[TheRetiredBridgeburner]

Mezla PigDog, on 14 January 2019 - 10:50 AM, said:

I agree but blaming it on her is letting the rest of the Tory government off the hook. It's a Tory created crisis from start to finish. And Corbyn can't get away blameless now, complete lack of opposition leadership on the subject.

Have some many customers calling me about what to do about Brexit since the New Year.

Oh agreed, it's far from just her fault, but as the PM the book does stop with her (deservedly or not). And no, Corbyn isn't blameless. Strong opposition leadership with Brexit could have been such a massive winner for the Labour party and he's utterly wasted it.

[Gorefest]

It's because he is a leaver himself at heart. And like most other MPs he has also succumbed to playing party politics in the face of disaster. These people don't live in the real world, it is all about power play and positioning, not about the UK or its inhabitants. The Westminster bubble.

[Traveller]

If they do go ahead, the cost of leaving, the 'divorce settlement', is around 30 Billion, to help settle existing agreements etc. They should have put that on the side of a bus.

I'm secretly hoping it all gets thrown out as the nonsense it has been from day 1. May sounds rattled today.

[Mezla PigDog]

Remainer or Leaver Corbyn could have lead the opposition to expose the governments ineptitude and drive towards a better plan to Leave. I will love it if we Remain but I kind of agree with the fact that the referendum result was Leave and so we should Leave. I don't believe that strongly enough to find a way to argue in favour of Leave but a Norwegian model would at least mean the jobs that my household depend on would be secure. I don't buy into the catastrophising about the consequences of leaving the EU - no deal yes but an organised exit will be tolerable. I'm not saying anyone will be better off but once we're gone any information on who would have been better or worse off if we had stayed will just be stats in the wind - "I told you so" fodder for either side or easily argued against with waffle. We will work with what we have and who knows what might happen to make it seem like a very good decision or if we will be back in again before I'm dead. But allowing this to happen on his watch of leader of the opposition, I feel Corbyn has missed a huge opportunity and exposed himself as someone who probably couldn't handle government. A true leader would have got cross party agreement for some kind of alternative and created an alternative dialogue on the subject to May/Rees-Mogg/Farage bullshit. I agree with virtually everything else Corbyn stands for so I'm trying to weigh up where Brexit stands on my importance scale in case there is a General Election. I'll be very tempted to vote Green but the true losers of Brexit who are less well off than me and less able to weather the storm probably need me to vote Labour.

Right now I would vote for any party pledging to bring in Proportional Representation because First Passed The Post has caused this whole bloody thing. Sure we would have had UKIP MPs and possibly even BNP but at least it would all be out in the open to discredit and create a counter narrative. No point ensuring our elected officials aren't racist narrow minded bastards (at least on the surface) when there's a huge swathe of the country that is. Sunlight is the best of disinfectants and all that.

[Gorefest]

What they should have done from the very start is form a cross-party Brexit committee who jointly discuss what they want from a Brexit deal, then go to the EU with a clearly formulated exit strategy. Sadly they wasted most of the allocated two years arguing among each other for party political reasons, instead of realising that this is a national agenda issue that trumps party politics. But in a country where the concept of coalition and cooperation is in itself totally anathema, this was never going to happen. So you end up with a Brexit 'plan' formulated by just one political party which is not even fully endorsed by all members of that party. It is madness and utter incompetence.

[Mezla PigDog]

Definitely. The fact that the concept of coalition and cooperation is anathema is the source of most of our political problems I think.

[Maark Abbott]

Mezla PigDog, on 14 January 2019 - 01:34 PM, said:

the referendum result was Leave and so we should Leave.

"52% of the nation wishes to shoot themselves in the foot, now everyone must shoot themselves in the foot. Now we must work out which calibre of bullet to shoot our feet with to ensure the best possible foot-shooting."

A referendum won via illegal means on dodgy information that was advisory in nature and not legally binding is not one I'm inclined to lend any respect to the result of, especially as there are now claims that over a million postal ballots were lost and thus not counted.

[Morgoth]

Why is the result of a referendum so sacrosanct that no new referendum can be held? That makes little sense to me. Especially in a situation like this where the question was to keep the status quo or make a radical change. If the vote had been to remain you can be sure a new vote would have been suggested in a few years.

[Maark Abbott]

Morgoth, on 15 January 2019 - 08:50 AM, said:

Why is the result of a referendum so sacrosanct that no new referendum can be held? That makes little sense to me. Especially in a situation like this where the question was to keep the status quo or make a radical change. If the vote had been to remain you can be sure a new vote would have been suggested in a few years.

It's effectively because nationalists are finally 'right' about something and they refuse to let this fact go.

As to your last point - yes, and that's the great irony. Personally I'm minded that Leave are aware they'd lose in a second referendum and that's why they're so enraged at the mere prospect of it.

[Mezla PigDog]

I completely agree with all of the above but my experience growing up in a poor part of the UK with a lot of disenfranchised people who are categorically not all racist illiterate prats tells me that the parts of the country who haven't suffered so much have no right to turn around and tell them they are wrong and roll over the result.

This is why I'm so furious at the lack of opposition because strong leadership could have brought so much more to the table over the last 2 years and we wouldn't be in this last minute position. And the Tory's need the brinkmanship to get their way which is why they haven't shied away from running down the clock. It's all wrapped up in the huge degree of inequality that is endemic in this country and always has been. Leave or Stay that's not getting fixed any time soon. Brexit is a total distraction.

We'll all be drowning or at war due to food shortages caused by global warming in 20 years or so. Fuck it.

[Traveller]

Morgoth, on 15 January 2019 - 08:50 AM, said:

Why is the result of a referendum so sacrosanct that no new referendum can be held? That makes little sense to me. Especially in a situation like this where the question was to keep the status quo or make a radical change. If the vote had been to remain you can be sure a new vote would have been suggested in a few years.

'The people have spoken.'

No, out of those who voted, half wanted to leave, based on misinformation and outright lies.

The 'country' didn't want this, half at the least didn't. A new referendum based on the actual information, projected deals and the very real economic impact would seem to be as reasonable in a democratic sense as voting in any other election after a certain amount of time has passed.

If they haven't been able to come up with a satisfactory deal over the last two years, that essentially defines what Brexit will be, then no one who voted in the referendum knew what they were voting for. I think it should be overturned for that reason alone.

This post has been edited by Traveller: 15 January 2019 - 10:34 AM

[Maark Abbott]

Mezla PigDog, on 15 January 2019 - 10:03 AM, said:

I completely agree with all of the above but my experience growing up in a poor part of the UK with a lot of disenfranchised people who are categorically not all racist illiterate prats tells me that the parts of the country who haven't suffered so much have no right to turn around and tell them they are wrong and roll over the result.

This is why I'm so furious at the lack of opposition because strong leadership could have brought so much more to the table over the last 2 years and we wouldn't be in this last minute position. And the Tory's need the brinkmanship to get their way which is why they haven't shied away from running down the clock. It's all wrapped up in the huge degree of inequality that is endemic in this country and always has been. Leave or Stay that's not getting fixed any time soon. Brexit is a total distraction.

We'll all be drowning or at war due to food shortages caused by global warming in 20 years or so. Fuck it.

I live in Barnsley, South Yorkshire. Massively deprived area. Almost all our social or improvement funding comes from the EU. I don't really feel that the first part of the above fits in that regard, because whilst people (here at least) are certainly disenfranchised, merely blaming Brussels for issues coming from Westminster is counterproductive.

Traveller, on 15 January 2019 - 10:32 AM, said:

Morgoth, on 15 January 2019 - 08:50 AM, said:

Why is the result of a referendum so sacrosanct that no new referendum can be held? That makes little sense to me. Especially in a situation like this where the question was to keep the status quo or make a radical change. If the vote had been to remain you can be sure a new vote would have been suggested in a few years.

'The people have spoken.'

No, out of those who voted, half wanted to leave, based on misinformation and outright lies.

The 'country' didn't want this, half at the least didn't. A new referendum based on the actual information, projected deals and the very real economic impact would seem to be as reasonable in a democratic sense as voting in any other election after a certain amount of time has passed.

If they haven't been able to come up with a satisfactory deal over the last two years, that essentially defines what Brexit will be, then no one who voted in the referendum knew what they were voting for. I think it should be overturned for that reason alone.

You're thinking too sensibly about this. Don't forget *insert generic muh immigrants spiel here*.

[Traveller]

I know, I just walked into a theatre to give a tea break, and the scrub nurses, most of whom I get on with and otherwise seem like sensible people, were talking about how they still want their blue passports...

[Gorefest]

To be bluntly honest, I suspect that even if you would hold a second referendum the result would still be Leave. People by now have got so fed up with the whole thing that the general consensus seems to be: 'Just get on with it and we'll deal with the consequences.' So a second referendum would probably make no difference, plus it would disenfranchise even more voters from politics. If you wanted to do a second referendum it should have happened sometime mid 2018 already. Now that ship has sailed and no good will come from it.

[Primateus]

So, British parliament voted no for May's Brexit deal.

[Gorefest]

May's Brexit deal just got trashed. 202 against 432.

This post has been edited by Gorefest: 15 January 2019 - 07:45 PM

[Gorefest]

And Corbyn tabled a motion of no confidence. Politicking at it' saddest.

This post has been edited by Gorefest: 15 January 2019 - 08:08 PM

[Mezla PigDog]

Would have had exactly the same result a month ago. Sigh.

[Gorefest]

Delaying is the name of the game. Until there is no other option than no deal Brexit.

[Primateus]

It seems that Donald Tusk has now specifically suggested that the UK simply cancel Brexit.