OT. What the withdrawal agreement really means.

[harry]

[TimW]

I am not reading Harry's crappy right wing linkss, but I would like to say I am really pleased with the way the bexit fiasco is unfolding. I find myself becoming optimistic and hopeful for the future again. I see only two or three possible outcomes now, least liked first:

The May deal by some unpredictable fluke gets through. An election and the Labour party delay before introducing an even softer brexit. The whole thing is cancelled and indefinitely postponed by Peoples Vote.

So ukip and Leave are in my estimation all but defeated now. Not by the opposition or any Remain movement but hoist by their own petards of internal conflict, lies, fantasies and false promises. They have effectively self destructed.

It would be really good to put brexit and the nasty nationalists away for the long term with a proper defeat at the ballot box, and it would be really good if they were permanently excluded from what's going to be left of the Conservative Party so they can't get back into parliament but we will just have to see how events unfold. Anyway-

Looking forward to a happy and prosperous 2019! For all of us!

TW

[tim...]

what if Labour do not win that election (note that doesn't mean that the Tories will win instead)

how is the problem solved (This distinct possibly of this happing is exactly why there WONT be an early election)

the Peoples Vote results in "LEAVE"

You are fooling yourself if you think that isn't a 50-50 possibility.

And then, should Brexit be cancelled, there's the distinct possibility of a voter revolt at the election (be that an early one or at the next scheduled point) where a re-vamped "Leave" party (probably not the rump of UKIP) sweep up enough seats to start the process gain. 30% will win you most electoral constituencies and if all of the leavers vote the same way in those constituencies (against the incumbent who thwarted their wish), it's mathematically possible.

UKIP I'll give you

Leave not.

absolutely not

it was spoiling by Remoaners that has cost us a decent leave deal, not bickering amongst Leavers, most of whom want the same thing.

Nonsense

There is a decent Leave deal to be had if we had pursued that line unencumbered by trying to satisfy the wish of the elites who wanted BrINO all along.

tim

[Marland]

tim... <tims_

Whatever spin you put on it to make yourself feel better it doesn?t hide the fact that those political leaders who advocated Brexit that many who wished to leave the EU put their trust in ,are unlikely to deliver the result people like you wanted. That is either poor judgement or ignorance or piss poor planning by people like you

for depending on people who were not up to the job or were on personal crusades. You should have waited till the case to leave was stronger which if the EU is going to implode according to some who advocate leaving will happen in the not too distant future would have brought a less contentious referendum result if the movement for leave had waited till then. Instead like sheep you have followed the path to getting a technical leave but in practice unless something really changes drastically a situation where the EU still is able to influence the UK heavily which isn?t what you wanted and causing a lot of economic damage on the way which hasn?t ended yet. You can blame those who wished to remain all you want but it is people like you who were gullible enough to follow those who said leaving would be easy, all those on the remain side have had to do was wait why the leave side has struggled to get what it though was going to be so straightforward.

GH

[Fredxx]

Most people who voted for Brexit knew that resorting to WTO tariffs was a possibility.

If there is a another referendum and the result reverse3d, then I can see both Labour and Tories votes decimated by an invigorated UKIP led by Farage. In short there will be greater political Mayhem than Teresa could ever imagine.

[T i m]

I'm pretty sure that wasn't even on their radar!

They will have voted in the main to:

Reduce immigration. (= 'get rid of all these immigrants who are getting free flats and bunging up our doctors and hospitals ...'

'Give 350M/week to the NHS instead.' (which was never a valid sum or likely to happen).

'Stop Brussels making our laws' (the chances are no law has ever affected any of the negatively but the chances are they would have made things better for them).

Many people who voted put as much effort into doing so (in the form of personal research) as they do deciding if to have a tea or coffee.

And none of that is as significant as the referendum being annulled (it shouldn't really even be overturned as the result was 'engineered' away from a stalemate). I'm not saying we shouldn't still consider the option, should there be some real / actual justification in the future.

Cheers, T i m

[TimW]

I don't have a crystal ball but the prospects for the Tories are pretty bleak: hopelessly divided by brexit, shit economy, really nothing acheived while they have ballsed everything up. even if labour don't win a majority the smaller parties who will enter into coalition with them are Libdem and SNP and both of them will make the same demand which will be BIN BREXIT. So there's a good chance there. TW

[TimW]

On 12/01/2019 15:50, Fredxx wrote: [snip]

My feeling is that Brexit is yesterday's failed project now. Nothing will reinvigorate ukip. All the arguements for brexit have been knocked down and discredited. There may be a hardcore of nationalist right wing nutters left shouting 'leave means leave' but really not enough to cause anything like mayhem. TW

[tim...]

The problem is, as I have already said

that the Lever process was subverted by remainers.

I'm just a voter, how can I plan anything here?

The chance of the EU referendum comes along once in a blue moon. you take it when it arrives

tim

[T i m]

On Sat, 12 Jan 2019 20:25:41 -0000, "tim..." <tims_new [e-mail] wrote: <snip>

And what stops that being at any time in the future, potentially when more than just 1/3rd of the electorate want it?

What, 'just because', no matter how inappropriate it might be or how much it might cost everyone?

"Oh look, a side road, let's take it because there might not be another one ... (even though the road you are currently on and have used for 40 years was still serving it's purpose for the majority pretty well)."

You are fanatically desperate to swap our cow for some magic beans but you have no idea what dark magic might be present when you try to actually use them ... or find the trick might not work at all ...

Cheers, T i m

[Brian Gaff]

I think what has happened in fact is not what people want. Being really clear, the spectre of immigration with no rules was freaking people out. The only reason this happens of course is the eu has uneven standards of living in its members. If all were the same then the movement of workers would be both ways. Unfortunately none of this is going to affect the problem of asylum seekers from parts of the world where wars are happening and half of the time the history can be traced to the developed nations meddling in the past, and I have no issue with immigration of those coming can learn the language and be productive people in the economy. Thus, leaving the EU due to its federalism and its attempt to equalise the playing field is perhaps a little mad. The one thing that does need sorting is the corruption and inefficiency. If you want to fix that you need to have a credible government yourself, and a seat at the top table.

It does seem that the narrow victory for leave, based as it was on many rose tinted views of erected interests, was throwing the baby out with the bathwater. It may have taken some time but keeping on about the immigration due to unmatched economies seems to be a problem many countries now agree is an issue, which did not three years ago. I'd be willing to stay on and try to influence the debate myself. Brian

[Tim Lamb]

In message <q1ev67$h69$ [e-mail], Brian Gaff [e-mail]> writes

Hear hear!

It would help if the EU stopped encouraging further East European countries to join.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Interesting. You don't then believe in UK sovereignty so often quoted as a reason for leaving the EU?

Because, in the UK, parliament is that sovereignty.

And this parliament was elected after the referendum.

It's quite amusing the way some say the law must be observed - except when they disagree with law.

[Mark]

I would be willing to bet that most people who voted leave have no idea about WTO rules.

Naa.

[Mark]

How True.

[Mark]

Accurate analogy --> Brext === Magic Beans

[bert]

In article [e-mail]>, "Dave Plowman (News)" [e-mail]> writes

Except when they hand over sovereignty to the people.

And the majority of MPs in it stood on a manifesto which promised to implement the result of the referendum

You are referring to remainers like Bercow I take it.

[T i m]

<snip>

Aww bless, the nasty MP's promised you that and you believed them did you? Silly silly hopeful / gullible Berk. ;-(

Cheers, T i m

[TimW]

[...]

...

[...]

This ^^^ I totally don't understand. How did elite remainers sabotage the negotiations?

You would have thought that with a narrow majority in the referendum the leave camp would have wanted to cultivate consent and trust. Instead we got 'suck it up, traitors!' we got red lines, we got a Tory party refusing to countenance cross party cooperation, we got demands from Farage and the ERG for all the extreme solutions and the hardest brexits, we got the brexit yobs outside parliament and the angry gammons on BBCQT. No wonder the debate has become so toxic and divisive.

TW

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Seems very few have.

But odd that Brexiteers want to swap one set of rules they claim to have no control over (EU) with another set they'd have even less.