Could UK U-turn on Referendum Result
Discussion
///ajd said:
hidetheelephants said:
Beware of strawmen; North does not claim that 112 offers a permanent or even a longterm means of controlling immigration.
Better tell FIF then:FiF said:
....this often repeated twaddle about it's only an emergency measure. It can be used in emergencies, yes, but is of widespread application and can be used to deal with long-term issues – and without any time limit. Typically of many you just repeat the errors parroted by the ignorant. If the UK is an EFTA/EEA member there is no question of dumbly sitting there waiting for permission by full EU members to do something, we could take it, unilaterally, by right....
It's all wrapped up in the notion that an EFTA/EEA initial exit position is a sub optimal holding position for a number of years, how to move on from there is covered in Flexcit stage 3 and 5, and is continually being developed.
But what is the point of arguing here, never going to agree. Please don't attempt to drag me into things with any more of your attempts at baiting. Out.
FiF said:
///ajd said:
hidetheelephants said:
Beware of strawmen; North does not claim that 112 offers a permanent or even a longterm means of controlling immigration.
Better tell FIF then:FiF said:
....this often repeated twaddle about it's only an emergency measure. It can be used in emergencies, yes, but is of widespread application and can be used to deal with long-term issues – and without any time limit. Typically of many you just repeat the errors parroted by the ignorant. If the UK is an EFTA/EEA member there is no question of dumbly sitting there waiting for permission by full EU members to do something, we could take it, unilaterally, by right....
It's all wrapped up in the notion that an EFTA/EEA initial exit position is a sub optimal holding position for a number of years, how to move on from there is covered in Flexcit stage 3 and 5, and is continually being developed.
But what is the point of arguing here, never going to agree. Please don't attempt to drag me into things with any more of your attempts at baiting. Out.
Its not baiting, its trying to cut through the BS.
I wouod have though properly understanding the likely options under flexcit were quite important to understand. You wouldn't want masses of brexiteers thinking the norway option was the immigration land of milk and honey due to art 112/113, though I note several here have tried to do so.
Furthermore the steps to Flexcit stage 3+ are just dreams with no leverage or basis in reality. It is important to understand they are a fantasy before you try and jump to Stage 1-2 with unrealistic expectations for the future - it will only lead to disappointment.
Can you suggest any mechanism where - once granted an EEA status, the EU would grant continued SM access but relax FOML? How would this be achieved without it applying to all EU states?
Under EEA it's unlikely, although already mooted...
Under EFTA then there really isn't a basis for FMOL - other than the Swiss signing up to it but including their restrictions which they now want to increase further. The restrictions they've applied for years were acceptable to the EU, the newly proposed ones aren't.
Which demonstrates that there is a significant degree of flexibility in application of FOML when applied to an EFTA member with a free trade deal.
Under EFTA then there really isn't a basis for FMOL - other than the Swiss signing up to it but including their restrictions which they now want to increase further. The restrictions they've applied for years were acceptable to the EU, the newly proposed ones aren't.
Which demonstrates that there is a significant degree of flexibility in application of FOML when applied to an EFTA member with a free trade deal.
FiF said:
///ajd said:
hidetheelephants said:
Beware of strawmen; North does not claim that 112 offers a permanent or even a longterm means of controlling immigration.
Better tell FIF then:FiF said:
....this often repeated twaddle about it's only an emergency measure. It can be used in emergencies, yes, but is of widespread application and can be used to deal with long-term issues – and without any time limit. Typically of many you just repeat the errors parroted by the ignorant. If the UK is an EFTA/EEA member there is no question of dumbly sitting there waiting for permission by full EU members to do something, we could take it, unilaterally, by right....
It's all wrapped up in the notion that an EFTA/EEA initial exit position is a sub optimal holding position for a number of years, how to move on from there is covered in Flexcit stage 3 and 5, and is continually being developed.
But what is the point of arguing here, never going to agree. Please don't attempt to drag me into things with any more of your attempts at baiting. Out.
What a truly, spectacularly pointless exercise in "democracy".
Once the path of the consequences of brexit are clear, it really will have to be put to the people again, in the form of a GE or referendum, as clearly the path as it will appear will be far removed from the fantasy presented by the Leave campaign before Referendum 1. When the people who voted Leave are presented with the reality of what an exit will look like (continued freedom of movement, compliance with EU regs with no say on their creation, no £350m for the NHS etc etc etc, disappearance of EU funding for deprived areas such as Cornwall, Yorkshire, Wales etc), there will be enough pragmatists and realists amongst them to realise that it's really not in our interests to leave as it really will be an exercise in losing much to gain nothing. By the end of 2020, we'll be in the EU still and we'll be staying in it.
What a cock up.
SilverSixer said:
What, truly, is the benefit of all this? A 5 stage Flexcit on an uncertain, but certainly very long timetable, in order to renegotiate our country back to the position it had on June 22nd 2016 (which was one of essentially partner status to the the EU given our many hard won opt-outs and vetoes which we are now seeking to lose), all the while suffering poorer economic indicators and all the necessarily concurrent personal level problems millions of people will face.
What a truly, spectacularly pointless exercise in "democracy".
Once the path of the consequences of brexit are clear, it really will have to be put to the people again, in the form of a GE or referendum, as clearly the path as it will appear will be far removed from the fantasy presented by the Leave campaign before Referendum 1. When the people who voted Leave are presented with the reality of what an exit will look like (continued freedom of movement, compliance with EU regs with no say on their creation, no £350m for the NHS etc etc etc, disappearance of EU funding for deprived areas such as Cornwall, Yorkshire, Wales etc), there will be enough pragmatists and realists amongst them to realise that it's really not in our interests to leave as it really will be an exercise in losing much to gain nothing. By the end of 2020, we'll be in the EU still and we'll be staying in it.
What a cock up.
Careful with the "home truths" there silver.What a truly, spectacularly pointless exercise in "democracy".
Once the path of the consequences of brexit are clear, it really will have to be put to the people again, in the form of a GE or referendum, as clearly the path as it will appear will be far removed from the fantasy presented by the Leave campaign before Referendum 1. When the people who voted Leave are presented with the reality of what an exit will look like (continued freedom of movement, compliance with EU regs with no say on their creation, no £350m for the NHS etc etc etc, disappearance of EU funding for deprived areas such as Cornwall, Yorkshire, Wales etc), there will be enough pragmatists and realists amongst them to realise that it's really not in our interests to leave as it really will be an exercise in losing much to gain nothing. By the end of 2020, we'll be in the EU still and we'll be staying in it.
What a cock up.
If you present too much reasoned and logical argument at once it can set 'em off
SilverSixer said:
What, truly, is the benefit of all this?
...in order to renegotiate our country back to the position it had on June 22nd 2016...
...all the while suffering poorer economic indicators and all the necessarily concurrent personal level problems millions of people will face...
What a truly, spectacularly pointless exercise in "democracy".
Firstly it wasn't all about the economy, though the particular spin from Remain (3 million unemployed, year-long recession, more expensive mortgages, end of western political civilisation etc) was geared to making it look like the short-term economic impact was all people needed to consider. They didn't want to have too close a discussion on where more powers over more decisions in more policy areas would rest in future (Westminster) compared to the past (Brussels) for example. Also their modelling was one-sided with no room for the more optimistic scenarios, only the pessimistic ones. This is akin to a cost-benefit analysis which excludes benefits....in order to renegotiate our country back to the position it had on June 22nd 2016...
...all the while suffering poorer economic indicators and all the necessarily concurrent personal level problems millions of people will face...
What a truly, spectacularly pointless exercise in "democracy".
Secondly there's no means of knowing, and no basis for suggesting, that the position will be the same as 22 June, in fact it's certain that our position won't be the same because we won't be part of the EU and subject to all of its political incompetence and federalist intentions.
Poorer economic indicators...that'll be excluding FTSE 100, FTSE 250 and employment, for now. The long-term future of our economic indicators will be in our own hands more in the future (not totally) than before.
As an exercise in democracy the referendum was far from pointless, it allowed those prepared to vote and express their opinion to change the political direction of the country in a profound way. The turnout was high, at 72%, more than the 2015 general election, so people were interested. If some didn't bother to vote they can hardly complain about the result - but probably will.
I keep hearing about all these Brexit voters who did so because they believed £350million would be going to the NHS
I have never actually found one though, despite my asking a number of Brexit voters.
I keep hearing about all these Brexit voters who did so because they believed that immigration would cease
I have never actually found one though, despite my asking a number of Brexit voters.
So where is it that I keep hearing about these mythical Brexit voter opinions from?
Ahh yes, Remain voters desperate to believe that people could not possibly have voted for Brexit unless they had been stupid enough to believe the points above - usually this forms the preface to some sort of justification why (in ardent Remainer minds) that there MUST be some sort of rerun of the Referendum, in some form, at some time before they lose their cheap mobile roaming rights. (see, we can all be patronising!)
Give it a rest will you guys? By all means debate the points about what the final deal may look like but lets at least stop inferring that Brexit voters were in any way misled.
I have never actually found one though, despite my asking a number of Brexit voters.
I keep hearing about all these Brexit voters who did so because they believed that immigration would cease
I have never actually found one though, despite my asking a number of Brexit voters.
So where is it that I keep hearing about these mythical Brexit voter opinions from?
Ahh yes, Remain voters desperate to believe that people could not possibly have voted for Brexit unless they had been stupid enough to believe the points above - usually this forms the preface to some sort of justification why (in ardent Remainer minds) that there MUST be some sort of rerun of the Referendum, in some form, at some time before they lose their cheap mobile roaming rights. (see, we can all be patronising!)
Give it a rest will you guys? By all means debate the points about what the final deal may look like but lets at least stop inferring that Brexit voters were in any way misled.
Meanwhile, massive amounts of political effort is expended on the illusion of the EU problem, instead of focussing on pertinent matters of state and governance. This situation will dominate political discourse and effort for time immemorial now, to the detriment of other concerns and priorities.
All for absolutely nothing.
Well played, UK electorate. Well played. The dog is chasing its tail and can't be stopped.
All for absolutely nothing.
Well played, UK electorate. Well played. The dog is chasing its tail and can't be stopped.
Sway said:
Under EEA it's unlikely, although already mooted...
Under EFTA then there really isn't a basis for FMOL - other than the Swiss signing up to it but including their restrictions which they now want to increase further. The restrictions they've applied for years were acceptable to the EU, the newly proposed ones aren't.
Which demonstrates that there is a significant degree of flexibility in application of FOML when applied to an EFTA member with a free trade deal.
Apart from the fact that they don't have access to sm for most services including financial.Under EFTA then there really isn't a basis for FMOL - other than the Swiss signing up to it but including their restrictions which they now want to increase further. The restrictions they've applied for years were acceptable to the EU, the newly proposed ones aren't.
Which demonstrates that there is a significant degree of flexibility in application of FOML when applied to an EFTA member with a free trade deal.
///ajd said:
Careful with the "home truths" there silver.
If you present too much reasoned and logical argument at once it can set 'em off
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/07/28/property-funds-set-for-boost-from-brexit-sterling-fall-says-hend/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitterIf you present too much reasoned and logical argument at once it can set 'em off
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/07/27/uk-...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/07/28/hou...
There's a lot of talk of freedom of movement and whilst that's fine and dandy on continental Europe where potentially you might live cheek by jowel with at least one other border, how much does it affect insular little Britain? Similarly, it strikes me that mobility of the labour force is also biased, with English arguably the worlds second language, the preference for migrants will always be slewed towards here (?)
andymadmak said:
I keep hearing about all these Brexit voters who did so because they believed £350million would be going to the NHS
I have never actually found one though, despite my asking a number of Brexit voters.
I keep hearing about all these Brexit voters who did so because they believed that immigration would cease
I have never actually found one though, despite my asking a number of Brexit voters.
So where is it that I keep hearing about these mythical Brexit voter opinions from?
Ahh yes, Remain voters desperate to believe that people could not possibly have voted for Brexit unless they had been stupid enough to believe the points above - usually this forms the preface to some sort of justification why (in ardent Remainer minds) that there MUST be some sort of rerun of the Referendum, in some form, at some time before they lose their cheap mobile roaming rights. (see, we can all be patronising!)
Give it a rest will you guys? By all means debate the points about what the final deal may look like but lets at least stop inferring that Brexit voters were in any way misled.
LOL, did you actually interpolate what 17m people think from 'asking a number of Brexit voters'? I have never actually found one though, despite my asking a number of Brexit voters.
I keep hearing about all these Brexit voters who did so because they believed that immigration would cease
I have never actually found one though, despite my asking a number of Brexit voters.
So where is it that I keep hearing about these mythical Brexit voter opinions from?
Ahh yes, Remain voters desperate to believe that people could not possibly have voted for Brexit unless they had been stupid enough to believe the points above - usually this forms the preface to some sort of justification why (in ardent Remainer minds) that there MUST be some sort of rerun of the Referendum, in some form, at some time before they lose their cheap mobile roaming rights. (see, we can all be patronising!)
Give it a rest will you guys? By all means debate the points about what the final deal may look like but lets at least stop inferring that Brexit voters were in any way misled.
So easy, who the hell needs Ashcroft et al.
jjlynn27 said:
andymadmak said:
I keep hearing about all these Brexit voters who did so because they believed £350million would be going to the NHS
I have never actually found one though, despite my asking a number of Brexit voters.
I keep hearing about all these Brexit voters who did so because they believed that immigration would cease
I have never actually found one though, despite my asking a number of Brexit voters.
So where is it that I keep hearing about these mythical Brexit voter opinions from?
Ahh yes, Remain voters desperate to believe that people could not possibly have voted for Brexit unless they had been stupid enough to believe the points above - usually this forms the preface to some sort of justification why (in ardent Remainer minds) that there MUST be some sort of rerun of the Referendum, in some form, at some time before they lose their cheap mobile roaming rights. (see, we can all be patronising!)
Give it a rest will you guys? By all means debate the points about what the final deal may look like but lets at least stop inferring that Brexit voters were in any way misled.
LOL, did you actually interpolate what 17m people think from 'asking a number of Brexit voters'? I have never actually found one though, despite my asking a number of Brexit voters.
I keep hearing about all these Brexit voters who did so because they believed that immigration would cease
I have never actually found one though, despite my asking a number of Brexit voters.
So where is it that I keep hearing about these mythical Brexit voter opinions from?
Ahh yes, Remain voters desperate to believe that people could not possibly have voted for Brexit unless they had been stupid enough to believe the points above - usually this forms the preface to some sort of justification why (in ardent Remainer minds) that there MUST be some sort of rerun of the Referendum, in some form, at some time before they lose their cheap mobile roaming rights. (see, we can all be patronising!)
Give it a rest will you guys? By all means debate the points about what the final deal may look like but lets at least stop inferring that Brexit voters were in any way misled.
So easy, who the hell needs Ashcroft et al.
hypocrisy much?
andymadmak said:
I keep hearing about all these Brexit voters who did so because they believed £350million would be going to the NHS
I have never actually found one though, despite my asking a number of Brexit voters.
I keep hearing about all these Brexit voters who did so because they believed that immigration would cease
I have never actually found one though, despite my asking a number of Brexit voters.
So where is it that I keep hearing about these mythical Brexit voter opinions from?
Ahh yes, Remain voters desperate to believe that people could not possibly have voted for Brexit unless they had been stupid enough to believe the points above - usually this forms the preface to some sort of justification why (in ardent Remainer minds) that there MUST be some sort of rerun of the Referendum, in some form, at some time before they lose their cheap mobile roaming rights. (see, we can all be patronising!)
Give it a rest will you guys? By all means debate the points about what the final deal may look like but lets at least stop inferring that Brexit voters were in any way misled.
We are debating the final deal but the fact that it might upset some brexiters seems to be why we all should "shut up".I have never actually found one though, despite my asking a number of Brexit voters.
I keep hearing about all these Brexit voters who did so because they believed that immigration would cease
I have never actually found one though, despite my asking a number of Brexit voters.
So where is it that I keep hearing about these mythical Brexit voter opinions from?
Ahh yes, Remain voters desperate to believe that people could not possibly have voted for Brexit unless they had been stupid enough to believe the points above - usually this forms the preface to some sort of justification why (in ardent Remainer minds) that there MUST be some sort of rerun of the Referendum, in some form, at some time before they lose their cheap mobile roaming rights. (see, we can all be patronising!)
Give it a rest will you guys? By all means debate the points about what the final deal may look like but lets at least stop inferring that Brexit voters were in any way misled.
You are kidding yourself if:
- you don't think the main message of £350m / week had an impact on brexit voters.
- you think drawing a distinction between cease and control will change the perception of brexiteers who clearly hoped for rather more than fundamentally unchanged FMOL.
The latter point seems to be where we are headed. Fantasy flexcit phases 3-5 won't materially change that, though I can see it could be used to keep pulling the wool over the eyes of the more gullible. Don't worry "norway" first, then we get rid of FMOL later (don't ask how just yet please, keep the faith....)
///ajd said:
We are debating the final deal but the fact that it might upset some brexiters seems to be why we all should "shut up".
You are kidding yourself if:
[b]you don't think the main message of £350m / week had an impact on brexit voters
you think drawing a distinction between cease and control will change the perception of brexiteers who clearly hoped for rather more than fundamentally unchanged FMOL [/b]
The latter point seems to be where we are headed. Fantasy flexcit phases 3-5 won't materially change that, though I can see it could be used to keep pulling the wool over the eyes of the more gullible. Don't worry "norway" first, then we get rid of FMOL later (don't ask how just yet please, keep the faith....)
Source please? Or else its just a theoryYou are kidding yourself if:
[b]you don't think the main message of £350m / week had an impact on brexit voters
you think drawing a distinction between cease and control will change the perception of brexiteers who clearly hoped for rather more than fundamentally unchanged FMOL [/b]
The latter point seems to be where we are headed. Fantasy flexcit phases 3-5 won't materially change that, though I can see it could be used to keep pulling the wool over the eyes of the more gullible. Don't worry "norway" first, then we get rid of FMOL later (don't ask how just yet please, keep the faith....)
And I haven't told anyone to shut up about the final deal. You just made that up. Like you usually do.
Edited by andymadmak on Thursday 28th July 13:34
Edited by andymadmak on Thursday 28th July 13:34
andymadmak said:
jjlynn27 said:
andymadmak said:
I keep hearing about all these Brexit voters who did so because they believed £350million would be going to the NHS
I have never actually found one though, despite my asking a number of Brexit voters.
I keep hearing about all these Brexit voters who did so because they believed that immigration would cease
I have never actually found one though, despite my asking a number of Brexit voters.
So where is it that I keep hearing about these mythical Brexit voter opinions from?
Ahh yes, Remain voters desperate to believe that people could not possibly have voted for Brexit unless they had been stupid enough to believe the points above - usually this forms the preface to some sort of justification why (in ardent Remainer minds) that there MUST be some sort of rerun of the Referendum, in some form, at some time before they lose their cheap mobile roaming rights. (see, we can all be patronising!)
Give it a rest will you guys? By all means debate the points about what the final deal may look like but lets at least stop inferring that Brexit voters were in any way misled.
LOL, did you actually interpolate what 17m people think from 'asking a number of Brexit voters'? I have never actually found one though, despite my asking a number of Brexit voters.
I keep hearing about all these Brexit voters who did so because they believed that immigration would cease
I have never actually found one though, despite my asking a number of Brexit voters.
So where is it that I keep hearing about these mythical Brexit voter opinions from?
Ahh yes, Remain voters desperate to believe that people could not possibly have voted for Brexit unless they had been stupid enough to believe the points above - usually this forms the preface to some sort of justification why (in ardent Remainer minds) that there MUST be some sort of rerun of the Referendum, in some form, at some time before they lose their cheap mobile roaming rights. (see, we can all be patronising!)
Give it a rest will you guys? By all means debate the points about what the final deal may look like but lets at least stop inferring that Brexit voters were in any way misled.
So easy, who the hell needs Ashcroft et al.
hypocrisy much?
Don't think that anyone said that all brexit voters voted because of 350m lie. Or that all brexit voters did so because immigration would stop.
To extrapolate what people think based on 'I asked some' is beyond stupid. Doesn't seem to stop you.
andymadmak said:
And yet, without asking anybody, you remain contingent seem convinced that Brexit voters did so because of 350m for the NHS etc etc.
hypocrisy much?
Why if it was only an embarrassing lie was it the key brexit message?hypocrisy much?
All over the Battle bus, plastered infront of Gove, Boris et al. Clear message the cash would goto NHS.
They were even putting leaflets in hospitals with NHS logos making it look like the NHS agreed!
Had no impact on any brexit voter you reckon?
They spent alot of money on a message everyone would ignore - according to you - didn't they!!
jjlynn27 said:
No hypocrisy at all. You have this weird thing where you just make up things, as you did with my 'gf' fiasco, you just can't help yourself. What contingent?
Don't think that anyone said that all brexit voters voted because of 350m lie. Or that all brexit voters did so because immigration would stop.
To extrapolate what people think based on 'I asked some' is beyond stupid. Doesn't seem to stop you.
Wow. Just wow. So Remain poster after remain poster keeps posting references to the 350 million, and to "how Brexiters will be so disappointed when the immigration does not stop" etc and somehow you don't think this is relevant given that they have no evidence to support this contention? A contention that they then use to justify their bleatings? Wow. Don't think that anyone said that all brexit voters voted because of 350m lie. Or that all brexit voters did so because immigration would stop.
To extrapolate what people think based on 'I asked some' is beyond stupid. Doesn't seem to stop you.
As for the GF comment from last week (or whenever) I made an honest mistake by confusing you with another poster. As soon as it was pointed out I apologised to you for the mistake and the confusion. Shows the calibre of man that you are that you cannot accept an apology for a genuine mix up.
///ajd said:
andymadmak said:
And yet, without asking anybody, you remain contingent seem convinced that Brexit voters did so because of 350m for the NHS etc etc.
hypocrisy much?
Why if it was only an embarrassing lie was it the key brexit message?hypocrisy much?
All over the Battle bus, plastered infront of Gove, Boris et al. Clear message the cash would goto NHS.
They were even putting leaflets in hospitals with NHS logos making it look like the NHS agreed!
Had no impact on any brexit voter you reckon?
They spent alot of money on a message everyone would ignore - according to you - didn't they!!
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff