Brexit and the Consequences

[Atilla]

Post event fact check!

In 2017, Mr Fox said the UK would be able to replicate 40 EU free trade deals by Brexit day.

But so far the department has only been able to finalise "continuity agreements" with seven of the 69 countries and regions with which the EU has trade deals.

There are facts and then there is fictitious promises.

These agreements are not with the EU nations but with the 69 countries and regions with which the EU has trade deals.

I recall somebody (Davies or Fox) stating these would be the easiest trade deals ever to be completed.

 

[Atilla]

Timsk, CV, Mikey and the rest of you not so true blues anymore... Are you Blukip or Purple Tories?

 

[Oscar Reed]

Post event fact check!

In 2017, Mr Fox said the UK would be able to replicate 40 EU free trade deals by Brexit day.
But so far the department has only been able to finalise "continuity agreements" with seven of the 69 countries and regions with which the EU has trade deals.

There are facts and then there is fictitious promises.

These agreements are not with the EU nations but with the 69 countries and regions with which the EU has trade deals.

I recall somebody (Davies or Fox) stating these would be the easiest trade deals ever to be completed.

You guys not a trade deal with Hutt River yet.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/wes...nce-leonard-dies-aged-93-20190213-p50xlc.html

 

[Atilla]

You guys not a trade deal with Hutt River yet.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/wes...nce-leonard-dies-aged-93-20190213-p50xlc.html

Well that's a crying shame. He sounds like most reasonable man and Brexiteers once again missed out on a potential trade agreement from lack of planning and sound work.

Good at making noises but lame in delivering anything fruitful to digest.

 

[timsk]

Timsk, CV, Mikey and the rest of you not so true blues anymore... Are you Blukip or Purple Tories?

Hi At',
I am not a 'true blue' - never have been and seriously doubt I ever will be. Historically, I've always voted Green or Liberal. Not any more: I'm now politically disenfranchised as there's no party that sufficiently reflects my views. I was conned into voting Tory for the first time ever at the last election because, foolishly, I thought they would deliver Brexit. The breakaway independent - supposedly centrist group - might, potentially, have been of interest to me - save for their opposition to Brexit. To my mind, that makes them anti-democratic - so I can't support them. Besides which, it looks to me as if their love of the EU is just about their only common denominator. So, when this mess is eventually resolved, I doubt there will be sufficient political glue to hold them together. If they are to survive - let alone prosper - the ex-Lab/Con members respectively will have to abandon some basic principles that they've championed for many years. I can't see that happening.
Tim.

 

[Atilla]

Hi At',
I am not a 'true blue' - never have been and seriously doubt I ever will be. Historically, I've always voted Green or Liberal. Not any more: I'm now politically disenfranchised as there's no party that sufficiently reflects my views. I was conned into voting Tory for the first time ever at the last election because, foolishly, I thought they would deliver Brexit. The breakaway independent - supposedly centrist group - might, potentially, have been of interest to me - save for their opposition to Brexit. To my mind, that makes them anti-democratic - so I can't support them. Besides which, it looks to me as if their love of the EU is just about their only common denominator. So, when this mess is eventually resolved, I doubt there will be sufficient political glue to hold them together. If they are to survive - let alone prosper - the ex-Lab/Con members respectively will have to abandon some basic principles that they've championed for many years. I can't see that happening.
Tim.

I feel the referendum was very undemocratic. It didn't include expats living in EU who will almost certainly be impacted.

Students who will be impacted had a poor turn out.

Having a single 50.1/49.9 split for deciding such an important decision leaves process open to abuse, fraud or just simply errors of all sorts i.e. Cambridge Analytica targeting adverts to sway opinion.

So for many people who keep banging their democratic drum about the 37% determining the fate of UK is to me a little stinky off.

Country needs direction and leadership and you don't want to vote or provide leadership. You got us here and like Cameron you walking away. Very lame.

Then there are those who never vote but did vote for the brexit and will never vote again. Then the same people who don't participate say democracy doesn't represent me.

A great deal of mixed-up puppies out there keep talking about the will of the people? If you ask them any reasonable question about Brexit the reply is - it is the will of the people? What exactly is the will of the people?

This will of the people business is effectively, what they were promised and their dreams, packaged up as the democratic referendum they voted on.

Brexit isn't going to fix any of it that's for sure.

 

[Signalcalc]

Oh yeah? And what say you Theresa?

Brexit: Greg Clark, Amber Rudd and David Gauke issue delay warning http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47336501

 

[mike.]

Timsk, CV, Mikey and the rest of you not so true blues anymore... Are you Blukip or Purple Tories?

Did you not watch the TV program the other night "Sleeping with the far right " Well I make that guy look like an extreme lefty snowflake...

 

[Atilla]

Did you not watch the TV program the other night "Sleeping with the far right " Well I make that guy look like an extreme lefty snowflake...

Love your purple outfit. Suits you sir

 

[0007]

 

[timsk]

. . . Country needs direction and leadership and you don't want to vote or provide leadership. You got us here and like Cameron you walking away. Very lame. . .

Hi At',
I'm unsure if your comments are directed at me personally - or if your post is just one of your standard rants about 'mixed-up puppies' that you like to get off your chest from time to time? I assume the latter as there's not much that you said that appears to me to have anything to do with my post that you quoted!
Tim.

 

[Atilla]

Purple suits you sir

 

[Atilla]

Hi At',
I'm unsure if your comments are directed at me personally - or if your post is just one of your standard rants about 'mixed-up puppies' that you like to get off your chest from time to time? I assume the latter as there's not much that you said that appears to me to have anything to do with my post that you quoted!
Tim.

Well yes it was aimed at your comprehension of our democratic values and some blind acceptance they should be adhered to contrary to anything else that comes out of Parliament or the HoLs.

Then there is the point that you will not be voting irrespective of which ever party that is presented unless they promise to execute Brexit.

Democracy starts and ends with Brexit for you and nothing else.


As for my other comments, yes they are for all the other pundits who go on about democracy and will of the people. Democracy is inclusive of all people.

One of the biggest mistakes about TM is she didn't carry Parliament or her cabinet with her. Hence, where we are today. It's all about her daft poker hand, secrecy and the rest. You are much the same ilk. Brexit or nothing else. Then everyone wonders why we are so messed up. Especially in light of you being one of the more reasonable temperaments on these blogs.

Take back control and give it to who?

 

[timsk]

Hi Atilla,
Thank you for the clarity.

Well yes it was aimed at your comprehension of our democratic values and some blind acceptance they should be adhered to contrary to anything else that comes out of Parliament or the HoLs.

My "comprehension of our democratic values" is very simple. Namely, they (the democratic values) must be adhered to, otherwise all we have is democracy in name only, i.e. no democracy at all.

Then there is the point that you will not be voting irrespective of which ever party that is presented unless they promise to execute Brexit.

Well, at the last election, both the Conservatives and Labour made exactly that promise. Sadly, it now appears that Mrs. May was telling porkies and she had/has no intention if delivering Brexit. I've provided watertight evidence to back up this fact in recent posts.

Democracy starts and ends with Brexit for you and nothing else.

Yes it does. For the simple reason that if it's not delivered, then the arguments that have raged on this thread, in the HoCs, in the media and across the land will all have been in vain. As I've made clear previously, what's at stake now is waaaaaay more serious than any Brexit outcome; it's whether or not we still have a democratic parliamentary system that's fit for purpose. If we don't (because Brexit isn't delivered), then I fear social unrest could result that will eclipse that of France. I dunno about you - but I don't want that to happen.

As for my other comments, yes they are for all the other pundits who go on about democracy and will of the people. Democracy is inclusive of all people.

Well, that depends entirely on the type of democracy that's utilised. The 2016 referendum doesn't allow for that and parliament accepted that when they voted in favour of holding the referendum. One thing's for sure: if the losing side is the one that ends up winning - then it's fair and reasonable to say that democracy is noninclusive of the majority of people.

One of the biggest mistakes about TM is she didn't carry Parliament or her cabinet with her. Hence, where we are today. It's all about her daft poker hand, secrecy and the rest. You are much the same ilk. Brexit or nothing else. Then everyone wonders why we are so messed up. Especially in light of you being one of the more reasonable temperaments on these blogs.

I have no idea what you mean when you say I'm "much the same ilk". I've never behaved like Theresa May! Everything's all messed up because of her sheer incompetence and lack of integrity.

Take back control and give it to who?

Bit of a non-sequitur and one that's been addressed on here many times before.
Tim.

 

[Atilla]

Hi Atilla,
Thank you for the clarity.

My "comprehension of our democratic values" is very simple. Namely, they (the democratic values) must be adhered to, otherwise all we have is democracy in name only, i.e. no democracy at all.

Parliament is Sovereign. Referendum was unintentional and politically driven, poorly constructed and advisory only. These are FACTS!


Well, at the last election, both the Conservatives and Labour made exactly that promise. Sadly, it now appears that Mrs. May was telling porkies and she had/has no intention if delivering Brexit. I've provided watertight evidence to back up this fact in recent posts.

Yes both parties still playing politics and divided today. No change there. The party of Brexit along with its leader is nowhere to be seen. Perhaps more realistically, UKIP don't want Farage back and Farage forming new party.

Yes it does. For the simple reason that if it's not delivered, then the arguments that have raged on this thread, in the HoCs, in the media and across the land will all have been in vain. As I've made clear previously, what's at stake now is waaaaaay more serious than any Brexit outcome; it's whether or not we still have a democratic parliamentary system that's fit for purpose. If we don't (because Brexit isn't delivered), then I fear social unrest could result that will eclipse that of France. I dunno about you - but I don't want that to happen.

People touting will of the people not very much for the will of the peoples vote now that outcomes are somewhat clearer. Once again all this referendum a one time event seems to be inscribed in stone as if that's it. Peoples concept of democracy whether they have participated in previous votes or will do so in the future is all up in the air.

Well, that depends entirely on the type of democracy that's utilised. The 2016 referendum doesn't allow for that and parliament accepted that when they voted in favour of holding the referendum. One thing's for sure: if the losing side is the one that ends up winning - then it's fair and reasonable to say that democracy is noninclusive of the majority of people.



I have no idea what you mean when you say I'm "much the same ilk". I've never behaved like Theresa May! Everything's all messed up because of her sheer incompetence and lack of integrity.

Well you keep talking about the democracy and will of the people and no longer voting having voted for Brexit. Democracy is not a one time snapshot event. You have a singular static view of democracy. Bit like Farage. When the time came to show a bit of leadership he went off in to his LBC chatterbox. You voted for Brexit you stay on and vote again with whatever Parliament dishes out to you. Taking back control is for Parliament. Not whatever some pie in the sky version Brexiteer weazels promised the people. You don't get any of this do you. Even Farage is distancing him self away from Norwegian model. SC talks about the fantastic Japan or Canadian model. Boris talks about Canada+++ what ever the +++ are in his alternative view of events are. You are right. You Brexiteers don't have any idea of what you do want and that is the trouble. I want out. OUT! That's it. Let's get on with it. You sound like my barber.

Bit of a non-sequitur and one that's been addressed on here many times before.
Tim.

Agree with you on last point along with rest of the world!

 

[barjon]

"...........Well, at the last election, both the Conservatives and Labour made exactly that promise. Sadly, it now appears that Mrs. May was telling porkies and she had/has no intention if delivering Brexit. I've provided watertight evidence to back up this fact in recent posts............

Tim.

Tim

Whilst I agree with you about TM’s uselessness I do take issue with you a bit here. Firstly, you haven’t provided “watertight evidence”, just the evidence to the enquiry presented by the sacked brexit department people. You have not presented (or seen) evidence from No10 that would probably cast “the facts” in a very different light. Nor have I and I don’t even know whether they did give any evidence. Nonetheless I very much doubt that they would regard the evidence you adduce as watertight.

Secondly, it seems to me she has tried to deliver Brexit of a sort, albeit not one that you would favour. Perhaps that’s because the Brexit deal you want was never really on the cards rather than lack of intention on her part other than the desire not to finish up with no deal.

I have no doubt that a stronger leader would done somewhat better but, as i’ve said before, she hasn’t had a strong hand to play.

 

[timsk]

Mornin' Jon,

Whilst I agree with you about TM’s uselessness I do take issue with you a bit here. Firstly, you haven’t provided “watertight evidence”, just the evidence to the enquiry presented by the sacked brexit department people. You have not presented (or seen) evidence from No10 that would probably cast “the facts” in a very different light. Nor have I and I don’t even know whether they did give any evidence. Nonetheless I very much doubt that they would regard the evidence you adduce as watertight.

I accept (as I'm sure you would too) that this is your opinion and that what I consider to be watertight evidence you might think is anything but. As far as I'm concerned, the picture is black and white and as clear as day. Either Mrs. May is a dishonourable, duplicitous incompetent or Steve Baker and Suella Braverman's testimonies to the European Scrutiny Committee were a pack of lies. It's one or the other. The latter strikes me as being highly improbable, whereas the PM has a long track record for doing U-turns and saying one thing and then doing another. Now, I further accept that I'm choosing to believe the two ex DExEU ministers (who resigned I believe, and not sacked) whereas, possibly, you might question them. Either way, surely you, Atilla et al are as shocked by the content and implications of those videos as I am? Not least because if the SBs are lying, this would warrant an inquiry of some kind and the adverse publicity would be a massive coup for the remain campaign.

Secondly, it seems to me she has tried to deliver Brexit of a sort, albeit not one that you would favour. Perhaps that’s because the Brexit deal you want was never really on the cards rather than lack of intention on her part other than the desire not to finish up with no deal.

This is the whole point of those testimonies Jon. The Brexit deal 'I want' was fleshed out by David Davis and his staff at DExEU and something very closely aligned to it was offered to us by Donald Tusk no less. That was last summer. Brexit could have been done and dusted long ago if the PM believed in it and wanted it. She's a remainer who would rather accept a worse deal for the country than the better one prepared by her own department. It's not hard to understand why she's accused of treachery and treason. The evidence to support that accusation looks pretty watertight to me!

I have no doubt that a stronger leader would done somewhat better but, as I've said before, she hasn’t had a strong hand to play.

She had (note tense) a perfectly strong hand but, deliberately or otherwise, she's played it appallingly badly.
Tim.

 

[0007]

Timsk has correctly identified the important issue that goes beyond Brexit namely: democracy. We can argue for ever the pros and cons of Brexit but the one issue that has come to the fore, is the Establishment Principals who think they morally own and run the country (and probably do). They believe it is quite acceptable to subvert and if possible override the democratic vote. Their self-importance and superior intellect allows them to think that it doesn't matter whether the people were "right or wrong" or if the electorate was "too stupid" to know what it was doing. They just don't get it: there was a vote and the result was perfectly clear.

The hypocrisy of our governing classes has now been totally exposed and the ordinary peasantarati like myself will not forget it. It matters not now, that Theresa May has shown herself to be incompetent and duplicitous and has wasted 2 and half years to achieve virtually nothing – that's all water under the bridge and is no longer worth worrying about. She will eventually go. If we don't leave and end up with BRINO (Brexit in name only) there will spring up new anti-establishment parties (Nigel springs to mind – he's the waiting in the wings) that will I suspect change UK politics for ever – and possibly not for the best. Perhaps we will end up with numerous small parties for ever trying to forge coalitions and achieving little – that's how it seems to work in some parts of Europe.

Judging the public mood as far as I can see, I think many many people are more concerned with the issue of democracy than whether we trade with/without a Backstop/WTO/Customs union. The once great Labour Party took leave of its senses when it put Corbyn on the leadership ballot paper and is now well on the way to being irrelevant.

What a mess!

 

[timsk]

'Peasantarati' - love it!

 

[barjon]

Mornin' Jon,

I accept (as I'm sure you would too) that this is your opinion and that what I consider to be watertight evidence you might think is anything but. As far as I'm concerned, the picture is black and white and as clear as day. Either Mrs. May is a dishonourable, duplicitous incompetent or Steve Baker and Suella Braverman's testimonies to the European Scrutiny Committee were a pack of lies. It's one or the other. The latter strikes me as being highly improbable, whereas the PM has a long track record for doing U-turns and saying one thing and then doing another. Now, I further accept that I'm choosing to believe the two ex DExEU ministers (who resigned I believe, and not sacked) whereas, possibly, you might question them. Either way, surely you, Atilla et al are as shocked by the content and implications of those videos as I am? Not least because if the SBs are lying, this would warrant an inquiry of some kind and the adverse publicity would be a massive coup for the remain campaign.


This is the whole point of those testimonies Jon. The Brexit deal 'I want' was fleshed out by David Davis and his staff at DExEU and something very closely aligned to it was offered to us by Donald Tusk no less. That was last summer. Brexit could have been done and dusted long ago if the PM believed in it and wanted it. She's a remainer who would rather accept a worse deal for the country than the better one prepared by her own department. It's not hard to understand why she's accused of treachery and treason. The evidence to support that accusation looks pretty watertight to me!


She had (note tense) a perfectly strong hand but, deliberately or otherwise, she's played it appallingly badly.
Tim.

The point is that you have chosen to accept one side of the evidence as gospel without considering any evidence from the other side. I agree with you that it is unlikely that the two ex ministers would have told downright lies but they also presented their opinions as facts (No10 intentions etc) and would probably have put their own case in the best possible light that they could. Right, they were not sacked but taken over (or, more properly, their work was)

TM is playing a devious game trying to ensure a “no deal” outcome that can be seen as the EU’s fault. Her ministers have seen through her plan, hence rebelling to make sure of a deal. Likely? Not really, but maybe hanging together as well as your conviction that she is playing a dirty game to effectively remain in.