Non aviation content. Play nice – No religion, no politics and no axe grinding please.
  • 1
  • 92
  • 93
  • 94
  • 95
  • 96
  • 575
By Colonel Panic
#1664217
johnm wrote:Most Remainers seem willing to accept that the EU and UK are imperfect but take the view that the benefits of membership and the opportunity to influence future direction outweigh the downsides.

I'm sorry, but once again the implication is that those who voted Remain were / are more balanced, thoughtful and rational. To say so is, as far as I can see, completely falacious. For every "Junckers is a p1sshead so w must leave the EU" I give you "How will I be able to post a selfie from Benidorm if I lose free roaming".
User avatar
By PaulB
#1664218
Colonel Panic wrote:
johnm wrote:Most Remainers seem willing to accept that the EU and UK are imperfect but take the view that the benefits of membership and the opportunity to influence future direction outweigh the downsides.

I'm sorry, but once again the implication is that those who voted Remain were / are more balanced, thoughtful and rational. To say so is, as far as I can see, completely falacious. For every "Junckers is a p1sshead so w must leave the EU" I give you "How will I be able to post a selfie from Benidorm if I lose free roaming".


So what are the rational evidence based reason for wanting to leave then, because it sounds inherently risky to me (The NHS has gone from being the largest purchaser of fax machines to being the largest purchaser of fridges (for stockpiling medicines)).
User avatar
By eltonioni
#1664223
PaulB wrote:
johnm wrote:
eltonioni wrote:It's still No Deal though. There's no mandate for anything else.


No deal is the legal default under Article 50. Whether there is a mandate for anything else is still under debate in Westminster.


There isn’t a mandate for anything is there? Non of the above says how leaving shall be achieved or when.

The referendum was advisory, both main parties have leave in their manifestoes.... Apart from the referendum where frankly the population was lied to and possibly influenced by external forces, there’s no mandate.

Remember, we were told that we’d have trade deals sorted with ease and that the E.U. would be a pushover because “they need us more than we need them”. Today at PMQs, they were talking about deals with The Maldives! Well, that’ll replace lost E.U. trade, won’t it?

Old news. The result and the law says we're out on March 30th.
By Colonel Panic
#1664232
PaulB wrote:So what are the rational evidence based reason for wanting to leave then

Here's one; the CAP is financially & environmentally unsustainable & totally inappropriate for the UK, but the EU can't, hasn't and won't make any meaningful changes to it.
By johnm
#1664235
Colonel Panic wrote:
PaulB wrote:So what are the rational evidence based reason for wanting to leave then

Here's one; the CAP is financially & environmentally unsustainable & totally inappropriate for the UK, but the EU can't, hasn't and won't make any meaningful changes to it.

And there we see the problem in a nutshell, leaving justified by a single issue, no context. We know there’s lots of things wrong in the EU and the U.K. but no Brexit scenario has yet beaten Remain.
By Leodisflyer
#1664238
There are those who stand to gain through Brexit. Some significantly. For others it was more a matter of principle and they are prepared to pay a price.
User avatar
By stevelup
#1664244
johnm wrote:
Colonel Panic wrote:
PaulB wrote:So what are the rational evidence based reason for wanting to leave then

Here's one; the CAP is financially & environmentally unsustainable & totally inappropriate for the UK, but the EU can't, hasn't and won't make any meaningful changes to it.

And there we see the problem in a nutshell, leaving justified by a single issue, no context. We know there’s lots of things wrong in the EU and the U.K. but no Brexit scenario has yet beaten Remain.


You really do take things to extremes sometimes. CP has given one good example of a broken EU system and you're inferring he's some kind of 'idiot brexiteer' who is suggesting that one thing as a sole reason to leave...

The clue is where he said 'here's one'!
By johnm
#1664248
@stevelup My point was that one example of an imperfect activity or policy is not a reason to justify Brexit. You might as well say that a flat battery implies chucking the car.
By Leodisflyer
#1664254
He did give one example in reply to a question. The question wasn’t “give one example and explain your wider reasons”.

Your response was, in my view a valid devopment of a point within constrained space, but can also see both perspectives here. Overall another example of why we humans rely so much on non-verbal communication and. as a technologist, another example of why technology can’t yet fully replace face to face meetings.
johnm liked this
User avatar
By stevelup
#1664255
John, he was clearly giving just one example. The fact you interpreted that to mean he was giving that one example as a sole reason to justify Brexit says more about you than it does anyone else!

CPs answer was completely unambiguous to the rest of us.

And with respect to your car analogy, quite right... but if there are dozens (maybe hundreds) of seemingly small problems, your car might well end up being beyond economical repair!
Leodisflyer, johnm liked this
By Leodisflyer
#1664257
Getting back to the topic and next steps that Parliament is debating, can anybody find anything in the election manifestos of the main parties that gives them a mandate for no deal?

The Conservative manifesto is very clear on promising a deal and a good future training relationship. If you go back to it and use it as a baseline then like it or loathe the deal on offer, it does meet an electoral promise.

If Parliament can’t accept the deal then it does look as though the democratic next step is some form of public vote as the main parties didn’t seek a mandate for no deal in the GE and no deal is counter to the promises made in the referendum campaign.
Newfy liked this
User avatar
By PaulB
#1664265
That’s a totally logical argument, but I can’t see any merit in another vote when all the polls would suggest that the country is still split right down the middle.

I really don’t know what the answer is now, although it was fun today watching a load of Conservative Brexiteers complaining about Parliament taking control!
johnm liked this
By Bill Haddow
#1664267
Prior to the referendum the Prime Minister, David Cameron, made it clear to the UK electorate that there was no second chance after the referendum, and that people should think long and hard before voting. It was quite proper and responsible for him to say this, and it was not gainsaid by any other major party leader. (Of course, they all expected a "Remain" result.)

Well, we got the result. The people's vote. To leave. End of.

Bill H
mick w liked this
User avatar
By eltonioni
#1664270
Leodisflyer wrote:Getting back to the topic and next steps that Parliament is debating, can anybody find anything in the election manifestos of the main parties that gives them a mandate for no deal?

The Conservative manifesto is very clear on promising a deal and a good future training relationship. If you go back to it and use it as a baseline then like it or loathe the deal on offer, it does meet an electoral promise.

If Parliament can’t accept the deal then it does look as though the democratic next step is some form of public vote as the main parties didn’t seek a mandate for no deal in the GE and no deal is counter to the promises made in the referendum campaign.



Top of page 36. There’s no promise of any particular deal that I can see, just the promise to negotiate as a strong and stable government and that “no deal is better than a bad deal”, so it’s still no deal.

https://www.conservatives.com/manifesto

Labour promised Brexit with unicorns.

https://labour.org.uk/manifesto/negotia ... xit/#first

We voted in a weak and wobbly government and No Deal is the law, both domestic and international, so it’s still no deal. Parliament can’t even agree what they don’t like, never mind what they want, so it’s still no deal.

I picked up an interesting point yesterday, that the Crown (the PM in daily practice ) is sovereign over international law, not Parliament. Parliament can huff and puff all it likes but if she wants to ignore the debate, amendments, votes etc, she can, so it’s still no deal.

Forcing a GE seems the only way to change the situation, although yesterday even Ken Clarke said he’d vote for May’s bad deal so there’s no obvious Tory appetite for the required no confidence vote even if it means leaving, so it’s still no deal.
Last edited by eltonioni on Thu Jan 10, 2019 6:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
By Leodisflyer
#1664274
The referendum didn’t define the form of Brexit. The manifesto proposed what is being delivered now. The party with the second largest chunk of votes were somewhat ambiguous, but set out 6 tests in their support of leaving.

I’m very much in a minority, but I do think the deal is consistent with the referendum and subsequent GE manifestos. Yes, it delivers a holding position to then negotiate a future relationship, so not the end of the road, but it is the logical and democratic conslusion at this stage.

My point is that, if Parliament can’t back the deal, then I see no mandate for hard Brexit and also no mandate for remain. The convolution of the Labour position the becomes a logical sequence - although that process does mandate a hold on A50 and, if the EU doesn’t agree a pause then the next logical step would be the unilateral withdrawal of Article 50 to allow the main parties to follow up on their manifestos and agree next steps.
Last edited by Leodisflyer on Thu Jan 10, 2019 7:06 am, edited 1 time in total.
johnm, Newfy liked this
  • 1
  • 92
  • 93
  • 94
  • 95
  • 96
  • 575