Goodbye Brussels, hello Burnley.

[kave]

You lost the moral high ground when you voted to give away our countries hardwon sovereignty to an unelected body in Brussels run by a rude disrespect ful man called Junker for whom no one voted.

I was not aware that you actually voted for you prime minister either, rather a political party who decides who should be their leader which then becomes prime minister if they win.
Same goes for the eu parlament. Democracy is not that all of the people in eu have the right to decided everything by themselves.
Why the majority in the uk thought they could be better off outside I cant understand. If you like to keep your trade deals between uk and eu you will have to accept immigration by similar figures as today. Look at Norway.
The EU is not perfect, it will never be, but the uk had alot to say due to its size and powerful negotiations.
Time will tell.

 

[GrannyJen]

I think it best to begin that moratorium and allow things to cool off.

 

[fred]

Strong indications that sanity (and democracy) will prevail as the House of Lords issues a report indicating that parliamentary oversight will likely be required before invoking Article 50. (Remember that 75% of the House of Commons voted remain).

http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/LLN-2016-0034#fullreport

 

[T6 CFO]

There are no doubt plenty of ways to prevent Article 50 being invoked both by interpreting legislation to suite ones position or by enacting new legislation.

Somehow our wonderful politicians have got us into a position where virtually no one is now happy. The remain side lost, our prime minister who got us into this has fallen on his sword leaving his party in turmoil and the opposition are seeking to oust their leader as the PLP seek to overturn the wishes of the grass roots.
On the out side any chance of a positive exit has been destroyed by removing its leader leaving a misguided opportunist whose excuse is that he sensed wavering.
We are now left in the hands of these self serving idiots to sort things out.
My only hope is that if they carry on in this manner as they will unite a country against them and ultimately change the way we are governed.
Staying in or leaving were never perfect solutions. In my experience doing either in a positive manner would have been better than a fudge which is where we are headed.
I voted out on the basis of the democratic control this would give us but only if done so in an outward looking inclusive manner.


Mike

 

[Amarillo]

Strong indications that sanity (and democracy) will prevail as the House of Lords issues a report indicating that parliamentary oversight will likely be required before invoking Article 50. (Remember that 75% of the House of Commons voted remain).

http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/LLN-2016-0034#fullreport

This week's Economist suggests that a Norwegian type association is the most likely outcome if there is no "Breversal".

In many ways, that is the worst of all results:
1. Payment of about 85% of full membership but without the rebate
2. No direct influence on EU policy
But we would all still benefit from the free movement of people.

However, it is substantially better than another scenario they give which involves complete disassociation from the EU resulting in:
1. Scotland leaving the UK
2. A hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic resulting in the IRA re-arming
3. Banks moving much of their European financial business to Dublin, Paris and/or Frankfurt

It is unfortunate that few people properly thought through the consequences of leaving the EU. Why couldn't, for example, the Economist have produced these scenarios before we voted?

I suppose we can all still look forward to the extra £350,000,000 per week promised by the leave campaign to the NHS.

 

[Amarillo]

I voted out on the basis of the democratic control this would give us but only if done so in an outward looking inclusive manner.

The question was:
Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union?

There was no option to add a condition to your answer.

 

[T6 CFO]

This week's Economist suggests that a Norwegian type association is the most likely outcome if there is no "Breversal".

In many ways, that is the worst of all results:
1. Payment of about 85% of full membership but without the rebate
2. No direct influence on EU policy
But we would all still benefit from the free movement of people.

However, it is substantially better than another scenario they give which involves complete disassociation from the EU resulting in:
1. Scotland leaving the UK
2. A hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic resulting in the IRA re-arming
3. Banks moving much of their European financial business to Dublin, Paris and/or Frankfurt

It is unfortunate that few people properly thought through the consequences of leaving the EU. Why couldn't, for example, the Economist have produced these scenarios before we voted?

I suppose we can all still look forward to the extra £350,000,000 per week promised by the leave campaign to the NHS.

It was for the remain side to give these arguments. I don't know how many times I have to say this but spreading fear, accusations of racism and banging on about 350 million on the side of buses was stupid. You are still doing it, everyone with an ounce of sense knew it was a distortion but the remain side and media just could not let it go.
Remain should have won and blew it.


Mike

 

[Deskman]

For some reason the EU and the politicians / parties seems to be unable to inform the people about options and consequences. The tactics used resemble those used by companies to make us believe the next washing powder is the ultimate solution. And nobody beliefs they are honest in their claims.

In several newspaper comments I'm reading about the mess the referendum caused (nothing new) but also about the unawareness of the worldwide consequences for the EU as 'partner' on a global scale. And that scares me more than all the turmoil in the UK.

What if China, Brazil and other big economic entities take the lead because Europe decides to be a bunch of non-cooperating countries with closed borders, different currencies, and massive sets of complicated deals to guarantee their sovereignty? (and please look up what that word means...)

It would have been a much better idea to reform the EU than to leave it. Also a tough job but in the end we will need to work together to make the world a bit better (and sustainable).

 

[estresao]

Here is everything explained

 

[GrannyJen]

Brexit part 1 has only just happened. Already it's a mess in every sense of the word.

Did Gove stab Boris in the back or is Boris and Gove playing a double act where Boris steps back without losing face, Gove loses to Theresa, Theresa is left to do all the unpalatable bits of executing Article 50, negotiating our way out, preparing for a 2020 election when Boris bounces back in, A caesar reincarnation still bearing the scars of Brutus, announces to the world how Theresa has screwed it, follow me to the promised land?

Either way, its cynical filth of the worst kind playing with peoples lives and futures.

 

[Amarillo]

It was for the remain side to give these arguments. I don't know how many times I have to say this but spreading fear, accusations of racism and banging on about 350 million on the side of buses was stupid. You are still doing it, everyone with an ounce of sense knew it was a distortion but the remain side and media just could not let it go.
Remain should have won and blew it.

The remain side did give those arguments, they lined up Mark Carney, Christine Lagarde, Liz Snape, Paul Drechsler and even Barack Obama to warn of the dire consequences of leaving the European Union.

The leave side managed to enrol (wittingly or unwittingly) the support of Donald Trump, Marine Le Pen, Vladimir Putin and possibly Kim Jong-un.

The problem was multi-fold:
1. A distrusted political elite
2. An ineffective Labour leader, more interested with his Marxist ideals than the jobs of British workers
3. A dishonest leave campaign
4. A belief in an EU free utopia by the poorly educated
5. A nostalgic view of Britain by the elderly
And others, such as people voting to leave with the ludicrous belief that they could attach one or more conditions to their leave vote...

As far as I can see, the only British political leader to come out smelling of roses is Nicola Sturgeon. Why is it that every Scottish electoral district voted to remain, while just south of the border a very different voting pattern emerged? Are conditions really that different in the Scottish Borders (58.5% remain) to Carlisle (60% leave) and Northumberland (54% leave)?

 

[DavidofHook]

So you pay no heed to the additional tax revenues provided to local authorities by migrants educated as the expense of a foreign country?

Uhh?
Show me the sums

 

[DavidofHook]

The remain side did give those arguments, they lined up Mark Carney, Christine Lagarde, Liz Snape, Paul Drechsler and even Barack Obama to warn of the dire consequences of leaving the European Union.

The leave side managed to enrol (wittingly or unwittingly) the support of Donald Trump, Marine Le Pen, Vladimir Putin and possibly Kim Jong-un.

The problem was multi-fold:
1. A distrusted political elite
2. An ineffective Labour leader, more interested with his Marxist ideals than the jobs of British workers
3. A dishonest leave campaign
4. A belief in an EU free utopia by the poorly educated
5. A nostalgic view of Britain by the elderly
And others, such as people voting to leave with the ludicrous belief that they could attach one or more conditions to their leave vote...

As far as I can see, the only British political leader to come out smelling of roses is Nicola Sturgeon. Why is it that every Scottish electoral district voted to remain, while just south of the border a very different voting pattern emerged? Are conditions really that different in the Scottish Borders (58.5% remain) to Carlisle (60% leave) and Northumberland (54% leave)?

The trouble is that predictions are just that. For example despite Obama's threats, we have Congress looking at a Bill to fast track a trade agreement with the U.K. "It's greatest ally", in one year.

Re your list why is it that some on the Remain side seem incapable of producing posts without insults?

The Leave campaign was no more dishonest than the Remain (see above re Obama). So why say that it was?? And I am sure that no one either side intentionally lies.
Then Item 4 .refers to the seventeen million Leave voters as 'poorly educated', another insult and without foundation. Please justify.
And to cap it all, we have ageism. You say that 'elderly' Leavers voted as they did because of 'nostalgia.' Why insult the elderly and imply that somehow they are unable to think for themselves? Please justify saying such a thing. And you could define for us what you mean by 'elderly'?....

Presumably in the interests of fairness you will be providing us with a breakdown of why the Remain voted as they did, starting with perhaps how intelligent they are.??

Desperate attempts by Scotland to remain in the EU because they 'all voted to stay' ain't going to happen is it? It was a national UK vote and on that basis Hampshire could say it wants to stay.. You will have seen that Nicola Sturgeon got the cold shoulder at Brussels and also the article that suggests that if Scotand were to go it alone she would be the new Greece but without the warmth. No one wants that.

We have all got to pull together to make this work. If negative comments drag us down then everyone suffers. The die has been cast by the highest number of voters ever so, let's accept the result, there will shortly be a plan, and go for it.

 

[T6 CFO]

The remain side did give those arguments, they lined up Mark Carney, Christine Lagarde, Liz Snape, Paul Drechsler and even Barack Obama to warn of the dire consequences of leaving the European Union.

The leave side managed to enrol (wittingly or unwittingly) the support of Donald Trump, Marine Le Pen, Vladimir Putin and possibly Kim Jong-un.

The problem was multi-fold:
1. A distrusted political elite
2. An ineffective Labour leader, more interested with his Marxist ideals than the jobs of British workers
3. A dishonest leave campaign
4. A belief in an EU free utopia by the poorly educated
5. A nostalgic view of Britain by the elderly
And others, such as people voting to leave with the ludicrous belief that they could attach one or more conditions to their leave vote...

As far as I can see, the only British political leader to come out smelling of roses is Nicola Sturgeon. Why is it that every Scottish electoral district voted to remain, while just south of the border a very different voting pattern emerged? Are conditions really that different in the Scottish Borders (58.5% remain) to Carlisle (60% leave) and Northumberland (54% leave)?

In answer to some of your points.

Trust me lining up that lot to tell us how they would screw us or how we would be screwed was not a good plan.

The list you apply to the leave side were on the whole the ones the remain side tried to use to tarnish the leave campaign.

The suggestion that leave tried to enrol Trump is quite ludicrous and answers point 3 in your list. Both told lies, their politicians it's what they do. Better explanations have been given why they do this but I can't be bothered to repeat them. As for the rest of your list. It is all obvious, previously answered or now irrelevant.

I shall refrain from commenting on Nicola Sturgeon.

Time to move on.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Amarillo]

Show me the sums

No need. It is a widely accepted fact that migrants, as a whole, contribute more than they use.

I think that there are genuine concerns about the fostering of children born to foreign born migrants: but not that they exist or use up local authority resources, but that there are too few foreign born migrants putting themselves forward as foster parents.

 

[Amarillo]

Then Item 4 .refers to the seventeen million Leave voters as 'poorly educated', another insult and without foundation. Please justify.

It was a generalisation. See here.

Why insult the elderly and imply that somehow they are unable to think for themselves? Please justify

If, for some reason, you feel offended, I am sorry. I merely presented an opinion based on fact.

Of those who voted:
75% of 18-24 voted remain
56% of 25-49 voted remain
44% of 50-64 voted remain
39% of 65+ voted remain

Why? I asked myself. I surmised that it was based largely on a nostalgic view of Britain. You are welcome to post an alternative reason to this age divide.

Presumably in the interests of fairness you will be providing us with a breakdown of why the Remain voted as they did, starting with perhaps how intelligent they are.??

I think that it is generally accepted that those who voted to remain are, on average, educated to a higher level than those who voted to leave. Of course there will be a great many exceptions, and you may well count yourself as one of those exceptions - so no need to feel insulted.

there will shortly be a plan.

There is no plan, and if there ever is a credible plan, I very much hope it will be tested by a general election before it is enacted.

 

[Amarillo]

The suggestion that leave tried to enrol Trump is quite ludicrous

Do you understand the terms wittingly and unwittingly?

 

[T6 CFO]

It was a generalisation. See here.



If, for some reason, you feel offended, I am sorry. I merely presented an opinion based on fact.

Of those who voted:
75% of 18-24 voted remain
56% of 25-49 voted remain
44% of 50-64 voted remain
39% of 65+ voted remain

Why? I asked myself. I surmised that it was based largely on a nostalgic view of Britain. You are welcome to post an alternative reason to this age divide.



I think that it is generally accepted that those who voted to remain are, on average, educated to a higher level than those who voted to leave. Of course there will be a great many exceptions, and you may well count yourself as one of those exceptions - so no need to feel insulted.



There is no plan, and if there ever is a credible plan, I very much hope it will be tested by a general election before it is enacted.

Enlighten me CF why is it that on average that the more educated people voted remain and the less educated voted to leave.

 

[Digger]

Some one quoted If, for some reason, you feel offended, I am sorry. I merely presented an opinion based on fact.
Of those who voted:
75% of 18-24 voted remain
56% of 25-49 voted remain
44% of 50-64 voted remain
39% of 65+ voted remain

Facts are based on what. Voting is private and no one knows who voted what. Are you quoting supposed polls as we know how accurate they are!

I will refrain for arguing re lower educated as that is based on your opinion and definitely not on fact. As for some of us unless you have a doctorate maybe consider those who do.

 

[Amarillo]

Enlighten me CF why is it that on average that the more educated people voted remain and the less educated voted to leave.

I don't know. There is some detail in this pro leave newspaper.

 

[DavidofHook]

It was a generalisation. See here.



If, for some reason, you feel offended, I am sorry. I merely presented an opinion based on fact.

Of those who voted:
75% of 18-24 voted remain
56% of 25-49 voted remain
44% of 50-64 voted remain
39% of 65+ voted remain

Why? I asked myself. I surmised that it was based largely on a nostalgic view of Britain. You are welcome to post an alternative reason to this age divide.



I think that it is generally accepted that those who voted to remain are, on average, educated to a higher level than those who voted to leave. Of course there will be a great many exceptions, and you may well count yourself as one of those exceptions - so no need to feel insulted.



There is no plan, and if there ever is a credible plan, I very much hope it will be tested by a general election before it is enacted.

Oh dear, you are impossible.

Your response listed a generalisation, an opinion, a surmising, a 'generally accepted view', but no facts. Oh, and a spurious list of voting results. A waste of time. And a lack of respect for more than half the people who voted in the referendum. Sad.

I did not say there was a plan but have a read of John Redwoods blogs and you will see his plan.

General elections introduce uncertainty which we don't need now so I fear that you will be disappointed as it is highly unlikely we shall be having one.

 

[WelshGas]

Of those who voted:
25% of 18-24 voted leave
44% of 25-49 voted leave
56% of 50-64 voted leave
61% of 65+ voted leave

Which basically shows that with age comes experience of work and life, of being responsible for a family, of raising children to adulthood and always being there for them and looking out for them and knowing what Democracy is and abiding by that standard.
The youngsters have little life experience, few have significant responsibility for others living for themselves most of the time as shown any Saturday night in most town centres.
I know who I would prefer to make decisions that affect the whole country and it ain't the "younger" generation who get upset when they don't get their own way, as shown by today's march in London to overthrow the Referendum result.
Reminds me of the Terrible Two Tantrums.

 

[GrannyJen]

"the younger generation " not knowing about life so lets disregard theire Vote is brilliant in it's arrogant disregard for the voting rights by the geriatric masses. Therein lies the ferment of civil unrest.

Tell that to the Mums who saw the younger generation Sent off to be cannon fodder as the older generations blundered through nationalistic pigheaded decisions by died in the wool old farts unable to change.

Sorry. The younger generation will pay through their labours for my pension. Show them respect.

 

[Amarillo]

Your response listed a generalisation, an opinion, a surmising, a 'generally accepted view', but no facts. Oh, and a spurious list of voting results. A waste of time. And a lack of respect for more than half the people who voted in the referendum. Sad.

Had you followed the link I gave, and interpreted the chart, you would see that the generalisation was based on hard facts. The chart showed the percent of remain and leave local authorities split by GCSE scores.

You can see more analysis here.

John Redwood

This John Redwood?

 

[T6 CFO]

I don't know. There is some detail in this pro leave newspaper.

There can be lots of reasons for statistics or facts as you call them. It is your interpretation I was interested in and I have no interest in following a link to a "pro leave newspaper" that somehow makes it ok does it.

You've read it, what is it telling YOU? why if the figures are correct did this happen, why is that older people by the numbers you have given are more likely to vote out.
There are reasons for both that I can think of.
Why is it in your opinion.
I will then give you mine.


Mike