On Fri, 23 Feb 2018 15:19:26 -0000, "tim..."
Post by tim...Post by pamela[...]
The Leavers are now a lobby group petitioning Parliament for
their preferred option. There is no obligation to take on
board any of what is suggested by Leavers.
Post by tim...The blame for this lies squarely with the Remoaners, trying to
circumvent the referendum result by delaying everything until
staying in is the only option left.
How so? We're leaving the EU as advised by the referendum.
Nothing else is required.
Leaving in name only is disrespecting the result
Leaving in name only is, er, leaving, is it not?
technically yes but what's the fucking point
The real point of the referendum was to shut up the annoying noise
being made by Cameron's backbenchers. It was never set up to really
leave the EU in all totality and that wasn't on offer.
Post by tim...No-one voted for that. No-one.
Yes, they did. 17 million of them.
No they didn't
They voted to leave IN REALITY based upon the campaign teams
presentations (I'm struggling to avoid using the word manifesto
here).
If they like, voters can pretend they're voting to live on the moon
but that's not what is being asked.
"We've voted to leave the EU." It
was a binary question: Leave or Remain. You chose Leave. You
didn't think to ask first what Leave means.
That was all discussed during the campaign
The campaign invented benefits which were not on offer, such as
almost no immigration and £350 million a week.
It's how elections work
The referendum was nothing like how our elections work, on party
system, apart from the act of voting. Neither side in the referndum
had a manifesto and neither was accountable if they failed to
deliver what they promised. Also the demarcation of sides themselves
was ill defined.
People don't vote in parliamentary election to have a random
person wearing a blue rosette as their MP.
They vote for a person whose political ideas, as expressed in
their campaign literature, match theirs.
Suggesting otherwise only comes from the mind of a child.
The campaign promises were not on offer in the ballot booth no
matter how much you would like them to be.
Post by tim...At best we voted for less regulations imposed on us by the EU,
Not an option on the ballot paper.
but it was in the campaign literature
There was no official campaign literature. Factions, such as UKIP
or Michael Gove's pals, tried to make it look as if they spoke for
the Leave but what they said had no official status.
Post by tim...that we currently have a role in framing. We didn't vote to have
these same regulations imposed upon us by the EU, whilst giving
up our role in framing them.
That's right. All we did was vote remain or leave.
No, we voted for the contents of Leave's campaign literature.
More fool you and anyone else who voted on that basis. It seems to
underline that Leavers were largely uneducated, easily-fooled, etc.
You *have* to be responsible for your decision.
Post by tim...Any claims that we did would be most perverse.
What is perverse about getting the best deal for Britain after
we've left?
Nothing But leaving in name only is NOT the best deal that we can
get It is 1000 times worse that just staying in.
All of the mood music from EU heads of Sates is that we can have a
"Canada" deal if that is acceptable to us
As a Leaver, IMHO that is bloody good deal and a million times
better than Brino (or leaving with no deal).
That's your opinion but Parliament will decide what's best for the
country.
(You will recall at the start of the process we were told that
there would be no trade deal on offer, at all. The phrase "thin
gruel" WAS used here.)
It is however not close enough to "staying in" for the Remoaners
in the cabinet (and Parliament) so, unfortunately, we have been
stopped from snapping their hands off as they offered it, by a few
people's idealism.
The greatest idealism in the current process is evident in the
demands made by ultra Brexiteers. Jacod Rees-Mogg sounds as if he's
on another planet.
I don't believe that it is acceptable for you to leverage that
intransigent on the part of a few idiots, into us staying in.
It was your "team" who vetoed the good offer, if the resting
alternative is bad, on your head be it.
Do you WANT the UK to collectively jump off a cliff?
Nope, but there is the making of an offer on the table, where we
don't have to.
If it's rejected by the Remoaners, the jumping off the cliff will
be their fault
Parliament will take responsibility for its actions. If you don't
like what Parliament decides then vote for a different MP.
[...]
Post by tim...This is what the Remainers always seem to assume when declaring
that everything about leaving is bad. They simply fail to
understand that we do have enough cards in our hand to push them
nearer to a reasonable deal.
We don't hold ~any~ cards!
Yes we do
The normal rational for making a trade deal with a county is "We
allow you to trade with us, tariff free. If you allow us to trade
with you, tariff free". As the 5th (6th, 7th - doesn't matter)
largest economy in the world and the largest one that the EU
trades with, if we were none member they would be falling over
themselves in the rush to do a deal with us.
You can't trade tariff free in a bilateral agreement cooked up with
another country if you, or the other country, wishes to rely on WTO
rules and WTO adjudcation. Another country wouldn't accede to this.
I don't see what having to make that deal on the way out, takes
away from that desire.
[...]
--
The wheels are coming off the Brexit clown car