EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

[Greyblades]

Given how fienishly difficult the job is I think you might be surprised. A lot of the invective, on both sides, stems as much as anything from the lack of progress and attendent frustration. The Major problem with May's deal was that in locking us into the Backstop and (probably) signing us up to taking future EU rules it really was Brexit in name only, all the downsides and none of the benefits.

By Contrast, No Deal represents some benefits - and so does a deal without the Backstop.

EU court supremacy, tax and subsidy restictions, "political offenses" obligations and a 39 billion pound payment atop it?

I dont see enough people being happy to put this to bed with just the backstop removed.

[InsaneApache]

Bloody hell.

'Take a new oath of loyalty to Bruxelles'.



Now tell me about treason. If this aint it I don't know what is.

[edyzmedieval]

With the Supreme Court now in unanimity over the closure of Parliament - can this Brexit thing be put to solving once and for all, please? I don't expect it so but at least try and finish this charade.

[InsaneApache]

Funny that it was unanimous no dissenters at all....oh wait....

[InsaneApache]

"The last time we were in territory like this it was settled by war, civil war!"

https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presente...supreme-court/

[Beskar]

Funny that it was unanimous no dissenters at all....oh wait....

52% didn't agree to a hard Brexit, only a radical minority of that did. Leave was campaigned on getting a deal or various soft-Brexit options.

[InsaneApache]

52% didn't agree to a hard Brexit, only a radical minority of that did. Leave was campaigned on getting a deal or various soft-Brexit options.

Are you serious?

[Greyblades]

Probably, considering its verbatem one of the libdem/labour/rebel tories' favoured talking points; an attempt to dilute and delegitimaize the result through assumptions favourable to thier position.

52% of those who turned out voted to leave, no specification on the form it took was provided merely that we would indeed leave. Pity that the sabotage of May and Hammond's remainer faction ensured none of the even remotely palatable of potential soft brexits were allowed to materialize, but no amount of heel dragging will set back the clock and serves only exacerbate the backlash next election will bring on those that turned coat.

[rory_20_uk]

52% didn't agree to a hard Brexit, only a radical minority of that did. Leave was campaigned on getting a deal or various soft-Brexit options.

The ballot didn't say anything about these great deals. Why would the EU give leavers a better deal than staying?

Sounds a lot like "Hey! I bought lottery tickets to win the jackpot!!"

[Beskar]

The ballot didn't say anything about these great deals. Why would the EU give leavers a better deal than staying? Sounds a lot like "Hey! I bought lottery tickets to win the jackpot!!"

Like the £350 million per week for the NHS.

Oh, I would love that to be true. But no chance.

[Pannonian]

Like the £350 million per week for the NHS.

Oh, I would love that to be true. But no chance.

I would fully support Brexit if the Leavers keep their campaign promises.

[rory_20_uk]

Like the £350 million per week for the NHS.

Oh, I would love that to be true. But no chance.

Exactly. There was no chance it was true. It was a claim just the same as politicians make every election.

In the UK, there is no requirement for politicians to keep any election promise and generally they don't.

And given this one was both extreme as well as unsubstantiated one would have to be a fool to believe it.

[Pannonian]

Exactly. There was no chance it was true. It was a claim just the same as politicians make every election.

In the UK, there is no requirement for politicians to keep any election promise and generally they don't.

And given this one was both extreme as well as unsubstantiated one would have to be a fool to believe it.

Wouldn't any opposition be justified in blocking Brexit until Brexiteers have shown they can fulfil their promises?

[Beskar]

And given this one was both extreme as well as unsubstantiated one would have to be a fool to believe it.

Unfortunately, I knew a few of those fools."Well, they wouldn't put a lie like that on a bus!"

[InsaneApache]

Unfortunately, I knew a few of those fools."Well, they wouldn't put a lie like that on a bus!"

You need to find a better class of friends.

[rory_20_uk]

Wouldn't any opposition be justified in blocking Brexit until Brexiteers have shown they can fulfil their promises?

No. They were not legally bound promises. And the courts have determined that apparently politicians are allowed to lie.

Did you display this dedication to the truth in every other case where politicians lie?

[rory_20_uk]

Unfortunately, I knew a few of those fools."Well, they wouldn't put a lie like that on a bus!"

And such people are everywhere in every walk of life. Casting untold numbers of votes and making many important decisions.

When my father was a juror one person with him said the defendant must be innocent since he had honest eyes!

I personally would like a system of examination before one gets the right to vote but I realise this would be unworkable.

[Pannonian]

No. They were not legally bound promises. And the courts have determined that apparently politicians are allowed to lie.

Did you display this dedication to the truth in every other case where politicians lie?

Yes I do. I accept the opposition's right, heck duty, to oppose the government. That's why they're the loyal opposition. I expect the government to have to carry Parliament to carry out their legislation, and if they can't persuade Parliament, to have to drop their plans. Do you agree with this?

[rory_20_uk]

Yes I do. I accept the opposition's right, heck duty, to oppose the government. That's why they're the loyal opposition. I expect the government to have to carry Parliament to carry out their legislation, and if they can't persuade Parliament, to have to drop their plans. Do you agree with this?

Yes.

And the "opposition" has refused to have an election since they are more scared of loosing their jobs (and with Corbyn, possibly being responsible for reality for once) they refuse to do so.

Boris has lost 100% of his votes. He does not command the house. Boot him out! Vote of no confidence! Get an election! Why did Labour vote against this? Let's see what the electorate want (in as far as first past the post does that).

Woukd you agree to that?

[Beskar]

You need to find a better class of friends.

Personally speaking in the world around me at the time, those below the age of 40 voted remain, those above voted Brexit (not absolute, obviously, my Grandmother voted Remain for example.)

Unfortunately, the few that said that pretty much dismiss my rebuttals based on my age compared to theirs. Also given the demographics of the area, those above 40 outnumber those below.

I feel this is one of those generational dividing issues, and the polls suggested at the time. In a decade, the populace could have a comfortable pro-remain stance. Part of this is that younger people identify as being European and not just British.

[Pannonian]

Yes.

And the "opposition" has refused to have an election since they are more scared of loosing their jobs (and with Corbyn, possibly being responsible for reality for once) they refuse to do so.

Boris has lost 100% of his votes. He does not command the house. Boot him out! Vote of no confidence! Get an election! Why did Labour vote against this? Let's see what the electorate want (in as far as first past the post does that).

Woukd you agree to that?

Get the PM to call an election then. Why don't you petition him to do that, if that's what you want?

[rory_20_uk]

Get the PM to call an election then. Why don't you petition him to do that, if that's what you want?

Do you not agree the leader of the opposition should have agreed to the election when called?

Yes or no.

[Pannonian]

Do you not agree the leader of the opposition should have agreed to the election when called?

Yes or no.

No. There's been an election in 2017. The will of the people as asked in 2017 has resulted in the present Parliament. The constitution says another election is not due until 2022. If you're questioning whether the will of the people is still the same, shouldn't you be pushing for the 2016 question to be asked again?

[edyzmedieval]

Will of the people doesn't mean you can do whatever you want, especially when you campaign on a deal with the European Union.

Take the example of Romania - in 2016, the ruling party was elected and had a comfortable majority to pass their agenda. An agenda of economic boom, development and a better deal with the EU. (sounds familiar?) Unfortunately, they diverted to serious corruption scandals and legalising corruption essentially so naturally, the people protested heavily, we sent their party president to jail, their popularity has cratered and they're on track to have a stinging defeat in Presidential elections next year.

When you lie to the people to get elected, consequences will happen.

[Greyblades]

Hence why they wont call an early election despite the ruling party having its majority broken; they know the current remainer majority parliament wont be there after the election and anything they do now with it will be undone by the next parliament.

I dont think there's a plan behind thier current actions, they're reduced to stalling brext at any cost in the desperate hope that something, anything will change in their favour before 2022 when the election law they are relying on to maintain the dealock runs out.

[Pannonian]

Hence why they wont call an early election despite the ruling party having its majority broken; they know the current remainer majority parliament wont be there after the election and anything they do now with it will be undone by the next parliament.

I dont think there's a plan behind thier current actions, they're reduced to stalling brext at any cost in the desperate hope that something, anything will change in their favour before 2022 when the election law they are relying on to maintain the dealock runs out.

The solution is simple. If you want to pass a Law, form a proposal that will pass through Parliament. That's the basic principle of lawmaking in any country that has a Parliament, Congress or other lawmaking body.

[Pannonian]

Will of the people doesn't mean you can do whatever you want, especially when you campaign on a deal with the European Union.

Take the example of Romania - in 2016, the ruling party was elected and had a comfortable majority to pass their agenda. An agenda of economic boom, development and a better deal with the EU. (sounds familiar?) Unfortunately, they diverted to serious corruption scandals and legalising corruption essentially so naturally, the people protested heavily, we sent their party president to jail, their popularity has cratered and they're on track to have a stinging defeat in Presidential elections next year.

When you lie to the people to get elected, consequences will happen.

There's an assumption in the UK, particular among the right, and more prevalent the further right you go, that will of the people results in an authority to do whatever you like without further checks and balances. As you have the Great Man theory of history, the far right also has the Great Man theory of politics, where one man, unconstrained by customs and law, shapes the world as they see fit, backed once and for all by the monolithic authority that is the Will of the People.

[rory_20_uk]

There's an assumption in the UK, particular among the right, and more prevalent the further right you go, that will of the people results in an authority to do whatever you like without further checks and balances. As you have the Great Man theory of history, the far right also has the Great Man theory of politics, where one man, unconstrained by customs and law, shapes the world as they see fit, backed once and for all by the monolithic authority that is the Will of the People.

Such as Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot? Cromwell, Robespierre?

Or has it nothing to do with Right / Left and it is Authoritarian regimes?

But no - just the Right.

[Greyblades]

The solution is simple. If you want to pass a Law, form a proposal that will pass through Parliament. That's the basic principle of lawmaking in any country that has a Parliament, Congress or other lawmaking body.

Very good, and when the representatives of the people wont pass or overturn the laws the voters want, despite promising to do so when running for election, the people replace them with someone else who will next election.

This process is exactly why the majority of represetatives in parliament want to put election off as long as possible, now that their majority relies on those who have openly refused to do what they promised.

[Pannonian]

Such as Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot? Cromwell, Robespierre?

Or has it nothing to do with Right / Left and it is Authoritarian regimes?

But no - just the Right.

I can add Corbyn to that list. But, unlike those who see themselves as centre right, there is no evidence of anything of that sort in the centre left. I value rule of law, lawmaking by Parliament, and the executive acting within bounds that I've been accustomed to all my life. Do you support lawmaking as Parliament's prerogative?