agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,586
Likes: 4,181
|
Post by agent69 on May 14, 2019 16:45:25 GMT
Could probably do without the partonising nature of your comments:
- Many would have preferred it if the EU had not moved the 29th March date. In any event, they did move it after assuring us that they would not
- Whether the border between tha UK and the other 27 is land or sea is irrelevent. The issue is that the EU want the mechanism for goods and people passing across the Irish border to be different to the other 26 borders. a Again, they originally said all 27 must be treated the same
- I'm fine with the concept of single transferable votes, just no idea why it should suddenly become the system of choice. In your example we are left with a remain option that will appeal to all remainers but a leave option containing a caveat. Doesn't sound like a level playing field to me.
no they don't. Ok, so they would prefer us to stay and have the same arrangements with everyone. However, they are prepared to have different arrangements on the Irish border than elsewhere if we leave.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,586
Likes: 4,181
|
Post by agent69 on May 14, 2019 16:50:47 GMT
If you really think there's no difference between a land and sea border, you've clearly never been anywhere near a land border that's been open for decades and is facing closure. Where exactly is this border?
I assume you don't mean the Irish border, as this isn't facing closure, and to suggest otherwise may just be taken as typical remoaner fear stories.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 8,948
Likes: 4,787
|
Post by adrianc on May 14, 2019 16:57:59 GMT
Of course, nobody knows (...still...) where and how we're actually going to end up if and when we do leave. Retaining EEA and/or SM and/or CU membership will see it remain fairly open - bear in mind even the SE/NO land border isn't fully open, with delays for customs checks on goods. Schengen is pretty much the same thing as the CTA www.economist.com/britain/2018/02/22/norways-border-shows-the-problems-brexit-could-create-in-irelandAnything short of that - even if we don't end up with the full-on-no-deal dog's brexit, and it will definitely have to become a lot less open for goods than it is currently, and to claim otherwise is disingenuous to the point of mendacity. If you want to say "becoming a lot less open" is different to "facing closure", then you feel free. fullfact.org/europe/eu-referendum-and-irish-border/
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,842
Likes: 2,756
|
Post by michaelc on May 14, 2019 17:01:37 GMT
Yes, obviously there are many who would have preferred crashing out of the EU with no deal on 29th March. Fortunately, there are grown-ups who actually have the country's best interests at heart.
If you really think there's no difference between a land and sea border, you've clearly never been anywhere near a land border that's been open for decades and is facing closure. Oh, and thank you for again proving that you really don't understand STV. Seems to imply the rest are children and should be treated as such? Their views less valid than yours for example? Local elections, by-elections, general elections and referendums in this country have all been considered free and fair even if there are malign influences here and there, lies told here and there etc etc. The results of those votes have always been implemented and they need to be before we consider putting in place the next councilor, the next MP, the next PM or the referendum decisions. This is how our democracy works and it is incredibly sad that there exist so many who believe the issue of the day more important than democracy and our constitution itself. Regarding the confirmatory vote, I am British and was born here but my father who was also British lived in Moscow for 20 years in the late 70s and 80s. I have many other family ties and there are some in my family who are essentially out and out communists. Clearly I'm not (and neither was my father). The point I want to make is during communist Russia it was very common to have "elections" where the public would simply vote "yes" or "no". I would call that a "confirmatory vote" and it was at the time ridiculed by most of the population as pointless - a pretence of democracy. I just cannot believe so many are advocating a move in the direction of something like that. To be clear I'm not in any way suggesting remainers are in some way linked to such a system, but just highlighting that what they are advocating with a "confirmatory vote" is not a million miles from the """Democracy""" present in soviet russia last century.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,664
Likes: 2,988
|
Post by IFISAcava on May 14, 2019 17:06:42 GMT
Our government asked (no, begged) them to! My original commet was in relation to the suggestion that the EU had said something was 100% non-negotiable, and the inference that this should be taken at face value. The March 29th date was changed because it suited both side to change it. However, that doesn't alter the fact that the EU said it would not be altered, and then they changed it when their backs were against the wall. No, Theresa May said (no less than 50 times) that we were leaving on 29th March when the two years of A50 were up. EU said if we wanted to request an extension to A50 so as not to leave on 29th March then we had to request it and they'd then think about it. Which they did when we finally asked. There is a lot of rewriting of history going on already.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 8,948
Likes: 4,787
|
Post by adrianc on May 14, 2019 17:08:01 GMT
Local elections, by-elections, general elections and referendums in this country have all been considered free and fair even if there are malign influences here and there, lies told here and there etc etc. The results of those votes have always been implemented and they need to be before we consider putting in place the next councilor, the next MP, the next PM or the referendum decisions. This is how our democracy works and it is incredibly sad that there exist so many who believe the issue of the day more important than democracy and our constitution itself. When was the last time that a major campaign found itself on the receiving end of quite so much censure and penalty for multiple breaches of electoral law? When, come to that, was the last time a vote implemented simply a general direction with zero detail? Never that I can recall. Both the other national referenda had all ten regional referenda had much more defined outcomes. Odd. I thought all the ridicule was aimed at the fact there was a single party standing, with results north of 99% of all votes being cast for them (and those campaigning against never being seen again).
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,664
Likes: 2,988
|
Post by IFISAcava on May 14, 2019 17:13:05 GMT
Yes, obviously there are many who would have preferred crashing out of the EU with no deal on 29th March. Fortunately, there are grown-ups who actually have the country's best interests at heart.
If you really think there's no difference between a land and sea border, you've clearly never been anywhere near a land border that's been open for decades and is facing closure. Oh, and thank you for again proving that you really don't understand STV. Seems to imply the rest are children and should be treated as such? Their views less valid than yours for example? Local elections, by-elections, general elections and referendums in this country have all been considered free and fair even if there are malign influences here and there, lies told here and there etc etc. The results of those votes have always been implemented and they need to be before we consider putting in place the next councilor, the next MP, the next PM or the referendum decisions. This is how our democracy works and it is incredibly sad that there exist so many who believe the issue of the day more important than democracy and our constitution itself. Regarding the confirmatory vote, I am British and was born here but my father who was also British lived in Moscow for 20 years in the late 70s and 80s. I have many other family ties and there are some in my family who are essentially out and out communists. Clearly I'm not (and neither was my father). The point I want to make is during communist Russia it was very common to have "elections" where the public would simply vote "yes" or "no". I would call that a "confirmatory vote" and it was at the time ridiculed by most of the population as pointless - a pretence of democracy. I just cannot believe so many are advocating a move in the direction of something like that. To be clear I'm not in any way suggesting remainers are in some way linked to such a system, but just highlighting that what they are advocating with a "confirmatory vote" is not a million miles from the """Democracy""" present in soviet russia last century. The democratic irony is that if the referendum had been legally binding, like a general election, it would have been invalidated by the law breaking of the Leave campaign. It cannot be anti-democratic to have a vote on a specific proposal that didn't exist in 2016 (i.e. TM's deal). It may not be politically wise, and Parliament may choose to decide for itself rather than ask people again, but it is not anti-democratic, and to consider those asking for a referendum on TM's deal as akin to totalitarian regimes like the Soviet Union beggars belief.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,664
Likes: 2,988
|
Post by IFISAcava on May 14, 2019 17:18:55 GMT
My original commet was in relation to the suggestion that the EU had said something was 100% non-negotiable, and the inference that this should be taken at face value. The March 29th date was changed because it suited both side to change it. However, that doesn't alter the fact that the EU said it would not be altered, and then they changed it when their backs were against the wall. No, Theresa May said (no less than 50 times) that we were leaving on 29th March when the two years of A50 were up. EU said if we wanted to request an extension to A50 so as not to leave on 29th March then we had to request it and they'd then think about it. Which they did when we finally asked. There is a lot of rewriting of history going on already. sorry, TM said it 108 times according to Peter Bone MP. Point me please to where the EU said it would not be altered.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,183
Likes: 5,989
|
Post by registerme on May 14, 2019 20:35:32 GMT
If you really think there's no difference between a land and sea border, you've clearly never been anywhere near a land border that's been open for decades and is facing closure. Where exactly is this border?
I assume you don't mean the Irish border, as this isn't facing closure, and to suggest otherwise may just be taken as typical remoaner fear stories.
Have they managed to solve that problem without me noticing?
|
|
Godanubis
Member of DD Central
Anubis is known as the god of death and is the oldest and most popular of ancient Egyptian deities.
Posts: 2,011
Likes: 1,013
|
Post by Godanubis on May 14, 2019 23:52:28 GMT
If there is another bite at the cherry then there needs to be a minimum criteria to avoid the same arguments to ask for yet another. May/Corbyn should go to no deal as it is a leave option. Giving leave 55 remain 45. This confirms previous result. Anything else will always give remain an advantage by giving them votes from a leave option. There must be at least a 10% difference to stay for it to be valid reversal of previous vote.By that logic the second referendum (2016) didn't reverse the first referendum (1975) so we should remain. The first I remember and voted was a common Market not all the current power given to overrule our highest courts.
|
|
Godanubis
Member of DD Central
Anubis is known as the god of death and is the oldest and most popular of ancient Egyptian deities.
Posts: 2,011
Likes: 1,013
|
Post by Godanubis on May 14, 2019 23:59:44 GMT
By that logic the second referendum (2016) didn't reverse the first referendum (1975) so we should remain. The first I remember and voted was a common Market not all the current power given to overrule our highest courts. Let’s settle it simply. Only those that were eligible to vote in First referendum when we entered a common market can vote in any other cobbled together new one. I do believe in the last one the majority of older and wiser that actually knew what has been taken away voted to leave. If we do nothing we will be out anyway. When Jeremy destroys the economy the EU will chuck us out as we will make Greece look like a rich country in comparison.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,664
Likes: 2,988
|
Post by IFISAcava on May 15, 2019 5:28:25 GMT
By that logic the second referendum (2016) didn't reverse the first referendum (1975) so we should remain. The first I remember and voted was a common Market not all the current power given to overrule our highest courts. No. The Treaty of Rome (1957), which we signed up to when we joined in 1973, established the European Court of Justice.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 8,948
Likes: 4,787
|
Post by adrianc on May 15, 2019 7:00:34 GMT
<waits for "but Yooooooman Rites!" (c) Daily Mail> As well as the ECJ, which as IFI says, has been in place since before we joined the EEC - the European Court of Human Rights is nothing whatsoever to do with the EU. It's part of the Council of Europe, 47 member states including Putin's Russia (albeit suspended following Crimea) - the only wholly-or-partially geographically European countries that aren't members are the Vatican (theocracy), Kosovo (in the throes of joining), Belarus and Kazakhstan (endemic human rights abuses). The UK was a founding signatory in 1959, having basically written the European Convention on Human Rights which the court is there to enforce. The much-loathed Human Rights Act 1998 was brought in to allow UK courts to prosecute breaches of that exact same convention, rather than them having to go to the court. No more, no less. ...and nobody can ever say which bits of the convention they think are so terrible (apart from the whole "applying to everybody, even if you don't like them" bit, which is surely what they're needed for)... www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdfThen, of course, there's all those other supranational judicial systems that the UK's a part of - from the UN Security Council and International Court of Justice, down to arbitration bodies for any major international body. They're all basically the same thing as the ECJ... Ensuring members follow the same membership rules, and resolving disputes between them. Yet nobody ever complains about them... It's almost as if either they think the ECJ is something unique, or they simply dislike it because of the E. Oh, and as far as the ECJ goes...? The UK refers fewer cases to it, and wins more of them, than other EU countries... www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/news/latest/new-analysis-shows-uk-rarely-taken-european-court
|
|
Godanubis
Member of DD Central
Anubis is known as the god of death and is the oldest and most popular of ancient Egyptian deities.
Posts: 2,011
Likes: 1,013
|
Post by Godanubis on May 15, 2019 8:44:11 GMT
All the about workers rights and human rights being lost is a just crazy. We would most likely keep in line with EU changes as they will be the best for everyone. Just because you can change things to the detriment of others doesn’t mean you will there would be great difficulty and loss of political capital on any party advocating such changes.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 8,948
Likes: 4,787
|
Post by adrianc on May 15, 2019 8:52:27 GMT
All the about workers rights and human rights being lost is a just crazy. We would most likely keep in line with EU changes as they will be the best for everyone. No point in leaving, then...
|
|