dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
Post by dandy on Jan 21, 2019 14:21:41 GMT
I hope this is a joke - this is ridiculous and reckless language. There is no sense in which any sort of "coup" is taking place, and if you think there is then you might like to read up on coups from history (hint: they often start with tanks being sent to Parliaments). Sadly, it is neither a joke nor a "troll" as they say. I would give your opinion more respect than using the adjectives you have applied to mine although I do understand that because I was using my phone at the time, I wasn't able to write much more than I did. In my opinion, what is happening right now is far more important than leave/remain or any other issue. It goes to the heart of what this nation has been for a very long time - democratic. It has frankly amazed me that so many politicians and members of society seem to have put the issue of the day as more important than the democratic process itself. Parliment is indeed sovereign and can largely do as it wishes including changing past decisions but it is not a collective dictator. It is answerable to the people. I truly believe that if some parliamentarians believe the issue of the day is more important than the democratic process and are plotting a silent coup the PM may have few options. If push comes to shove, then yes government should prevent such a coup by force if it comes to it. Whatever are you suggesting michaelc ? That the 400 or so weasel MPs scheming against the electorate are taken away in the back of some police vans and replaced with honorable servants of the people? I'll contribute at least a few shillings ...
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 3,008
Member is Online
|
Post by IFISAcava on Jan 21, 2019 14:33:43 GMT
JamesFrance how do you see the UK getting "immediate" trade deals with the EU when trade is an EU competency and any trade deal would need to be negotiated on behalf of the EU as a whole and ratified by 27 member states? Presumably after we've flounced out and refused to pay our exit bill? Liam Fox and his erstwhile Department of International Trade (or whatever it is called) have achieved precisely >>nothing<< in the two years it's been running. Liam Fox - "Let's have a trade deal"! Other country - "Great idea, what's your relationship with the EU going to be"? Liam Fox - "Don't know". Other country - "OK, come back and talk to us when you do know". Liam Fox - ..... >takes deeeeeeep breath< Because the EU is DESPERATE for our £39b plus our ongoing trade. I wish people would stop being so negative. Do you really think 27 member states are needed to decide EU trade policy/deals? 25 of them are absolutely irrelevant, they do as they are told or they have their funding stopped. Very very simple. All these EXPERTS scare-mongering are much the same as those that said we MUST JOIN THE EURO. This is now a small number of weasel MPs vs the public. Any second referendum (for those dreaming of one) will be massively pro-leave. British Pride isnt going to back down on this and only those politicians so out-of-touch with reality are still calling for one. It is time to let the EU know that we are leaving with no deal on 29 March and we will keep our £39b until a deal is found. Nope - there was much more disagreement about the Euro, and the reason we didn't join was at least in part because we listened to the experts' advice! To say that a majority of the public backs a no deal exit (held back only by "weasel MPs") is simply supposition - all polls suggest the opposite, Remain has huge lead over no deal head-to-head. Anyway, if you want to be sure in a proper democratic fashion (as you should given the likely chaos that will ensue) just ask them in a referendum on that issue. They might even back it as you suggest, in which case we're all settled and ready to go.
|
|
dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
Post by dandy on Jan 21, 2019 14:49:55 GMT
Nope - there was much more disagreement about the Euro, and the reason we didn't join was at least in part because we listened to the experts' advice! To say that a majority of the public backs a no deal exit (held back only by "weasel MPs") is simply supposition - all polls suggest the opposite, Remain has huge lead over no deal head-to-head. Anyway, if you want to be sure in a proper democratic fashion (as you should given the likely chaos that will ensue) just ask them in a referendum on that issue. They might even back it as you suggest, in which case we're all settled and ready to go. "To say that a majority of the public backs a no deal exit (held back only by "weasel MPs") is simply supposition"Where did I say this? The majority of the public backed LEAVE. No more or less. "No deal" was always the fall back position which MPs overwhelmingly voted for. "All polls suggest the opposite"Good old polls. The same things that said Trump lost and that Remain won? Oh. "Anyway, if you want to be sure in a proper democratic fashion (as you should given the likely chaos that will ensue) just ask them in a referendum on that issue."
I think you miss the point about why a second referendum is bad. It is not because Remain might win - as that will never happen. Heard of the stiff upper lip? We are British not French No the reason a second referendum is bad is because it simply prolongs this BS, will create further divide and will destroy yet more value AND will make the biggest threat to this country more likely - a JC government. Instead of that we should be doing deals with USA, China, India etc already.
|
|
copacetic
Member of DD Central
Posts: 305
Likes: 666
|
Post by copacetic on Jan 21, 2019 15:14:35 GMT
Unfortunately relying on belief systems is one of the main problems with the Brexit mess. There's a mass of evidence, from many sources; if you choose not to believe it just realise that is what you are doing. May 2016 treasury report: assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524967/hm_treasury_analysis_the_immediate_economic_impact_of_leaving_the_eu_web.pdf"The analysis in this document comes to a clear central conclusion: a vote to leave would represent an immediate and profound shock to our economy. That shock would push our economy into a recession and lead to an increase in unemployment of around 500,000, GDP would be 3.6% smaller, average real wages would be lower, inflation higher, sterling weaker, house prices would be hit and public borrowing would rise compared with a vote to remain. " What actually happened since 2016 though was unemployment dropped from 5% to 4.1% and GDP grew by 1.9% in 2016 and 1.8% in 2017 (source ONS). Inflation has jumped from 0.5% to about 2% but we're not exactly experiencing the 70s rates of inflation yet. Sterling is weaker but there are pluses and minuses for this so that's not really a clear cut negative. House prices have continued to rise (not imo a good thing). The issue is there is indeed a mass of 'evidence' out there but you have to question the source. Politicians, businesses, media and other organisations have agendas. They figure out what is in their best interests and produce this evidence to support what they want to do. Apply the same healthy skeptisim to this evidence as you do to a RICS valuation report presented to you by a peer to peer platform that's trying to get you to invest in their loan offering and you'll find the final outcome is a lot less certain (either positive or negative) than what you may be led to believe.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,952
Likes: 4,386
|
Post by agent69 on Jan 21, 2019 15:33:33 GMT
A report produced by a load of civil servants who have never wanted to leave?
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,952
Likes: 4,386
|
Post by agent69 on Jan 21, 2019 15:43:17 GMT
But that option wasn't on the ballot paper The first referendum was stay out or join, 2016 was remain in or leave. Polar opposites. In any case the result of the 1973 referendum was honoured by all sides, until people decided (40 odd years later) that we should consider leaving. People should follow 1973 and honour the result of the current vote. If people are unhappy at a later point in time they can propose a vote to re-join We have a settled position, it's called leave
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,952
Likes: 4,386
|
Post by agent69 on Jan 21, 2019 15:51:50 GMT
it's allowing people to decide after seeing what has actually happened If that was the intention then it should have been clearly explained on the ballot paper, and what do you think the EU's position would have been if we had told them this?
Excuse me Mr Junker but we are thinking of leaving. Please can you spend a load of time and money over the next 2 years to see what sort of a deal you would give us, and then we will decide if we want to go.
|
|
copacetic
Member of DD Central
Posts: 305
Likes: 666
|
Post by copacetic on Jan 21, 2019 15:52:36 GMT
A report produced by a load of civil servants who have never wanted to leave?
Probably, but I'd go so far as to say that those same civil servants could have produced a report showing how utterly amazing a vote to leave would be economically if the chancellor had been in favour of leaving.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 3,008
Member is Online
|
Post by IFISAcava on Jan 21, 2019 15:53:53 GMT
But that option wasn't on the ballot paper The first referendum was stay out or join, 2016 was remain in or leave. Polar opposites. In any case the result of the 1973 referendum was honoured by all sides, until people decided (40 odd years later) that we should consider leaving. People should follow 1973 and honour the result of the current vote. If people are unhappy at a later point in time they can propose a vote to re-join We have a settled position, it's called leave Again - no it wasn't. The referendum was in 1975 and we had already joined in 1973. Repeating an incorrect statement doesn't make it true. People are unhappy now with all that has transpired since 2016 and are suggesting the situation has changed enough for a third referendum on the actual negotiated terms.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 3,008
Member is Online
|
Post by IFISAcava on Jan 21, 2019 15:55:00 GMT
But that option wasn't on the ballot paper The first referendum was stay out or join, 2016 was remain in or leave. Polar opposites. In any case the result of the 1973 referendum was honoured by all sides, until people decided (40 odd years later) that we should consider leaving. People should follow 1973 and honour the result of the current vote. If people are unhappy at a later point in time they can propose a vote to re-join We have a settled position, it's called leaveRemind me what type of leave have we settled on? Or are we back to "Brexit means Brexit"?
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 3,008
Member is Online
|
Post by IFISAcava on Jan 21, 2019 15:56:45 GMT
Nope - there was much more disagreement about the Euro, and the reason we didn't join was at least in part because we listened to the experts' advice! To say that a majority of the public backs a no deal exit (held back only by "weasel MPs") is simply supposition - all polls suggest the opposite, Remain has huge lead over no deal head-to-head. Anyway, if you want to be sure in a proper democratic fashion (as you should given the likely chaos that will ensue) just ask them in a referendum on that issue. They might even back it as you suggest, in which case we're all settled and ready to go. "To say that a majority of the public backs a no deal exit (held back only by "weasel MPs") is simply supposition"Where did I say this? The majority of the public backed LEAVE. No more or less. "No deal" was always the fall back position which MPs overwhelmingly voted for. "All polls suggest the opposite"Good old polls. The same things that said Trump lost and that Remain won? Oh. "Anyway, if you want to be sure in a proper democratic fashion (as you should given the likely chaos that will ensue) just ask them in a referendum on that issue."
I think you miss the point about why a second referendum is bad. It is not because Remain might win - as that will never happen. Heard of the stiff upper lip? We are British not French No the reason a second referendum is bad is because it simply prolongs this BS, will create further divide and will destroy yet more value AND will make the biggest threat to this country more likely - a JC government. Instead of that we should be doing deals with USA, China, India etc already. The BS is going to be prolonged regardless. A referendum won by Leave on the terms negotiated ends it.
|
|
dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
Post by dandy on Jan 21, 2019 16:22:49 GMT
Remind me what type of leave have we settled on? Or are we back to "Brexit means Brexit"? The country voted to leave with no deal (unless a deal that is backed by parliament is found). That is what was voted for and that is what MPs also voted for when triggering A50. AND yes brexit does indeed mean brexit - it certainly does not mean remoan
|
|
JamesFrance
Member of DD Central
Port Grimaud 1974
Posts: 1,323
Likes: 897
|
Post by JamesFrance on Jan 21, 2019 17:14:41 GMT
|
|
duck
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,749
Likes: 6,426
|
Post by duck on Jan 21, 2019 17:39:02 GMT
|
|
JamesFrance
Member of DD Central
Port Grimaud 1974
Posts: 1,323
Likes: 897
|
Post by JamesFrance on Jan 21, 2019 17:58:01 GMT
I do like the one in the link below it of the football song with the two girls
|
|