Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[Strokes]

49 minutes ago, Donut said:

Brexiteers: every time your point of view is disproved, shift the goal posts and pretend you voted for something else.

 

The idea parliament cant do anything in the event of no deal is a good thing?

You really don’t understand, they have a choice, accept the deal. Or no deal. Parliament will decide.

[Donut]

31 minutes ago, MattP said:

How is that any different to Toddy and Buce just repping you everytime you wander back on here?
 

Yet again here you come on here telling everyone and anyone how they voted (and you'll again run off as soon as someone shows why you are wrong again) and show you don't understand it all.
 

No one on your side of the argument has still managed to get it through their heads that this wasn't all about economics, you have to take yourself out of that mindset to understand why people voted leave, we were threatened with an immediate punishment budget from the chancellor, an immediate recession and 300,000 job losses in the aftermath of a vote to leave, yet still did it.

 

You know why we did? Because we knew it was bollocks. It's completely baffling to see left wingers who are supposed to be about making life easier for the poorest trying to force them to have to deal with outrageous tariffs on the goods they buy.

I know lots of people voted on the basis of immigration and are to some extent racist.

 

Whether you want to hear that or not is up to you, but there are countless examples on tv, countless radio callers, countless internet posts.

 

What people like you have done, is tried to make a brexit vote look clever by adding in all these abstract concepts like sovereignty, that we had anyway, and claiming that was the reason you voted.

 

Maybe you are clever and maybe you did. But the campaigns were never fought on this basis.

 

What youre also doing is trying to base the "success" of the campaign and leaving on things that CANNOT be measured, because you also know that things that CAN be measured ie falls in the pound, the bill to implement max fac, tariffs etc demonstrate its a bad decision.

[Strokes]

4 minutes ago, Donut said:

I know lots of people voted on the basis of immigration and are to some extent racist.

 

Whether you want to hear that or not is up to you, but there are countless examples on tv, countless radio callers, countless internet posts.

 

What people like you have done, is tried to make a brexit vote look clever by adding in all these abstract concepts like sovereignty, that we had anyway, and claiming that was the reason you voted.

 

Maybe you are clever and maybe you did. But the campaigns were never fought on this basis.

 

What youre also doing is trying to base the "success" of the campaign and leaving on things that CANNOT be measured, because you also know that things that CAN be measured ie falls in the pound, the bill to implement max fac, tariffs etc demonstrate its a bad decision.

The max fac bill was a lie and has been disproved, the pound devaluation has had a positive impact for our exports. 

[Guest Foxin_mad]

I am not a Brexit fan myself.

 

However, I don't really see the issue with a vote in parliament being passed to decide the actions that parliament should take, seems a lot of bluster from many remainers, quite frankly making themselves look a bit daft. 

 

This kind of thing happens all the time, if a sitting government has a majority or a large majority these kind of things will always pass parliament unless there are major divisions within a party.

 

At the end of the day the Lisbon Treaty was passed by a sitting Labour government with a large majority, there was no way it wasn't going to pass parliament, it was a formality. Again there was no way a referendum was going to be held on the matter. 

 

Perhaps this is a deficiency of our constitution but now parliament and the lords have passed it, I cant see how that isn't a democracy at work whether you agree with the result or not. Its not as if May held a gun to everyone's head. 

 

At the end of the day it is entirely possible for the UK to be offered a deal by the EU that is worse for us as a country than no deal. If you don't believe that then I think you underestimate the EU! 

 

They could offer us a deal where they sell goods to us for no tariff, but our exports are treated as third country, or our service industry products (most of our economy) is highly tariffed. There could be any number of things, surely people cant say that us being able to buy cheap Audi/BMWs but get **** all in return is a good thing? This is the kind of thing we need to protect against. 

[Strokes]

31 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

But he's already told us that last night's vote was a victory for democracy.

 

So, if the govt agrees to stay in a single market for goods and to compromise on free movement, and parliament is unable to amend it, that will be a victory for democracy.

Likewise, if John Bercow says parliament can only agree something like this or have no deal, that will be a victory for democracy.

 

Parliament will be able to amend it, but it will have to be done afterwards. If a soft brexit is agreed (I don’t think it’s the right term, it isn’t really a type of brexit, it’s a type of remain) then the people will get another chance in GE. I will now only vote for MPs who support brexit, I don’t care which party they come from. 

 

[Sharpe's Fox]

time for some history libtards

 

 

[Buce]

41 minutes ago, Donut said:

I know lots of people voted on the basis of immigration and are to some extent racist.

 

Whether you want to hear that or not is up to you, but there are countless examples on tv, countless radio callers, countless internet posts.

 

What people like you have done, is tried to make a brexit vote look clever by adding in all these abstract concepts like sovereignty, that we had anyway, and claiming that was the reason you voted.

 

Maybe you are clever and maybe you did. But the campaigns were never fought on this basis.

 

What youre also doing is trying to base the "success" of the campaign and leaving on things that CANNOT be measured, because you also know that things that CAN be measured ie falls in the pound, the bill to implement max fac, tariffs etc demonstrate its a bad decision.

 

You don’t have to look any further than this forum to see the racist Little Englander voters. 

 

 

[Alf Bentley]

34 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

I am not a Brexit fan myself.

 

However, I don't really see the issue with a vote in parliament being passed to decide the actions that parliament should take, seems a lot of bluster from many remainers, quite frankly making themselves look a bit daft. 

 

This kind of thing happens all the time, if a sitting government has a majority or a large majority these kind of things will always pass parliament unless there are major divisions within a party.

 

At the end of the day the Lisbon Treaty was passed by a sitting Labour government with a large majority, there was no way it wasn't going to pass parliament, it was a formality. Again there was no way a referendum was going to be held on the matter. 

 

Perhaps this is a deficiency of our constitution but now parliament and the lords have passed it, I cant see how that isn't a democracy at work whether you agree with the result or not. Its not as if May held a gun to everyone's head. 

 

At the end of the day it is entirely possible for the UK to be offered a deal by the EU that is worse for us as a country than no deal. If you don't believe that then I think you underestimate the EU! 

 

They could offer us a deal where they sell goods to us for no tariff, but our exports are treated as third country, or our service industry products (most of our economy) is highly tariffed. There could be any number of things, surely people cant say that us being able to buy cheap Audi/BMWs but get **** all in return is a good thing? This is the kind of thing we need to protect against. 

 

The issue with the vote in parliament is that it may deprive MPs of the opportunity to fully represent their constituents' views/interests once any deal is negotiated. MPs have voted to reduce their ability to represent us on the most important issue for decades. To make an extreme analogy, if MPs voted to abolish parliament and hand full power to the government, would that be democratic? I don't think so.

 

The contents of the Lisbon Treaty were known when it was voted on, whereas the contents of any Brexit deal are unknown. MPs were able to propose amendments to the Lisbon Treaty legislation, but those amendments were defeated. The equivalent would be for the govt to present its Brexit deal to Parliament, allow Parliament to have a full say - then, if the deal was approved without amendment, that would be fully democratic. Instead, without knowing the contents of the deal, MPs may have voted to limit themselves to a binary choice between what May/Davis negotiate and No Deal. That might end up yielding a deal that I like, or Bercow might allow MPs to have a full say, but it transfers power from our elected representatives to our unelected executive before we even know what deal there is, if any.

 

16 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Parliament will be able to amend it, but it will have to be done afterwards. If a soft brexit is agreed (I don’t think it’s the right term, it isn’t really a type of brexit, it’s a type of remain) then the people will get another chance in GE. I will now only vote for MPs who support brexit, I don’t care which party they come from. 

 

 

Not sure I understand you. Are you saying that Parliament will be able to amend any deal after voting Yes/No on the legislation, or after leaving the EU? There seems to be some sort of assurance in a letter that Bercow will decide the extent to which Parliament can intervene beyond voting Yes/No, but no guarantee. Are you saying that the EU would agree to us renegotiating the deal after we've accepted or rejected it? I cannot imagine the EU agreeing to renegotiate after we've signed or after a general election - and I don't see the point in amending legislation if we've already agreed to something else and there is no option to renegotiate. Maybe I'm misunderstanding you?

[Strokes]

1 minute ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

The issue with the vote in parliament is that it may deprive MPs of the opportunity to fully represent their constituents' views/interests once any deal is negotiated. MPs have voted to reduce their ability to represent us on the most important issue for decades. To make an extreme analogy, if MPs voted to abolish parliament and hand full power to the government, would that be democratic? I don't think so.

 

The contents of the Lisbon Treaty were known when it was voted on, whereas the contents of any Brexit deal are unknown. MPs were able to propose amendments to the Lisbon Treaty legislation, but those amendments were defeated. The equivalent would be for the govt to present its Brexit deal to Parliament, allow Parliament to have a full say - then, if the deal was approved without amendment, that would be fully democratic. Instead, without knowing the contents of the deal, MPs may have voted to limit themselves to a binary choice between what May/Davis negotiate and No Deal. That might end up yielding a deal that I like, or Bercow might allow MPs to have a full say, but it transfers power from our elected representatives to our unelected executive before we even know what deal there is, if any.

 

 

Not sure I understand you. Are you saying that Parliament will be able to amend any deal after voting Yes/No on the legislation, or after leaving the EU? There seems to be some sort of assurance in a letter that Bercow will decide the extent to which Parliament can intervene beyond voting Yes/No, but no guarantee. Are you saying that the EU would agree to us renegotiating the deal after we've accepted or rejected it? I cannot imagine the EU agreeing to renegotiate after we've signed or after a general election - and I don't see the point in amending legislation if we've already agreed to something else and there is no option to renegotiate. Maybe I'm misunderstanding you?

There is always a way to renegotiate deals, governments change, electorates change. No deal is set in stone forever. It would not be right to do that. 

 

[Strokes]

34 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

You don’t have to look any further than this forum to see the racist Little Englander voters. 

 

 

[Alf Bentley]

1 minute ago, Strokes said:

There is always a way to renegotiate deals, governments change, electorates change. No deal is set in stone forever. It would not be right to do that. 

 

 

Obviously, future UK-EU relations will not be set in stone and could be renegotiated in future.....future relations won't even be negotiated now for a couple of years, probably.

 

But it's the divorce deal (or non-deal) that we're sorting out now. That will be pretty much set in stone if/when it is approved by the UK Parliament, Council of Ministers & European Parliament.

MPs may have just limited themselves to a Yes/No vote on the divorce terms negotiated, without knowing what they are. They might suit you, they might suit me, they might suit nobody.

 

Ah, well! We'll see! Work to do, then football to watch....

[Strokes]

25 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Obviously, future UK-EU relations will not be set in stone and could be renegotiated in future.....future relations won't even be negotiated now for a couple of years, probably.

 

But it's the divorce deal (or non-deal) that we're sorting out now. That will be pretty much set in stone if/when it is approved by the UK Parliament, Council of Ministers & European Parliament.

MPs may have just limited themselves to a Yes/No vote on the divorce terms negotiated, without knowing what they are. They might suit you, they might suit me, they might suit nobody.

 

Ah, well! We'll see! Work to do, then football to watch....

They probably won’t suit anyone but such is life.

[Alf Bentley]

8 minutes ago, Strokes said:

They probably won’t suit anyone but such is life.

 

[Donut]

2 hours ago, MattP said:

How is that any different to Toddy and Buce just repping you everytime you wander back on here?
 

Yet again here you come on here telling everyone and anyone how they voted (and you'll again run off as soon as someone shows why you are wrong again) and show you don't understand it all.
 

No one on your side of the argument has still managed to get it through their heads that this wasn't all about economics, you have to take yourself out of that mindset to understand why people voted leave, we were threatened with an immediate punishment budget from the chancellor, an immediate recession and 300,000 job losses in the aftermath of a vote to leave, yet still did it.

 

You know why we did? Because we knew it was bollocks. It's completely baffling to see left wingers who are supposed to be about making life easier for the poorest trying to force them to have to deal with outrageous tariffs on the goods they buy.

Do you accept that a significant amount of leave voters are at best xenophobic and at worst racist?

 

if its not all about the economics, there was no point talking about investing into the NHS and trade deals world wide.

 

And if it was all about sovereignty, why did the brexit white paper say "parliament has always been sovereign"?

 

Or are you and all the other brexiteers who are definitely not racist and definitely don't care about the economy right and the people that run the country are wrong?

 

 

Edited 21 June 2018 by Donut

[Buce]

46 minutes ago, Strokes said:

 

Come off it, Strokes, you know I don’t mean you. 

 

You and Sharpey are the only honest leavers on here. 

[Guest Foxin_mad]

17 minutes ago, Donut said:

Do you accept that a significant amount of leave voters are at best xenophobic and at worst racist?

 

 

 

That is unfounded nonsense I am afraid. 

 

I am not a Brexit voter but I live in a heavily Brexit area.

 

To be quite honest if you speak to a lot of people they voted the way they did because they are disillusioned with a range of factors, poor infrastructure, poor job creation, little planning for the future, north south divide. This has been created by the policy failures of successive governments.

 

I think quite a few people were voting against the establishment, per se including the EU. It is rather silly to pretend that European and UK immigration polices are not also to blame in some way, there is a problem and people are correct to be concerned and ask questions about certain kinds of migration. That is not racist, its raising valid concerns about demographic, population and the ability to sustain and provide public services. 

 

Europe does need reform, it needs to stop this federal Europe nonsense, had they given in to Cameron's very tame demands we wouldn't be here now, so if you ask me those idiots who turned down Cameron's requests are as much to blame as anyone. Had Cameron have come back and said I have got us a deal, that probably would have been enough to swing the vote, of course if he had got a deal there may not have been a vote anyway. 

 

To keep calling these people racist is small minded idiocy I am afraid. Really it makes you rather hypocritical as you are as narrow minded as the people you claim are narrow minded to have that view.  There are many good people who voted for Brexit for a range of reasons, only a small number will be 'racist'.

Edited 21 June 2018 by Foxin_mad

[Izzy]

Exactly a year to the day since this thread was restarted I see.

 

What 736 pages of joy and happiness it has been.

[Webbo]

Just now, Izzy Muzzett said:

Exactly a year to the day since this thread was restarted I see.

 

What 736 pages of joy and happiness it has been.

I like to think some people have benefited from my knowledge.

[Nick]

8 minutes ago, Webbo said:

I like to think some people have benefited from my knowledge.

The first four words of that statement are surely a contradiction in terms in their own right and don’t even get me started on the final two.

 

[Webbo]

2 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

The first four words of that statement are surely a contradiction in terms in their own right and don’t even get me started on the final two.

 

I'm here to educate and inform .

[Guest MattP]

2 hours ago, Donut said:

I know lots of people voted on the basis of immigration and are to some extent racist.

 

Whether you want to hear that or not is up to you, but there are countless examples on tv, countless radio callers, countless internet posts.

 

What people like you have done, is tried to make a brexit vote look clever by adding in all these abstract concepts like sovereignty, that we had anyway, and claiming that was the reason you voted.

 

Maybe you are clever and maybe you did. But the campaigns were never fought on this basis.

 

What youre also doing is trying to base the "success" of the campaign and leaving on things that CANNOT be measured, because you also know that things that CAN be measured ie falls in the pound, the bill to implement max fac, tariffs etc demonstrate its a bad decision.

The biggest racist I know voted Remain, purely because his business benefits from extremely cheap Labour from Eastern Europe. I'm sure racost people voted leave, I'm sure racist people voted remain, like in elections I'm sure racist people vote Tory and racist people vote Labour.

The bolded bit though, we had it anyway? Go on then, explain to me how a country who can't even do it's own trade deals and can have it's highest court overulled by a foreign jurisdiction has it's own sovereighty? Just actually answer the question as well, don't come back here and just whittle on about immigration again while avoiding it, address that issue directly.
 

2 hours ago, Buce said:

You don’t have to look any further than this forum to see the racist Little Englander voters.

Don't forget those little Welshman as well who had the gall to vote to leave.

 

I'm just glad the tolerant and certainly not xenophobic Scottish and Northern Irish voted to stay.

[Guest MattP]

2 hours ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

time for some history libtards

 

 

What a man.

I mean, thank god he was never in charge of anything but what a principled individual who would never sell out, I wish he had been here to see the people vote to come out of the European Union.

[Donut]

14 minutes ago, MattP said:

The biggest racist I know voted Remain, purely because his business benefits from extremely cheap Labour from Eastern Europe. I'm sure racost people voted leave, I'm sure racist people voted remain, like in elections I'm sure racist people vote Tory and racist people vote Labour.

The bolded bit though, we had it anyway? Go on then, explain to me how a country who can't even do it's own trade deals and can have it's highest court overulled by a foreign jurisdiction has it's own sovereighty? Just actually answer the question as well, don't come back here and just whittle on about immigration again while avoiding it, address that issue directly.
 

Don't forget those little Welshman as well who had the gall to vote to leave.

 

I'm just glad the tolerant and certainly not xenophobic Scottish and Northern Irish voted to stay.

The answer to the question is the brexit white paper produced by the government, which includes leave voters, says "parliament has always been sovereign".

 

That is the answer. Unless theyre lying. Why would they lie by talking about taking back control, then admit we had control?

 

Is anyone in this whole brexit thing capable of telling something that isn't a lie?

[Alf Bentley]

27 minutes ago, Webbo said:

I'm here to educate and inform .

 

Yes, I see you as the BBC of Foxes Talk.

 

9 minutes ago, MattP said:

What a man.

I mean, thank god he was never in charge of anything but what a principled individual who would never sell out, I wish he had been here to see the people vote to come out of the European Union.

 

He was in charge of several ministries during the Wilson/Callaghan governments of the 60s & 70s: Postmaster-General, Technology, Industry & Energy.

A bit before my time so I can't comment on what he was like as a minister.

 

I'd still have ended up on the opposite side from him, but the Brexit referendum would have been better informed if he'd been around to contribute his Left Brexit views.

I'm sure his contribution would have been more elucidating than those of any politician on either side. 

[Sharpe's Fox]

1 hour ago, MattP said:

What a man.

I mean, thank god he was never in charge of anything but what a principled individual who would never sell out, I wish he had been here to see the people vote to come out of the European Union.

If you debate from the left you always win because there are better democratic arguments. Cheap kumquats and wage slavery is not an argument.