National News Brexit - the Deal or No Deal poll

[SteMerritt]

View attachment 2175

What's the point wit regards this image? We've had a GE since the referendum haven't we, so MPs were elected with whatever their views on Brexit known...

 

[Peterdev]

It highlights why we haven’t made any progress with the exit from the EU.
The MPs clearly don’t want brexit
Their view is parliament decides whether we exit the EU, the people do not.
I’ll be interested in what the outcome is when we stay in. A lot of unhappy people I would imagine.
Anyway parliament will not let us leave and the EU want us to stay so the ayes have it

 

[Peterdev]

The majority of those that voted did so to leave. Those that didn’t, that was their choice not to bother.
I’m just saying parliament decides as it’s up to them whether they accept the vote or dismiss it.
It’s just advisory and they can ignore what the outcome was.
That’s parliamentary democracy for you.
And the LDs can adopt cancelling A50 as that will give them plenty of votes from the Remain side and more MPs

 

[m]

The MPs clearly don’t want brexit
Their view is parliament decides whether we exit the EU, the people do not.

...and who decides who the MPs are?

 

[Peterdev]

Obviously the voters, but the choice leaves much to be desired

 

[m]

Obviously the voters, but the choice leaves much to be desired

Well we agree there.

Reflecting on the glibness of my preceding post it is a shame that more moderate 'leavers' should be forced to vote for dangerous one-trick-ponies such as the Brexit Party - however well it may serve my personal beliefs.

 

[Sarge]

You need to read @SteMerritt 's post properly. You can't make an 'it's MPs v the people' claim, as MPs have been elected or re-elected since the referendum when their views on Brexit were already known.

(In any case, for accuracy, 'the people' didn't vote to Leave. Some of the people did).

In 2016, out of a population of over 64, 600,00, ..... 46,400,000 were registered to vote, ( there were about 18,100,000 were not registered or not eligible to vote), of the 46,400,000 able to vote, 17.410,462 voted to leave.... therefore considerably much less than half of 'the people' (eligible to vote) in 2016 voted to leave

granted, on votes cast in the referendum, the Uk voted to leave, by a narrow percentage of those who chose to vote. but, in a total population of 64,600,000 in (2016), leave votes cast 17,410,000 does not in anyway constitute 'the people',

as others have already pointed out 17,4100,000 is merely some of the people, and for that matter, way less than one-third of ALL the people who were residing in the UK in 2016

its the individuals choice who/ what they vote for .... we have a GE every few years ( maximum term of 5 years) , 'people' have a change of mind/ heart between GE's on who they vote for .... yet,apparently, to some, a non legally binding referendum result must be adhered to as well as executed, as three years on nobody is permitted to have changed their mind, even though the GE result, after the referendum saw the balance of power shift from the previous GE result?

 

[Gary Baldi]

Well we agree there.

Reflecting on the glibness of my preceding post it is a shame that more moderate 'leavers' should be forced to vote for dangerous one-trick-ponies such as the Brexit Party - however well it may serve my personal beliefs.

And that is a choice I have. I don't want to vote for the Brexit party, but who else will represent a Leave view without question? If the Tories change leader again, who knows what will come in?

 

[m]

And that is a choice I have. I don't want to vote for the Brexit party, but who else will represent a Leave view without question? If the Tories change leader again, who knows what will come in?

I don't have it in me to 'like' your post but I fully accept the point you make.

 

[Gary Baldi]

I don't have it in me to 'like' your post but I fully accept the point you make.

Fair enough. The Lib Dems are hoovering up the other side who want to Remain, so really it's a one issue polarisation of politics that we are seeing.

Which makes Labour's position even more flimsy and confusing. They are managing to muddle voters while the others are rushing to the poles to grab what they can. The middle ground of politics is going again

 

[m]

Fair enough. The Lib Dems are hoovering up the other side who want to Remain, so really it's a one issue polarisation of politics that we are seeing.

Which makes Labour's position even more flimsy and confusing. They are managing to muddle voters while the others are rushing to the poles to grab what they can. The middle ground of politics is going again

Can't disagree with any of that.

I neither know nor care what Cameron's bio is titled, but if it's not 'The Man Who Fucked The Country' it should be.

 

[SteMerritt]

I neither know nor care what Cameron's bio is titled, but if it's not 'The Man Who Fucked The Country' it should be.

That was Russel Brand's I believe.

 

[Sarge]

outside a shop in Weymouth ....

 

[Essexyellows]

And your proof that the EU wants to be a nation state? (And I stress PROOF, not some comment read in your favourite newspaper).

Enjoy this, hopefully you will appreciate the subtle use of language they use.
It is their own publication, freely available for any voter too read.
Of course "we" were "uninformed" when it came to voting weren`t we??

Texts adopted - Improving the functioning of the European Union building on the potential of the Lisbon Treaty - Thursday, 16 February 2017

www.europarl.europa.eu

I think the old fashioned term for it is "mission creep" where you start something, like the results so push on with it irrespective of its moral or legal status.

 

[Peterdev]

Pete. I can’t let you get away with the assertion that most objections to the EU in the media were based on intolerance, taking back control and racist rants. This is an incorrect observation of those who object to the EU having an increasing control of our lives.
My objection is based not on the numbers who come into the country. We need doctors, nurses and arguably footballers.
It’s not about taking back control..blasé words to be honest. It is about having more say in what happens in our country.
Just because many of us would like to be governed more by our politicians than those in Brussels does not make us more intolerant. Even though some of our politicians are not great we can at least get rid of them when there’s an election.
There’s no reason why the countries in the EU can’t trade with us and be friends. It’s not all about hating others, being nasty to foreigners and erecting trade barriers.
It’s about having freedom to trade.
I hear a lot of people complaining about the state of our country at the moment. We’ve been in the EU for 40 years...has it all been good so far?

 

[Sarge]

seriously? .....

EU given Brexit draft with backstop scrubbed out, UK sources admit

PM’s negotiators intent on waiting until last minute before sharing plan with Brussels

www.theguardian.com

 

[Whingit]

There’s no reason why the countries in the EU can’t trade with us and be friends. It’s not all about hating others, being nasty to foreigners and erecting trade barriers.
It’s about having freedom to trade.

Anything British businesses export will have to adhere to EU regs, which we will no longer be helping to shape. Would it really make sense for companies to produce products for the, presumably, deregulated UK market and then produce a different product for the export market? It seems inefficient to me and I can see business just making things for the more standardised, regulated market anyway.

 

[Sheik djibouti]

Pete. I can’t let you get away with the assertion that most objections to the EU in the media were based on intolerance, taking back control and racist rants. This is an incorrect observation of those who object to the EU having an increasing control of our lives.
My objection is based not on the numbers who come into the country. We need doctors, nurses and arguably footballers.
It’s not about taking back control..blasé words to be honest. It is about having more say in what happens in our country.
Just because many of us would like to be governed more by our politicians than those in Brussels does not make us more intolerant. Even though some of our politicians are not great we can at least get rid of them when there’s an election.
There’s no reason why the countries in the EU can’t trade with us and be friends. It’s not all about hating others, being nasty to foreigners and erecting trade barriers.
It’s about having freedom to trade.
I hear a lot of people complaining about the state of our country at the moment. We’ve been in the EU for 40 years...has it all been good so far?

Possibly not, but stunts like this were given an awful lot of air time and the oxygen of publicity and not once has anyone, to my knowledge, from either leave campaign apologised for it.



And yet serious consideration is being given by some to allowing this individual and his ilk a greater say in our democracy.

Please stop and think about that for a while.....

Personally, I wouldn't trust him with the remote for my telly, let alone the keys to Westminster

Even respected Senior Government Ministers were at it with the Turkey migrant flood nonsense (more project fear than project fear itself).
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36479259
At least Gove has since come clean and said they were wrong to say it...even if the damage was already done and it was 2 years after the referendum.

Why do you think voters weren't swayed by these issues? Plenty of vox pop around pre and post-referendum to suggest they very much were!

We've been in the EU for 40 years....correct. Has all of it been good....probably not.

A simple question for you in return - how much of what you perceive as bad is directly attributable to the EU and how much is actually down to domestic policy decisions?

 

[tonyw]

I’m just saying parliament decides as it’s up to them whether they accept the vote or dismiss it.
It’s just advisory and they can ignore what the outcome was.
That’s parliamentary democracy for you.

I mean, I don't disagree with any of that - but I suspect you're saying it like it's a bad thing?

Whereas I would argue that we've had a parliament in place since the 13th century, and a democratically elected parliament (properly) since the Reform Act of 1832, and this form of government is what we know, and understand, and has generally served the country well over its modern history.

Of course the remedy for an incompetent and ineffectual parliament in our system is to hold another election to elect a new parliament - and this is what has annoyed me more than anything else over the last two years of Brexit incompetence; that somehow, at different times, both sides have contrived to avoid going back to the people despite not being able to form a functional government.

 

[m]

It’s not about taking back control..... It is about having more say in what happens in our country.

What's the difference?