Brexit

Barney

I guess it does not matter what articles are produced they can be easily dismissed if you are so inclined. There are many more and there have been TV programmes on the subject as well. I guess if you want to stay in the EU then you believe articles that suit you; I want to leave so I am more inclined to believe the articles that support my view. It just needs to be sorted sooner rather than later.

MrsGrey

Barney said:

I guess if you want to stay in the EU then you believe articles that suit you; I want to leave so I am more inclined to believe the articles that support my view. It just needs to be sorted sooner rather than later.

Well, anyone can believe whatever they like, of course. Even if it is that the earth is flat.

But if something is proven factually wrong, I think anyone who believes it is wilfully ignorant.

Saying the EU makes us throw away food because it doesn't meet size/shape regulations is on a par with saying I want to stay in the EU because when I get to 60 they'll give me a Harrods food hamper every month and 3 free holidays to an EU destination of my choice.

Both are untrue.

Articles can be 'easily dismissed' if one has no interest in the truth.

MrsGrey

So far, I've not hear a single valid statement of fact that justifies leaving the EU.

And believe me, I'd like to!

They make us do this, they make us do that .... every reason I've heard is just false.

On the other hand, if someone says they just don't want to be part of a group, they want to the UK to do things their own way without reference to a bigger group, they don't want to cooperate or compromise... well, that's fair enough.

It's not a point of view I agree with, but it's as valid as any other.

Yet, strangely, I hardy ever hear this put forward as a reason for voting Leave.

Instead I hear rubbish like 'if we leave we can have interest rates set by our own country', or 'I'm fed up of the European Court of Human Rights telling us what to do' or 'we'll be forced to adopt the euro' :doh:

imagelost

BubblesNeverDies said:

Madcap, I've had other things to do today, but I'm back briefly. :biggrin:
You said
"If things were absolutely 100% going swimmingly 17.4 million people wouldn`t have voted to leave."

You know as well as I do (although you'd never admit it), that 17.4 million people were conned into believing that the EU was the cause of the financial crash of 2008, subsequent Tory austerity measures, a million Turks were at the border and anything else Farage, Reet-Smugg and his band the ERG (if ever there was a misnomer) et al could think of.

If there had been a referendum prior to the 2008 financial crash do you really believe that Leave would've won.
It was just convenient for all the rabid anti-EU (insert epithet) to blame the EU for everything.

As far as the concrete reasons for remain, Whitehorse mentioned some of them.
But for Chrissake, stop thinking yourself into your little self-sufficient box, we're all on a little rock in space and if we don't get our act together soon we won't be on it much longer.

You keep banging on (and I mean, you really keep banging on) about co-operation and yet you want us out of a fantastic project which is trying to unite millions of people not by force but by choice and which was born out of the ashes of WW2 in an attempt for it never to happen again.

And you keep going on and on about Pyotr Alexeyevich Kropotkin, can you tell me what he actually achieved?

And btw Aslef, Grey and MrsGrey among others have been dismantling all the "vague" reasons that people voted to leave.

Now I need a beer. :biggrin: :ale:

And I know you shouldn't start a sentence with "And" :biggrin:

I did not vote to leave because of financial crash

imagelost

MrsGrey said:

Barney said:

I guess if you want to stay in the EU then you believe articles that suit you; I want to leave so I am more inclined to believe the articles that support my view. It just needs to be sorted sooner rather than later.

Well, anyone can believe whatever they like, of course. Even if it is that the earth is flat.

But if something is proven factually wrong, I think anyone who believes it is wilfully ignorant.

Saying the EU makes us throw away food because it doesn't meet size/shape regulations is on a par with saying I want to stay in the EU because when I get to 60 they'll give me a Harrods food hamper every month and 3 free holidays to an EU destination of my choice.

Both are untrue.

Articles can be 'easily dismissed' if one has no interest in the truth.

The ugly food that now on sale

imagelost

I did not want to be part of a Euro army

IronHerb

Bubbles,- You know as well as I do (although you'd never admit it), that 17.4 million people were conned into believing that the EU was the cause of the financial crash of 2008, subsequent Tory austerity measures, a million Turks were at the border and anything else Farage, Reet-Smugg and his band the ERG (if ever there was a misnomer) et al could think of.

Any proof of that?

imagelost

Burn tonight

ammerinaberdeen

I haven’t been ‘Conned’ by anyone and to suggest that 17.4 million were, is if I may say, a little over the top.
Millions like me had our reasons for doing so and do not recognise most of the slurs aimed at us.
We had a referendum we said leave. We didn’t ask for a deal and certainly not the rubbish of ‘May’s’ Deal.
I’m just an ordinary bloke but if we are, as I feel we are, betrayed by the elite parliamentarians telling us ‘They’ know better than us! Beware!

BubblesNeverDies

I didn't say that the reason people voted leave was because of the 2008 financial crash.
I meant that before then there was very little to complain about the EU apart from frivolous matters like the ban on bent cucumbers.
However after 8 years of the subsequent austerity measures and all the anti-EU propaganda (Daily Fail, Express, Sun, Telegraph, UKIP etc.) the EU was an easy target for the protest vote.


imagelost said:
Burn tonight
Please explain your comment.

imagelost

BubblesNeverDies said:

I didn't say that the reason people voted leave was because of the 2008 financial crash.
I meant that before then there was very little to complain about the EU apart from frivolous matters like the ban on bent cucumbers.
However after 8 years of the subsequent austerity measures and all the anti-EU propaganda (Daily Fail, Express, Sun, Telegraph, UKIP etc.) the EU was an easy target for the protest vote.


imagelost said:
Burn tonight
Please explain your comment.

Yeah I was having a fire in the garden,,, I was burning a box that stainless bin come in,, on the box it had made in the UK,,, and the Union Jack
Took picture of it but will not load on to this site

Barney

'European Union' does not appear on new passports according to reports in the press

TheMadcapLaughs

Whitehorsehammer said:

Madcap said

And the concrete reasons for staying in the EU are................?

For me it is that I am a citizen of Europe and I can travel, work, own property without problem. I feel privilaged to be in other European countries as a European citizen, if we leave I will feel like an outsider. I desperately hope that we get a second referendum and choose to stay.

Sorry not replied sooner, I agree, this does appear to be a positive. Not being an expert I'm not sure how easy it was to do any of the above pre EU. People certainly lived, worked and retired abroad before the EU's inception, but in an ideal world, yes anything that facilitates this is a positive. On the flip side, free movement has deprived poorer countries of talent, money and "bodies" as people will tend to migrate to more prosperous countries exacerbating problems within the countries they have left. FOM and immigration in general is a contentious issue that imo politicians have swept under the carpet. And don't worry, we ain't leaving.

TheMadcapLaughs

Two things I have been thinking about. Gina Miller campaigned tirelessly for parliament to have the final say in regards to brexit, after all, she argued, we live in a parliamentary democracy and it was only constitutional that parliament as a whole have the final say. Why then is she now campaigning for the people's vote. Seems a bit contradictory. Secondly Gina Miller's court case received an almost unprecedented level of media attention, you could barely turn the tv on without Gina being centre stage. At the moment there is a court case proceeding that argues that we have already left the EU. The 29th of March was written into uk law as passed by parliament as the official date. Teresa May and the EU have agreed to extend this date, however, this new date wasn't presented to parliament and new legislation wasn't passed to rescind the original legislation. By uk law, it is argued that we have already left. I would have thought this would be a big story and the chap who has brought the case would be given the same celebrity as Gina Miller. Apparently not.

grey_til_I_dye

Madcap

Your recollection of Gina Miller as a meejah darling hardly fits with mine.

If memory serves, she was reviled by the usual suspects, and received death threats (not, I believe from the meejah...).

MrsGrey

TheMadcapLaughs said:

Gina Miller campaigned tirelessly for parliament to have the final say in regards to brexit, after all, she argued, we live in a parliamentary democracy and it was only constitutional that parliament as a whole have the final say.

That's not quite what she as arguing. She was disputing the powers of the executive (govt) to act unilaterally without proper authority.

Her campaign for a peopel's vote is different, and doesn't contradict what she did earlier.

TheMadcapLaughs

Grey, I agree, the threats to her were totally unacceptable, but she was constantly on the news and interviewed on various current affairs programmes. The court case was headline news. Not one person I have spoken to is aware of the current court case, and no, I couldn't tell you the chaps name who has brought it. The fact that a case is to be heard in the high court that argues that the UK has already left the EU I would have thought would be a little higher profile. I don't expect it to win, and I don't expect us to leave. The men in grey have closed ranks.

MrsGrey

TheMadcapLaughs said:

The 29th of March was written into uk law as passed by parliament as the official date. Teresa May and the EU have agreed to extend this date, however, this new date wasn't presented to parliament and new legislation wasn't passed to rescind the original legislation.

Again, not right.

The new date was written into a statutory instrument which amended the existing legislation (a process which is completely routine, and happens with lots of UK law). , The SI was presented to Parliament on 27 March - they debated it and voted to agree it (In the Commons and in the Lords).

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/brexit/the-eu/eu-exit-day-is-changed-in-uk-law/

Which may be why the media isn't covering it much, specially since so much other stuff is going on with Brexit.

MrsGrey

TheMadcapLaughs said:

The fact that a case is to be heard in the high court that argues that the UK has already left the EU I would have thought would be a little higher profile. I don't expect it to win, and I don't expect us to leave. The men in grey have closed ranks.

The Daily Mail and the Express seem to be giving it a fair amount of column inches.

BubblesNeverDies

More fake news dismantled by MrsGrey. :clap:

TheMadcapLaughs

I discovered it by chance the other day and was gobsmacked that I hadn't seen mention of it, I did notice that a former appeal court judge thought the case had merit but various other legal chaps dismissed it as nonsense. As far as the Gina Miller case, again I have failed to understand the complexity of the case. I understood her fight was to maintain the sovereignty of parliament, I.E. they should have the final say.

TheMadcapLaughs

Have just been reading up a little on the Gina Miller case and I don't think it makes either of us right or wrong. I still read it as parliament as a whole having the final say as opposed to the sitting government only. Imo that makes her insistence on a people's vote contradictory. She also mentioned that she supported neither side, that she was merely interested in the laws of the land and parliamentary democracy being upheld. I think that may have been a fib. By fake news I assume you mean a court case is not going ahead?

imagelost

I hear the cod war is about start again
:fishslap:

MrsGrey

BubblesNeverDies said:

More fake news dismantled by MrsGrey. :clap:

It wasn't fake news, I don't think. It was either the argument being put forward by the appellants, or perhaps the newspapers presentation of it, that I was saying was wrong in fact.

MrsGrey

TheMadcapLaughs said:

Imo that makes her insistence on a people's vote contradictory.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

I think that arguing

that the govt can't do whatever it likes without any Parliamentary scrutiny

is totally separate from, and not contradictory to arguing

that Parliament can ask the public to give its views on an issue through a people's vote referendum and agree to implement the result

BubblesNeverDies

MrsGrey, I was just lazy, but I hope the message was the same. :ok:

IronHerb

BubblesNeverDies said:

More fake news dismantled by MrsGrey. :clap:

More fake news dismantled by MrsG. :biggrin:

MIAHammer

ammerinaberdeen said:

I’m just an ordinary bloke but if we are, as I feel we are, betrayed by the elite parliamentarians telling us ‘They’ know better than us! Beware!

Isn’t that the reason they were voted into power. They are meant to know better than us. Otherwise what’s the point?

imagelost

MIAHammer said:

ammerinaberdeen said:

I’m just an ordinary bloke but if we are, as I feel we are, betrayed by the elite parliamentarians telling us ‘They’ know better than us! Beware!

Isn’t that the reason they were voted into power. They are meant to know better than us. Otherwise what’s the point?

It’s all about choices

BubblesNeverDies

Here's an interesting essay by Simon Schama which gives a historical perspective:

Copy and paste

simon schama essay when britain chose europe

into Google and then click on

Simon Schama: When Britain chose Europe | Financial Times

It will bypass the FT paywall

(don't click the link
https://www.ft.com/content/68c8efa8-39df-11e9-b72b-2c7f526ca5d0)