FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > The truth about the U.K. Brexit team
The truth about the U.K. Brexit team
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
"Sooner or later, ordinary people are going to wake up from their collective slumber ." Of all the possibilities from Brexit this is the least likely. Voters get angry and angry is stupid. And voters are easily bored. When it was getting near the end of the nomination process for Trump people just got bored and wanted it to end. (Because the Republican nomination process is different to the Democrats it usually ends this way in competitice races.) Voters will go the path of least resistance in a lot of cases. It feels like too much hassle to redo the Brexit decision so it wont happen. If it hits a tipping point (either enough sentiment, a systemic shock or something else big) then it might happen but it looks very unlikely. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Remain only has one position. " What is meant by a "reformed EU"? | |||
"Remain only has one position. Whereas Leave has hundreds of positions, dependant on your standpoint. The various factions within the process are now hardening their positions accordingly, and Mrs May is trying to please everyone, and is actually succeeding in pleasing no one. If the first nine months of the process were tumultuous, then I certainly fear for the next fifteen! " 100 of positions!!!!....I've only seen one so far  | |||
| |||
 | |||
| |||
""Luckily the majority of citizens in the UK have no real interest in politics ." Done a survey have you? "Has he fuck..hes imagining it  | |||
"Luckily the majority of citizens in the UK have no real interest in politics . The government are hardly going to reveal details of all the plans at this stage to the general public. We can take it as read that they will already have completes detailed planning. As the financial markets are not concerned about the impact of Brexit on the UK , I cannot see why many voters will be . " Jesus, you get worse everyday! If more people paid attention to politics we wouldn't be in this mess. The EU have revealed their plans and they seem to be kicking our arses so far. David Davis has already told you that his department haven't done much planning, the planning that they did do wasn't very good, and to top it off, he didn't bother reading it anyway!!! He said this to a select committee and you think he was lying, and made himself look like a twat for what reason exactly???? The finacial markets ARE worried, they are complaining they can't recruit good staff anymore, they are relocating to other places and they are begging the government for clarity. | |||
"Luckily the majority of citizens in the UK have no real interest in politics . The government are hardly going to reveal details of all the plans at this stage to the general public. We can take it as read that they will already have completes detailed planning. As the financial markets are not concerned about the impact of Brexit on the UK , I cannot see why many voters will be . " luckily you are merely one speck that make up the vocal minority | |||
"Luckily the majority of citizens in the UK have no real interest in politics . The government are hardly going to reveal details of all the plans at this stage to the general public. We can take it as read that they will already have completes detailed planning. As the financial markets are not concerned about the impact of Brexit on the UK , I cannot see why many voters will be . " The currency markets didnt like the leave vote did they? There is a reason why the Stock market is doing so well and it's the fact that sterling is down the pan. | |||
"Remain only has one position. Whereas Leave has hundreds of positions, dependant on your standpoint. The various factions within the process are now hardening their positions accordingly, and Mrs May is trying to please everyone, and is actually succeeding in pleasing no one. If the first nine months of the process were tumultuous, then I certainly fear for the next fifteen! 100 of positions!!!!....I've only seen one so far "Hard Brexit, soft Brexit, hard border, soft border, single market, customs union, controlled migration.....start perming the combinations and then you start to see the hundreds of positions available. | |||
"Remain only has one position. What is meant by a "reformed EU"?" That was never on the table when we had the referendum. Maybe a third option should have been available....remain and fight for reform. Would have got my vote. | |||
 | |||
""Luckily the majority of citizens in the UK have no real interest in politics ." Done a survey have you? "Hes speaking from personal experience if the information in his posts are anything to go by | |||
"In the last few days we have received confirmation about something that we have all suspected for a long time. Whether we are Brexiters or Remainers, these revelations should be really alarming to everyone who wants to see a better future for the U.K. FAILING TO PLAN IS PLANNING TO FAIL. " Did you watch the budget? Philip Hammond put aside £3 billion to be spent on PLANNING for Brexit. Also on your comments about the Cabinet having no final destination about Brexit agreed in the cabinet.....that's because several different cabinet members have different ideas about what that should be. Philip Hammond said within the last week that the cabinet will have a meeting to agree a final destination before trade talks start with the EU. As we've only been negotiating with the EU so far on the divorce bill, citizens rights and the Irish border there has been no need as yet to have a 'final destination' agreement within cabinet. The final destination only really affects the trade talks and will be agreed in cabinet before trade talks start with the EU. | |||
"In the last few days we have received confirmation about something that we have all suspected for a long time. Whether we are Brexiters or Remainers, these revelations should be really alarming to everyone who wants to see a better future for the U.K. FAILING TO PLAN IS PLANNING TO FAIL. Did you watch the budget? Philip Hammond put aside £3 billion to be spent on PLANNING for Brexit. Also on your comments about the Cabinet having no final destination about Brexit agreed in the cabinet.....that's because several different cabinet members have different ideas about what that should be. Philip Hammond said within the last week that the cabinet will have a meeting to agree a final destination before trade talks start with the EU. As we've only been negotiating with the EU so far on the divorce bill, citizens rights and the Irish border there has been no need as yet to have a 'final destination' agreement within cabinet. The final destination only really affects the trade talks and will be agreed in cabinet before trade talks start with the EU. " There speaks the expert so look and listen please all you people you have been told by the kipper | |||
"Remain only has one position. What is meant by a "reformed EU"? That was never on the table when we had the referendum. Maybe a third option should have been available....remain and fight for reform. Would have got my vote." Wasn’t reform what Cameron tried for pre referendum? The EU basically told him to sod off as they never believed he would call a referendum, or that if he did we would vote the way we did. The clusterfuck started way before the referendum....and has blame on many sides. Our glorious leaders do not, however, seem to be capable of managing the situation we find ourselves in now tho. | |||
"Remain only has one position. What is meant by a "reformed EU"? That was never on the table when we had the referendum. Maybe a third option should have been available....remain and fight for reform. Would have got my vote. Wasn’t reform what Cameron tried for pre referendum? The EU basically told him to sod off as they never believed he would call a referendum, or that if he did we would vote the way we did. The clusterfuck started way before the referendum....and has blame on many sides. Our glorious leaders do not, however, seem to be capable of managing the situation we find ourselves in now tho." The EU held their position as they never believed that we would have a referendum, or then, to actually vote to leave. Now we have Mrs Merkel and Mr Macron calling for EU reforms. The Eastern part of the Union is getting suspicious of what these reforms would be, but reform must surely come. | |||
"Remain only has one position. What is meant by a "reformed EU"? That was never on the table when we had the referendum. Maybe a third option should have been available....remain and fight for reform. Would have got my vote. Wasn’t reform what Cameron tried for pre referendum? The EU basically told him to sod off as they never believed he would call a referendum, or that if he did we would vote the way we did. The clusterfuck started way before the referendum....and has blame on many sides. Our glorious leaders do not, however, seem to be capable of managing the situation we find ourselves in now tho. The EU held their position as they never believed that we would have a referendum, or then, to actually vote to leave. Now we have Mrs Merkel and Mr Macron calling for EU reforms. The Eastern part of the Union is getting suspicious of what these reforms would be, but reform must surely come. " Then after the EU has reformed, we can have another referendum to see if we want to rejoin.  | |||
"In the last few days we have received confirmation about something that we have all suspected for a long time. Whether we are Brexiters or Remainers, these revelations should be really alarming to everyone who wants to see a better future for the U.K. FAILING TO PLAN IS PLANNING TO FAIL. Yesterday Philip Hammond said that there has been no cabinet discussion at all about the final destination. What this means is that there is no end result or final position that the cabinet have all signed up to aim for. How can the cabinet team present a united front if they are all aiming for different things individually? The ambiguity that individual ministers have presented in speeches in the last 18 months can now be understood. David Davis has perhaps enlightened us most in recent days with his announcement that the U.K. Govt has not undertaken any strategic planning in order to form their exit strategy. He went further by suggesting an event like Brexit could be like the 2008 financial crash and thereby somehow (in his mind) it could not be planned for. Are we to take from this that David Davis knows that the financial effects will be so bad that it is not worth planning for? I bet that the Boards of many of the U.K. and US banks wish they could have been given two years notice of the crash. I am fairly sure that they would not have just said that it was not worth making any plans to mitigate their losses. Then we have illustrations of cognitive dissonance that every day, never fails to astound us. Today it was Boris Johnson’s turn to say that we are wanting to intensify our trade links with the EU whilst at the same time leaving it. Brexiters - you should be very afraid because this level of cooperative incompetence cannot continue indefinitely. Sooner or later, ordinary people are going to wake up from their collective slumber and realise that a bunch of Clowns are leading them to the jaws of disaster through a lack of basic strategic planning. Your Brexit dream will end in tatters unless the U.K. Brexit team adopts serious businesslike tactics that ANY business or professional entity would employ." The banking crash seemed nothing but pre-designed imo | |||
"In the last few days we have received confirmation about something that we have all suspected for a long time. Whether we are Brexiters or Remainers, these revelations should be really alarming to everyone who wants to see a better future for the U.K. FAILING TO PLAN IS PLANNING TO FAIL. Did you watch the budget? Philip Hammond put aside £3 billion to be spent on PLANNING for Brexit. Also on your comments about the Cabinet having no final destination about Brexit agreed in the cabinet.....that's because several different cabinet members have different ideas about what that should be. Philip Hammond said within the last week that the cabinet will have a meeting to agree a final destination before trade talks start with the EU. " But the vocal leave supports on here keep telling us that they *know* what people voted for when they voted leave. They keep saying that it was *obvious* that is was a vote for hard brexit and to leave the EEA etc. And May has been saying 'Brexit means brexit'. So surely that must mean it is all clear to the MPs? If all that above is true then why would their be any disagreement between the leave MPs? -Matt | |||
"In the last few days we have received confirmation about something that we have all suspected for a long time. Whether we are Brexiters or Remainers, these revelations should be really alarming to everyone who wants to see a better future for the U.K. FAILING TO PLAN IS PLANNING TO FAIL. Did you watch the budget? Philip Hammond put aside £3 billion to be spent on PLANNING for Brexit. Also on your comments about the Cabinet having no final destination about Brexit agreed in the cabinet.....that's because several different cabinet members have different ideas about what that should be. Philip Hammond said within the last week that the cabinet will have a meeting to agree a final destination before trade talks start with the EU. But the vocal leave supports on here keep telling us that they *know* what people voted for when they voted leave. They keep saying that it was *obvious* that is was a vote for hard brexit and to leave the EEA etc. And May has been saying 'Brexit means brexit'. So surely that must mean it is all clear to the MPs? If all that above is true then why would their be any disagreement between the leave MPs? -Matt" Because they are not all leave MP's in the cabinet. Hammond is a remainer and it's clear he would prefer to remain, but is also a democrat and accepts the country voted democratically to leave. He'll be arguing in cabinet for us to stay as close to the EU as possible after Brexit, while real Brexiters in the cabinet like Michael Gove will be arguing for the opposite. | |||
"In the last few days we have received confirmation about something that we have all suspected for a long time. Whether we are Brexiters or Remainers, these revelations should be really alarming to everyone who wants to see a better future for the U.K. FAILING TO PLAN IS PLANNING TO FAIL. Did you watch the budget? Philip Hammond put aside £3 billion to be spent on PLANNING for Brexit. Also on your comments about the Cabinet having no final destination about Brexit agreed in the cabinet.....that's because several different cabinet members have different ideas about what that should be. Philip Hammond said within the last week that the cabinet will have a meeting to agree a final destination before trade talks start with the EU. But the vocal leave supports on here keep telling us that they *know* what people voted for when they voted leave. They keep saying that it was *obvious* that is was a vote for hard brexit and to leave the EEA etc. And May has been saying 'Brexit means brexit'. So surely that must mean it is all clear to the MPs? If all that above is true then why would their be any disagreement between the leave MPs? -Matt Because they are not all leave MP's in the cabinet. Hammond is a remainer and it's clear he would prefer to remain, but is also a democrat and accepts the country voted democratically to leave. He'll be arguing in cabinet for us to stay as close to the EU as possible after Brexit, while real Brexiters in the cabinet like Michael Gove will be arguing for the opposite. " But it is not whether every MP in the cabinet *agrees* with the destination chosen. They haven't even sat down to work out what that destination should even be. -Matt | |||
| |||
"In the last few days we have received confirmation about something that we have all suspected for a long time. Whether we are Brexiters or Remainers, these revelations should be really alarming to everyone who wants to see a better future for the U.K. FAILING TO PLAN IS PLANNING TO FAIL. Did you watch the budget? Philip Hammond put aside £3 billion to be spent on PLANNING for Brexit. Also on your comments about the Cabinet having no final destination about Brexit agreed in the cabinet.....that's because several different cabinet members have different ideas about what that should be. Philip Hammond said within the last week that the cabinet will have a meeting to agree a final destination before trade talks start with the EU. But the vocal leave supports on here keep telling us that they *know* what people voted for when they voted leave. They keep saying that it was *obvious* that is was a vote for hard brexit and to leave the EEA etc. And May has been saying 'Brexit means brexit'. So surely that must mean it is all clear to the MPs? If all that above is true then why would their be any disagreement between the leave MPs? -Matt Because they are not all leave MP's in the cabinet. Hammond is a remainer and it's clear he would prefer to remain, but is also a democrat and accepts the country voted democratically to leave. He'll be arguing in cabinet for us to stay as close to the EU as possible after Brexit, while real Brexiters in the cabinet like Michael Gove will be arguing for the opposite. " The correct term for a "real brexiter" is headbanging brexiter extremist. Just saying. | |||
| |||
"In the last few days we have received confirmation about something that we have all suspected for a long time. Whether we are Brexiters or Remainers, these revelations should be really alarming to everyone who wants to see a better future for the U.K. FAILING TO PLAN IS PLANNING TO FAIL. Did you watch the budget? Philip Hammond put aside £3 billion to be spent on PLANNING for Brexit. Also on your comments about the Cabinet having no final destination about Brexit agreed in the cabinet.....that's because several different cabinet members have different ideas about what that should be. Philip Hammond said within the last week that the cabinet will have a meeting to agree a final destination before trade talks start with the EU. But the vocal leave supports on here keep telling us that they *know* what people voted for when they voted leave. They keep saying that it was *obvious* that is was a vote for hard brexit and to leave the EEA etc. And May has been saying 'Brexit means brexit'. So surely that must mean it is all clear to the MPs? If all that above is true then why would their be any disagreement between the leave MPs? -Matt Because they are not all leave MP's in the cabinet. Hammond is a remainer and it's clear he would prefer to remain, but is also a democrat and accepts the country voted democratically to leave. He'll be arguing in cabinet for us to stay as close to the EU as possible after Brexit, while real Brexiters in the cabinet like Michael Gove will be arguing for the opposite. But it is not whether every MP in the cabinet *agrees* with the destination chosen. They haven't even sat down to work out what that destination should even be. -Matt" Because so far there has been no need to agree a final destination in cabinet as trade negotiations haven't started. Trade talks won't be starting until around Feb/March next year so gives the cabinet plenty of time to discuss it and get agreement on it. | |||
"In the last few days we have received confirmation about something that we have all suspected for a long time. Whether we are Brexiters or Remainers, these revelations should be really alarming to everyone who wants to see a better future for the U.K. FAILING TO PLAN IS PLANNING TO FAIL. Did you watch the budget? Philip Hammond put aside £3 billion to be spent on PLANNING for Brexit. Also on your comments about the Cabinet having no final destination about Brexit agreed in the cabinet.....that's because several different cabinet members have different ideas about what that should be. Philip Hammond said within the last week that the cabinet will have a meeting to agree a final destination before trade talks start with the EU. But the vocal leave supports on here keep telling us that they *know* what people voted for when they voted leave. They keep saying that it was *obvious* that is was a vote for hard brexit and to leave the EEA etc. And May has been saying 'Brexit means brexit'. So surely that must mean it is all clear to the MPs? If all that above is true then why would their be any disagreement between the leave MPs? -Matt Because they are not all leave MP's in the cabinet. Hammond is a remainer and it's clear he would prefer to remain, but is also a democrat and accepts the country voted democratically to leave. He'll be arguing in cabinet for us to stay as close to the EU as possible after Brexit, while real Brexiters in the cabinet like Michael Gove will be arguing for the opposite. But it is not whether every MP in the cabinet *agrees* with the destination chosen. They haven't even sat down to work out what that destination should even be. -Matt Because so far there has been no need to agree a final destination in cabinet as trade negotiations haven't started. Trade talks won't be starting until around Feb/March next year so gives the cabinet plenty of time to discuss it and get agreement on it. " Oh good grief. So you admit that the referendum was a sham then? -Matt | |||
"In the last few days we have received confirmation about something that we have all suspected for a long time. Whether we are Brexiters or Remainers, these revelations should be really alarming to everyone who wants to see a better future for the U.K. FAILING TO PLAN IS PLANNING TO FAIL. Did you watch the budget? Philip Hammond put aside £3 billion to be spent on PLANNING for Brexit. Also on your comments about the Cabinet having no final destination about Brexit agreed in the cabinet.....that's because several different cabinet members have different ideas about what that should be. Philip Hammond said within the last week that the cabinet will have a meeting to agree a final destination before trade talks start with the EU. But the vocal leave supports on here keep telling us that they *know* what people voted for when they voted leave. They keep saying that it was *obvious* that is was a vote for hard brexit and to leave the EEA etc. And May has been saying 'Brexit means brexit'. So surely that must mean it is all clear to the MPs? If all that above is true then why would their be any disagreement between the leave MPs? -Matt Because they are not all leave MP's in the cabinet. Hammond is a remainer and it's clear he would prefer to remain, but is also a democrat and accepts the country voted democratically to leave. He'll be arguing in cabinet for us to stay as close to the EU as possible after Brexit, while real Brexiters in the cabinet like Michael Gove will be arguing for the opposite. But it is not whether every MP in the cabinet *agrees* with the destination chosen. They haven't even sat down to work out what that destination should even be. -Matt Because so far there has been no need to agree a final destination in cabinet as trade negotiations haven't started. Trade talks won't be starting until around Feb/March next year so gives the cabinet plenty of time to discuss it and get agreement on it. Oh good grief. So you admit that the referendum was a sham then? -Matt" No, 'Vote Leave' wasn't the government it was a campaign group that made a series of suggestions and recommendations that 'could' be implemented should the country vote Leave. The government at the time was David Cameron's Conservative party which campaigned for Remain. | |||
"In the last few days we have received confirmation about something that we have all suspected for a long time. Whether we are Brexiters or Remainers, these revelations should be really alarming to everyone who wants to see a better future for the U.K. FAILING TO PLAN IS PLANNING TO FAIL. Did you watch the budget? Philip Hammond put aside £3 billion to be spent on PLANNING for Brexit. Also on your comments about the Cabinet having no final destination about Brexit agreed in the cabinet.....that's because several different cabinet members have different ideas about what that should be. Philip Hammond said within the last week that the cabinet will have a meeting to agree a final destination before trade talks start with the EU. But the vocal leave supports on here keep telling us that they *know* what people voted for when they voted leave. They keep saying that it was *obvious* that is was a vote for hard brexit and to leave the EEA etc. And May has been saying 'Brexit means brexit'. So surely that must mean it is all clear to the MPs? If all that above is true then why would their be any disagreement between the leave MPs? -Matt Because they are not all leave MP's in the cabinet. Hammond is a remainer and it's clear he would prefer to remain, but is also a democrat and accepts the country voted democratically to leave. He'll be arguing in cabinet for us to stay as close to the EU as possible after Brexit, while real Brexiters in the cabinet like Michael Gove will be arguing for the opposite. But it is not whether every MP in the cabinet *agrees* with the destination chosen. They haven't even sat down to work out what that destination should even be. -Matt Because so far there has been no need to agree a final destination in cabinet as trade negotiations haven't started. Trade talks won't be starting until around Feb/March next year so gives the cabinet plenty of time to discuss it and get agreement on it. Oh good grief. So you admit that the referendum was a sham then? -Matt No, 'Vote Leave' wasn't the government it was a campaign group that made a series of suggestions and recommendations that 'could' be implemented should the country vote Leave. The government at the time was David Cameron's Conservative party which campaigned for Remain. " No, you still don't quite understand. 'David Cameron's Conservative party' didn't campaign for anything specific. As you just stated yourself, 'Vote Leave' wasn't the government. Neither was the remain campaign. I live in a Tory district and my MP was very strongly campaigning to leave the EU. So you are saying that the government took the result of the advisory referendum and decided to trigger article 50 and withdraw from the EU without actually bothering to sit down first and work out the end state they were aiming for then? Well, to be fair, it doesn't matter what you think of that statement. It is what Hammond has said the state of affairs is. -Matt | |||
"Remain only has one position. What is meant by a "reformed EU"? That was never on the table when we had the referendum. Maybe a third option should have been available....remain and fight for reform. Would have got my vote." 14 May 2016 - Jeremy Carbon The Labour leader said: "There is so much more the European Union could be doing......That is why we are voting to remain and reform, to work within Europe to improve people's lives here in Britain." 21 June 2016 Mr Cameron has said repeatedly this week that Britain could continue the process of reforming the EU, particularly on the issue of freedom of movement, if we remain a member. 18 June 2016 - Tim Carton "For many people, me included, the EU needs reform, there are sensible things we could do, some very quickly. Where it has become too burdensome, bureaucratic and bloated." Yep, nobody from the remain campaign ever mentioned reforming the EU... "We all want you to vote to remain, so that we can reform the EU. Mind you, we can't tell you what we mean by reform, we all think it means different things, and if you vote to remain, well, we just don't have any plans how to achieve any reforms, but don't worry, it'll be alright.... The EU will bend over backwards for us, and will allow us to reform the EU how we want it (even though we can't tell you what that is)" | |||
"Remain only has one position. What is meant by a "reformed EU"? That was never on the table when we had the referendum. Maybe a third option should have been available....remain and fight for reform. Would have got my vote. 14 May 2016 - Jeremy Carbon The Labour leader said: "There is so much more the European Union could be doing......That is why we are voting to remain and reform, to work within Europe to improve people's lives here in Britain." 21 June 2016 Mr Cameron has said repeatedly this week that Britain could continue the process of reforming the EU, particularly on the issue of freedom of movement, if we remain a member. 18 June 2016 - Tim Carton "For many people, me included, the EU needs reform, there are sensible things we could do, some very quickly. Where it has become too burdensome, bureaucratic and bloated." Yep, nobody from the remain campaign ever mentioned reforming the EU... "We all want you to vote to remain, so that we can reform the EU. Mind you, we can't tell you what we mean by reform, we all think it means different things, and if you vote to remain, well, we just don't have any plans how to achieve any reforms, but don't worry, it'll be alright.... The EU will bend over backwards for us, and will allow us to reform the EU how we want it (even though we can't tell you what that is)" " Your point is ? | |||
"In the last few days we have received confirmation about something that we have all suspected for a long time. Whether we are Brexiters or Remainers, these revelations should be really alarming to everyone who wants to see a better future for the U.K. FAILING TO PLAN IS PLANNING TO FAIL. Did you watch the budget? Philip Hammond put aside £3 billion to be spent on PLANNING for Brexit. Also on your comments about the Cabinet having no final destination about Brexit agreed in the cabinet.....that's because several different cabinet members have different ideas about what that should be. Philip Hammond said within the last week that the cabinet will have a meeting to agree a final destination before trade talks start with the EU. But the vocal leave supports on here keep telling us that they *know* what people voted for when they voted leave. They keep saying that it was *obvious* that is was a vote for hard brexit and to leave the EEA etc. And May has been saying 'Brexit means brexit'. So surely that must mean it is all clear to the MPs? If all that above is true then why would their be any disagreement between the leave MPs? -Matt Because they are not all leave MP's in the cabinet. Hammond is a remainer and it's clear he would prefer to remain, but is also a democrat and accepts the country voted democratically to leave. He'll be arguing in cabinet for us to stay as close to the EU as possible after Brexit, while real Brexiters in the cabinet like Michael Gove will be arguing for the opposite. But it is not whether every MP in the cabinet *agrees* with the destination chosen. They haven't even sat down to work out what that destination should even be. -Matt Because so far there has been no need to agree a final destination in cabinet as trade negotiations haven't started. Trade talks won't be starting until around Feb/March next year so gives the cabinet plenty of time to discuss it and get agreement on it. Oh good grief. So you admit that the referendum was a sham then? -Matt No, 'Vote Leave' wasn't the government it was a campaign group that made a series of suggestions and recommendations that 'could' be implemented should the country vote Leave. The government at the time was David Cameron's Conservative party which campaigned for Remain. No, you still don't quite understand. 'David Cameron's Conservative party' didn't campaign for anything specific. As you just stated yourself, 'Vote Leave' wasn't the government. Neither was the remain campaign. I live in a Tory district and my MP was very strongly campaigning to leave the EU. -Matt" The 'Stronger IN Remain campaign' was separate to the government but they both still campaigned for Remain. The official position of the government during the EU referendum was to Remain and Cameron used all the powers of government at his disposal. Such as sending out the taxpayer funded £9 million quid Pro-EU government leaflets to every house in the country and putting Remain campaign material on official government websites. | |||
"In the last few days we have received confirmation about something that we have all suspected for a long time. Whether we are Brexiters or Remainers, these revelations should be really alarming to everyone who wants to see a better future for the U.K. FAILING TO PLAN IS PLANNING TO FAIL. Did you watch the budget? Philip Hammond put aside £3 billion to be spent on PLANNING for Brexit. Also on your comments about the Cabinet having no final destination about Brexit agreed in the cabinet.....that's because several different cabinet members have different ideas about what that should be. Philip Hammond said within the last week that the cabinet will have a meeting to agree a final destination before trade talks start with the EU. But the vocal leave supports on here keep telling us that they *know* what people voted for when they voted leave. They keep saying that it was *obvious* that is was a vote for hard brexit and to leave the EEA etc. And May has been saying 'Brexit means brexit'. So surely that must mean it is all clear to the MPs? If all that above is true then why would their be any disagreement between the leave MPs? -Matt Because they are not all leave MP's in the cabinet. Hammond is a remainer and it's clear he would prefer to remain, but is also a democrat and accepts the country voted democratically to leave. He'll be arguing in cabinet for us to stay as close to the EU as possible after Brexit, while real Brexiters in the cabinet like Michael Gove will be arguing for the opposite. But it is not whether every MP in the cabinet *agrees* with the destination chosen. They haven't even sat down to work out what that destination should even be. -Matt Because so far there has been no need to agree a final destination in cabinet as trade negotiations haven't started. Trade talks won't be starting until around Feb/March next year so gives the cabinet plenty of time to discuss it and get agreement on it. Oh good grief. So you admit that the referendum was a sham then? -Matt No, 'Vote Leave' wasn't the government it was a campaign group that made a series of suggestions and recommendations that 'could' be implemented should the country vote Leave. The government at the time was David Cameron's Conservative party which campaigned for Remain. No, you still don't quite understand. 'David Cameron's Conservative party' didn't campaign for anything specific. As you just stated yourself, 'Vote Leave' wasn't the government. Neither was the remain campaign. I live in a Tory district and my MP was very strongly campaigning to leave the EU. -Matt The 'Stronger IN Remain campaign' was separate to the government but they both still campaigned for Remain. The official position of the government during the EU referendum was to Remain and Cameron used all the powers of government at his disposal. Such as sending out the taxpayer funded £9 million quid Pro-EU government leaflets to every house in the country and putting Remain campaign material on official government websites. " OK, you are correct on that point. The official govt position at the time was to remain in the EU, and yes, they did send out that leaflet to all households explaining the reasoning behind their views. Should the govt have been impartial on this? That is another debate. I personally, don't see why they need to be. We elect them to govern our country. For better or for worse we are delegating responsibility to them. But that is all a separate point to the one you are dodging and ducking and that is that the current cabinet have not sat down to discuss the end state for the UK's relationship with the EU. And, in my opinion, the reason for that would be that they would have to confront the reality that there is no one single acceptable end state that would satisfy all the wide and ranging desires and reasons why 52% of the voters voted to leave the EU. If they confronted that, then they would realise that there is no overall majority approach that would be acceptable. Chose 'Norway' and you piss off this group. Chose 'Switzerland' and you'd piss off that group, etc. That would then leave the only obvious conclusion and that remaining in the EU would be the most sensible option. Which would then show the weakness of the Tory party and pretty quickly sink them. So May decided to bluster on and hope for the best. Alas we are now seeing what May's 'best' looks like. And it isn't very good. -Matt | |||
"In the last few days we have received confirmation about something that we have all suspected for a long time. Whether we are Brexiters or Remainers, these revelations should be really alarming to everyone who wants to see a better future for the U.K. FAILING TO PLAN IS PLANNING TO FAIL. Did you watch the budget? Philip Hammond put aside £3 billion to be spent on PLANNING for Brexit. Also on your comments about the Cabinet having no final destination about Brexit agreed in the cabinet.....that's because several different cabinet members have different ideas about what that should be. Philip Hammond said within the last week that the cabinet will have a meeting to agree a final destination before trade talks start with the EU. But the vocal leave supports on here keep telling us that they *know* what people voted for when they voted leave. They keep saying that it was *obvious* that is was a vote for hard brexit and to leave the EEA etc. And May has been saying 'Brexit means brexit'. So surely that must mean it is all clear to the MPs? If all that above is true then why would their be any disagreement between the leave MPs? -Matt Because they are not all leave MP's in the cabinet. Hammond is a remainer and it's clear he would prefer to remain, but is also a democrat and accepts the country voted democratically to leave. He'll be arguing in cabinet for us to stay as close to the EU as possible after Brexit, while real Brexiters in the cabinet like Michael Gove will be arguing for the opposite. But it is not whether every MP in the cabinet *agrees* with the destination chosen. They haven't even sat down to work out what that destination should even be. -Matt Because so far there has been no need to agree a final destination in cabinet as trade negotiations haven't started. Trade talks won't be starting until around Feb/March next year so gives the cabinet plenty of time to discuss it and get agreement on it. Oh good grief. So you admit that the referendum was a sham then? -Matt No, 'Vote Leave' wasn't the government it was a campaign group that made a series of suggestions and recommendations that 'could' be implemented should the country vote Leave. The government at the time was David Cameron's Conservative party which campaigned for Remain. No, you still don't quite understand. 'David Cameron's Conservative party' didn't campaign for anything specific. As you just stated yourself, 'Vote Leave' wasn't the government. Neither was the remain campaign. I live in a Tory district and my MP was very strongly campaigning to leave the EU. -Matt The 'Stronger IN Remain campaign' was separate to the government but they both still campaigned for Remain. The official position of the government during the EU referendum was to Remain and Cameron used all the powers of government at his disposal. Such as sending out the taxpayer funded £9 million quid Pro-EU government leaflets to every house in the country and putting Remain campaign material on official government websites. OK, you are correct on that point. The official govt position at the time was to remain in the EU, and yes, they did send out that leaflet to all households explaining the reasoning behind their views. Should the govt have been impartial on this? That is another debate. I personally, don't see why they need to be. We elect them to govern our country. For better or for worse we are delegating responsibility to them. But that is all a separate point to the one you are dodging and ducking and that is that the current cabinet have not sat down to discuss the end state for the UK's relationship with the EU. And, in my opinion, the reason for that would be that they would have to confront the reality that there is no one single acceptable end state that would satisfy all the wide and ranging desires and reasons why 52% of the voters voted to leave the EU. If they confronted that, then they would realise that there is no overall majority approach that would be acceptable. Chose 'Norway' and you piss off this group. Chose 'Switzerland' and you'd piss off that group, etc. That would then leave the only obvious conclusion and that remaining in the EU would be the most sensible option. Which would then show the weakness of the Tory party and pretty quickly sink them. So May decided to bluster on and hope for the best. Alas we are now seeing what May's 'best' looks like. And it isn't very good. -Matt" Well they can’t put off talking about the destination any longer now, so this situation is about to come to a head in very short order. So far the U.K. has spent a year trying to avoid a total capitulation and ended up with a 99% capitulation. With that kind of success rate I can’t help but think it might just be best to agree up front with everything the EU want in trade talks and save a lot of time and stress? The alternative will be to see a huge infight amongst a Brexiters about the end destination - starting with the Cabinet. | |||
"In the last few days we have received confirmation about something that we have all suspected for a long time. Whether we are Brexiters or Remainers, these revelations should be really alarming to everyone who wants to see a better future for the U.K. FAILING TO PLAN IS PLANNING TO FAIL. Did you watch the budget? Philip Hammond put aside £3 billion to be spent on PLANNING for Brexit. Also on your comments about the Cabinet having no final destination about Brexit agreed in the cabinet.....that's because several different cabinet members have different ideas about what that should be. Philip Hammond said within the last week that the cabinet will have a meeting to agree a final destination before trade talks start with the EU. But the vocal leave supports on here keep telling us that they *know* what people voted for when they voted leave. They keep saying that it was *obvious* that is was a vote for hard brexit and to leave the EEA etc. And May has been saying 'Brexit means brexit'. So surely that must mean it is all clear to the MPs? If all that above is true then why would their be any disagreement between the leave MPs? -Matt Because they are not all leave MP's in the cabinet. Hammond is a remainer and it's clear he would prefer to remain, but is also a democrat and accepts the country voted democratically to leave. He'll be arguing in cabinet for us to stay as close to the EU as possible after Brexit, while real Brexiters in the cabinet like Michael Gove will be arguing for the opposite. But it is not whether every MP in the cabinet *agrees* with the destination chosen. They haven't even sat down to work out what that destination should even be. -Matt Because so far there has been no need to agree a final destination in cabinet as trade negotiations haven't started. Trade talks won't be starting until around Feb/March next year so gives the cabinet plenty of time to discuss it and get agreement on it. " What kind of government signs article 50 and then, 9 months later still have no idea of where they want to end up? It's madness. Theyre charlatans and shysters | |||
"Remain only has one position. What is meant by a "reformed EU"? That was never on the table when we had the referendum. Maybe a third option should have been available....remain and fight for reform. Would have got my vote. 14 May 2016 - Jeremy Carbon The Labour leader said: "There is so much more the European Union could be doing......That is why we are voting to remain and reform, to work within Europe to improve people's lives here in Britain." 21 June 2016 Mr Cameron has said repeatedly this week that Britain could continue the process of reforming the EU, particularly on the issue of freedom of movement, if we remain a member. 18 June 2016 - Tim Carton "For many people, me included, the EU needs reform, there are sensible things we could do, some very quickly. Where it has become too burdensome, bureaucratic and bloated." Yep, nobody from the remain campaign ever mentioned reforming the EU... "We all want you to vote to remain, so that we can reform the EU. Mind you, we can't tell you what we mean by reform, we all think it means different things, and if you vote to remain, well, we just don't have any plans how to achieve any reforms, but don't worry, it'll be alright.... The EU will bend over backwards for us, and will allow us to reform the EU how we want it (even though we can't tell you what that is)" Your point is ?" My point is quotation of the campaign to remain was based in reforming the EU. Many, many, people voted to stay in expecting that reform would happen. But reform what? And how? And into what? You weren't told, because everyone's ideas on what that reform should be is different. So in just the same way that Brexit is criticised for 'having no plan' , what was the plan to 'remain and reform'? Even on this forum, many remain posters at various times have said the EU needs reforming (even on this thread)- but offer nothing as to where they think reform should be, and what to. | |||
"Remain only has one position. What is meant by a "reformed EU"? That was never on the table when we had the referendum. Maybe a third option should have been available....remain and fight for reform. Would have got my vote. 14 May 2016 - Jeremy Carbon The Labour leader said: "There is so much more the European Union could be doing......That is why we are voting to remain and reform, to work within Europe to improve people's lives here in Britain." 21 June 2016 Mr Cameron has said repeatedly this week that Britain could continue the process of reforming the EU, particularly on the issue of freedom of movement, if we remain a member. 18 June 2016 - Tim Carton "For many people, me included, the EU needs reform, there are sensible things we could do, some very quickly. Where it has become too burdensome, bureaucratic and bloated." Yep, nobody from the remain campaign ever mentioned reforming the EU... "We all want you to vote to remain, so that we can reform the EU. Mind you, we can't tell you what we mean by reform, we all think it means different things, and if you vote to remain, well, we just don't have any plans how to achieve any reforms, but don't worry, it'll be alright.... The EU will bend over backwards for us, and will allow us to reform the EU how we want it (even though we can't tell you what that is)" Your point is ? My point is quotation of the campaign to remain was based in reforming the EU. Many, many, people voted to stay in expecting that reform would happen. But reform what? And how? And into what? You weren't told, because everyone's ideas on what that reform should be is different. So in just the same way that Brexit is criticised for 'having no plan' , what was the plan to 'remain and reform'? Even on this forum, many remain posters at various times have said the EU needs reforming (even on this thread)- but offer nothing as to where they think reform should be, and what to. " These points have some merit. To the average man and woman in the street, the sight of David Cameron coming back from Europe with nothing as migration was running out of control, must have surely pointed them in the direction of the Leave campaign. We needed campaigners on the Remain side to highlight points along the lines of "what we would fight for if we stayed in". Sadly, these were largely lacking during the campaign. | |||
"Remain only has one position. What is meant by a "reformed EU"? That was never on the table when we had the referendum. Maybe a third option should have been available....remain and fight for reform. Would have got my vote. 14 May 2016 - Jeremy Carbon The Labour leader said: "There is so much more the European Union could be doing......That is why we are voting to remain and reform, to work within Europe to improve people's lives here in Britain." 21 June 2016 Mr Cameron has said repeatedly this week that Britain could continue the process of reforming the EU, particularly on the issue of freedom of movement, if we remain a member. 18 June 2016 - Tim Carton "For many people, me included, the EU needs reform, there are sensible things we could do, some very quickly. Where it has become too burdensome, bureaucratic and bloated." Yep, nobody from the remain campaign ever mentioned reforming the EU... "We all want you to vote to remain, so that we can reform the EU. Mind you, we can't tell you what we mean by reform, we all think it means different things, and if you vote to remain, well, we just don't have any plans how to achieve any reforms, but don't worry, it'll be alright.... The EU will bend over backwards for us, and will allow us to reform the EU how we want it (even though we can't tell you what that is)" Your point is ? My point is quotation of the campaign to remain was based in reforming the EU. Many, many, people voted to stay in expecting that reform would happen. But reform what? And how? And into what? You weren't told, because everyone's ideas on what that reform should be is different. So in just the same way that Brexit is criticised for 'having no plan' , what was the plan to 'remain and reform'? Even on this forum, many remain posters at various times have said the EU needs reforming (even on this thread)- but offer nothing as to where they think reform should be, and what to. These points have some merit. To the average man and woman in the street, the sight of David Cameron coming back from Europe with nothing as migration was running out of control, must have surely pointed them in the direction of the Leave campaign. We needed campaigners on the Remain side to highlight points along the lines of "what we would fight for if we stayed in". Sadly, these were largely lacking during the campaign." Yes remain ran a bad campaign and missed opportunities for example they can control EU freedom of movement by imposing the 3 month rule - why it was never mentioned is probably because they didn't follow it and use it to limit immigration We have always had more migrants from the rest of the world than the EU - can we not control that? We spouted the Australian system - they let 260,000 in last year! However anything the remain side said was "project fear" even now they say that project fear hasn't happened - we haven't left yet! The UK has gone from the best performing G7 economy to the worst. The pound has tanked. Inflation is the highest it's been in years. Well it may get better once we have left - nobody knows! But there will be hardship but that's worth it people say - for how long though - 2, 3, 10 years? | |||
| |||
"The real problem with the remain campaign is they never gave you a reason for staying in the eu. It was all based on what "might" happen if we leave. Most people dont respond well to scare tactics and if thet cant give you reasons to stay... This of it this way you have a offer of another job but your employer says if you go there you may not pass your probation. Is this going to make you stay in your current job? The divorce bill is a bug faux paux by the eu too. As this is ment to be only what we have commited to paying minus any rebates we get from the eu which shows the real cost of being in the eu. I belive this is mostly upto 2020 excluding the pensions. Cobsidering we dont leave till 2019 50 billion for 1 year is a lot! And regarding the pensions surely those need reforming to be inline with the state pension age!" I think the real problem was that instead of listening to bare faced liars, people should have worked out for themselves that Brexit was a bad idea. The most Googled item in Britain the day after the referendum was; - "What is Brexit? " You cannot fix stupidity! | |||
"The real problem with the remain campaign is they never gave you a reason for staying in the eu. It was all based on what "might" happen if we leave. Most people dont respond well to scare tactics and if thet cant give you reasons to stay... This of it this way you have a offer of another job but your employer says if you go there you may not pass your probation. Is this going to make you stay in your current job? The divorce bill is a bug faux paux by the eu too. As this is ment to be only what we have commited to paying minus any rebates we get from the eu which shows the real cost of being in the eu. I belive this is mostly upto 2020 excluding the pensions. Cobsidering we dont leave till 2019 50 billion for 1 year is a lot! And regarding the pensions surely those need reforming to be inline with the state pension age! I think the real problem was that instead of listening to bare faced liars, people should have worked out for themselves that Brexit was a bad idea. The most Googled item in Britain the day after the referendum was; - "What is Brexit? " You cannot fix stupidity! " 100% correct the referendum on both sides was all about lies each party trying to frighten people As you say brexit was a word no one had heard of unfortunately now we all have to pay the consiquensis | |||
"The real problem with the remain campaign is they never gave you a reason for staying in the eu. It was all based on what "might" happen if we leave. Most people dont respond well to scare tactics and if thet cant give you reasons to stay... This of it this way you have a offer of another job but your employer says if you go there you may not pass your probation. Is this going to make you stay in your current job? The divorce bill is a bug faux paux by the eu too. As this is ment to be only what we have commited to paying minus any rebates we get from the eu which shows the real cost of being in the eu. I belive this is mostly upto 2020 excluding the pensions. Cobsidering we dont leave till 2019 50 billion for 1 year is a lot! And regarding the pensions surely those need reforming to be inline with the state pension age! I think the real problem was that instead of listening to bare faced liars, people should have worked out for themselves that Brexit was a bad idea. The most Googled item in Britain the day after the referendum was; - "What is Brexit? " You cannot fix stupidity! 100% correct the referendum on both sides was all about lies each party trying to frighten people As you say brexit was a word no one had heard of unfortunately now we all have to pay the consiquensis " Badly run by both sides i agree...CaMoron thought it wouldnt happen....and tbh so did most of the country...but a little bit of research and just a bit...easily exposed the lies ran out by the leave camp....but on the other it was more difficult with the remain camp... as tbh we didnt know what would happen...we have seen glimpses of what will happen...my thoughts are that if the BoE haddnt stepped in we could well be in recession now....who knows... | |||
| |||
| |||
"Some voted for these Muppets and have argued how great the brexit process is, as well as the government. Maybe capital punishment should be restored " I think BREXIT is probably going to punishment enough for capital in the UK.  | |||
"The real problem with the remain campaign is they never gave you a reason for staying in the eu. It was all based on what "might" happen if we leave. Most people dont respond well to scare tactics and if thet cant give you reasons to stay... This of it this way you have a offer of another job but your employer says if you go there you may not pass your probation. Is this going to make you stay in your current job? The divorce bill is a bug faux paux by the eu too. As this is ment to be only what we have commited to paying minus any rebates we get from the eu which shows the real cost of being in the eu. I belive this is mostly upto 2020 excluding the pensions. Cobsidering we dont leave till 2019 50 billion for 1 year is a lot! And regarding the pensions surely those need reforming to be inline with the state pension age!" Actually, fear tactics have frequently worked for the Conservative party. Cameron's majority a case in point. However this time the fear of "immigration" and Muslims (remember that flier?) and the basically crappy state of government services and the standard of living lead to a referendum on the government not the EU. | |||
 | |||
