The EU Referendum

[yogi bear up the cagire]

I look at the candidates to lead the Conservatives, and the shambolic scenes at Labour, and find it surprising that anyone would want to get rid of David Cameron. I feel much more confident about him running the country than any of the alternatives.

I'm no lover of Cameron but think I did warn people who wanted to get rid of him, that they should be careful what they were wishing for. However, when someone commits political suicide there's not much you can do. This suicide, even if it could be decribed as accidental, was a desperate and selfish act and we are now starting to experience its world wide consequences and ramifications.

 

[Beefy]

True, I can't argue with that.

 

[leeblue]

The pound going down the pan nicely at the moment....which will only get worse for a while yet...and then complete disaster when we actually exit the EU. As predicted by most financial experts pre vote. Recession looming almost inevitable in fact, a democratically chosen recession....awsome.

 

[Gremlin]

The pound going down the pan nicely at the moment....which will only get worse for a while yet...and then complete disaster when we actually exit the EU. As predicted by most financial experts pre vote. Recession looming almost inevitable in fact, a democratically chosen recession....awsome.

Let me guess, you're more a fan of the 80s & 90s recessions (that EU membership failed to protect us from) right?

All I can say is that I'm glad that Doug Gurr isn't as gloomy as you seem to be.
https://www.theguardian.com/technol...tra-staff-one-hour-delivery-service-prime-now

WW3 started yet, btw?

 

[londonblue]

Let me guess, you're more a fan of the 80s & 90s recessions (that EU membership failed to protect us from) right?

All I can say is that I'm glad that Doug Gurr isn't as gloomy as you seem to be.
https://www.theguardian.com/technol...tra-staff-one-hour-delivery-service-prime-now

WW3 started yet, btw?

For the most part recessions are a natural phenomena, and will happen anyway. That is what happened in the past. This one, however, is self inflicted.

 

[leeblue]

Let me guess, you're more a fan of the 80s & 90s recessions (that EU membership failed to protect us from) right?

All I can say is that I'm glad that Doug Gurr isn't as gloomy as you seem to be.
https://www.theguardian.com/technol...tra-staff-one-hour-delivery-service-prime-now

WW3 started yet, btw?

I'm not interested in the whole fear campaign etc etc, just the facts. We are down against the dollar and euro big time.
And yes recessions do come in cycles...boom and bust etc but the facts point to a recession looming and one that has been instigated by 'the people' in twenty years time who knows where things will stand but the next few years are gonna be interesting to say the least.

 

[Pubey]

An interesting analysis on personal views/beliefs and Brexit:
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/personal-values-brexit-vote/

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

https://www.opencanada.org/features/brexit-post-mortem-17-takeaways-fallen-david-cameron/

 

[Bielzibubz]

Blimey, you lot STILL droning on about this :smile: It's happened, get over it. How about we all pull together to make it work and quit the whining.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Blimey, you lot STILL droning on about this :smile: It's happened, get over it. How about we all pull together to make it work and quit the whining.

How about invoking article 50 then?That would seem a good place to start.

 

[Bielzibubz]

I get it. You're still ****ed you called it wrong, AGAIN but chin up, could be worse, you could live in Spa............oh, wait! :hilarious:

On a serious note. Why invoke article 50 and start the leave negotiations from a position of weakness. That weakness being no coordinated strategy or planning? That's one of the major failings of Cameron and his government that's been highlighted by Brexit. They, just like yourself, were so **** sure of it being a remain vote they didn't spend a penny or one minute of their time actually planning for this outcome. Hence his immediate resignation. Get the CP leaderhip contest done and dusted, put whoever she thinks is up to the job in the position and then, and only then invoke Article 50 and start negotiating.

The whining and bleating coming from the major political parties and national heads withing the EU is due to one simple fact. They don't want this Brexit to work. They can't afford to let it work. If it works for us it's only a matter off time before the populace of various sovereign nations start demanding the right to vote as well, and the EU know that. That's why they, and you, want article 50 invoked as soon as possible. It's noting to do with the uncertainty within the markets it's causing. They are scared ****less that we've made the right decision and it will start to be seen by the rest of the EU that we've actually made the right decision.

 

[RHB]

So, time for a debate in Parliament on the Referendum result.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36777494

Sizeable amount of signatures on the e petition (4.1 million) even with 77,000 dodgy sigs removed.

I've often thought that e Petitions to Parliament were a waste of time. I suspect that this one will be no different and maybe they should be scrapped as totally ineffective.

 

[MK Shrimper]

May said "Brexit is Brexit", so it looks like there's no going back.

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

How about invoking article 50 then?That would seem a good place to start.

I suspect the start has already taken place.
lots of east EU countries are very worried about Russia and NATO; but many do not do the 2% budget for defence; and the U.K. Is THE only proper military member of NATO in Europe ( geographically) while France is ambiguous as to its foreign policy.
If the EU does want to hurt the UK financially then TM may suggest that the UK will need to retrench its defence policy; with Allies like Spain chomping on about Gib and FI then perhaps some hard decisions DO happen.

 

[superblue24]

So, time for a debate in Parliament on the Referendum result.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36777494

Sizeable amount of signatures on the e petition (4.1 million) even with 77,000 dodgy sigs removed.

I've often thought that e Petitions to Parliament were a waste of time. I suspect that this one will be no different and maybe they should be scrapped as totally ineffective.

Not necessarily, why waste time debating something that was settled in a referendum (the biggest democratic vote you can hope for) not one month ago?

As to the broader point of the petitions, I think it's good that these things are brought to parliament to at least be discussed. Not exactly fair that a petition with 9,000 signatures doesn't get heard, yet an e-mail from one person/point of view is delivered by Corbyn regularly during QT

 

[RHB]

Not necessarily, why waste time debating something that was settled in a referendum (the biggest democratic vote you can hope for) not one month ago?

As to the broader point of the petitions, I think it's good that these things are brought to parliament to at least be discussed. Not exactly fair that a petition with 9,000 signatures doesn't get heard, yet an e-mail from one person/point of view is delivered by Corbyn regularly during QT

They don't have a choice given the number of signatures and the rules governing petitions to parliament.

 

[superblue24]

They don't have a choice given the number of signatures and the rules governing petitions to parliament.

Agreed, but common sense dictates that it was never going to go further than a big fat "no" due to the fact that 17 million had already voted the other way less than a month ago. So I'm not sure what other outcome was expected from this discussion topic....?

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

Not necessarily, why waste time debating something that was settled in a referendum (the biggest democratic vote you can hope for) not one month ago?

As to the broader point of the petitions, I think it's good that these things are brought to parliament to at least be discussed. Not exactly fair that a petition with 9,000 signatures doesn't get heard, yet an e-mail from one person/point of view is delivered by Corbyn regularly during QT

It wasn't settled in a referendum. Hence all the uncertainty about what we are going to do next.

And it's what we should do next that should be asked in the second referendum. May needs to come up her best plan - be it the EEA+ path (Norway) or the go it alone (Canada model) or some hybrid that the EU are actually willing to grant us (so no cherry picking the best of both) - and that plan needs to be put to the vote in a referendum with the choice of that or remain.

 

[superblue24]

It wasn't settled in a referendum. Hence all the uncertainty about what we are going to do next.

And it's what we should do next that should be asked in the second referendum. May needs to come up her best plan - be it the EEA+ path (Norway) or the go it alone (Canada model) or some hybrid that the EU are actually willing to grant us (so no cherry picking the best of both) - and that plan needs to be put to the vote in a referendum with the choice of that or remain.

What wasn't settled? The second referendum referred to in that link states:

"We the undersigned call upon HM Government to implement a rule that if the Remain or Leave vote is less than 60%, based on a turnout of less than 75%, there should be another referendum."

Nothing in there about what we're doing next as a nation.

 

[Bielzibubz]

It wasn't settled in a referendum. Hence all the uncertainty about what we are going to do next.

And it's what we should do next that should be asked in the second referendum. May needs to come up her best plan - be it the EEA+ path (Norway) or the go it alone (Canada model) or some hybrid that the EU are actually willing to grant us (so no cherry picking the best of both) - and that plan needs to be put to the vote in a referendum with the choice of that or remain.

What wasn't settled exactly?