In the short term at least, yes, I agree.
That is why we had one - but our government made a mess of of it. So that mess has to be corrected if the UK is going to call itself 'a good example of a democratic state'.
Our government has shown itself nto be unwilling to act as our government, and is still acting as a vassal state of the EU.
It has to go, too.
>
Typical bert. Brexit to him is all about importing things. Never any problem buying anything from anyone and never was or ever will be. If you have the money to do so. Now explain where the UK is going to get the money to pay for all these imports - the magic money tree?
But I'm sure that concept is beyond him.
Says it all really. No interest in facts of any sort. No wonder you just love Trump.
If the referendum had made it clear that leaving the EU would end up with no new trade deal between us at all, why did so many tell us the EU would roll over and give us a decent new deal after we'd left?
It does and it saddens me (for them) that they have to live in their heads 24/7. Not that they know any different of course ...
Just as well really, under the circumstances, as they don't need any. They have walked into the bookies, seen a horse they like (called 'No more Immigrants', 'Begone Brussels' or '£360M to the NHS') and bet everone's money on it, without even studying the form or checking the going. They don't even care if they are actually horses and even likely to make it round.
They care about things that most people CGAF about and when pushed, even they can't explain how the things they care about actually impacts most people ITRW and in a way that is worth the cost and risk of Brexit.
Cheers, T i m
No - the goverenment are trying to save the UK from the Boaty McBoatfacers.
I'm not sure who this Mr. Foreigner person is you refer to. Perhaps you could elucidate.
The EU is not a democracy. It has some of the trappings of one - a Parliament comprised of members that no one has ever heard of, and who can't easily be removed. But that Parliament can neither initiate nor repeal legislation. Those powers reside with the unelected Commission, which unsurprisingly, therefore, behave like any powerful body or person in the situation: like an oligarchy.
Oligarchies represent a form of government the UK has been evolving away from for some hundreds of years.
Or perhaps you feel you are able to name the Shadow Commission we can vote in to replace the existing lot, or indeed name the Official Opposition in the EU Parliament. Let me know when you can.
That's right. And in the event of Leave, how d'ye thing that was going to be implemented, other than under Art. 50?
Well you were there. So you had the opportunity to learn and discuss and then vote. Did you take it? Not my fault if you didn't.
Yes, and that is SOP under these conditions. Look up Reception Statute which happened when the US became independent, and India too. That provides for legislative continuity so that everyone knows that the legal framework in place at D-1 is the same as that on D+1.
No, and anyone claiming to know is a liar, and would be the case whether we leave or remain, whether Blair got in in 1997 or whether John Major did etc etc et-bloody-cetra.
How about using your common sense and realising that, gosh, we can't predict the future, eh?
No, those of us with common sense realised that at the beginning and therefore required more information before we would be able to vote on it.
That said, I'm guessing you have never heard the phrase, 'Better the devil you know' and good or bad, the status quo was / is *much* more of a known than anything else. We obviously also realised that the status quo wasn't going to be forever but we also knew we could do something about it whenever we wanted, should the need arise.
Now wasn't the right time (apparently) for the 2/3rds of the electorate who didn't vote for it.
Common sense would also allow folk to comprehend that we are talking about what should happen now, about the situation now, not focusing on events that happened in the past.
It's my understanding that 'most people' had no feelings about the EU, had no issues with immigrants (in general) ad CGAF about where any rules were made.
What they will be bothered about is any increased cost of living, no extra jobs or housing, more difficulty traveling around the EU, plus loads of other issues we have and haven't even considered yet and all for what? Just to massage the ideals of a (mostly blinkered / gullible) minority?
Cheers, T i m
Oh dear. Typical remoaner. Cant even read.
That is simply the bullshit you have swallowed.
Quite. I really don't understand why Tim S and others don't see that. To say 'vote leave' means one of several very different things, but we won't tell you which one, is not much use in a vote.
Yup. And the only viable alternative is that awfully nice Mr Corbyn. Since your favourite Farage is very much yesterday's man.
Nice to know you've seen the light.
Ah - right. So it's not Germany ruling the roost today, then?
Then why didn't you look for it, ask questions, discuss it? Why d'ye expect to be spoon-fed?
I don't know where you get your funny idea that brexit means one of several things. I told you what it meant to me and why. And I formed my conclusions having seen the EU bully the smaller nations and force them to "vote again" on a number of issues. After that I started considering the EU, its Commission, and its parliament, and their relationships to each other and the public.
It's all simple enough.
Because they are on their own crusade and have no concerns re any collateral damage all of us may suffer, as long as they get what
*they* (1/3rd of the electorate) want.Of course, and if someone voted purely because they wanted £360M/w to the 'NHS instead' or the fear of hordes of immigrants pouring in (both formal posters from the leave campaign) and didn't look behind the lies to find the real truth.
And those of us with common sense (and a dab of empathy which allows us to differentiate between what's legal, formal and what's right (or wrong) etc), see that there is no way that only 1/3rd of the electorate should be allowed to decide what happens to the rest (given the question was really, 'Hands up who want's to leave the EU?', especially when it's still far from clear that 'forging ahead' *is* the right thing to do (especially in light of the papers published so far today).
It would be enough of a disturbance to go though if everyone (or at least a supermajority) actually wanted it but considering the country is split, the government needing support from the DLP just to retain power and all the other things that are far from certain over it, I really can't see why we should perceiver with it.
But the option of another public vote is being aired more and more (and both Farige and Mogg have suggested it should happen over the period). Let's hope if they do give us the option of a more informed vote, they actually publish all the information they have so far and make it a criminal act to print or post bogus information and lies.
Cheers, T i m
For a left brainer?
All you have listed is those things that *you* are bothered about but that doesn't reflect the feelings of 2/3rds of the electorate as I'm guessing they would have also voted for it?
What you aren't doing is conceding any of the benefits our EU membership has brought and accepted there could be a big price everone has to pay to cater for your personal crusade?
You seem more than happy / willing to Throw the baby out with the bath water' but with no signs of any tangible gains for most people.
You may be willing to cut your nose off to spite your face but the majority in the UK obviously aren't.
So, if you are even slightly bothered with the continuation in any level of democracy, you will support the idea of a second (and potentially better educated) peoples vote and if it's still that we should leave (and ideally a supermajority that Firage demanded himself) then that's what we do.
At lest we can do so knowing that it really was the will of the people (not just you and yer band of crusaders).
Cheers, T i m
I have explained in another post. And I gave a link to the government's presentation of 3 variants (plus some discussion of Ireland) before the referendum (still being peddled). I really can't be any clearer.
I told you what it meant to me and why.
Good, of course. And presumably you voted with the reasonable expectation that your meaning would be realised if your side won?
Well, seemingly so - to you.
Any idea what was on the original paper in 1973 then in 1975 when some were given the option to vote on it.
I just don't remmebr anyone asking .... About do you want to join the customs union.... I don;t remmebr them asking do you want house prices to rise fasster than peolpes wages. (well the poors wages) .
If you have to tick boxes for leaving why weren;t we asked those same Qs when joining. Maybe as in marriage and divorce we did say we'll love honour and obey till death do us part, I dont; know I wasn;t involved. All I got told was the futre was bright free electric and a 30 hour working week or less. (which wasn't part of the EEC or any deal)
Who here hasnt realised you vote for liars, it's just whether or not you agree with them is where you put your mark, or penis image.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.