Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by FrenchTart, Sep 11, 2016.
Fine by me, as long as the option to revoke A50 and Remain is also on the ballot.
Oh there will be resistance but as with everything in the EU parliament resistance is futile.
Yes, if her deal scrapes through by one vote then that will be it done and dusted with all previous defeats overruled and no further votes allowed. Utterly shameful behaviour.
Parliament is only half the process if we assume the commission is entirely pro federation, a very large anti federalist movement will be there next month aswell in parliament.
Council is still very nationalist, and each veto is expressly enough.
Again. I don’t have this fear. The whole shambles as far as I’m concerned has been a huge waste of time, the consequences of which are the real danger.
It’s people like me that should be feeling the real betrayal.
For the monet there is some truth in that but Germany and France are now pushing for a single state EU and if they tell the rest "you are either in or out" watch them fall into line.
an increased EU septic EU parliament is inevitable but that parliament will simply make sure they don't matter.
Regardless all I see with brexit right now is a Tory leadership contest that we have no idea what will result. Most likely Gove who’ll backstab the country.
Aswell as a much more aggressive EU that will have far less commodating presidents, entirely focused on probable deadlock for legislation.
To me no (trade) deal seems inevitable and Mays WA would simply lock us into a unknown atmosphere of discontent.
A federal Europe is not a realistic possibility. Even if there was a very strong push for it (which there currently isn't, despite scare stories) it wouldn't get far because lots of countries are not in favour and many never will be. Are the Italians, Spanish, Polish, Dutch etc any less protective of their national identities than the Brits? Of course not. I'd suggest it's a step too far for most French and Germans too.
Even if the UK ends up somehow remaining after this Brexit debacle, there is no realistic threat of being sucked into a federal Europe against our will. If such legislation was being pushed heavily by the EU and looked like succeeding, then we'd have another referendum and I'm pretty sure a very strong majority would favour Leave under that scenario. It's bogus to use the threat of a federal Europe to scare people into currently backing Brexit though.
That said, it might be interesting to see how many in the UK would currently favour being governed completely by the EU in light of the utter failure of our political system these past 2-3 years.
It wasn't that simple though, was it?
The leave campaign absolutely did present a half in, half out solution, just not one that was possible, as it was out of all the bits we don't like, and in on the bits we do, despite the two being intrinsically linked.
If the position presented by leave had actually been possible, it would have been awesome, but it never was even remotely available. It wasn't even a unicorn, it was a talking unicorn with an iq of 9000 and a space ship.
The referendum question only makes sense in that it was simple for people to understand and if you were assuming that remain would win. It contained no indication of what leaving the EU should and would entail. This enabled people to vote for Brexit for conflicting and mutually exclusive reasons, as well as to protest against the Tories/the establishment. Brexit was always going to fail to achieve majority support once the can kicking ran out of road and it had to finally be defined. The question now is do we just press on with this failure or face up to the truth and stop the madness?
Not Gove, please no....
This is a reaction to the fear mongering at the time of a the "disaster" of not being in the single market ecte.... rather foolishly he was arguing that leave didn't have to mean leaving the EU in its entirety, it was an attempt to compromise those fears, he should never have done it.
The fact is the governments official stance was voting leave meat leaving completely, its that that remainers argued would be the disaster, and that fear mongering continues. They never gave up on their campaign.
Regardless how you see the current farce - people do know that bills are voted and amended sometimes quite a few times when they navigate parliament to become law? I know this one hasnt really come back with amendments each time but for those going on about 2nd referendum vs 4th parliament vote they are totally different things. That said she is being a bit **** bringing essentially the same thing back again if it makes a 4th vote.
People expected to get what they voted for, its what they were told they would get, a remain parliament has been busy frustrating that at every turn and people know it.
They aren’t totally different things, a referendum if we assume it wasn’t totally advisory in practice, is exactly like MPs representing their opinion on motions.
MPs are middle(wo)men in the process for both. They can’t have both ways here. MPs are not there to enact dangerous policies just because they’re popular and all this talk of one side of a coin, ignoring the other entirely is exactly why this is a failure.
You cannot just ignore 16 million people completely because some 4head **** forgot how to run a referendum. This is permanently irresolvable now, one side HAS to lose and the indecisive have to make a decision.
MP's are elected because they represent the will of the people electing them, when that is no longer the case they don't get elected anymore, they are public servants, not dictators.
The fourth vote is being planned with the threat of general election if it fails. Another vote, another threat.
She knows that Labour will relish a general election therefore she is making no attempt to galvanise the HoC with this; it's a clear attempt to galvanise the DUP+Tories with a clear threat of risking Corbyn getting into power if they don't toe the line.
Yet their primary function is regardless of what the constituents think, they must mediate their excess with reasonable arguments.
A further drop in growth and prospects after more than 10 years of increasingly difficult financial situations, is not reasonable. They have every right to sacrifice their seat to save the country from itself.
Separate names with a comma.