Cameron is going to leave and let the Tory Eurosceptics sort out the
No matter how low the immigration is pushed down, the public isn't
going to be impressed with inevitable falling living standards, loss
of jobs, additional pressure on public finances, and fewer staff in
Corbyn is certain to leave before the next election and maybe he will
If Corbyn's successor is carefully chosen not to alienate the
majority of the public then Labour could easily be the next
And if it takes a parliamentary majority to approve the starting of
Brexit negotiations with the EU, and Labour is against that, together
with the SNP and possibly a Tory rump, Brexit may yet not happen.
On Friday, 24 June 2016 16:41:10 UTC+1, Tim Watts wrote:
If Corbyn had followed his alleged Euro-sceptic instincts, the Labour party would now be sitting pretty.
Which goes to show, there's a price to pay for hypocrisy.
Their own members showed them the way but they were too brain dead to take it.
There's a surprise.
Yo9u bave conflated twoi things.
Labour getting into power, and labour not proceeding with brexit.
One or the other, not both. That what the referendum vote was all about
WE are all brexiteers now, or not in politics at all.
If I had all the money I've spent on drink...
..I'd spend it on drink.
On Fri, 24 Jun 2016 18:43:21 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
But if Labour win, it will be a different sort of majority; it will be
a majority of seats, not a majority of votes as was the Referendum.
Several UK governments in recent years haven't had a majority of
votes. For example in the 2015 election, Conservatives had 11.3M votes
out of a total 30.7M votes cast*. Blair's 2005 victory gave him 9.5M
votes out of a total of 27.1M cast**. On those sorts of majorities,
majorities of seats not votes, Brexit would have lost heavily as it's
not been supported by any of the main parties. There's no reason why
the next Labour government, it that's what there is, shouldn't
procrastinate or even ignore the Referendum result if they feel so
inclined. There might well be uproar if they did, but it is possible
It doesn't. The govt of the day is free to do
that without any parliamentary majority.
The most parliament gets to do is approve or reject
what the negotiators produce if they produce anything.
If negotiations stall as IMO they will, because the EU
will be stupid enough to insist even now that the free
movement of people between the EU and Britain must
be part of any agreement, and that Britain must continue
to pay what it currently pays the EU, because the EU must
have that money to survive, the negotiators will will either
wait till the 2 year period expires, or make an obscene
gesture in the general direction of the EU and unilaterally
pull out of the EU. And in the later case, IMO the parliament
will be happy to do that.
I doubt even Labour would be that stupid given the very
unambiguous result of the referendum and the fact that
so many of the Labour voters are in favour of leaving.
I don't buy that. It might have happened with a less clear
cut referendum result and say Cameron saying that he was
going to go back to the EU to get more concessions, but
given how intransigent Junker etc clearly is, he wouldn't get any.
IMO any parliament that was actually stupid enough to try
to ignore the referendum result just seen would get punished
very severely at the next British elections, and they know that.
They know that UKIP might well get lots of MPs elected.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It 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.