The EU Referendum

[yogi bear up the cagire]

Who controls Britain? Was Brexit bought?

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ritains-political-system?CMP=share_btn_fb#_=_

 

[superblue24]

Who controls Britain? Was Brexit bought?

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ritains-political-system?CMP=share_btn_fb#_=_

Talk about being hard up for a story! I'm pretty sure that if there was any insinuation that The rich could "buy brexit", then the enormous amount of billionaires and top businessmen endorsing Remain could have won that battle hands down!

 

[RHB]

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....?

Probably not, which is why I questioned the worth of e petitions. They may give the British populace the illusion that they are challenging parliament, but in reality they appear to achieve little or nothing.

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

Probably not, which is why I questioned the worth of e petitions. They may give the British populace the illusion that they are challenging parliament, but in reality they appear to achieve little or nothing.

If talk and discussion are the first steps in change then the petitions achieve that. In the short term there is little tangible result AND a possible outcome of this subject is allowing the EU to see that the UK isn't knee jerk reacting and is open to mediation to find some common ground.
The problem, IMO, centres around the EU being unwilling to change, amend or be flexible.

 

[superblue24]

Probably not, which is why I questioned the worth of e petitions. They may give the British populace the illusion that they are challenging parliament, but in reality they appear to achieve little or nothing.

I hear what you're saying, but you used an open/closed case as an example of why the e-petition system is no good. You may as well have said that the system was no good because an e-petition to paint all of our post boxes blue, or have Adrian Chiles executed, or change our roads to drive on the right had failed, so they are no good.

Having said that you may have a point since I can't see any petitions that have been successful in achieving government backing and/or action, although I hasten to add that this is heavily caveated by the fact that the petitions that have made it to debate border the idiotic:

Stop Donald Trump accessing the UK
Stop Cameron spending tax payer money on EU Remain flyers
Make the production, sale and use of cannabis legal.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions?state=debated

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

Talk about being hard up for a story! I'm pretty sure that if there was any insinuation that The rich could "buy brexit", then the enormous amount of billionaires and top businessmen endorsing Remain could have won that battle hands down!

Perhaps incuding 'was Brexit bought' in my headline was an error. I think the story goes a bit deeper into the worrying way money is being used in the UK system, to buy influence and power.

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

Talk about being hard up for a story! I'm pretty sure that if there was any insinuation that The rich could "buy brexit", then the enormous amount of billionaires and top business endorsing Remain could have won that battle hands down!

Incidently if you read the first paragraph of the article and that is to be believed, support for Brexit received 54% of the funding whilst Remain only got 46%. Funny how impressions sometimes become more believable than fact. :smile: Evidently, those Remain billionaires didn't put their money where their mouth/heart was!

 

[Bielzibubz]

Large multinational conglomerates and extremely wealthy businessmen/leaders have been buying power and influencing government policy since the inception of modern day democracy. The wheels of governmental power are greased and kept turning by the corporate kick back, the implied friendships, the nepotism and the downright corrupt. Murdoch being the prime example on this side of the pond with regard to the media and Lockhead Martin & Northrup Grumman in the US with regards to their defense policy and spending.

Why would the referendum of been any different? Of course people were lent on. Of course some were put under pressure by third parties to tow a certain line. It happens every day in politics. Although it clearly didn't work for DC and his chums did it ;)

 

[RHB]

I hear what you're saying, but you used an open/closed case as an example of why the e-petition system is no good. You may as well have said that the system was no good because an e-petition to paint all of our post boxes blue, or have Adrian Chiles executed, or change our roads to drive on the right had failed, so they are no good.

Having said that you may have a point since I can't see any petitions that have been successful in achieving government backing and/or action, although I hasten to add that this is heavily caveated by the fact that the petitions that have made it to debate border the idiotic:

Stop Donald Trump accessing the UK
Stop Cameron spending tax payer money on EU Remain flyers
Make the production, sale and use of cannabis legal.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions?state=debated

My point was exactly that I have yet to see an e petition achieve any change of note. You have highlighted three which endorse that point. I chose to use the Referendum one because it had more momentum than any other I have seen.

You highlighted the wording of the referendum petition earlier. That wording made it less of an open and shut case I think.

"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."

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

Who would predict what can happen over the next month? Yet, barring some enormous obstacle, you have to take May at her word when she says that Brexit means Brexit. I'm sure the whole machine of disentanglement will soon be put into place. So really it comes down to long negociations ahead.
If I understand, May's negociating position is the following, someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

* She wishes to strictly control the entry of EU citizens into the UK.

* She doesn't wish any longer to contribute to the EU budget

* She wants open access for us to the European single market

What happens when there's no agreement after two years? :winking:









i

 

[rigsby]

Who would predict what can happen over the next monthe? Yet, barring some enormous obstacle, you have to take May at her word when she says that Brexit means Brexit. I'm sure the whole machine of disentanglement will soon be put into place. So really it comes down to long negociations ahead.
If I understand, May's negociating position is the following, someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

* She wishes to strictly control the entry of EU citizens into the UK.

* She doesn't wish any longer to contribute to the EU budget

* She wants open access for us to the European single market

What happens when there's no agreement after two years? :winking:

We know from history that our battles with Europe can take time but we always win in the end.

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

We know from history that our battles with Europe can take time but we always win in the end.

The difference maybe with this battle is that you are no longer at the table but on the way out of the door.

 

[rigsby]

The difference maybe with this battle is that you are no longer at the table but on the way out of the door.

That's the best bit. Whilst they squabble on the sinking ship we will be well clear. You just need to be brave and hold on for a bit.

You sound like the sort of person who was half way down Wembley Way when a certain Joe Pigott found the ball at his feet.

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

What wasn't settled?

What wasn't settled exactly?

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.

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

Who would predict what can happen over the next monthe? Yet, barring some enormous obstacle, you have to take May at her word when she says that Brexit means Brexit. I'm sure the whole machine of disentanglement will soon be put into place. So really it comes down to long negociations ahead.
If I understand, May's negociating position is the following, someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

* She wishes to strictly control the entry of EU citizens into the UK.

* She doesn't wish any longer to contribute to the EU budget

* She wants open access for us to the European single market

What happens when there's no agreement after two years? :winking:

As you rightly state, who can guess what will happen in a month?
But if Putin rattles his sabre and plays cossack then many in the EU might think having the UK as an offshore PARTNER is better than p***ing the strongest military (USA excluded) supporter.
The negotiations are going to be tough and trade/free movement are big headlines but not the full story by a long way.

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

That's the best bit. Whilst they squabble on the sinking ship we will be well clear. You just need to be brave and hold on for a bit.

You sound like the sort of person who was half way down Wembley Way when a certain Joe Pigott found the ball at his feet.

............and you sound the kind of person who was so cocksure we were going to win, you didn't bother going. No, I was still there.........................although I had put my jacket on. :winking:

 

[rigsby]

............and you sound the kind of person who was so cocksure we were going to win, you didn't bother going. No, I was still there.........................although I had put my jacket on. :winking:

Hope you have kept that lucky jacket:thumbsup:

By the way its not that little tweed number I saw Nigel Farage wearing on referendum day.

 

[rigsby]

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.

She could try the USA model. The one that sells more goods to Europe than Britain but has none of the many problems that made the majority of the British public vote out.

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

She could try the USA model. The one that sells more good to Europe than Britain but has none of the many problems that made the majority of the British public vote out.

The one built upon immigration? OK then.

 

[rigsby]

The one built upon immigration? OK then.

Yes you have to admire their immigration policy. You can't even get on the plane if your a wrong'un let alone enter the country. Unless that is you have endangered their own citizens like Abdul Hamza. They flew him to the USA on a nice private jet so he could spend the rest of his life in a maximum security prison. Whilst we continue to pay out over £100,000 in housing benefits alone for his extended family to live in London.

Just think if we had been a bit more USA in the first place we would probably still been in the EU. Oh well never mind, you remainers should have spoke out a bit sooner so you've only got yourselves to blame.