Brexit What Happens Next Thread ---multiple merged threads.

[cock-eyed octopus]

27 minutes ago, Dorkins said:

Yawn. No deal Brexit wasn't on the ballot paper. I'd post a picture of it for the umpteenth time on this thread but it's becoming a cliche.

No 'deal' was on the ballot paper. The implications of leaving were discussed exhaustively before the referendum, including what sort of deal could be done. It was up to each voter to make up their own mind as to whether to leave or remain.

 

[Dorkins]

4 minutes ago, Arpeggio said:

A. Neither was any form of joining the EU on any ballot paper ever.

Some of you Remainers are SO concerned about lazer like democracy were people should choose exactly what cake they want. You''re words"for the umpteenth time" illustrating your own dogmatic determination.

.......yet when it comes to your own wishes being enacted you express no concern whatsoever of any democratic process whatsoever or draw any other comparisons to suggest the same argument should apply.

I invite you to admit that point A) above is wrong so that you can come across as consistent, instead of picking and choosing to suit your arguments.

U ok hun?

My point was that the 2016 referendum was a mandate to leave the EU, not a mandate to leave the EU without a deal. Other forms of leaving the EU are available and they are 100% compatible with the 2016 referendum result.

Edited January 15, 2019 by Dorkins

[aheadofthecurve]

7 minutes ago, Hullabaloo82 said:

We have to pay the £39bn either way, that's literally the whole point. It represents funds that were already committed to EU budget before the referendum. 

Not true. The Germans are insisting that we ought to or the EU will be very upset with us but we don't have to. I personally don't care how upset the EU gets with us - least of all Germany.

[GrizzlyDave]

5 minutes ago, Dave Beans said:

We have to treat all countries the same under MFN!

We can buy from who we like. Do you think drugs made in Switzerland and Australia will be good enough for our citizens?

4 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said:

Its not about quality. If you are interested look up just how much work is involved in switching from a branded to an identical  generic drug. The NHS is already doing this as fast as it can, which is very slowly.

Anyway what is the problem you are trying to overcome, the drugs will still come from the EU just a little more slowly and expensively.   

I’m on the same page - I’m saying for the small amount of drugs which are problematic for our supply needs - we may need to look at alternatives. That process can be expedited.

1 minute ago, Confusion of VIs said:

That's German gold she is looking at. 

We won it fair and square ?

[OnionTerror]

4 minutes ago, GrizzlyDave said:

We can buy from who we like. Do you think drugs made in Switzerland and Australia will be good enough for our citizens?

I corrected my post.  We'd have to deploy an emergency suspension of checks on medicines via the WTO..  On pretty much anything else, all goods from third countries have to be treated the same.

Edited January 15, 2019 by Dave Beans

[Arpeggio]

2 minutes ago, Dorkins said:

U ok hun?

No need to give away that you are getting emotional. That's another game altogether. Stay on track.

3 minutes ago, Dorkins said:

My point was that the 2016 referendum was a mandate to leave the EU, not a mandate to leave the EU without a deal. Other forms of leaving the EU are available. 

So that's a no then.

[GrizzlyDave]

8 minutes ago, Dave Beans said:

I corrected my post.  We'd have to deploy an emergency suspension of checks on medicines via the WTO..  On pretty much anything else, all goods from third countries have to be treated the same.

Fair enough - thanks for clarifying.

I still see no drama - as far as I am aware we have a billateral no-deal trade agreement with Switzerland and their drugs are excellent.

 

Edited January 16, 2019 by GrizzlyDave

[Dorkins]

11 minutes ago, Arpeggio said:

So that's a no then.

Sure, there was no referendum on the Maastricht Treaty. That's just historical fact. I have no idea why you started ranting about the lack of a referendum on the Maastricht Treaty in reply to me as it wasn't in my post.

The whole debating tactic of asking a closed question and demanding that other posters answer it as if it's anybody's job to jump through your hoops is pretty tiresome. If you have a point to make just make it, if other people want to reply they will.

Edited January 16, 2019 by Dorkins

[Chunketh]

2 hours ago, thehowler said:

Real hammer blow of a result, much worse than expected. Dark message for the EU.

It looks like many Tories moving towards a harder Brexit. If the DUP come onboard for a no backstop proposal, they might have enough votes for it. Sense that the country wants closure, no appetite for extension/revoke, so be it.

A GE would be the clincher. No SM, no backstop etc for Tories. But how many Tory MPs would walk?

Tough call for the rebels tomorrow, who will see the hard leave drift from the vote result tonight. Put up or shut up time fast approaching.

So much for MPs accepting the inevitable and backing the deal...

With a 200/400 split NOTHING is off the table. Someone just needs to tell her that she has been told to **** off, no if's no but's, just **** off.

 

[smash]

1 hour ago, pig said:

Holy Crap 230 ?!?!

There will probably be a new turn of phrase coming into common usage. Something along the lines of "getting it up the backstop".

[ZeroSumGame]

5 minutes ago, smash said:

There will probably be a new turn of phrase coming into common usage. Something along the lines of "getting it up the backstop".

#BackstopMeansBrexit    #IAmToast #AWholeMonthWasted

Edited January 16, 2019 by ZeroSumGame

[Kosmin]

42 minutes ago, Chunketh said:

With a 200/400 split NOTHING is off the table. Someone just needs to tell her that she has been told to **** off, no if's no but's, just **** off.

I think she wants to stay to prevent a Labour government with Corbyn as PM. Strangely if that happened that would be the will of people.

[copydude]

Punters move to 81% no exit by deadline

 

[ebull]

I have a question about the 39Bn. [If pop is 60M, it's 750 each.]

QUESTION:

If ref2 were binary:

A. leave [managed no deal] and get 750 quid per head tax free cash [kids get it too]

B. remain

What would the result be?

Edited January 16, 2019 by ebull
ETA managed no deal

[copydude]

Clearly, that graph is only going one way and will be off the meter before the end of Jan.

[Peter Hun]

7 hours ago, thehowler said:

If I was in the EU I'd be thinking that Parliament's just sent a clear message they want no deal

You arn't the EU though and obviously have zero understanding of what the EU is. There is no message. There is no deal. The UK is leaving the EU with what it wants which is no relationship.  That's the UK's desire,so be it.

[Peter Hun]

6 hours ago, GrizzlyDave said:

[ ] remain a member of the EU

[ ] leave the EU with an ‘X’ future relationship*

 

 

 

* n.b. Parliment will ignore you if you choose this option because you are a thick racist xenophobic bigot.

Parliament was elected AFTER the referendum and therefore supersedes the referendum vote. 

87% (?) Of voters voted for parties that were leave with a deal that was good for the economy. 

You can post about the advisory referendum all you, like but parliament have to leave with a sound economic deal - that was the democratic will of the people.

Yesterday Parliament voted against the voters expressed will for a deal. Parliament voted against Brexit. That's a fact.

[GrizzlyDave]

25 minutes ago, Peter Hun said:

Parliament was elected AFTER the referendum and therefore supersedes the referendum vote. 

87% (?) Of voters voted for parties that were leave with a deal that was good for the economy. 

You can post about the advisory referendum all you, like but parliament have to leave with a sound economic deal - that was the democratic will of the people.

Yesterday Parliament voted against the voters expressed will for a deal. Parliament voted against Brexit. That's a fact.

I think the figure might be 84%.

In my view it is all irrelevant. Parliment appears to be impotent and this lack of an ability to either choose the type of brexit, or the mechanism to help choose brexit or mechanism to support A50 extension or revocation means that we crash our with no deal.

 

[Hullabaloo82]

6 hours ago, aheadofthecurve said:

Not true. The Germans are insisting that we ought to or the EU will be very upset with us but we don't have to. I personally don't care how upset the EU gets with us - least of all Germany.

Yes true. 

We don't pay the £39bn all in one go if we stay but we will still pay it over x years. The divorce settlement was for this reason; to recognise money the UK was already committed to spending. 

If we stay it just gets paid as part of our normal expenditure in line with the projects it relates to rather than in a lump sum. 

[Peter Hun]

56 minutes ago, GrizzlyDave said:

I think the figure might be 84%.

In my view it is all irrelevant. Parliment appears to be impotent and this lack of an ability to either choose the type of brexit, or the mechanism to help choose brexit or mechanism to support A50 extension or revocation means that we crash our with no deal.

 

So all democracy except your democracy is irrelevant. Gotcha.

The referendum was advisory to the previous Parliament and therefore, quite legally, irrelevant.

No MP was elected in the referendum.

All MP's were elected in the subsequent election, based on the promises in their manifestos.

MP's need to vote according to their voters wishes in the election. For the Conservatives that is probably May's deal.

 

[GrizzlyDave]

10 minutes ago, Peter Hun said:

So all democracy except your democracy is irrelevant. Gotcha.

The referendum was advisory to the previous Parliament and therefore, quite legally, irrelevant.

No MP was elected in the referendum.

All MP's were elected in the subsequent election, based on the promises in their manifestos.

MP's need to vote according to their voters wishes in the election. For the Conservatives that is probably May's deal.

 

Peter it doesn’t matter what you and I think or want, or what any politician thinks or wants. Unless legislation is passed - we automatically leave with no deal on 29th March. That’s the only thing we can be sure about.

[oracle]

2 minutes ago, Peter Hun said:

So all democracy except your democracy is irrelevant. Gotcha.

The referendum was advisory to the previous Parliament and therefore, quite legally, irrelevant.

No MP was elected in the referendum.

All MP's were elected in the subsequent election, based on the promises in their manifestos.

MP's need to vote according to their voters wishes in the election. For the Conservatives that is probably May's deal.

 

under the terms of OUR constitution no power can be given away to foreign entities without the consent of the people.

Please take the time to read the document,and acquaint yourself with how our process is meant to function.You will see just how badly our so called representatives have been violating THE LAW OF THIS LAND for decades.

That means the referendum IS NOT advisory.

It is legally binding, and it is MANDATORY process.MP's are not allowed to enact their own will over that of the populace on affairs such as this.THEY MUST,BY LAW, implement the decision that has been come to.

 

 

[Confusion of VIs]

4 hours ago, ebull said:

I have a question about the 39Bn. [If pop is 60M, it's 750 each.]

QUESTION:

If ref2 were binary:

A. leave [managed no deal] and get 750 quid per head tax free cash [kids get it too]

B. remain

What would the result be?

Thst you would conclude an idiot had set the referendum question?

Yesterday the Attorney General explained yet again why the idea that we wouldn't owe the £39bn if we left without a deal was nonsense.

We owe the money irrespective of how we leave and would be in default and taken to court if we did not pay up.

 

[Bruce Banner]

7 minutes ago, oracle said:

under the terms of OUR constitution no power can be given away to foreign entities without the consent of the people.

Please take the time to read the document,and acquaint yourself with how our process is meant to function.You will see just how badly our so called representatives have been violating THE LAW OF THIS LAND for decades.

That means the referendum IS NOT advisory.

It is legally binding, and it is MANDATORY process.MP's are not allowed to enact their own will over that of the populace on affairs such as this.THEY MUST,BY LAW, implement the decision that has been come to.

 

 

Or, presumably, if there is any doubt, seek clarification from the people.

[GrizzlyDave]

6 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

Or, presumably, if there is any doubt, seek clarification from the people.

Good luck with that.

tick tock.