Brexit consequences

[reohn2]

I think I'll move on

Be my guest

and remind people of the bizarre and hysterical claims made by Remainers during the campaign.

Surpassed in huge quantities by the liars in charge of the Brexit campaign

[Graham O]

Assuming that the June referendum result will be enacted in parliament looks an increasingly 'optimistic' stance.

I have a feeling you could be right. At the end of the day, is a government going to do something which is not objectively in the best interests of the country?

[mjr]

There is nothing written on the bus to say the whole £350m would go to the NHS, and when we stop funding the EU we will, if we choose, be able to spend more money on the NHS instead.

Maybe not on the bus, but it was on plenty of other Leave materials. See the poster behind Boris in the attached example.

And while many Remainers can say that they weren't willing to trust these mutually-exclusive claims, no-one could compositely disprove the lies Leave told about the future until after the vote... hours after the vote, when I thought it would take weeks.

People should be allowed an "Are you sure?" vote now we know Leave were full of BS. After all, you even have to confirm deletion of a downloaded picture, so let's confirm deletion of millions of people's European citizenship.

[53x13]

Assuming that the June referendum result will be enacted in parliament looks an increasingly 'optimistic' stance.

I have a feeling you could be right. At the end of the day, is a government going to do something which is not objectively in the best interests of the country?

Is a government going to enforce a non legal vote when it's not in the best interests of the current administration.
The easiest thing to do is to have another referendum. It's a common event in Europe, to have several referendum take place on the same issue.

Answers on a post card.

[Graham O]

Although another referendum would be the easiest, I think it will end up as a Parliamentary vote on Article 50 or whether to ratify the referendum result. Brexit was fought on the basis of Westminster supremacy and "take back control" and it would be hypocritical in the extreme if Parliament was then ignored and Royal Perogative used to push it through. Although the Tory right wing have always been the rebels over Europe, it could be that with a slim majority, the pro Europe Tories could push for a parliamentary motion on Brexit. Hopefully some of them will have the balls to put country before party.

[al_yrpal]

"Brexit means Brexit" , she said it..


Al

[Psamathe]

"Brexit means Brexit" , she said it..


Al

You can say the same about any work e.g. "sleep means sleep".

The difficulty about Brexit is that it means totally different things to different people. For some it is the extra £350m a week for the NHS whilst for others it is stopping immigration (probably from non-christian countries), many will enjoy being able to elect our leaders (... oh dear, they are already disappointed), others are just relieved Turkish migrants will not be flooding into the UK by Christmas, some are really enthusiastic about all that free trade with the rest of the world.

So whilst Brexit might mean Brexit, we have no idea (and little control) over what Brexit actually means (and those Leave politicians have mostly run away and are not telling anybody how to achieve what they promised (e.g. Boris saying UK people can still travel, live, work, buy houses in the EU, but the Eu can't do the same in the UK).

Ian

[Graham O]

"Brexit means Brexit" , she said it..


Al

But what does that mean? She hasn't said, AFAIK, the referendum result is binding and I will invoke Article 50. And she said it when she wanted support from the tory right wing. However she does scare me when she says that the position of EU citizens here is up for negotiation, and by implication, the position of UK citizens in Europe.

[Psamathe]

... However she does scare me when she says that the position of EU citizens here is up for negotiation, and by implication, the position of UK citizens in Europe.

Much as I distrust her [May], the status of EU citizens in the UK is not something that concerns me because it will be sorted in a fair manner. It will undoubtedly end-up on a reciprocity based agreement where EU citizens in the UK enjoy the same freedoms as UK citizens in the EU.

It is far more complex that "they can stay" or "they must go home". There are loads of issues like access to benefits, to in-work tax allowances, state housing entitlement, to NHS cover (e.g. the French withdrew state health cover to economically inactive non-retired non-French citizens living in France). So, if one EU country decides that UK citizens living there can stay but are not covered by the state healthcare system then expect citizens of that country living in the UK to not be covered by the NHS. Most of those pushing for unilateral commitments from the UK now would then be very angry when e.g. their tax money was paying for benefits/tax credits/housing for a citizen from <an EU country> when a UK citizen in that country was not receiving he same benefits.

Ian

[blackbike]

There is nothing written on the bus to say the whole £350m would go to the NHS, and when we stop funding the EU we will, if we choose, be able to spend more money on the NHS instead.

Maybe not on the bus, but it was on plenty of other Leave materials. See the poster behind Boris in the attached example.

And while many Remainers can say that they weren't willing to trust these mutually-exclusive claims, no-one could compositely disprove the lies Leave told about the future until after the vote... hours after the vote, when I thought it would take weeks.

People should be allowed an "Are you sure?" vote now we know Leave were full of BS. After all, you even have to confirm deletion of a downloaded picture, so let's confirm deletion of millions of people's European citizenship.

Again I have to correct a supposedly clever Remainer who reads too much into a simple statement.

The poster says ' Let us give the NHS the £350 million the EU takes every week'.

It does not say that it will happen, merely that a Leave vote would allow it while a Remain one obviously wouldn't.

Voting Leave was the only way to ensure that the UK government will in future be able to spend all its money as it sees fit, rather than having the EU decide how £350 million per week of it is spent.

Now we are leaving the EU, we have let the government spend that £350 on the NHS if it so chooses. Whether it does or not is entirely a matter for our elected representatives in parliament.

The people have never had a direct say in where their tax money goes, so the poster was a clear invitation to allow the UK government to decide how to spend that money, and anyone who thinks otherwise has not been misled. They are simply unaware of how our democracy works.

[Graham O]

Again I have to correct a supposedly clever Remainer who reads too much into a simple statement.

The poster says ' Let us give the NHS the £350 million the EU takes every week'.

It does not say that it will happen, merely that a Leave vote would allow it while a Remain one obviously wouldn't.

Voting Leave was the only way to ensure that the UK government will in future be able to spend all its money as it sees fit, rather than having the EU decide how £350 million per week of it is spent.

Now we are leaving the EU, we have let the government spend that £350 on the NHS if it so chooses. Whether it does or not is entirely a matter for our elected representatives in parliament.

The people have never had a direct say in where their tax money goes, so the poster was a clear invitation to allow the UK government to decide how to spend that money, and anyone who thinks otherwise has not been misled. They are simply unaware of how our democracy works.

Why do you keep going on about this £350 million going to Europe every week, when the figure has been proven to be false and takes no account of the rebate?

[Psamathe]

There is nothing written on the bus to say the whole £350m would go to the NHS, and when we stop funding the EU we will, if we choose, be able to spend more money on the NHS instead.

Maybe not on the bus, but it was on plenty of other Leave materials. See the poster behind Boris in the attached example.

And while many Remainers can say that they weren't willing to trust these mutually-exclusive claims, no-one could compositely disprove the lies Leave told about the future until after the vote... hours after the vote, when I thought it would take weeks.

People should be allowed an "Are you sure?" vote now we know Leave were full of BS. After all, you even have to confirm deletion of a downloaded picture, so let's confirm deletion of millions of people's European citizenship.

Again I have to correct a supposedly clever Remainer who reads too much into a simple statement.

The poster says ' Let us give the NHS the £350 million the EU takes every week'.

It does not say that it will happen, merely that a Leave vote would allow it while a Remain one obviously wouldn't.

Voting Leave was the only way to ensure that the UK government will in future be able to spend all its money as it sees fit, rather than having the EU decide how £350 million per week of it is spent.

Now we are leaving the EU, we have let the government spend that £350 on the NHS if it so chooses. Whether it does or not is entirely a matter for our elected representatives in parliament.

The people have never had a direct say in where their tax money goes, so the poster was a clear invitation to allow the UK government to decide how to spend that money, and anyone who thinks otherwise has not been misled. They are simply unaware of how our democracy works.

Sorry but that is a ridiculous argument. Most people seeing the poster would have interpreted it as a plan to give the NHS the £350m a week. It strongly suggests two things
1. That the EU takes £350m a week (which we have already established is a complete lie)
and 2. That we intend to give that money to the NHS (something that within hours of the referendum has being reneged on by Leave campaign).

That poster and how it is interpreted are clear and obvious.

Ian

[PDQ Mobile]

+1 most definitely

[al_yrpal]

Theresa's speech was very brief if you saw it, less than a minute. She couldn't possibly spell out everything in that time. I think she was just saying that she would honour the referendum result without a parliamentary vote, no more referendums and the UK will definitely be leaving the EU. The only circumstances in which that could possibly change as far as I can imagine is if the EU reformed itself in the meantime, and.... pigs might fly...

She said - "Brexit means Brexit and WE are going to make a success of it" Great!

Al

[Psamathe]

Theresa's speech was very brief if you saw it, less than a minute. She couldn't possibly spell out everything in that time. I think she was just saying that she would honour the referendum result without a parliamentary, no more referendums and the UK will definitely be leaving the EU. The only circumstances in which that could possibly change as far as I can imagine is if the EU reformed itself in the meantime, and.... pigs might fly...

She said - "Brexit means Brexit and WE are going to make a success of it" Great!

Al

But could that mean a "Norway solution" (what we had before but without any say in regs, without any votes or without any rebate) or a "Swiss solution" (not a lot different), or rely on WTO rules (with the tariffs). So what actually does Brexit mean - and I suspect you would get a lot of different answers from different Leave voters. and thus I suspect a lot will be very unhappy when we e.g. end-up leaving but keeping Freedom of Movement and/or leave but keep having all the "red tape" and Brussels dictating regs and/or have to pay export tariffs, etc. Whatever happens, a lot of Leave voters will not be getting what they want because they want different things.

Ian