pembroke allan wrote:Teresa may as said if MPs vote for her Brexit deal they can have another vote for a referendum??? What does this mean??
pembroke allan wrote:Teresa may as said if MPs vote for her Brexit deal they can have another vote for a referendum??? What does this mean??
Steve Zodiak wrote:pembroke allan wrote:Teresa may as said if MPs vote for her Brexit deal they can have another vote for a referendum??? What does this mean??
I think that means the sooner she sees a shrink the better.
pembroke allan wrote:Steve Zodiak wrote:pembroke allan wrote:Teresa may as said if MPs vote for her Brexit deal they can have another vote for a referendum??? What does this mean??
I think that means the sooner she sees a shrink the better.
It sounds as if she's given up getting a deal so we stay in EU despite the people saying out! This smacks of previous votes by Ireland stall until they get answer politicians want and not what the people wanted, what happened to democracy? And Only other option is out no deal when October comes cannot see that happening
pembroke allan wrote:Teresa may as said if MPs vote for her Brexit deal they can have another vote for a referendum??? What does this mean??
dogfound wrote:pembroke allan wrote:Teresa may as said if MPs vote for her Brexit deal they can have another vote for a referendum??? What does this mean??
she has tried to keep too many people happy from the get go..
and in my view should have realised that was not ever going to happen and then changed direction or resigned a long time ago..
nojac wrote:I don't think we will ever leave .
The government will keep voting , then postponing brexit.
Until we are all as confused as the PM, and have forgotten what it was all about.
pembroke allan wrote:Teresa may as said if MPs vote for her Brexit deal they can have another vote for a referendum??? What does this mean??
nojac wrote:I don't think we will ever leave .
The government will keep voting , then postponing brexit.
Until we are all as confused as the PM, and have forgotten what it was all about.
Tony Blue Williams wrote:pembroke allan wrote:Teresa may as said if MPs vote for her Brexit deal they can have another vote for a referendum??? What does this mean??
Actually I think it is Theresa May trying to pull a fast one here. My understanding is she has offered Parliament a vote on the possibility of a second referendum if MP's pass her withdrawal bill. That doesn't mean there will be a second referendum it only means MP's will vote whether they want another one.
As far as we know there is no majority in Parliament for another referendum as remain MP's are worried about the backlash from leave constituents.
There would also be problems as remain wouldn't necessarily be on the ballot paper. It would be up to the Electoral Commission to decide the choice. It could be Remain vs May deal or Remain vs No Deal vs May deal or No Deal vs May deal.
Personally I don't see how remain could possibly be on the ballot paper as that option was rejected in 2016. No one has had an opportunity to vote for no deal so that has to be on the ballot paper and the same with May's deal.
Tony Blue Williams wrote:pembroke allan wrote:Teresa may as said if MPs vote for her Brexit deal they can have another vote for a referendum??? What does this mean??
Actually I think it is Theresa May trying to pull a fast one here. My understanding is she has offered Parliament a vote on the possibility of a second referendum if MP's pass her withdrawal bill. That doesn't mean there will be a second referendum it only means MP's will vote whether they want another one.
As far as we know there is no majority in Parliament for another referendum as remain MP's are worried about the backlash from leave constituents.
There would also be problems as remain wouldn't necessarily be on the ballot paper. It would be up to the Electoral Commission to decide the choice. It could be Remain vs May deal or Remain vs No Deal vs May deal or No Deal vs May deal.
Personally I don't see how remain could possibly be on the ballot paper as that option was rejected in 2016. No one has had an opportunity to vote for no deal so that has to be on the ballot paper and the same with May's deal.
ReesWestonSuperMare wrote:She is trying to deliver a brexit (whatever that means) , her problem is she is stumped on every front. The numbers dont stack up for her.
I thought the basis of her deal seemed ok - albeit the irish back stop issue.
I think she now simply wants to go. She has done her best - given the circumstances - but this simply cant be fixed. Parliament says they wont accept no deal, the eu wont budge on the agreement, the MPs wont do a customs union.
Come 31st October - by default the EU will say your out - as is the legal process, unless Parliament revokes Article 50, which then keeps us in.
Apart from agreeing the deal on the table - then you need to try and re jig the numbers in Parliament. That means a general election - and the choice seems to then be Boris or Corbyn. I would favour Boris slightly more than Corbyn - but only slightly - they are both terrible - and not PM material.
So there we have it folks - an almost Shakespearean play about British politics - I bet the Russians are laughing there bollox off at this.
Sven wrote:ReesWestonSuperMare wrote:She is trying to deliver a brexit (whatever that means) , her problem is she is stumped on every front. The numbers dont stack up for her.
I thought the basis of her deal seemed ok - albeit the irish back stop issue.
I think she now simply wants to go. She has done her best - given the circumstances - but this simply cant be fixed. Parliament says they wont accept no deal, the eu wont budge on the agreement, the MPs wont do a customs union.
Come 31st October - by default the EU will say your out - as is the legal process, unless Parliament revokes Article 50, which then keeps us in.
Apart from agreeing the deal on the table - then you need to try and re jig the numbers in Parliament. That means a general election - and the choice seems to then be Boris or Corbyn. I would favour Boris slightly more than Corbyn - but only slightly - they are both terrible - and not PM material.
So there we have it folks - an almost Shakespearean play about British politics - I bet the Russians are laughing there bollox off at this.
She is most definitely NOT trying to deliver Brexit; what she is proposing (not too much different to many other MP's) is her version of Brexit that keeps the UK close to the EU in almost every aspect...only without a vote our a say on the things we would still have to accept without question!
I'm not saying Remain or Brexit, as that's an individual choice; but both sides need to wake up to the fact that we are now at a simple leave completely (WTO Rules until other 'deals' are made) or remain exactly as we are with a say on what goes forward situation
pembroke allan wrote:Sven wrote:ReesWestonSuperMare wrote:She is trying to deliver a brexit (whatever that means) , her problem is she is stumped on every front. The numbers dont stack up for her.
I thought the basis of her deal seemed ok - albeit the irish back stop issue.
I think she now simply wants to go. She has done her best - given the circumstances - but this simply cant be fixed. Parliament says they wont accept no deal, the eu wont budge on the agreement, the MPs wont do a customs union.
Come 31st October - by default the EU will say your out - as is the legal process, unless Parliament revokes Article 50, which then keeps us in.
Apart from agreeing the deal on the table - then you need to try and re jig the numbers in Parliament. That means a general election - and the choice seems to then be Boris or Corbyn. I would favour Boris slightly more than Corbyn - but only slightly - they are both terrible - and not PM material.
So there we have it folks - an almost Shakespearean play about British politics - I bet the Russians are laughing there bollox off at this.
She is most definitely NOT trying to deliver Brexit; what she is proposing (not too much different to many other MP's) is her version of Brexit that keeps the UK close to the EU in almost every aspect...only without a vote our a say on the things we would still have to accept without question!
I'm not saying Remain or Brexit, as that's an individual choice; but both sides need to wake up to the fact that we are now at a simple leave completely (WTO Rules until other 'deals' are made) or remain exactly as we are with a say on what goes forward situation
This was master plan all along? Make a deal that she knew was unacceptable to uda don't bother to ask anyone if it's ok but get it signed by EU hey Presto got deal that can never be ratified as she knew she didn't have enough support to pass it .. now be left with no deal which seems highly unlikely to be allowed to happen or revoke article 50 most likely outcome ! It's a Simple way to stay in EU without having another public vote or going through MPs
pembroke allan wrote:Sven wrote:ReesWestonSuperMare wrote:She is trying to deliver a brexit (whatever that means) , her problem is she is stumped on every front. The numbers dont stack up for her.
I thought the basis of her deal seemed ok - albeit the irish back stop issue.
I think she now simply wants to go. She has done her best - given the circumstances - but this simply cant be fixed. Parliament says they wont accept no deal, the eu wont budge on the agreement, the MPs wont do a customs union.
Come 31st October - by default the EU will say your out - as is the legal process, unless Parliament revokes Article 50, which then keeps us in.
Apart from agreeing the deal on the table - then you need to try and re jig the numbers in Parliament. That means a general election - and the choice seems to then be Boris or Corbyn. I would favour Boris slightly more than Corbyn - but only slightly - they are both terrible - and not PM material.
So there we have it folks - an almost Shakespearean play about British politics - I bet the Russians are laughing there bollox off at this.
She is most definitely NOT trying to deliver Brexit; what she is proposing (not too much different to many other MP's) is her version of Brexit that keeps the UK close to the EU in almost every aspect...only without a vote our a say on the things we would still have to accept without question!
I'm not saying Remain or Brexit, as that's an individual choice; but both sides need to wake up to the fact that we are now at a simple leave completely (WTO Rules until other 'deals' are made) or remain exactly as we are with a say on what goes forward situation
This was master plan all along? Make a deal that she knew was unacceptable to uda don't bother to ask anyone if it's ok but get it signed by EU hey Presto got deal that can never be ratified as she knew she didn't have enough support to pass it .. now be left with no deal which seems highly unlikely to be allowed to happen or revoke article 50 most likely outcome ! It's a Simple way to stay in EU without having another public vote or going through MPs
pembroke allan wrote:Remain will be on a ballot that's for sure it's been stated several times which is totally wrong unless a miracle happens .... but funny part is as I've stated legally it takes 22wks from start to have a referendum at moment theres 23 wks to 29th Oct so if this deal is not past what then ? Leave no deal or extension to article 50? It's more likely revoke article 50 as is the MPs plan all along!
dogfound wrote:all this leave with a deal stuff that emerged after the result is rubbish..
it was leave.
personally I did not vote as I was not convinced either way { still not } which would benefit our country more..i am now firmly in the leave camp as I believe in democracy..
had leave with a deal been the choice on the paper opposed to just leave....well im sure it would have swayed quite a few non voters towards voting leave...and infact some remain voters towards leave.
Tony Blue Williams wrote:dogfound wrote:all this leave with a deal stuff that emerged after the result is rubbish..
it was leave.
personally I did not vote as I was not convinced either way { still not } which would benefit our country more..i am now firmly in the leave camp as I believe in democracy..
had leave with a deal been the choice on the paper opposed to just leave....well im sure it would have swayed quite a few non voters towards voting leave...and infact some remain voters towards leave.
There was a pamphlet delivered to all households in the UK (at a cost of £9m) which clearly said the result of the referendum would be implemented. Leave meant leaving the EU along with it's institutions (ECJ/Customs Union/Single Market) There was nothing about the Irish boarder/deal/no deal or any other term or condition.
My interpretation of that commitment was a majority vote to leave the EU meant first and foremost the UK left the EU. If for the greater good both sides could negotiate a free trade deal then that would be nice but it was not essential.
Since the referendum we have seen backsliding on a grand scale. There was no reason to have a withdrawal agreement before a free trade deal. Indeed common sense would indicate that it is obvious that either a free trade deal came first or at least at the same time as a withdrawal agreement. If it had happened that way then the Irish Boarder would never have been an issue.
Since the referendum remain MP's along with the EU have contrived to fabricate conditions where the leave option is derailed or strangled at birth.
I admire your principles in that the most important thing is democracy. The referendum result must be honoured and implemented first and foremost. If after a reasonable amount of time (at least a decade) public opinion changes then we could have another vote but until then the crying childish remain vote will have lump it.
Tony Blue Williams wrote:pembroke allan wrote:Remain will be on a ballot that's for sure it's been stated several times which is totally wrong unless a miracle happens .... but funny part is as I've stated legally it takes 22wks from start to have a referendum at moment theres 23 wks to 29th Oct so if this deal is not past what then ? Leave no deal or extension to article 50? It's more likely revoke article 50 as is the MPs plan all along!
The remain side will strongly push for a remain option in a second referendum but I wouldn't say that will definitely be the case. The final decision will be made by the Electoral Commission but I would argue that remain was rejected by a 4% majority in 2016 and any other referendum should be about the terms on which we leave the EU i.e. No Deal/May's Deal and not whether we have changed our minds. Also if remain did appear on the ballot then surely that could face a legal challenge?
You make a good point about the timescale of another referendum and it would appear that there is not enough time to hold one between now and 31st October. However, the EU could simply grant a further extension if the UK requested one due to an intention to hold a second vote. The EU has several times stated it would grant an extension if the UK wanted to hold a second vote or General Election.
Tony Blue Williams wrote:dogfound wrote:all this leave with a deal stuff that emerged after the result is rubbish..
it was leave.
personally I did not vote as I was not convinced either way { still not } which would benefit our country more..i am now firmly in the leave camp as I believe in democracy..
had leave with a deal been the choice on the paper opposed to just leave....well im sure it would have swayed quite a few non voters towards voting leave...and infact some remain voters towards leave.
There was a pamphlet delivered to all households in the UK (at a cost of £9m) which clearly said the result of the referendum would be implemented. Leave meant leaving the EU along with it's institutions (ECJ/Customs Union/Single Market) There was nothing about the Irish boarder/deal/no deal or any other term or condition.
My interpretation of that commitment was a majority vote to leave the EU meant first and foremost the UK left the EU. If for the greater good both sides could negotiate a free trade deal then that would be nice but it was not essential.
Since the referendum we have seen backsliding on a grand scale. There was no reason to have a withdrawal agreement before a free trade deal. Indeed common sense would indicate that it is obvious that either a free trade deal came first or at least at the same time as a withdrawal agreement. If it had happened that way then the Irish Boarder would never have been an issue.
Since the referendum remain MP's along with the EU have contrived to fabricate conditions where the leave option is derailed or strangled at birth.
I admire your principles in that the most important thing is democracy. The referendum result must be honoured and implemented first and foremost. If after a reasonable amount of time (at least a decade) public opinion changes then we could have another vote but until then the crying childish remain vote will have lump it.
epping blue wrote:Tony Blue Williams wrote:pembroke allan wrote:Remain will be on a ballot that's for sure it's been stated several times which is totally wrong unless a miracle happens .... but funny part is as I've stated legally it takes 22wks from start to have a referendum at moment theres 23 wks to 29th Oct so if this deal is not past what then ? Leave no deal or extension to article 50? It's more likely revoke article 50 as is the MPs plan all along!
The remain side will strongly push for a remain option in a second referendum but I wouldn't say that will definitely be the case. The final decision will be made by the Electoral Commission but I would argue that remain was rejected by a 4% majority in 2016 and any other referendum should be about the terms on which we leave the EU i.e. No Deal/May's Deal and not whether we have changed our minds. Also if remain did appear on the ballot then surely that could face a legal challenge?
You make a good point about the timescale of another referendum and it would appear that there is not enough time to hold one between now and 31st October. However, the EU could simply grant a further extension if the UK requested one due to an intention to hold a second vote. The EU has several times stated it would grant an extension if the UK wanted to hold a second vote or General Election.
What would you say is the Remain Deal ? There's no status quo with the EU, the common market we voted to stay within in 76 bore absolutely no relation to the European Union we ended up in 40 years later. So where could we be in 10 / 20 years time.
Monetary union is a cert - 2 years - 5 years, no longer than that probably.
We know 5 countries will join in the next cuople of years. Serbia, Montenegro, Macedonia, Bosnia and Albania. Possibly 6 depending on the status of Kosovo. Where then Moldova, Ukraine and Belarus assuming they dont reintegrtate with Russia. Then there's the Caucuses, 10 years maybe. The point is we dont know, what we do know is that all the above have very low GDP and will undoubtly become net beneficiaries.
When can we expect those countries that are net beneficiaries of the budget reduce their sums and even become contributors. The economy is booming in Poland so why cant they start taking less or even contributing. In fact has any country in teh EU moved from being a beneficiary to contributor. Any liklihood of Luxembourg paying its way.
Central budgets beyond where we are now. Tax raising powers in at least some capacity going to Brussels. Nobody can give you a gaurantee that wont happen.
Further political intergration almost certainly. Europe is driven by ideology and if we end up at anytime with a very pro government god knows how far in we could end up.
If we stay in they'll change the law. We'll never be allowed to vote on this again. I'll rephrase that we'll never be allowed to vote out again.
Steve Zodiak wrote:I have said plenty of times that we were never going to be allowed to leave the EU. The scaremongers who told us about the catastrophic events that would take place just by us voting to leave are the same people who are saying exactly the same things again if we actually leave. They will repeat everything if another referendum is held, even though few, if any of their predictions have been correct so far. We could have referendums every year for the next decade, but until we get the result Parliament wants, nothing will ever be acted upon. Our puppet masters in the Commons and in Brussells know whats best for us, and we may as well accept that we no longer live in a democracy.
Users browsing this forum: DotBot [Bot], Google [Bot], grandstand boy, Grapeshot [Bot], ias [Bot], KenilworthBluebird, pembroke allan and 130 guests