Will Britain ever just piss off and get on with Brexit? -mod warning in OP (21/12)

ancapailldorcha

Aegir wrote: »

If you’re an English tax payer and you see all these subsidies paying for free university courses in Scotland, free prescriptions in Wales and support for some bull**** made up language inNorthern Ireland, while parts of England get neglected, then you can understand why.

Is this not the Union in a nutshell? Surely the UK is no longer a viable entity and should split for the sake of its four constituent states.

ancapailldorcha

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Is this not the Union in a nutshell? Surely the UK is no longer a viable entity and should split for the sake of its four constituent states.

In its current format, it probably isn’t.

If the government had listened to the English post Scottish Indy ref and given more say in the running of their own country, free from interference from the other members of the union, then Brexit may never have happened in the first place.

England needs its own parliament so it can sort out its own affairs.

Kidchameleon

Seth Brundle wrote: »

You know what it means so let's not be childish.
Google Aaron Banks or Cambridge Analytica for a start.

Define your term please and don't try to hide from the question. I know what rigged means, I am trying to figure out if we have a shared definition. Its called debating.

ancapailldorcha

Aegir wrote: »

In its current format, it probably isn’t.

If the government had listened to the English post Scottish Indy ref and given more say in the running of their own country, free from interference from the other members of the union, then Brexit may never have happened in the first place.

England needs its own parliament so it can sort out its own affairs.

Could you elaborate? I've read this idea being proposed before but I've never got how the existence of an English Parliament would have prevented Brexit.

Seth Brundle

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Define your term please and don't try to hide from the question. I know what rigged means, I am trying to figure out if we have a shared definition. Its called debating.

It's called deflection.
As you well know, the election was rigged by outside sources who influenced the voters who had not decided one way or the other.
There's plenty of evidence to demonstrate this, some of which is impending cases.
But as a tin foil hat wearing brexiteer, you will presumably deny these facts.

FrancieBrady

Seth Brundle wrote: »

It's called deflection.
As you well know, the election was rigged by outside sources who influenced the voters who had not decided one way or the other.
There's plenty of evidence to demonstrate this, some of which is impending cases.
But as a tin foil hat wearing brexiteer, you will presumably deny these facts.

Not to mention that they were lied to as well.

Farage, and a few other prominent Leavers very vocal on 'Leave' not meaning that they were intent on leaving the SM. That evidence is actually out there.

ancapailldorcha

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Could you elaborate? I've read this idea being proposed before but I've never got how the existence of an English Parliament would have prevented Brexit.

It’s all more or less guess work I suppose, but English nationalism has been awakened post the Indy ref.

If the English were given a voice and someone to fight for their corner of the UK, something outside of the UK parliament, then the level of discontent could have been voiced and the appropriate action taken. As it was, the politicians clearly weren’t listening.

ancapailldorcha

Aegir wrote: »

It’s all more or less guess work I suppose, but English nationalism has been awakened post the Indy ref.

If the English were given a voice and someone to fight for their corner of the UK, something outside of the UK parliament, then the level of discontent could have been voiced and the appropriate action taken. As it was, the politicians clearly weren’t listening.

Westminster is basically the English Parliament. How much influence can NI and Wales exert with less than 40 seats between them. Factor in Scotland's 59 and you're still short 100 out of 650.

declanflynn

Kidchameleon wrote: »

FrancieBrady wrote: »

My mother also said we would have to vote again.

Now we know where you picked up your disgraceful attitude to democracy.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Sarkosy was just the leader of another one of the EU 28. .

And he complete epitomises the attitude of them

FrancieBrady wrote: »

We sought and got legal guarantees and it was our FF government who decided to run the Referendum again on securing these.

Thats all obfuscation on your part. The dogs on the street know the EU started as a trading block and year on year acted more like a country in its own right. They have a national anthem and want an army. They need to f*ck right off. Why did the Irish gov bow to their overlords?

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Sorry to spoil your 'sinister EU' rant.

You haven't spoiled it at all, they are complete and utter scum.

Your wrong mate

FrancieBrady

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Westminster is basically the English Parliament. How much influence can NI and Wales exert with less than 40 seats between them. Factor in Scotland's 59 and you're still short 100 out of 650.

Brexit, isn't the problem. Brexit is a symptom of the yawning problem the UK now has. It's 'England centric' core is exposed.
The mistake England made is it should have let Scotland go. Trying to hold it together means England is going to be much weaker than it probably should have been if it does break up.

declanflynn

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Who cares, at least they govern themselves and choose to stand on their own feet.

I think they are about to cut at least one foot off

ancapailldorcha

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Westminster is basically the English Parliament. How much influence can NI and Wales exert with less than 40 seats between them. Factor in Scotland's 59 and you're still short 100 out of 650.

in terms of number of seats maybe, but it certainly does not give England the amount of attention that the Scottish Parliament gives to Scotland, for example.


When was the last time you heard a leader of a major political party say they were fighting for English rights?

declanflynn

Britain's graph has been on a downward slope for the last 100 years it's picking up speed for the last 3 years and will hit top speed in November.

ancapailldorcha

Aegir wrote: »

in terms of number of seats maybe, but it certainly does not give England the amount of attention that the Scottish Parliament gives to Scotland, for example.


When was the last time you heard a leader of a major political party say they were fighting for English rights?

What English rights are there which require fighting for? The UK is essentially England plus three satellites.

ancapailldorcha

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

What English rights are there which require fighting for? The UK is essentially England plus three satellites.

But you have the bizarre situation where Scottish, Welsh and Irish MPs can vote on laws in Parliament and then have those laws amended, or even ignored in their own countries.

You then have the question of financial support. The North England would love to get the sort of financial support the north of Ireland does.

Kidchameleon

declanflynn wrote: »

Your wrong mate

Not an argument

Kidchameleon

Seth Brundle wrote: »

It's called deflection.
As you well know, the election was rigged by outside sources who influenced the voters who had not decided one way or the other.
There's plenty of evidence to demonstrate this, some of which is impending cases.
But as a tin foil hat wearing brexiteer, you will presumably deny these facts.

Politicians lie all the time. That does not mean elections are rigged. Also, im pretty sure at this stage you dont know what rigged means

Guy:Incognito

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Politicians lie all the time. That does not mean elections are rigged. Also, im pretty sure at this stage you dont know what rigged means

What about breaking laws with regard election funding?

Just in case the breaking laws bit is confusing, they committed illegal acts.

Seth Brundle

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Politicians lie all the time. That does not mean elections are rigged. Also, im pretty sure at this stage you dont know what rigged means

So if it doesn't mean that it involved a form of vote tampering then do please enlighten us.

ancapailldorcha

Aegir wrote: »

But you have the bizarre situation where Scottish, Welsh and Irish MPs can vote on laws in Parliament and then have those laws amended, or even ignored in their own countries.

You then have the question of financial support. The North England would love to get the sort of financial support the north of Ireland does.

How much difference do non-English votes make though? At least 85% of the Commons must be English.

The North of England is a lot more prosperous than NI IMO. I'm not saying that it does not need investment but we've seen two decades of governments who refuse to do it.

ancapailldorcha

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

How much difference do non-English votes make though? At least 85% of the Commons must be English.

The North of England is a lot more prosperous than NI IMO. I'm not saying that it does not need investment but we've seen two decades of governments who refuse to do it.

The North of England didn't have thirty years of conflict though, so it isn't really a like for like comparison. That still doesn't get away from the fact that it is effectively English money going out of England.

The regional assemblies have the luxury of being populist. they can concentrate on keeping people happy and not have to worry about trivial matters, like running the country, foreign affairs, border security etc. People in England just don't have anyone like that standing up for them, instead they just have the Welsh, Scots and Irish slagging them off at every available opportunity.

I'm not saying it is the answer, but something is wrong, as the EU referendum showed. It is something that Westminster missed by a country mile and not just the conservatives, hell if Labour can't read the mood in Sunderland or Slough, then who can?

Kidchameleon

Seth Brundle wrote: »

So if it doesn't mean that it involved a form of vote tampering then do please enlighten us.

Who tampered with votes? Citations please

Kidchameleon

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

What about breaking laws with regard election funding?

Just in case the breaking laws bit is confusing, they committed illegal acts.

Citations please

Seanachai

The One Doctor wrote: »

This. The British are well known for blaming others for their treaty breaking. And they'll blame us.

I would not be surprised if civil war erupts in the UK, and not just in NI.

Civil unrest maybe, I wouldn't fancy the chances of middle class metropolitans against the working class in any case.

Dytalus

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Citations please

I'm pretty sure you'll ignore this, or handwave it away, because it's pretty widely reported on so you've clearly no interest in finding out:

Vote Leave broke electoral law

And Arron Banks (along with leave.EU) broke data protection laws during the campaign in sharing information that they should not have had access to, and were heavily fined for it.

ancapailldorcha

Aegir wrote: »

The North of England didn't have thirty years of conflict though, so it isn't really a like for like comparison. That still doesn't get away from the fact that it is effectively English money going out of England.

The regional assemblies have the luxury of being populist. they can concentrate on keeping people happy and not have to worry about trivial matters, like running the country, foreign affairs, border security etc. People in England just don't have anyone like that standing up for them, instead they just have the Welsh, Scots and Irish slagging them off at every available opportunity.

I'm not saying it is the answer, but something is wrong, as the EU referendum showed. It is something that Westminster missed by a country mile and not just the conservatives, hell if Labour can't read the mood in Sunderland or Slough, then who can?

That`s fair enough but England is by far the richest nation in the UK even though most of that wealth is concentrated in London and the surrounding area. I think an English Parliament would see the same division between Northern and Southern England that we see between England and the rest of the UK. I don`t think it would actually solve anything and constituencies would probably be established such that they benefit the Southern region.

Seth Brundle

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Who tampered with votes? Citations please

Now you're just being daft.
Are you denying that thousands of undecided voters were manipulated?

https://news.sky.com/story/cambridge-analytica-worked-on-brexit-campaign-emails-claim-11773350
https://www.theguardian.com/news/series/cambridge-analytica-files
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/new-evidence-emerges-of-steve-bannon-and-cambridge-analyticas-role-in-brexit

Now, like the thread title, I'd love to tell you to piss off but that would not be appropriate or mature so I'll politely tell you to get lost and stop being such a spoilt child!

ancapailldorcha

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

That`s fair enough but England is by far the richest nation in the UK even though most of that wealth is concentrated in London and the surrounding area. I think an English Parliament would see the same division between Northern and Southern England that we see between England and the rest of the UK. I don`t think it would actually solve anything and constituencies would probably be established such that they benefit the Southern region.

twenty years ago, that division was London/South east and every body else.

That has now been addressed with assemblies in Cardiff and Edinburgh and (if they get their **** together) Belfast.

No one addressed it for the South west and the North of England though.

Brexit showed up perfectly the division. The strongest remain votes were in London, the strongest leave votes north of Birmingham

Kidchameleon

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Now you're just being daft.
Are you denying that thousands of undecided voters were manipulated?

https://news.sky.com/story/cambridge-analytica-worked-on-brexit-campaign-emails-claim-11773350
https://www.theguardian.com/news/series/cambridge-analytica-files
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/new-evidence-emerges-of-steve-bannon-and-cambridge-analyticas-role-in-brexit

Now, like the thread title, I'd love to tell you to piss off but that would not be appropriate or mature so I'll politely tell you to get lost and stop being such a spoilt child!

You say manipulated and tampered but the reality is people were persuaded by excelent campeigning

ancapailldorcha

Aegir wrote: »

twenty years ago, that division was London/South east and every body else.

That has now been addressed with assemblies in Cardiff and Edinburgh and (if they get their **** together) Belfast.

No one addressed it for the South west and the North of England though.

Brexit showed up perfectly the division. The strongest remain votes were in London, the strongest leave votes north of Birmingham

I'm not sure that an English Parliament is the answer. Part of one perhaps but I agree completely on the division parts of your post. The disparity in the regions here is absolutely shocking.