The UK is Out - New PM - and whither now for Article 50

Moojor

Erm... if remain had won Cameron wouldn't have quit. So no that argument isn't countered.

PrestonHammer

Why didn't the remain camp bust the lies instead of coming out with whoppers of their own?

MrsGrey

thornburyiron said:

That's all it is. Someone's thoughts.

Like your relative who works in Brussels?

Tomw85

Moojor said:

Erm... if remain had won Cameron wouldn't have quit. So no that argument isn't countered.

Very fair point Moojor, I think one of these is in need for me ;facepalm

thornburyiron

Mrs G I believe she's been present at various confidential meetings and would probably be sacked anyway if it was known she'd been talking. As for her being my relative I've no idea as it seems so far removed I'd have no idea what to call it

claretandbluesky

I am amazed that we found anyone to take the job once Dave left as I feel Theresa may is faced with one of the worst decisions we could imagine, she must sacrifice the economy for the idea of democracy or sacrifice the idea of democracy to save the economy. I do state the word 'idea' of democracy as I do believe it only to be an idea that can be manipulated by information providers, so a more accurate description would be a mechanism through which the information providers do battle to impose their agenda through persuading the populous.

I also feel that were the leave - remain question put to parliament it would be an overwhelming majority to remain. This could be interpreted two ways, the first being that the MPs voting are fortunate to fall within the group of people that the world is working out ok for, or the other way to view it is that they are actually willing and able to inform themselves of the real facts and able to weigh and measure the risks versus reward for the nation as a whole than your average member of the public. I would probably say both would be about equally true personally.

NEoldiron

Tomw85

"I am still waiting for you to come back to me on the questions that I put back to you earlier..."

If you mean this, "what evidence you have to show that we were not losing our ability to veto etc etc." an absence of evidence does not prove a negative.

If you mean this, "we will suddenly stop being the 5th/6th biggest economy in the world", well if the likelihood of the City losing its financial passport becomes a reality together with the drop in inward foreign investment .......


Thorn,
if you've read my earlier posts I've said consistently that the referendum should not be viewed as a legally binding decision - which it isn't, but read the article by Richard Dawkins and see how other countries do it.

Grey's last post sums it up for me.

pardewalegend

Let's give thorn a bit of credit here please.
He has a relative who works within the EU and will certainly be better informed than anyone else on here that's for SURE

NEoldiron

AKA,

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-referendum-result-not-legally-binding-lawyers-letter-a7129626.html

Also FYI I'm coming from Canning Town if you must know. ;wink

grey_til_I_dye

pards

Leaving aside the fine point, sorry, but that is tosh.

You have no idea how well or ill-informed thorn's relative is, nor how that compares to those posting on here.

So it s far, far from SURE.

thornburyiron

I don't know if I can even call her a relative as she is in some obscure way related to a relative of mine as a kind of in law in law sort of way so I do not personally speak to her.
I am merely relaying what she has told my relative and although I gather she really loves her job she doesn't at all like where she's doing it.

IronHerb

Whether it is legally binding or not is irrelevant. If MP's go against the referendum result they will most likely be voted out of office at the next general election, and probably lose out to UKIP who will enforce an unsatisfactory exit.

thornburyiron

What's an unsa

IronHerb

United Nations Special Advisor ;lol

Corrected now ;ok

grey_til_I_dye

thorn

Not trying to discredit her or you, jut pointing out that pards assuming she was better informed than anyone else on Brexit was a bit of a stretch.

pardewalegend

Grey

No one on here would be better informed on here, not even you

thornburyiron

Grey I don't feel discredited I'm just relaying what she has said. It's the federal ambitions which get to her most. She is obviously better informed than most but not necessarily better informed than all.

pardewalegend

Don't worry Thorn
Theresa May herself could log on here and face an arguement on her credentials

Tomw85

NE sorry but I don't buy either of your points. Surely if the EU is not pushing for ever closer union there would be a mandate or something to say so. I gave evidence to show that it is, I can't really do much more than that.

Also re London losing its financial passport, can you provide anything to support your claims here?

I have given plenty of other examples to show that we should continue to have a strong economy, I couldn't help notice that you didn't provide anything to counter that as your views that we will become a small divided nation are just that, your views and not based on fact.

grey_til_I_dye

thorn

What makes her better informed? The simple fact that she is employed within the EU?

What information is she able to access that is not public domain?

Is every EU employee better informed than any non-EU employee?

What happens when EU employees disagree about something?

Who trumps whom?

pardew

What on earth makes you think that

a) you are qualified to make such a statement

b) that someone you have never met, and know nothing about, is so well-informed.

It's a nonsense.

MrsGrey

pards/thorn

I am not challenging how much she knows or doesn't know. I was trying to make the point that her views are just opinions. She will bring to the process of forming an opinion her own priorities, prejudices and attitudes.

If it follows that anyone whose opinion is based on first hand experience is right, how do you explain the fact that many people have just as much, and possibly more, knowledge but come to a different conclusion?

IronHerb

Tom,

From the FT on 29th June

The City of London should no longer be able to clear euro-denominated trades, the French president said on Tuesday, adding to post-Brexit fears.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e8e0c44a-3d89-11e6-9f2c-36b487ebd80a.html#axzz4En9SrzK7

This is some ridiculous figure of 1 trillion Euro a day I think.

thornburyiron

All I was trying to get across was that she knows first hand that a federal state of Europe is the aim of the EU. Her opinion is that she doesn't like the idea or the thought of it.
As far as I'm aware she's not expressed any other views or details.

Tomw85

Ironherb, sorry but you need to subscribe to be able to read the article so my response is without having read it. The headline which I could see says that the French president wants to rule out London clearing euro's. This doesn't mean it is law, also if he does get his way then to me that is just another example of the EU not being democratic and in fact being very protectionist.

pardewalegend

;doh

ASLEFshrugged

thornburyiron said:

As I posted a couple of weeks ago my tenuous relative who is a translator at the EU in Brussels said vote remain if you want her to keep her job or leave if you don't want to be part of a German led federal state of Europe. They've already applied to join NATO as such so they're determined to do it.

Because the French can't wait to part of a German led federal stare of Europe. Laugh, I nearly.......see Derek and Clive.

grey_til_I_dye

pardewalegend said:

Don't worry Thorn
Theresa May herself could log on here and face an arguement on her credentials

Presumably from you, since she was for Remain.

thorn

How can she possibly 'know' that?

Is it some kind of secret plan that she has found out about?

Or is it what she has surmised?

And if so, without knowing what information she had access to, it's very hard to take as anything other than an 'I reckon'.

MrsGrey

thornburyiron said:

All I was trying to get across was that she knows first hand that a federal state of Europe is the aim of the EU. Her opinion is that she doesn't like the idea or the thought of it.

It's part of the stated aim: ever closer Union. No inside knowledge needed.

Particularly as the UK exemption from that was a headline agenda item in the recent negotiations. And was agreed.

I'm now a bit puzzled as to why you have quoted it/her comment twice.

grey_til_I_dye

tom

What is undemocratic about protectionism?

I would assume the whole point of a trade bloc was to be protectionist.

If the UK isn't in the EU, why would the EU look to protect its status as a financial hub by giving it access to privileges available to a trade bloc it has voted to leave?

Tomw85

Grey

Because it is them saying do as we want or it will cost you. I understand wanting to protect your own interests but it was due to it being based in London that it was able to grow as it has with our geographical location, laws, infrastructure and language. Now they want to make money from it.

Where was our protection when the Chinese were dumping cheap steel into the EU market?