How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 11)
Discussion
banjowilly said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
It appears that Banjowilly has so little grasp of history, he thinks the EEC is the same as the EU.
and that people can meaningly vote for something, that would not even exist for another 18 years, let alone understand what it would mean for the UK, and themselves.
A question for you PPP. Why should the government have given you a vote in 1972, 1975 & 2016?and that people can meaningly vote for something, that would not even exist for another 18 years, let alone understand what it would mean for the UK, and themselves.
Pan Pan Pan said:
banjowilly said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
It appears that Banjowilly has so little grasp of history, he thinks the EEC is the same as the EU.
and that people can meaningly vote for something, that would not even exist for another 18 years, let alone understand what it would mean for the UK, and themselves.
A question for you PPP. Why should the government have given you a vote in 1972, 1975 & 2016?and that people can meaningly vote for something, that would not even exist for another 18 years, let alone understand what it would mean for the UK, and themselves.
Brooking10 said:
I’ve never seen a million people together in one place so no I don’t 
I’m still not clear on why people seem vehemently opposed to a hypothetical “type of leave” vote.
It was proposed and rejected, so isn't what you went to the polls on and isn't what determined the result. If you are fine with ignoring that aspect, then fine. I’m still not clear on why people seem vehemently opposed to a hypothetical “type of leave” vote.
I tried your line of debate with Elysium and others on here. Turned out it wasn't just on how to leave, but of course included remaining.
Brooking10 said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
Brooking10 said:
crankedup said:
The fear is that our democratic system will be hugely damaged if politicians were to dismiss the relevance of the referendum result 2016.
We do not need ‘more’ democracy, the issue was settled 2016.
I am not advocating a second ref before I go any further but .....We do not need ‘more’ democracy, the issue was settled 2016.
If people think more folk than ever want to leave and a sufficient to win the day majority of this want to do so with no deal why is there such angst over any prospect of a vote to decide the manner of departure ?
I’m still not clear on why people seem vehemently opposed to a hypothetical “type of leave” vote.
The vote result was to leave the EU.
Given the nefarious ways in which those did not get the result they expected / wanted in 2016 have tried to thwart, over turn, or water down the result of that referendum, there is little trust, that any subsequent vote will be handled appropriately, unless the UK goes to the ignominy of asking for international overseer's to conduct any subsequent referendums on the matter., Such is the lack of trust in democracy that the remainers have engendered in the UK voting system.
If any second referendum is held, the option to remain must categorically not be included on the ballot paper, as stated above that specific question has already been asked, and clearly answered.
Pan Pan Pan said:
The question of whether or not the UK remains a member of the EU or leaves it, has already been asked (for the first ever time in 2016), and that question has clearly been answered.
The vote result was to leave the EU.
Given the nefarious ways in which those did not get the result they expected / wanted in 2016 have tried to thwart, over turn, or water down the result of that referendum, there is little trust, that any subsequent vote will be handled appropriately, unless the UK goes to the ignominy of asking for international overseer's to conduct any subsequent referendums on the matter., Such is the lack of trust in democracy that the remainers have engendered in the UK voting system.
If any second referendum is held, the option to remain must categorically not be included on the ballot paper, as stated above that specific question has already been asked, and clearly answered.
You’re answering a question I’m not asking.The vote result was to leave the EU.
Given the nefarious ways in which those did not get the result they expected / wanted in 2016 have tried to thwart, over turn, or water down the result of that referendum, there is little trust, that any subsequent vote will be handled appropriately, unless the UK goes to the ignominy of asking for international overseer's to conduct any subsequent referendums on the matter., Such is the lack of trust in democracy that the remainers have engendered in the UK voting system.
If any second referendum is held, the option to remain must categorically not be included on the ballot paper, as stated above that specific question has already been asked, and clearly answered.
As I say this is purely hypothetical and focussed only on whether/why there is an objection to the people being asked what type of exit they would support.
Pan Pan Pan said:
The question of whether or not the UK remains a member of the EU or leaves it, has already been asked (for the first ever time in 2016), and that question has clearly been answered.
The vote result was to leave the EU.
Given the nefarious ways in which those did not get the result they expected / wanted in 2016 have tried to thwart, over turn, or water down the result of that referendum, there is little trust, that any subsequent vote will be handled appropriately, unless the UK goes to the ignominy of asking for international overseer's to conduct any subsequent referendums on the matter., Such is the lack of trust in democracy that the remainers have engendered in the UK voting system.
If any second referendum is held, the option to remain must categorically not be included on the ballot paper, as stated above that specific question has already been asked, and clearly answered.
I do find it strange that view of may on the Remain side is that the 2016 Referendum should never have been held, but then, the answer to the current situation is another Referendum...The vote result was to leave the EU.
Given the nefarious ways in which those did not get the result they expected / wanted in 2016 have tried to thwart, over turn, or water down the result of that referendum, there is little trust, that any subsequent vote will be handled appropriately, unless the UK goes to the ignominy of asking for international overseer's to conduct any subsequent referendums on the matter., Such is the lack of trust in democracy that the remainers have engendered in the UK voting system.
If any second referendum is held, the option to remain must categorically not be included on the ballot paper, as stated above that specific question has already been asked, and clearly answered.
banjowilly said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
banjowilly said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
It appears that Banjowilly has so little grasp of history, he thinks the EEC is the same as the EU.
and that people can meaningly vote for something, that would not even exist for another 18 years, let alone understand what it would mean for the UK, and themselves.
A question for you PPP. Why should the government have given you a vote in 1972, 1975 & 2016?and that people can meaningly vote for something, that would not even exist for another 18 years, let alone understand what it would mean for the UK, and themselves.
Brooking10 said:
I’m still not clear on why people seem vehemently opposed to a hypothetical “type of leave” vote.
How about this. It is decided to settle an issue by referendum
Govt and Parliament are pretty clear on which side they favour. Govt gifted Remain a £9 million head start.
The rules are made clear
Govt spells out that 50%+1 vote is enough to settle the issue.
Govt says it will deliver on what we decide.
We decided.
The losers then spend 3 years drumming up daily scare stories “scurvy”, “planes falling out of the sky” etc. to try to change the minds of the electorate.
A continual barrage of fear mongering. Every bloody day. And when they believe they have the numbers....
Then they say. “You need to vote again”
And if Remain wins. It is settled.
If Leave wins , as Swinson and Allen have said - they will still try to block it.
Why does Remain need to win 1 referendum and Leave needs to win 2?
Why can’t Remainers just accept that the democratic result is to leave. And let us leave ?
Pan Pan Pan said:
I will tell you, if you first tell me why you think voting to remain in the EEC in 1975 also qualifies as a vote to go into something, that would not even exist for another 18 years, let alone allow those being asked to vote in 1975 how much they understand about an organization (that would not even exist for another 18 years).
No you won't. Your evasiveness is as obvious as your naivety on geo politics. But I'll tell you where you're wrong anyway. We live in a representative democracy. We elect and pay for people to make decisions on our behalf. There is moreover no tradition of referendums in the UK for that very reason. You bleat on over & over again about 1972 as if it was somehow the most egregious betrayal in our long island history when as it turns out, you don't actually know how your country is governed in the first place. crankedup said:
The fear is that our democratic system will be hugely damaged if politicians were to dismiss the relevance of the referendum result 2016.
We do not need ‘more’ democracy, the issue was settled 2016.
You and others keep stating this ‘damage’. It is however just your opinions We do not need ‘more’ democracy, the issue was settled 2016.
Wise people realise when a decision was in error and reverse it. Businesses and families do it all the time. It is very normal.
Yet you continue to assert that our democracy will be for ever damaged when the only evidence is some but not all brexiteers stating so.
Do you not even listen to the leave voters who say: I’d rather remain than have No Deal; I’d rather remain than sign up to the WA; I’d rather remain than sign up to a bad deal.
You see you can’t even all agree amongst yourselves what you want.
It was 17.4M. The only certainty is that it is not that number any more. That leaves 49M who do not necessarily agree with you. They may not all be able to vote but many will have opinions and will be future voters in some cases.
At the end of the day what are leavers going to do? Protest for a bit until their employers get fed up.
Brooking10 said:
crankedup said:
The fear is that our democratic system will be hugely damaged if politicians were to dismiss the relevance of the referendum result 2016.
We do not need ‘more’ democracy, the issue was settled 2016.
I am not advocating a second ref before I go any further but .....We do not need ‘more’ democracy, the issue was settled 2016.
If people think more folk than ever want to leave and a sufficient to win the day majority of this want to do so with no deal why is there such angst over any prospect of a vote to decide the manner of departure ?
Nickgnome said:
EDIT
At the end of the day what are leavers going to do? Protest for a bit until their employers get fed up.
Probably not much they can do beyond marshalling enough votes to destroy the Conservative Party and ensuring that Corbyn and his mob is put in power for a generation. I’d be very beware of unintended consequences. At the end of the day what are leavers going to do? Protest for a bit until their employers get fed up.
banjowilly said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
I will tell you, if you first tell me why you think voting to remain in the EEC in 1975 also qualifies as a vote to go into something, that would not even exist for another 18 years, let alone allow those being asked to vote in 1975 how much they understand about an organization (that would not even exist for another 18 years).
No you won't. Your evasiveness is as obvious as your naivety on geo politics. But I'll tell you where you're wrong anyway. We live in a representative democracy. We elect and pay for people to make decisions on our behalf. There is moreover no tradition of referendums in the UK for that very reason. You bleat on over & over again about 1972 as if it was somehow the most egregious betrayal in our long island history when as it turns out, you don't actually know how your country is governed in the first place. Nickgnome said:
You and others keep stating this ‘damage’. It is however just your opinions
Well, if you think ignoring a democratic vote (or rather playing lip service to it whilst all the while doing everything you can to over turn it) is unlikely to do any damage to faith in our democracy then you're entitled to your view. If you refuse to see it or consider it, then there is not much to say to you is there? Nickgnome said:
Wise people realise when a decision was in error and reverse it. Businesses and families do it all the time. It is very normal.
You start from the premise that the decision was an error. It wasn't, so the rest of your point falls away. Nickgnome said:
Yet you continue to assert that our democracy will be for ever damaged when the only evidence is some but not all brexiteers stating so.
It's his, and others opinion. I think he's probably right. You don't. Nickgnome said:
Do you not even listen to the leave voters who say: I’d rather remain than have No Deal; I’d rather remain than sign up to the WA; I’d rather remain than sign up to a bad deal.
You see you can’t even all agree amongst yourselves what you want.
Well, Leavers want to leave. You've cited some opinions that align with your world view, but I suspect the reality is that the majority want to leave, preferably with a deal, but with no deal if needs be. You see you can’t even all agree amongst yourselves what you want.
Nickgnome said:
It was 17.4M. The only certainty is that it is not that number any more.
Yes, it's probably higherNickgnome said:
That leaves 49M who do not necessarily agree with you. They may not all be able to vote but many will have opinions and will be future voters in some cases.
I actually let out a groan when I got to this bit? You're seriously not going to lay claim to the 49m?????Nickgnome said:
At the end of the day what are leavers going to do? Protest for a bit until their employers get fed up.
Oh my. How quickly you toss away democracy when decisions go against you. You really think this is how it works? So the ONS have stated today they got their immigration figures wrong by a massive 16%, 16% more people from the EU east expansion (Poland etc.) came to the UK than they thought, and ROW immigration was overestimated by a similar amount.
They now class their own figures as experimental.
Strange how it took a new broom at the top to get these figures out in public now.
They now class their own figures as experimental.
Strange how it took a new broom at the top to get these figures out in public now.
Pan Pan Pan said:
I will tell you, if you first tell me why you think voting to remain in the EEC in 1975 also qualifies as a vote to go into something, that would not even exist for another 18 years, let alone allow those being asked to vote in 1975 how much they understand about an organization (that would not even exist for another 18 years).
Why does voting for leave with the greatest easiest deal in history in 2016 qualify as a vote for no deal and economic depression in 2019?Pan Pan Pan said:
Ah! the old selective democracy ploy, where at one instance it is perfectly OK for the government to take the country into something, without first asking the people if this was what they wanted, and without telling them what doing so, would mean for them. Yet it (somehow) is not OK for the government to take the UK out of something, despite the massive increase in knowledge and experience of what an EU is, ( and of course not forgetting the little matter of the first, and only referendum the people of the UK have ever been given on the matter of the UK`s membership of the EU, where the result was for the UK to LEAVE the EU) But since you have no respect for democracy, I wouldn't expect you to understand what happened in 2016..
No, it's the cowardice of Parliament subcontracting their actual job. I had a feeling you wouldn't be able to grasp that, seems I was right. The point is not that a vote was held in 2016 to leave it's that you had no right to one in 1972 & that is why your endless whining about 1972 is so wide of the mark, you're complaining about Parliament literally doing their job.banjowilly said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
I will tell you, if you first tell me why you think voting to remain in the EEC in 1975 also qualifies as a vote to go into something, that would not even exist for another 18 years, let alone allow those being asked to vote in 1975 how much they understand about an organization (that would not even exist for another 18 years).
No you won't. Your evasiveness is as obvious as your naivety on geo politics. But I'll tell you where you're wrong anyway. We live in a representative democracy. We elect and pay for people to make decisions on our behalf. There is moreover no tradition of referendums in the UK for that very reason. You bleat on over & over again about 1972 as if it was somehow the most egregious betrayal in our long island history when as it turns out, you don't actually know how your country is governed in the first place. Edited by crankedup on Wednesday 21st August 14:58
banjowilly said:
No, it's the cowardice of Parliament subcontracting their actual job. I had a feeling you wouldn't be able to grasp that, seems I was right. The point is not that a vote was held in 2016 to leave it's that you had no right to one in 1972 & that is why your endless whining about 1972 is so wide of the mark, you're complaining about Parliament literally doing their job.
Not convinced with that argument. In a representative democracy the people send power to MPs. Effectively the voters lend their power to their MP. What should not happen is the MPs give away that power without the permission pf the people. Hence the need to consult the people before doing so. Referenda should have been held several times, certainly at the time of Maastricht as it changed the nature of the EEC. Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff