More Brexit good news.......

[John52]

antony1969 - 2017-10-24 2:07 PM

 

Brian Kirby - 2017-10-24 1:34 PM

 

antony1969 - 2017-10-24 6:32 AM.........................Wonder how much "forfeiting a bit more national independence" is acceptable to Brian ... He's already said we could have referendum after referendum every 16 months as opinions change and opinions over how big a "bit" is differs too I'm sure ... I gotta feeling Brians bit is much bigger than mine 8-)

See my post below above in response to Roger, Antony.

 

You seem to have skimmed my earlier post on referendums, but hot to have read it. There is no mention of 16 months, only of the flawed logic of referendums as a way to determine government policy on the basis of public opinion.

 

However, I guess the bit of national independence I'd forfeit in exchange for advantage elsewhere would be bigger than yours, because you'd be so focused on the loss, you'd lose sight of any conceivable advantage! :-D

 

My apologies ... A quick look on the other 9 page EU thread has you down as agreeing to referendums every 2 years not 16 months as I earlier said ... What's 6 months between friends ... Regarding the size of the bit you've not said how big that bit might be but by your answer I guess it could well grow into a humongous chunk

 

Still not managed to quote it then.

You must be so used to misquoting people to set up your straw men, that you even do it on a forum where we can look back and see what they really said (lol)

[John52]

Germany has done the right thing after WW2 - what we told them to do and what we should have done ourselves. Become less militaristic, more democratic, more egalitarian and work hard.

Now they are more prosperous than we are* some people resent it. :-(

*to the point where our Prime Minister is begging the Germans for help - http://uk.businessinsider.com/theresa-may-begged-claude-juncker-brexit-negotiations-2017-10

[RogerC]

Brian Kirby - 2017-10-24 1:12 PM

RogerC - 2017-10-23 9:41 PM

Brian Kirby - 2017-10-23 6:19 PM   4 No Roger I have not said, clearly or otherwise, that I am "prepared to surrender even more under the expansionist efforts of the EU leadership". What I have said is that I am relaxed about pooling sovereignty for our mutual good. This is just another of your straw man arguments.

Albeit under another thread you did write: If that means forfeiting a bit more national independence, so be it". Forfeit, surrender, pooling (although how one can pool Sovereignty escapes me just now) it all boils down to the same thing in my book: EU encroachment on, and a diminishing of the powers and independence of self determination by a Sovereign power. Any further diminishing of National Sovereignty/self determination etc is not a price I would be prepared to pay regardless of what it buys us. Clearly you are although you now appear to deny having said as much.

Not another straw man! The full quote is: "If it's better for us to be in, in terms of rising living standards and long term growth and stability, then in is where we should be. If that means forfeiting a bit more national independence, so be it." So, in short, give a bit to gain a bit. So, no, I did not "say as much", as your selective snip might infer. As ever, you omit context to distort the point, with which distortion you then proceed to argue, and end up merely arguing with yourself. If you wish to do that I have no objection - just, please, don't bring me into it! :-DPooled sovereignty? This is from the OUP online dictionary:"A term used to denote the sharing of decision-making powers between states in systems of international cooperation. Whereas unanimous decision-making between states leaves sovereignty unscathed, given the right of any state to unilaterally veto decisions, pooling of sovereignty implies a departure from unanimous decision-making. The most prominent system of international cooperation in which sovereignty is pooled is the European Union (EU). In a number of issue areas which have been defined in the treaty and subsequent treaty amendments, the member state delegates in the Council, one of the EU's legislative organs, decide by a qualified majority. Consequently, pooling creates the possibility that individual member states can be outvoted. The main reason why states choose to pool sovereignty is to reduce the likelihood of gridlock in policy areas where—on average—states expect to be better off by pooling sovereignty than by retaining the unanimity rule. This has been the case particularly in the context of creating a European single market for goods and services. The introduction of qualified majority voting in these issues demonstrated that EU member states valued the benefits of the abolition of trade barriers more than those that would have been associated with retaining the right to veto. However, in policy areas which governments consider particularly sensitive for domestic or ideological reasons or where the potential gains from pooling sovereignty are uncertain, governments are likely to retain the right to veto (for example, foreign and security policy, and redistributive policies)."That coincides with my understanding of the concept. But, I can see why you might struggle with it.

Irrespective of context and dress it up how you will, you have admitted to being willing to surrender ever more national independence.  You are clearly amenable to ceding ever more power to Brussels, and that is something I consider myself and the leave voters have decided to say 'no more' to.

Regarding pooling sovereignty.  That, to me, is nothing more than a different way of saying government/control by committee and decisions determined by 'majority' voting.  'Pooling sovereignty' does not convey what, to me, it actually means.  To me it means a reduction in independence and a diminishing of self determination. 

If you cared to read one of my previous posts you would have seen how the EU leadership is moving ever closer towards a 'majority' decision making process and that it is expanding into ever more spheres of influence whilst it is reducing/removing the opportunities for nations to use a veto.  So to me, and with specific regard to the EU, pooling sovereignty is something I am extremely uncomfortable with hence that forms part of my desire to leave.

However given your acceptance of the likely (because it is extremely likely in my opinion) imposition of ceding ever more national independence to Brussels I can see how, for you, pooling sovereignty fits into the picture.  Give away more national independence and enter a pooling of interests whereby decisions are determined by majority and likely not to have a right of veto.   Well if that is your idea of a club to stay in it most certainly is not mine.  

[RogerC]

John52 - 2017-10-24 1:41 PM

RogerC - 2017-10-23 5:12 PM

John52 - 2017-10-23 2:58 PM

RogerC - 2017-10-23 1:37 PMCautious of politicians from nations that have, in times past, committed untold, and some times unspeakable, acts in search of expansionism and domination?

Do you realise that applies to Britain?

Clearly I do which is why I commented that it referred to recent history....specifically two world wars.  Your post just goes to show you either do not read , or do not understand the conditional comment I added at the end of the post.

So here it is again for your edification though I doubt you can resist another irrelevant reply as is your wont.

"Oh and before our resident topic diverter and others look to focus attention back to events reaching back to the stone ages please resist and accept that my reference is to recent/modern history as in WWl & WWll".

Another Straw Man. Nobody was going back to the Stone Ages. You are just selecting a time period that suits your prejudices (WW1 & 2 - both of which where war was declared by Britain by the way) and ignoring what went before and after (eg Suez)None of those running Germany now had the slightest involvement in what you are holding against them. And despite runing a far more Democratic and Egalitarian country than Britain they would punish anyone for wearing Nazi Regalia like the German immigrants in Britain's Unelected Head of State and Hangers On - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1481148/Prince-Harry-faces-outcry-at-Nazi-outfit.html

I never said anyone was going back to the stone ages.  The time scale I chose, in my post to make clear I....that is me, my opinion and intent, was to focus on what Germany had done in terms of expansionism. In the past it was done militarily, today it is being done in a political/fiscal manner.  Just look at what it has done to Greece.  Take a look and see just how much it has 'not' paid in terms of war reparations and, when that figure is taken into account it is not difficult to see where, over the decades, Germany has benefited more so than most all other European countries post WWll.

As for today's generation, you brought that into the forum.  I am referring to the political elite not 'Joe Public' having expansionist ambitions.  Likewise I mentioned nothing about the Nazi's.  You brought that into the forum.

Regarding declarations of war.............yet another irrelevance. However I see why you did so.  Without it you couldn't have brought the Royal Family into the topic yet again.  This time your insertion really does scrape the bottom of the barrel.  You might like to read up on the background to the photo and take it in context not in isolation as you clearly have done.  However that wouldn't fit with your bitterness would it!!

So Straw Man argument?  Looking at your post I'm 100% certain there's a character in the Wizard of Oz just waiting for you to audition for.  

[RogerC]

John52 - 2017-10-24 3:02 PMGermany has done the right thing after WW2 - what we told them to do and what we should have done ourselves. Become less militaristic, more democratic, more egalitarian and work hard.Now they are more prosperous than we are* some people resent it. :-( *to the point where our Prime Minister is begging the Germans for help - http://uk.businessinsider.com/theresa-may-begged-claude-juncker-brexit-negotiations-2017-10

The businessinsider report has been 'junked' by a number of politicians etc including Juncker himself.  You might like to take a look at the reports from the other side of the fence which indicate the 'leak' was unfounded and is possibly part of a campaign to place the blame for stalling talks/no deal exit on the EU.

[antony1969]

John52 - 2017-10-24 2:57 PM

 

antony1969 - 2017-10-24 2:07 PM

 

Brian Kirby - 2017-10-24 1:34 PM

 

antony1969 - 2017-10-24 6:32 AM.........................Wonder how much "forfeiting a bit more national independence" is acceptable to Brian ... He's already said we could have referendum after referendum every 16 months as opinions change and opinions over how big a "bit" is differs too I'm sure ... I gotta feeling Brians bit is much bigger than mine 8-)

See my post below above in response to Roger, Antony.

 

You seem to have skimmed my earlier post on referendums, but hot to have read it. There is no mention of 16 months, only of the flawed logic of referendums as a way to determine government policy on the basis of public opinion.

 

However, I guess the bit of national independence I'd forfeit in exchange for advantage elsewhere would be bigger than yours, because you'd be so focused on the loss, you'd lose sight of any conceivable advantage! :-D

 

My apologies ... A quick look on the other 9 page EU thread has you down as agreeing to referendums every 2 years not 16 months as I earlier said ... What's 6 months between friends ... Regarding the size of the bit you've not said how big that bit might be but by your answer I guess it could well grow into a humongous chunk

 

Still not managed to quote it then.

You must be so used to misquoting people to set up your straw men, that you even do it on a forum where we can look back and see what they really said (lol)

 

Ehhhh ... Its there for all to see ... I've given you a clue , page 9 t'other EU thread ... It's not difficult even for your good self ... What's "to set up your straw men" mean by the way ???

[antony1969]

John52 - 2017-10-24 3:02 PM

 

Germany has done the right thing after WW2 - what we told them to do and what we should have done ourselves. Become less militaristic, more democratic, more egalitarian and work hard.

Now they are more prosperous than we are* some people resent it. :-(

*to the point where our Prime Minister is begging the Germans for help - http://uk.businessinsider.com/theresa-may-begged-claude-juncker-brexit-negotiations-2017-10

 

Hey John you might wanna check what your quoting in future ... That German rubbish was called by Juncker himself as lies this morning !!! Keep up

[John52]

antony1969 - 2017-10-24 3:47 PM

 

.....was called by Juncker himself as lies this morning !

So its True then (lol)

(As Sir Humphrey Appleby said when some politician denied rumours he wanted to become Prime Minister ;-) )

[John52]

antony1969 - 2017-10-24 3:44 PM

What's "to set up your straw men" mean by the way ???

 

What you do all the time - put words into someone's mouth and then criticise them for saying them.

Set up a Straw Man who is easy to knock down.

But people with more than one brain cell do it when its not easy to check what they really said.

Not on a written forum when its easy to scroll back and see it (lol)

[John52]

RogerC - 2017-10-23 1:37 PM

Oh and before our resident topic diverter and others look to focus attention back to events reaching back the stone ages

 

RogerC - 2017-10-24 3:32 PM

I never said anyone was going back to the stone ages.

 

Its actually in the quote you posted - 2 lines above where you denied saying it (lol)

[John52]

RogerC - 2017-10-22 9:06 PM

 

what Germany couldn't in two world wars.....

 

RogerC - 2017-10-24 3:32 PM

Likewise I mentioned nothing about the Nazi's. You brought that into the forum.

 

See above *-)

 

Germany has done the Right thing - what we told them to do and what we should have followed our own advice and done ourselves. Less Militarism, More Democracy and Egalitariasim - so people have more chance of success through their ability and efforts instead of their parentage.

So they have taken over from us as the strongest economy with the greatest average wealth - state pension four times ours!

Naturally the most successful economy has the greatest say in the EU

They are hardly going to want advice from Britain are they .

By slating them for that you are the one coming across as bitter.

[Brian Kirby]

RogerC - 2017-10-24 3:06 PM...........................

1 Irrespective of context and dress it up how you will, you have admitted to being willing to surrender ever more national independence.  You are clearly amenable to ceding ever more power to Brussels, and that is something I consider myself and the leave voters have decided to say 'no more' to.

 

2 Regarding pooling sovereignty.  That, to me, is nothing more than a different way of saying government/control by committee and decisions determined by 'majority' voting.  'Pooling sovereignty' does not convey what, to me, it actually means.  To me it means a reduction in independence and a diminishing of self determination. 

 

3 If you cared to read one of my previous posts you would have seen how the EU leadership is moving ever closer towards a 'majority' decision making process and that it is expanding into ever more spheres of influence whilst it is reducing/removing the opportunities for nations to use a veto.  So to me, and with specific regard to the EU, pooling sovereignty is something I am extremely uncomfortable with hence that forms part of my desire to leave.

 

4 However given your acceptance of the likely (because it is extremely likely in my opinion) imposition of ceding ever more national independence to Brussels I can see how, for you, pooling sovereignty fits into the picture.  Give away more national independence and enter a pooling of interests whereby decisions are determined by majority and likely not to have a right of veto.   Well if that is your idea of a club to stay in it most certainly is not mine.  

1 Roger, you really must stop this! :-D I have said I am happy that we give up some national independence providing we get back an acceptable advantage. Give a bit to gain a bit, as I said. How on earth does that equate to "ceding ever more power to Brussels". Can you not see the gross exaggeration you are making?

 

2 Pooling sovereignty does, indeed, mean "a reduction in independence and a diminishing of self determination". However, what you seem to be overlooking is that this is not an involuntary pooling, it is voluntary. What we cede is what we choose to cede. What we choose not to cede we do not cede.

 

3 I acknowledge that this idea leaves you uneasy. But, again, you do appear to overlook that any such ceding of veto rights is (and was) gained by agreement in the Council (elected) and the parliament (elected), not by imposition of the Commission (unelected).

 

4 With respect, "because it is extremely likely in my opinion" does not make anything any more, or less, likely to happen than does anyone else's opinion. Is this committee structure not equate to what happens in almost every democratic government and institution the UK subscribes to? Is it not the way the UN security council arrives at most of its decisions? Is it not the way politics is conducted throughout the civilised world. Where is the EU's power to impose the "ceding ever more national independence" coming from?

[antony1969]

John52 - 2017-10-24 5:35 PM

 

antony1969 - 2017-10-24 3:44 PM

What's "to set up your straw men" mean by the way ???

 

What you do all the time - put words into someone's mouth and then criticise them for saying them.

Set up a Straw Man who is easy to knock down.

But people with more than one brain cell do it when its not easy to check what they really said.

Not on a written forum when its easy to scroll back and see it (lol)

 

I put words into peoples mouths on here ??? A faceless forum ??? Im good then aren't I ??? You said straw men by the way , maybe you need to scroll back and see what you said !!! ... You might also in future want to check info you put on here that hours before had been classed as untruthful ... Just a thought

[antony1969]

John52 - 2017-10-24 5:57 PM

 

RogerC - 2017-10-22 9:06 PM

 

what Germany couldn't in two world wars.....

 

RogerC - 2017-10-24 3:32 PM

Likewise I mentioned nothing about the Nazi's. You brought that into the forum.

 

See above *-)

 

Germany has done the Right thing - what we told them to do and what we should have followed our own advice and done ourselves. Less Militarism, More Democracy and Egalitariasim - so people have more chance of success through their ability and efforts instead of their parentage.

So they have taken over from us as the strongest economy with the greatest average wealth - state pension four times ours!

Naturally the most successful economy has the greatest say in the EU

They are hardly going to want advice from Britain are they .

By slating them for that you are the one coming across as bitter.

 

 

Germany has done the right thing your spot on ... AFD a far right party taking their place ... Couldn't agree more

[RogerC]

John52 - 2017-10-24 5:46 PM

RogerC - 2017-10-23 1:37 PMOh and before our resident topic diverter and others look to focus attention back to events reaching back the stone ages

RogerC - 2017-10-24 3:32 PMI never said anyone was going back to the stone ages.

Its actually in the quote you posted - 2 lines above where you denied saying it (lol)

Out of context John...........do try harder if you are going to misquote me.

[RogerC]

Brian Kirby - 2017-10-24 6:36 PM

RogerC - 2017-10-24 3:06 PM...........................1 Irrespective of context and dress it up how you will, you have admitted to being willing to surrender ever more national independence.  You are clearly amenable to ceding ever more power to Brussels, and that is something I consider myself and the leave voters have decided to say 'no more' to.2 Regarding pooling sovereignty.  That, to me, is nothing more than a different way of saying government/control by committee and decisions determined by 'majority' voting.  'Pooling sovereignty' does not convey what, to me, it actually means.  To me it means a reduction in independence and a diminishing of self determination. 3 If you cared to read one of my previous posts you would have seen how the EU leadership is moving ever closer towards a 'majority' decision making process and that it is expanding into ever more spheres of influence whilst it is reducing/removing the opportunities for nations to use a veto.  So to me, and with specific regard to the EU, pooling sovereignty is something I am extremely uncomfortable with hence that forms part of my desire to leave.4 However given your acceptance of the likely (because it is extremely likely in my opinion) imposition of ceding ever more national independence to Brussels I can see how, for you, pooling sovereignty fits into the picture.  Give away more national independence and enter a pooling of interests whereby decisions are determined by majority and likely not to have a right of veto.   Well if that is your idea of a club to stay in it most certainly is not mine.  

1 Roger, you really must stop this! :-D I have said I am happy that we give up some national independence providing we get back an acceptable advantage. Give a bit to gain a bit, as I said. How on earth does that equate to "ceding ever more power to Brussels". Can you not see the gross exaggeration you are making?2 Pooling sovereignty does, indeed, mean "a reduction in independence and a diminishing of self determination". However, what you seem to be overlooking is that this is not an involuntary pooling, it is voluntary. What we cede is what we choose to cede. What we choose not to cede we do not cede.3 I acknowledge that this idea leaves you uneasy. But, again, you do appear to overlook that any such ceding of veto rights is (and was) gained by agreement in the Council (elected) and the parliament (elected), not by imposition of the Commission (unelected).4 With respect, "because it is extremely likely in my opinion" does not make anything any more, or less, likely to happen than does anyone else's opinion. Is this committee structure not equate to what happens in almost every democratic government and institution the UK subscribes to? Is it not the way the UN security council arrives at most of its decisions? Is it not the way politics is conducted throughout the civilised world. Where is the EU's power to impose the "ceding ever more national independence" coming from?

As I have said many times....dress it up however you want you are clearly prepared to cede 'some' (although what your idea of 'some' is I don't know) national power/sovereignty to Brussels.  The reason is an irrelevance. Leave voters were minded to vote leave partly 'because' of the EU already having too much input/control over Westminster and here you are claiming to be 'happy' to cede even more.

Although you qualify it as give a bit/gain a bit I fail to see how ceding ever more power/control to Brussels can ever be a win/win situation in the long run.  The more power Brussels has over member nations the more it will use those powers in it's own interests. 

Are you aware the EU mandarins have considered making adoption of the Euro compulsory across the member states?  That, as just one example of their thinking, scares me badly.  To even consider it is, in my opinion, beyond the pale.

As for the comment 'we chose what to cede or not to cede' you might like to read into the expansion of majority voting and the reduction in scope/subject of the national veto, though I doubt anything will convince you that the right of veto and choice of what we cede, or not as the case may be, has been diminishing as the years have gone by.  According to my reading this situation is only set to deepen.....or as I prefer to think about it....to get worse.

At least we agree on one thing:

"Pooling sovereignty does, indeed, mean "a reduction in independence and a diminishing of self determination".

.......and that is where we are clearly poles apart.  You are 'happy' to relinquish 'some' more powers whereas I am most certainly not. 

I prefer to be governed by our own rather than those in Brussels who I deem to be more interested in the monolith which they clearly desire to see expand in terms of encompassing ever more nations and implementing and presiding over ever widening spheres of influence.

As for the other examples you note I concede that there is a democratic process of sorts in terms of negotiation and voting.  However the UN, which you use as an example, is hardly a figure of the democratic process to hold up as a glowing example.  It is undemocratic in that the member nations (East/West grouping) are almost always at odds with one another.  Russia/China will veto anything the West wishes to enact through sheer political bloody mindedness.  It is toothless.  It does not interfere with national law making or fiscal processes etc etc so I fail to see the relevance. 

[Archiesgrandad]

I can't be bothered to read through all this stuff, over and over again. If someone starts a new thread it is quickly hijacked by those who aren't prepared to hold their counsel until we at least start to have some feedback from the negotiators on the direction in which they are moving. You are merely expressing own opinions, and it really is difficult to see what you can possibly know that might inform those opinions, apart from prejudice and a high degree of misunderstanding of whatever information you seek out to justify your claims.

We are all entitled to think and say/write whatever we want, subject to the not unreasonable restraints that apply to us all within our society, and being wrong or ill informed is definately allowed, it's just your reputation that might be in jeopardy.

What I cannot begin to understand is why so many of you have apparently no idea how much more difficult you make these negotiations whilst we have this constant tsunami of negative comment from the minority whose views did not prevail.Unless you believe that it would be better to face the most disastrous outcome that the Franco/German axis might choose to impose on us rather than allow the government to negotiate with the obvious support of us all and thereby bring the EU to a new and better way of dealing with us, then for all our sakes rethink your strategy. We have been promised that we will get to vote on the final agreement, so unless your actual motivation is anarchy and the breakdown of our society, Syria is probably a good example of how this works out, and I'm sure neither you or I want that, then let our democracy prevail and at least keep your own counsel until we know something.

There are some 190 odd nation states recognised by the UN, and only 27 of them are part of the EU/ Within the EU there are several countries which are near basket cases and for the time being they are being propped up by the EU. Several more have only recently started to move into the First world community and are being propped up by the EU. Another group are besieged by separatist movements on various grounds and are a cause of great concern to the EU. The EU wants us to be tied to them because we are a wealthy country and we buy lots of things from them and are not very good at insisting that they buy their fair share from us in return.

The other 160 odd countries seem to manage reasonably well without being in the EU and I can't think of any reason why the UK might be different.

 

Please, wait and see what we are asked to accept and let the negotiators do their job.

 

AGD

[Barryd999]

Archiesgrandad - 2017-10-24 9:21 PM

 

I can't be bothered to read through all this stuff, over and over again. If someone starts a new thread it is quickly hijacked by those who aren't prepared to hold their counsel until we at least start to have some feedback from the negotiators on the direction in which they are moving. You are merely expressing own opinions, and it really is difficult to see what you can possibly know that might inform those opinions, apart from prejudice and a high degree of misunderstanding of whatever information you seek out to justify your claims.

We are all entitled to think and say/write whatever we want, subject to the not unreasonable restraints that apply to us all within our society, and being wrong or ill informed is definately allowed, it's just your reputation that might be in jeopardy.

What I cannot begin to understand is why so many of you have apparently no idea how much more difficult you make these negotiations whilst we have this constant tsunami of negative comment from the minority whose views did not prevail.Unless you believe that it would be better to face the most disastrous outcome that the Franco/German axis might choose to impose on us rather than allow the government to negotiate with the obvious support of us all and thereby bring the EU to a new and better way of dealing with us, then for all our sakes rethink your strategy. We have been promised that we will get to vote on the final agreement, so unless your actual motivation is anarchy and the breakdown of our society, Syria is probably a good example of how this works out, and I'm sure neither you or I want that, then let our democracy prevail and at least keep your own counsel until we know something.

There are some 190 odd nation states recognised by the UN, and only 27 of them are part of the EU/ Within the EU there are several countries which are near basket cases and for the time being they are being propped up by the EU. Several more have only recently started to move into the First world community and are being propped up by the EU. Another group are besieged by separatist movements on various grounds and are a cause of great concern to the EU. The EU wants us to be tied to them because we are a wealthy country and we buy lots of things from them and are not very good at insisting that they buy their fair share from us in return.

The other 160 odd countries seem to manage reasonably well without being in the EU and I can't think of any reason why the UK might be different.

 

Please, wait and see what we are asked to accept and let the negotiators do their job.

 

AGD

 

The only reason Parliament and possibly the people may get any say in the final deal is because of the millions of people who have applied pressure or in the case of Gina Miller took the government to court. Had everyone just sulked off the day after the referendum and said nothing which oddly most Brexiteers seemed to think is how politics works then I suspect there would have been no chance of parliament or the people getting any further say.

 

There has been a constant attempt by the Brexiteers to silence those who are apposed to Brexit or want to see us get the best deal possible. Calling us Whingers, bad losers, remoaners and a whole host of derogatory names. What they fail to understand is politics and democracy does not work like that. Things change, peoples opinions change, new facts are revealed. Of course it needs constant scrutiny and discussion.

[antony1969]

Barryd999 - 2017-10-24 11:47 PM

 

Archiesgrandad - 2017-10-24 9:21 PM

 

I can't be bothered to read through all this stuff, over and over again. If someone starts a new thread it is quickly hijacked by those who aren't prepared to hold their counsel until we at least start to have some feedback from the negotiators on the direction in which they are moving. You are merely expressing own opinions, and it really is difficult to see what you can possibly know that might inform those opinions, apart from prejudice and a high degree of misunderstanding of whatever information you seek out to justify your claims.

We are all entitled to think and say/write whatever we want, subject to the not unreasonable restraints that apply to us all within our society, and being wrong or ill informed is definately allowed, it's just your reputation that might be in jeopardy.

What I cannot begin to understand is why so many of you have apparently no idea how much more difficult you make these negotiations whilst we have this constant tsunami of negative comment from the minority whose views did not prevail.Unless you believe that it would be better to face the most disastrous outcome that the Franco/German axis might choose to impose on us rather than allow the government to negotiate with the obvious support of us all and thereby bring the EU to a new and better way of dealing with us, then for all our sakes rethink your strategy. We have been promised that we will get to vote on the final agreement, so unless your actual motivation is anarchy and the breakdown of our society, Syria is probably a good example of how this works out, and I'm sure neither you or I want that, then let our democracy prevail and at least keep your own counsel until we know something.

There are some 190 odd nation states recognised by the UN, and only 27 of them are part of the EU/ Within the EU there are several countries which are near basket cases and for the time being they are being propped up by the EU. Several more have only recently started to move into the First world community and are being propped up by the EU. Another group are besieged by separatist movements on various grounds and are a cause of great concern to the EU. The EU wants us to be tied to them because we are a wealthy country and we buy lots of things from them and are not very good at insisting that they buy their fair share from us in return.

The other 160 odd countries seem to manage reasonably well without being in the EU and I can't think of any reason why the UK might be different.

 

Please, wait and see what we are asked to accept and let the negotiators do their job.

 

AGD

 

The only reason Parliament and possibly the people may get any say in the final deal is because of the millions of people who have applied pressure or in the case of Gina Miller took the government to court. Had everyone just sulked off the day after the referendum and said nothing which oddly most Brexiteers seemed to think is how politics works then I suspect there would have been no chance of parliament or the people getting any further say.

 

There has been a constant attempt by the Brexiteers to silence those who are apposed to Brexit or want to see us get the best deal possible. Calling us Whingers, bad losers, remoaners and a whole host of derogatory names. What they fail to understand is politics and democracy does not work like that. Things change, peoples opinions change, new facts are revealed. Of course it needs constant scrutiny and discussion.

 

Think most leave voters understand totally how democracy works even if they are of low intelligence , easily conned , easily duped , racist , Alf Garnett types , little Englanders and so on and so on as many remain voters have called us ... Just like the lies and untruths throughout the campaign Barry on both sides so has the name calling been ... Folk in glass houses and all that

[Barryd999]

antony1969 - 2017-10-25 6:46 AM

 

Barryd999 - 2017-10-24 11:47 PM

 

Archiesgrandad - 2017-10-24 9:21 PM

 

I can't be bothered to read through all this stuff, over and over again. If someone starts a new thread it is quickly hijacked by those who aren't prepared to hold their counsel until we at least start to have some feedback from the negotiators on the direction in which they are moving. You are merely expressing own opinions, and it really is difficult to see what you can possibly know that might inform those opinions, apart from prejudice and a high degree of misunderstanding of whatever information you seek out to justify your claims.

We are all entitled to think and say/write whatever we want, subject to the not unreasonable restraints that apply to us all within our society, and being wrong or ill informed is definately allowed, it's just your reputation that might be in jeopardy.

What I cannot begin to understand is why so many of you have apparently no idea how much more difficult you make these negotiations whilst we have this constant tsunami of negative comment from the minority whose views did not prevail.Unless you believe that it would be better to face the most disastrous outcome that the Franco/German axis might choose to impose on us rather than allow the government to negotiate with the obvious support of us all and thereby bring the EU to a new and better way of dealing with us, then for all our sakes rethink your strategy. We have been promised that we will get to vote on the final agreement, so unless your actual motivation is anarchy and the breakdown of our society, Syria is probably a good example of how this works out, and I'm sure neither you or I want that, then let our democracy prevail and at least keep your own counsel until we know something.

There are some 190 odd nation states recognised by the UN, and only 27 of them are part of the EU/ Within the EU there are several countries which are near basket cases and for the time being they are being propped up by the EU. Several more have only recently started to move into the First world community and are being propped up by the EU. Another group are besieged by separatist movements on various grounds and are a cause of great concern to the EU. The EU wants us to be tied to them because we are a wealthy country and we buy lots of things from them and are not very good at insisting that they buy their fair share from us in return.

The other 160 odd countries seem to manage reasonably well without being in the EU and I can't think of any reason why the UK might be different.

 

Please, wait and see what we are asked to accept and let the negotiators do their job.

 

AGD

 

The only reason Parliament and possibly the people may get any say in the final deal is because of the millions of people who have applied pressure or in the case of Gina Miller took the government to court. Had everyone just sulked off the day after the referendum and said nothing which oddly most Brexiteers seemed to think is how politics works then I suspect there would have been no chance of parliament or the people getting any further say.

 

There has been a constant attempt by the Brexiteers to silence those who are apposed to Brexit or want to see us get the best deal possible. Calling us Whingers, bad losers, remoaners and a whole host of derogatory names. What they fail to understand is politics and democracy does not work like that. Things change, peoples opinions change, new facts are revealed. Of course it needs constant scrutiny and discussion.

 

Think most leave voters understand totally how democracy works even if they are of low intelligence , easily conned , easily duped , racist , Alf Garnett types , little Englanders and so on and so on as many remain voters have called us ... Just like the lies and untruths throughout the campaign Barry on both sides so has the name calling been ... Folk in glass houses and all that

 

I agree the name calling is wearing a bit thin now but if they understand how democracy works why has there constantly been an attempt to silence those who voted remain? The attitude in the early days especially after the referendum was one of surprise that the remainers had the audacity to say anything at all. Almost like because we lost the referendum we should have no say in the shape of things to come.

 

I dont remember any lies told by the remain side by the way, just predictions that may or may not come true. Leave however. *-)

[John52]

Brian Kirby - 2017-10-24 6:36 PM

 

Where is the EU's power to impose the "ceding ever more national independence" coming from?

 

The Daily Mail

(lol)

[antony1969]

Barryd999 - 2017-10-25 8:22 AM

 

antony1969 - 2017-10-25 6:46 AM

 

Barryd999 - 2017-10-24 11:47 PM

 

Archiesgrandad - 2017-10-24 9:21 PM

 

I can't be bothered to read through all this stuff, over and over again. If someone starts a new thread it is quickly hijacked by those who aren't prepared to hold their counsel until we at least start to have some feedback from the negotiators on the direction in which they are moving. You are merely expressing own opinions, and it really is difficult to see what you can possibly know that might inform those opinions, apart from prejudice and a high degree of misunderstanding of whatever information you seek out to justify your claims.

We are all entitled to think and say/write whatever we want, subject to the not unreasonable restraints that apply to us all within our society, and being wrong or ill informed is definately allowed, it's just your reputation that might be in jeopardy.

What I cannot begin to understand is why so many of you have apparently no idea how much more difficult you make these negotiations whilst we have this constant tsunami of negative comment from the minority whose views did not prevail.Unless you believe that it would be better to face the most disastrous outcome that the Franco/German axis might choose to impose on us rather than allow the government to negotiate with the obvious support of us all and thereby bring the EU to a new and better way of dealing with us, then for all our sakes rethink your strategy. We have been promised that we will get to vote on the final agreement, so unless your actual motivation is anarchy and the breakdown of our society, Syria is probably a good example of how this works out, and I'm sure neither you or I want that, then let our democracy prevail and at least keep your own counsel until we know something.

There are some 190 odd nation states recognised by the UN, and only 27 of them are part of the EU/ Within the EU there are several countries which are near basket cases and for the time being they are being propped up by the EU. Several more have only recently started to move into the First world community and are being propped up by the EU. Another group are besieged by separatist movements on various grounds and are a cause of great concern to the EU. The EU wants us to be tied to them because we are a wealthy country and we buy lots of things from them and are not very good at insisting that they buy their fair share from us in return.

The other 160 odd countries seem to manage reasonably well without being in the EU and I can't think of any reason why the UK might be different.

 

Please, wait and see what we are asked to accept and let the negotiators do their job.

 

AGD

 

The only reason Parliament and possibly the people may get any say in the final deal is because of the millions of people who have applied pressure or in the case of Gina Miller took the government to court. Had everyone just sulked off the day after the referendum and said nothing which oddly most Brexiteers seemed to think is how politics works then I suspect there would have been no chance of parliament or the people getting any further say.

 

There has been a constant attempt by the Brexiteers to silence those who are apposed to Brexit or want to see us get the best deal possible. Calling us Whingers, bad losers, remoaners and a whole host of derogatory names. What they fail to understand is politics and democracy does not work like that. Things change, peoples opinions change, new facts are revealed. Of course it needs constant scrutiny and discussion.

 

Think most leave voters understand totally how democracy works even if they are of low intelligence , easily conned , easily duped , racist , Alf Garnett types , little Englanders and so on and so on as many remain voters have called us ... Just like the lies and untruths throughout the campaign Barry on both sides so has the name calling been ... Folk in glass houses and all that

 

I agree the name calling is wearing a bit thin now but if they understand how democracy works why has there constantly been an attempt to silence those who voted remain? The attitude in the early days especially after the referendum was one of surprise that the remainers had the audacity to say anything at all. Almost like because we lost the referendum we should have no say in the shape of things to come.

 

I dont remember any lies told by the remain side by the way, just predictions that may or may not come true. Leave however. *-)

 

Who's constantly tried to silence remain voters and how ??? ... I predict your going to stop using your crystal ball to tell us what you predict a Brexit future will look like ... You know like all predictions they may or may not come true

[Guest pelmetman]

Good old Blighty confounds the doom mongers again >:-) ..........

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41747940

 

Interest rates going up next month methinks B-) ......

 

 

[John52]

RogerC - 2017-10-22 9:43 PM

Although I agree with the current situation vis a vis the HoL

So even you can't defend the House of Lords in a 'Democracy'

But the only one who might stop making it worse, and do something about it, is Jeremy Corbyn.

Which is why the Establishment is running smear campaigns against him.

[John52]

pelmetman - 2017-10-25 9:36 AM

 

Good old Blighty confounds the doom mongers again >:-) ..........

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41747940

 

Interest rates going up next month methinks B-) ......

 

 

Just subtract GDP from the real inflation rate and you might see why the National Debt is still growing

The only statistic that matters is the Current Account Deficit, but they don't like to talk about that *-)