship if we think the EU is trying to deliberately frustrate a FTA. We've surely kicked up enough of a stink on the issue that we can claim bad faith and threaten a no-deal walk-out. My understanding is that concerns over our international reputation would prevent this according to some but surely a breakdown in communications would harm both parties' reputations.
Click to expand...

https://www.kingdomcomment.com/blog/anatomy-of-a-smear-dan-hannan

Not sure if this is relevant to what your saying but put it up anyway .

So your saying there really isn’t any incentive for the EU to try to make a deal in good faith but we “might” be able to walk away .Walk away to what ? No deal ,isn’t that already an option right now without having to hand over this pie in the sky figure of 39 billion ...this so called deal is handing every single card over to the EU for the future negotiations or am I seeing this completely wrong ? What in this deal is good for the UK or can be classed as leaving ?
 
SlowDownDerek said:
Yes, which is why a compromise needs to be reached that satisfies the definition of leaving the EU and also allows people to campaign for further movement towards their preferred outcome moving forward. There is also no clear definition of what 'remain' means either so your point doesn't really work.
Click to expand...

I'm all for an extension to article which allows people to campaign based on well thought out proposals for both leave and remain. Remain does not need to be 'go back to how things were' for me, it's clear things need to change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;