Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Will Britain piss off and get on with Brexit II (mod warning in OP)

Options
1…133134136138139…203

Comments

  • Options
    #4052
    fash
    Registered Users Posts: 2,272 ✭✭✭fash


    mick087 wrote: »
    But 52% did vote to leave

    The referendum was leave or remain.
    Indeed And leaving the EU but staying in the single market would not only respect the referendum vote - but would represent what the people intended and represent the will of the people.

    What we currently have is a deliberate and extraordinary perversion of a rather dubious referendum.


  • Options
    #4053
    Nate--IRL--
    Registered Users Posts: 2,223 ✭✭✭Nate--IRL--


    CelticRambler wrote: »
    Why won't they agree to the Level Playing Field conditions, then, and oversight of the ECJ ? Other countries do.

    Which ones as a matter of interest?

    Nate


  • Options
    #4054
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,403 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    mick087 wrote: »
    Expert projections? you mean experts in what you want to hear.
    You can get experts in anything you want to hear. There is no expert who can predict the future all they do is give it there best guess.

    Every projection shows Brexit damaging the UK economy.

    I'll take that more seriously than someone getting annoyed with me questioning the religion of Brexit.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Options
    #4055
    mick087
    Registered Users Posts: 1,122 ✭✭✭mick087


    fash wrote: »
    Indeed And leaving the EU but staying in the single market would not only respect the referendum vote - but would represent what the people intended and represent the will of the people.

    What we currently have is a deliberate and extraordinary perversion of a rather dubious referendum.

    All this was after the fact as im sure you know.
    This should of been talked about before but wasn't.
    The reason being, we was all cock sure remain would win.


  • Options
    #4056
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,512 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    mick087 wrote: »
    But 52% did vote to leave

    The referendum was leave or remain.
    What were the options given to people in terms of leaving the EU?.
    Did everyone vote to leave the single market?
    Did everyone vote to leave the EFTA?
    What exactly did they vote for when they ticked the leave box?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4057
    RobMc59
    Registered Users Posts: 4,831 ✭✭✭RobMc59


    fash wrote: »
    That's not exactly correct: the UK wants to be able to pour state aid into companies to give them a competitive edge, remove environmental protections and labour and welfare safeguards to allow them to undercut EU businesses.
    That's not setting domestic standards - that is unfairly undercutting EU business.

    Let's not forget that the UK has history in this and did the same thing to the Irish free state when that came in to existence. So it's not like it has not always been their go to plan (aside from the fact that they've continuously stated that this was the purpose of brexit).

    I thought you were describing the EU subsidies to Airbus that got them into trouble with the WTO.


  • Options
    #4058
    mick087
    Registered Users Posts: 1,122 ✭✭✭mick087


    Seth Brundle wrote: »
    What were the options given to people in terms of leaving the EU?.
    Did everyone vote to leave the single market?
    Did everyone vote to leave the EFTA?
    What exactly did they vote for when they ticked the leave box?

    The vote was leave or remain
    As when they joined i believe it was the same.

    There was no other question to mark except stay or remain well as far as im aware of anyway.


  • Options
    #4059
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    mick087 wrote:
    The vote was leave or remain As when they joined i believe it was the same.


    They knew what they were joining. When they voted to leave they didn't know where they would be arriving


  • Options
    #4060
    fash
    Registered Users Posts: 2,272 ✭✭✭fash


    mick087 wrote: »
    All this was after the fact as im sure you know.
    This should of been talked about before but wasn't.
    The reason being, we was all cock sure remain would win.
    Perhaps you were cock sure - but many were not - as evidenced by the significant fall in sterling in the months coming up to the referendum.
    Furthermore, the issue is that either the wording of the referendum matters - in which case, staying in the single market while being out of the EU is a legitimate brexit or the will of the people is relevant in which case 80%+ wanted to stay in the single market.
    So which is it ?


  • Options
    #4061
    fash
    Registered Users Posts: 2,272 ✭✭✭fash


    RobMc59 wrote: »
    I thought you were describing the EU subsidies to Airbus that got them into trouble with the WTO.
    Since Airbus is a significantly UK company (and the Americans slapped tariffs on Scotch specifically because of it), I'm betting those sneaky Brits were behind it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4062
    forgottenhills
    Registered Users Posts: 441 ✭✭forgottenhills


    CelticRambler wrote: »
    60% of the UK electorate voted against Johnson. That he still ended up with a majority in parliament is a reflection of the undemocratic nature of FPTP. On the basis of votes cast, 60% against Johnson's supposedly oven-ready Brexit is a marked shift from the 52% in favour of the whatever-you-want-it-to-be Brexit.

    What nonsense. For a start many Labour voters favour Brexit and UK voters are acutely aware of how FPTP works. If there were 60% of UK voters firmly against a hard Brexit then they would have gathered around an anti Brexit party such as the Liberal Democrats who got only 7.4% of the vote. Or the Tories would have sensed which way the wind was blowing and watered down their policies. But none of these happened and your argument is merely whistling in the wind.


  • Options
    #4063
    forgottenhills
    Registered Users Posts: 441 ✭✭forgottenhills


    fash wrote: »
    Indeed And leaving the EU but staying in the single market would not only respect the referendum vote - but would represent what the people intended and represent the will of the people.

    What we currently have is a deliberate and extraordinary perversion of a rather dubious referendum.

    You are forgetting last years UK election where the choices were clear.


  • Options
    #4064
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    theological wrote:
    The UK should be able to determine its own domestic policy and any arrangement should be rejected if the EU is asking for continued control over its domestic policy after the agreement is signed.

    "Domestic" policies apply to matters that are exclusively local. We have been over this before and I gave examples like licensing hours and speed limits where the UK can do what it likes.

    If you want to be part of a seamless single market, then you adopt common standards. The countries of the UK adopt common standards and I don't see Wales or Scotland bristling at a loss of sovereignty.

    And they all have their own licensing hours.


  • Options
    #4065
    forgottenhills
    Registered Users Posts: 441 ✭✭forgottenhills


    ancapailldorcha wrote: »
    Every projection shows Brexit damaging the UK economy.

    Everybody accepts this at this stage but Brexiteers who are in a majority in the UK just want out, regardless of the cost. Its English nationalism on the rise and nationalism doesn't take the economics of a situation into account first and foremost. Amazingly people in Ireland are still in denial that this is happening.


  • Options
    #4066
    mick087
    Registered Users Posts: 1,122 ✭✭✭mick087


    fash wrote: »
    Perhaps you were cock sure - but many were not - as evidenced by the significant fall in sterling in the months coming up to the referendum.
    Furthermore, the issue is that either the wording of the referendum matters - in which case, staying in the single market while being out of the EU is a legitimate brexit or the will of the people is relevant in which case 80%+ wanted to stay in the single market.
    So which is it ?


    Yes i was sure remain would win. I was wrong.

    The people did vote and there have been 2 general elections since.


  • Options
    #4067
    fash
    Registered Users Posts: 2,272 ✭✭✭fash


    forgottenhills wrote: »
    You are forgetting last years UK election where the choices were clear.
    Were they? 60% voted against Tory - even though the other choices are mostly awful, and the FPTP system doesn't actually allow for any reasonable representation of true democracy.


  • Options
    #4068
    fash
    Registered Users Posts: 2,272 ✭✭✭fash


    mick087 wrote: »
    Yes i was sure remain would win. I was wrong.
    I wasn't - and some people who listened to me at the time made money on sterling.
    The people did vote and there have been 2 general elections since.
    Elections which are about lots of different topics. When the people are asked what is their opinion of brexit, they say this is not what they want and this is a bad idea - and 80%+ on the day of the referendum wanted to remain in the single market. So why should the UK government refuse to implement the will of the people?


  • Options
    #4069
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,403 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    fash wrote: »
    Were they? 60% voted against Tory - even though the other choices are mostly awful, and the FPTP system doesn't actually allow for any reasonable representation of true democracy.

    The British electoral system is profoundly undemocratic but it's what they have. Brexit is happening. It'll hurt those who voted for it the most but we're at the stage now where it just has to play out in some form.

    Once it's defined, we'll see schisms in the coalition that voted for it and quite quick and clear calls to rejoin the EU if things get bad enough IMO.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Options
    #4070
    theological
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,831 ✭✭✭theological


    ancapailldorcha wrote: »
    The British electoral system is profoundly undemocratic but it's what they have. Brexit is happening. It'll hurt those who voted for it the most but we're at the stage now where it just has to play out in some form.

    Once it's defined, we'll see schisms in the coalition that voted for it and quite quick and clear calls to rejoin the EU if things get bad enough IMO.

    The British public also voted to leave the electoral system as it was in 2011.

    It isn't "undemocratic". It is just a different form of decision making. The strength of the British system is that you get decisive governments.

    The strength of the Irish system is that it encourages compromise.

    The strength of the American system is that it represents the states equally. The House of Representatives versus the Senate is a great example. One house represented by population, and the other represented by the different states and both are there to balance each other out. (By the by, both Ireland and Britain could benefit from a model like this. The House of Lords is outdated and unfit for purpose, a model where the regions, and the nations are represented more strongly than London and the South East could be beneficial).

    Different electoral systems have different nuances, but all are democratic even if they achieve their aims slightly differently.


  • Options
    #4071
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    theological wrote:
    Different electoral systems have different nuances, but all are democratic even if they achieve their aims slightly differently.


    And they are all representative democracies, in which the electorate choose the people who decide and implement policy.

    That's not how Brexit came about. The elected representatives abdicated their responsibility and entrusted the decision to people ill-qualified to make it.

    Pure democracy alright.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4072
    forgottenhills
    Registered Users Posts: 441 ✭✭forgottenhills


    fash wrote: »
    Were they? 60% voted against Tory - even though the other choices are mostly awful, and the FPTP system doesn't actually allow for any reasonable representation of true democracy.

    The choices were clear. The British electorate could have voted Lib Dem if they wanted to stop a Brexit or Labour to stop a hard Brexit but they didn't vote to put either party in government. The 57% who didn't vote Tory contain Brexit supporters. The British electorate know how FPTP works and have gamed it previously to get results they wanted. You are simply in denial.


  • Options
    #4073
    RobMc59
    Registered Users Posts: 4,831 ✭✭✭RobMc59


    fash wrote: »
    Since Airbus is a significantly UK company (and the Americans slapped tariffs on Scotch specifically because of it), I'm betting those sneaky Brits were behind it.

    Of course,the standard answer,blame the brits.


  • Options
    #4074
    cantwbr1
    Registered Users Posts: 303 ✭✭cantwbr1


    forgottenhills wrote: »
    The choices were clear. The British electorate could have voted Lib Dem if they wanted to stop a Brexit or Labour to stop a hard Brexit but they didn't vote to put either party in government. The 57% who didn't vote Tory contain Brexit supporters. The British electorate know how FPTP works and have gamed it previously to get results they wanted. You are simply in denial.

    I think that you just proved his point. The majority of voters in the UK voted for parties that favoured soft or no Brexit. The vagaries of FPTP negated that


  • Options
    #4075
    forgottenhills
    Registered Users Posts: 441 ✭✭forgottenhills


    cantwbr1 wrote: »
    I think that you just proved his point. The majority of voters in the UK voted for parties that favoured soft or no Brexit. The vagaries of FPTP negated that

    All you can say with certainty is that the British electorate were not motivated to vote against a hard Brexit. Proof of the pudding is that we are currently heading very shortly for a hard Brexit and there is nobody out on the UK streets protesting or threatening to (yeah I know COVID etc. etc. but it did not stop BLM protests).

    Anyway all of this is whistling into the wind, completely pointless. People should be taking about the dangers of a no deal world post December 2020 not about the ancient history of the 2016 vote.

    Where is the discussion of the threat of tariffs or the treatment of UK financial services into the EU in the no deal world? These important areas should be dominating the discussion at this point in time, not trying to replay matches that have been already decided.


  • Options
    #4076
    fash
    Registered Users Posts: 2,272 ✭✭✭fash


    RobMc59 wrote: »
    Of course,the standard answer,blame the brits.
    Only when they are responsible: I note you blame the EU for all ills - even where it has nothing to do with the problem at hand - let's pick your recent example of Airbus and the WTO- in reality it was a tit for tat between the EU including the UK and the US in relation to American under the counter support for Boeing through American military purchases.
    The WTO Airbus decision has merely come out earlier - yet you impliedly deny all British responsibility and suggest that the EU was unreasonable


  • Options
    #4077
    fash
    Registered Users Posts: 2,272 ✭✭✭fash


    forgottenhills wrote: »

    Where is the discussion of the threat of tariffs or the treatment of UK financial services into the EU in the no deal world? These important areas should be dominating the discussion at this point in time, not trying to replay matches that have been already decided.
    They have been - or at least for those who are directly affected by it. For everyone else, is it that relevant? You can find out as much as you want by reading the relevant sources


  • Options
    #4078
    RobMc59
    Registered Users Posts: 4,831 ✭✭✭RobMc59


    fash wrote: »
    Only when they are responsible: I note you blame the EU for all ills - even where it has nothing to do with the problem at hand - let's pick your recent example of Airbus and the WTO- in reality it was a tit for tat between the EU including the UK and the US in relation to American under the counter support for Boeing through American military purchases.
    The WTO Airbus decision has merely come out earlier - yet you impliedly deny all British responsibility and suggest that the EU was unreasonable

    I see you're making it up as you go again.I merely pointed out that your grandstanding soap box dressing down of the UK in which you berated them for giving subsidies sounded very like what the WTO gave the EU a pummeling for...pot..kettle... black..penny dropped yet?


  • Options
    #4079
    mick087
    Registered Users Posts: 1,122 ✭✭✭mick087


    First Up wrote: »
    That's not how Brexit came about. The elected representatives abdicated their responsibility and entrusted the decision to people ill-qualified to make it.
    Pure democracy alright.

    The UK gave the choice to its citizens that is pure simple democracy.
    The elected representatives was correct to give this right power to its citizens.

    The elceted then answerd to its citizens during the 2 following elections and if citizens was not happy they was able to take that power away from them.

    No power should be greater than that of its own citizens.


  • Options
    #4080
    swampgas
    Registered Users Posts: 3,548 ✭✭✭swampgas


    At this point isn't the blame game a bit irrelevent?

    The UK government has no leverage, and has burned many, many bridges with the EU.

    The UK can demand and insist and whinge and moan all it wants, it makes no difference: the Barnier staircase remains the only framework for any future relationship the UK has with the EU.

    The UK seems to be hanging onto its red lines around any role for the ECJ and sensible LPF arrangements. Fair enough, as a sovereign nation it can do what it likes (international treaties notwithstanding), but that just means that when they crash out in December without a deal it's on their own heads. The EU is under no obligation, legal or moral, to give them a sweetheart deal just because they want one.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4081
    fash
    Registered Users Posts: 2,272 ✭✭✭fash


    RobMc59 wrote: »
    I see you're making it up as you go again.I merely pointed out that your grandstanding soap box dressing down of the UK in which you berated them for giving subsidies sounded very like what the WTO gave the EU a pummeling for...pot..kettle... black..penny dropped yet?
    Not really since the US and EU aren't looking for a tariff and quota free access to each others markets and both of them knew the rules when they signed up to the WTO - so that situation is literally the exact opposite of what the UK is looking for (and being outraged about that it isn't getting).


Advertisement