Could UK U-turn on Referendum Result

[anonymous-user]

http://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/theresa-may-no-vot...

[Sylvaforever]

jsf said:

OK Derek, I am clearly wasting my time debating this with you.

lot of closed minds out there.

Most of them in the senior levels of the civil service.

[don'tbesilly]

jsf said:

OK Derek, I am clearly wasting my time debating this with you.

Clearly, we are now taking into consideration what Clinton stated in his defence of his liaison with Lewinsky back in 1998 (18yrs ago!) while talking about the meaning of Brexit, even ///ajd has been sucked (excuse the pun) in with this bizarre turn of events.

[Elysium]

jsf said:

http://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/theresa-may-no-vot...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-3765312/Parliament-say-Brexit-process.html

From the same briefing we get the following headlines:

"Theresa May: No vote for MPs on triggering Article 50"

and

"Parliament 'will have its say on Brexit process'"

This is much clearer now. Thanks

At least Brexit still means Brexit

Edited by Elysium on Tuesday 30th August 23:33

[s2art]

Elysium said:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-376531...

From the same briefing we get the following headlines:

"Theresa May: No vote for MPs on triggering Article 50"

and

"Parliament 'will have its say on Brexit process'"

This is much clearer now. Thanks

At least Brexit still means Brexit

Edited by Elysium on Tuesday 30th August 23:33

Its not contradictory. Parliament will need to vote on repealing the 1972 EC act, they will have their say.

[anonymous-user]

worth a watch, deep breaths ///ajd

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07th7b3

[anonymous-user]

s2art said:

Elysium said:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-376531...

From the same briefing we get the following headlines:

"Theresa May: No vote for MPs on triggering Article 50"

and

"Parliament 'will have its say on Brexit process'"

This is much clearer now. Thanks

At least Brexit still means Brexit

Edited by Elysium on Tuesday 30th August 23:33

Its not contradictory. Parliament will need to vote on repealing the 1972 EC act, they will have their say.

So long as the court doesn't block her in October, May will trigger Art50, then the MP' can have a chat about it, is the basic comment. They wont get a say on Art50 being invoked and there wont be a vote on accepting the deal and there isn't going to be an early General Election.

That stuffs Owen Smith for s start.

[Elysium]

s2art said:

Its not contradictory. Parliament will need to vote on repealing the 1972 EC act, they will have their say.

The headlines are clearly contradictory. The spokesman actually says the following:

1. There is no legal obligation to consult parliament before triggering article 50 (subject of course to this being held as correct following the legal challenge)

2. But, parliament will have a say on article 50, we just don't know when and we might not do what they say.

We have a long long way to go here.

[Ridgemont]

///ajd said:

Derek Smith said:

You really have no idea, do you. It was a cop out, or rather a punishment. She's got it tough as PM, but Fox, Smith, and Davis (why do you say Johnson? He's nothing to do with the negotiations) have got it much, much tougher. It is funny in a way. If anything, it shows she bitter about the vote.

You've no idea what goes on.

That's how I read it too - its almost "OK Davis - lets see you negotiate your promised wonderful bilateral trade deals for the UK with each of the 27 members of the EU (please bear in mind they are all in a trading bloc called the EU where they don't do bilaterals.....)"

In some ways they may chose not to drip feed the negotiation - in many ways this would be a poor approach. Then again, they may decide to leak for various reasons.

If the drip feed is bad ("Nasty EU won't give us this") then I actually think its unclear how that may play out. There is a risk that instead of thinking "oh dear the remain fearmongers were right about not having barrier free SM access and FMOL, better rethink or we'll be FUBAR'd", it'll be turned into "rubbish govt can't deliver what we wanted /or/ bloody EU not giving us what we want, we should definitely leave such a nasty club!".

Its a minefield!

God talk about clutching at straws. I wonder what the pair of you would have made of it had she not appointed a brexiteer? 'See! She's a remainer and it's not happening as she's given it to xxxx!'.
The Kremlinology involved in a simple phrase that was meant to reassure leavers that they were still getting Brexit despite electing someone who had campaigned for in, is laughable. Especially when couched in terms of 'you know nothing!' I can tell you x means ......'. With all due respect unless you are sat in Number 10 I'd hazard to say you know fk all.

[alfie2244]

Ridgemont said:

///ajd said:

Derek Smith said:

You really have no idea, do you. It was a cop out, or rather a punishment. She's got it tough as PM, but Fox, Smith, and Davis (why do you say Johnson? He's nothing to do with the negotiations) have got it much, much tougher. It is funny in a way. If anything, it shows she bitter about the vote.

You've no idea what goes on.

That's how I read it too - its almost "OK Davis - lets see you negotiate your promised wonderful bilateral trade deals for the UK with each of the 27 members of the EU (please bear in mind they are all in a trading bloc called the EU where they don't do bilaterals.....)"

In some ways they may chose not to drip feed the negotiation - in many ways this would be a poor approach. Then again, they may decide to leak for various reasons.

If the drip feed is bad ("Nasty EU won't give us this") then I actually think its unclear how that may play out. There is a risk that instead of thinking "oh dear the remain fearmongers were right about not having barrier free SM access and FMOL, better rethink or we'll be FUBAR'd", it'll be turned into "rubbish govt can't deliver what we wanted /or/ bloody EU not giving us what we want, we should definitely leave such a nasty club!".

Its a minefield!

God talk about clutching at straws. I wonder what the pair of you would have made of it had she not appointed a brexiteer? 'See! She's a remainer and it's not happening as she's given it to xxxx!'.
The Kremlinology involved in a simple phrase that was meant to reassure leavers that they were still getting Brexit despite electing someone who had campaigned for in, is laughable. Especially when couched in terms of 'you know nothing!' I can tell you x means ......'. With all due respect unless you are sat in Number 10 I'd hazard to say you know fk all.

[anonymous-user]

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk...

[PositronicRay]

jsf said:

s2art said:

Elysium said:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-376531...

From the same briefing we get the following headlines:

"Theresa May: No vote for MPs on triggering Article 50"

and

"Parliament 'will have its say on Brexit process'"

This is much clearer now. Thanks

At least Brexit still means Brexit

Edited by Elysium on Tuesday 30th August 23:33

Its not contradictory. Parliament will need to vote on repealing the 1972 EC act, they will have their say.

So long as the court doesn't block her in October, May will trigger Art50, then the MP' can have a chat about it, is the basic comment. They wont get a say on Art50 being invoked and there wont be a vote on accepting the deal and there isn't going to be an early General Election.

That stuffs Owen Smith for s start.

Wibble means wibble.

[///ajd]

Team work in action:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/aug/30/di...

"May has asked every cabinet minister, most of whom campaigned to remain in the EU, to set out how Brexit could be a success in their areas, and will be expecting them to report back on Wednesday."


--

Hammond it seems is a key SM advocate.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/aug/30/di...

[anonymous-user]

Glad to see the lie that is the tag line "Britain stronger in Europe" is being ditched.

[anonymous-user]

///ajd said:

Team work in action:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/aug/30/di...

"May has asked every cabinet minister, most of whom campaigned to remain in the EU, to set out how Brexit could be a success in their areas, and will be expecting them to report back on Wednesday."


--

Hammond it seems is a key SM advocate.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/aug/30/di...

Equally it will be interesting to find out if the 'Brexit liars' have yet managed to make any progress on lining up the ducks, before May even considers proceeding . Impossible of course as they made it all up.

[don'tbesilly]

Jimboka said:

///ajd said:

Team work in action:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/aug/30/di...

"May has asked every cabinet minister, most of whom campaigned to remain in the EU, to set out how Brexit could be a success in their areas, and will be expecting them to report back on Wednesday."


--

Hammond it seems is a key SM advocate.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/aug/30/di...

Equally it will be interesting to find out if the 'Brexit liars' have yet managed to make any progress on lining up the ducks, before May even considers proceeding . Impossible of course as they made it all up.

The lies of the Leave campaign proved more credible than the lies of the Remain campaign.
It's only the remainers who quite understandably are bleating bitterly about it.

[///ajd]

don'tbesilly said:

The lies of the Leave campaign proved more credible than the lies of the Remain campaign.
It's only the remainers who quite understandably are bleating bitterly about it.

Who was most taken in by the lies? Who was most vulnerable to believing a load of tosh?

Same article:

"Research from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation shows that people earning less than £20,000 a year, with lower qualifications and living in low-skilled areas, were the driving force behind Brexit."

Sure there are exceptions. Good that our economic future was decided by "non-experts".

[Elysium]

///ajd said:

Team work in action:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/aug/30/di...

"May has asked every cabinet minister, most of whom campaigned to remain in the EU, to set out how Brexit could be a success in their areas, and will be expecting them to report back on Wednesday."

Good article. Interesting to have some insight into the process being followed and some of the politics.

Chuka Umunna agrees with me that Brexit means Brexit is meaningless!

[b2hbm]

Elysium said:

Chuka Umunna agrees with me that Brexit means Brexit is meaningless!

Unfortunately for you and others on here, despite claiming it is a meaningless phrase "Brexit means Brexit" has been defined. You must have missed it. From the conservative party themselves.....

Theresa May said:

First, Brexit means Brexit. The campaign was fought, the vote was held, turnout was high, and the public gave their verdict.

There must be no attempts to remain inside the EU, no attempts to rejoin it through the back door, and no second referendum.

The country voted to leave the European Union, and it is the duty of the Government and of Parliament to make sure we do just that.

That's pretty clear to me. It means we're leaving the EU.

As a Leave voter I'm more than happy to retain trading partnerships and links to European nations. There was never any doubt that we would retain links and partnerships and I can't recall any of the main Leave campaigners saying we would have nothing to do with Europe if we left. From the posts on here it seems to be a Remain voter stance taken in the aftermath of a democratic and clear vote.

[don'tbesilly]

///ajd said:

Who was most taken in by the lies? Who was most vulnerable to believing a load of tosh?

Same article:

"Research from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation shows that people earning less than £20,000 a year, with lower qualifications and living in low-skilled areas, were the driving force behind Brexit."

Sure there are exceptions. Good that our economic future was decided by "non-experts".

///ajd said:

Who was most taken in by the lies?

I don't know and nor do you, but more people who voted leave believed the lies of the leave campaign than the lies of the remain campaign.
Live with it.

///ajd said:

Who was most vulnerable to believing a load of tosh?

I don't know and nor do you, but more people who voted leave believed the tosh of the leave campaign than the tosh of the remain campaign.
Live with it.

///ajd said:

Same article:

"Research from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation shows that people earning less than £20,000 a year, with lower qualifications and living in low-skilled areas, were the driving force behind Brexit."

Sure there are exceptions. Good that our economic future was decided by "non-experts".

As opposed to our future being decided by ALL the experts that voted remain,what utter ignorant and superior nonsense you espouse.