Article 50 Discussion

[fletch70]

1 hour ago, Jase1982 said:

 

I don't see how you can have democracy with anything but full proportional representation.  You talk about weak governments but that is only relevant if you're talking in terms of one political party being right, and the other is wrong.  We should adopt the asian mentality of no one being right, in order to reach a common goal based on cooperation, trust, honesty and fairness etc.  Supposed weak governments don't get anything passed in the UK (Or other similar countries) because we have a party political system that sets people up as adversarial as possible.  Even the commons is set up like a boxing ring; we should have a circular commons area.  Look at the European Parliament - It's round.

 

Well if you go that far, the only way to have a true democracy is to have direct rule i.e every question is put to the electorate (as in rule of the mob - a rough transition of democracy). As for PR , yes there are many countries that have systems of PR and some do form stable governments although I think Italy is a case where it really doesn't work. Also and I say this with some misgivings, having pure 100% PR does let some voices be heard that many would think shouldn't - how do you think Hitler became chancellor ? It also lets corrupt people become leaders (and I mean really corrupt mentioning no names Berlusconi). A system like Germany where each state or area elects 50% of the parliamentary members and the rest are elected via PR does seem to allow regional voices to be heard and provides stables governments. Of course the UK rejected a form of PR in 2011 although I don't think AV works. Any form of PR does mean coalitions are the order of the day but then look how disproportionally NI influence the Torys at the moment- equally with PR the SNP would become much smaller while the LibDems and god help us UKIP would become stronger 

[Jase1982]

19 hours ago, fletch70 said:

Well if you go that far, the only way to have a true democracy is to have direct rule i.e every question is put to the electorate (as in rule of the mob - a rough transition of democracy). As for PR , yes there are many countries that have systems of PR and some do form stable governments although I think Italy is a case where it really doesn't work. Also and I say this with some misgivings, having pure 100% PR does let some voices be heard that many would think shouldn't - how do you think Hitler became chancellor ? It also lets corrupt people become leaders (and I mean really corrupt mentioning no names Berlusconi). A system like Germany where each state or area elects 50% of the parliamentary members and the rest are elected via PR does seem to allow regional voices to be heard and provides stables governments. Of course the UK rejected a form of PR in 2011 although I don't think AV works. Any form of PR does mean coalitions are the order of the day but then look how disproportionally NI influence the Torys at the moment- equally with PR the SNP would become much smaller while the LibDems and god help us UKIP would become stronger 

 

In terms of Italy I think they have only been a democracy for 70 odd years, and only really went through major political changes as short a time ago as the 90s due to extreme corruption.  So I think they're an extreme example because they have always had an element of corruption.  In terms of extreme voices being heard I would argue that in a truly representative democracy all voices should be heard no matter how unpleasant - The trick is in education; if you educate people well enough and it's easier to fact check you shouldn't in theory see situations that arose in Germany (If Nigel Farage had been born much earlier he'd have easily convinced more voters to join his movement).  They talk about a rise in the far right but I still believe they're on the fringes, and it's much easier to fact check / educate people today than it has been in any point in history (The real challenge is fighting back against fake news).  Just look at the difference in rallies between the peoples vote and brexit - Nigel Farage gets 86 people and Tommy Robinson had a few thousand.  The peoples march had hundreds of thousands.  A lot of people are genuinely not motivated by the far right and can still be convinced to take another path.  People in this country just need greater access to further education and a true representative democracy will follow.

[fletch70]

If my O level History is correct, Italy had a Constitutional Monarchy in the interwar years and would therefore have been a democracy of sorts, albeit usurped by Mussolini. The Weimar Republic was also a democracy - so you see, democracies can be abused. Russia is a 'democratic' state although I would say it was more totalitarian. I take your point on free speech but we do not have free speech as it is, there are many things we can not talk about - I dare you , when at work to go on a mysognistic rant - you would rightly lose your job. You are also right about fake news and that does need attention but I think you are wrong about the rise of the right. Many Tory MPs are concerned they will be deselected because of their pro Europe views- I know of one who is in serious danger and has been named as a traitor on the front page of a national newspaper. The people who run the constituency Conservative parties are generally much further right than the ordinary Tory voter. It is not just education that is needed but also political participation - both of us who went on the march in London know several people who agreed with us but did not go- if that was the same for everyone the march wouldn't have been 1 million it could have been 10. I think we will have to fundamentally disagree , education will not lead to true democracy. 

[tobyjugg2]

Interesting how many of the 'indicative vote' options would already seem to have been shown to be undeliverable

 

 

Undeliverable

 

Brexit as promoted for the referendum (no risk, all sorted before we invoke article 50)

So many of the assurances given to the voters in the leave campaign are either undeliverable or simply have not been delivered

- and that excludes all those that we were assured would be delivered after Brexit - I'm just referring to what we were promised would be delivered

This of itself should negate the referendum. One of the options has proven to be undeliverable.

 

 

Undeliverable AND NOT voted for by the people

** All these ++ deals

- Have we not already seen that these small groups don't want the UK as part of their clubs?

- and we do need their Ok

 

 

Not voted for by the people or clearly stated wouldn't happen in vote leaves campaign

*  Mays deal

*  Hard Brexit no deal

*  Some other undefined and unagreed deal

 

 

Doesn't really leave a lot does it?

I am utterly sick to death of all politicians promoting their personal visions.

 

 

 

 

 

It IS an unavoidable fact that People Voted for a defined Brexit that is NOT going to happen.

In my eyes that DOES NOT mean politicians can just throw some 'whatever they like' into the pot as 'what the people voted for'

Well NO IT ISN'T

 

 

The only legitimate options are:

 

1. Revoke the article 50 notification as:

* SIGNIFICANT Vote Leave stated terms have not been met

* The Brexit as defined by Vote Leave is undeliverable

 

 

2. Put the actual available options to the people in a fresh referendum clearly stating the options and impacts with a delivery plan.

If there is no fresh agreement or definitive result - the referendum is void.

 

 

Pretty Basic breach of contract stuff

Edited March 27, 2019 by tobyjugg2

[London1971]

Last week I was sure we were heading for a no deal,

 

I think we've drifted the opposite way now, and it will be a long delay, with Brexit kicked into the long grass. 

 

 

[tobyjugg2]

22 minutes ago, London1971 said:

Last week I was sure we were heading for a no deal,

 

I think we've drifted the opposite way now, and it will be a long delay, with Brexit kicked into the long grass. 

 

 

 

I think you are right, that does seem to be the most likely result for now.

Doesn't make it any more right though.

 

It irritates me no end that the politicians on all sides are allowed to get away with these twisted lies.

 

 

 

It needs to be broken down to the simplest terms:

 

* We were given a referendum to vote on two presented options

* and the one that won is undeliverable.

 

* Anything beyond that is political machinations and NOTHING to do with what was presented, or what people voted for.

 

 

 

 

We need to understand that many of the indicative vote options would require acceptance and passing of Mays deal - the transistion.

Which would then even further limit ANY options in the future negotiations and any options for us to hold these politicians to account

 

We have drifted too far away from the referendum options as described.

 

 

Edited March 27, 2019 by tobyjugg2

[Jase1982]

Apparently Parliament have set the 1st of April to debate the revoke article 50 petition.  Although I received an E-mail stating the government are committed to enacting the will of the people and delivering on the referendum result etc etc... I am concerned as to why May and the government seem so intent on pushing ahead with Brexit to the detriment of Westminster, the union, and the close partnerships we held within Europe.

[London1971]

51 minutes ago, tobyjugg2 said:

 

 

* and the one that won is undeliverable.

 

 

 

It was plain lies, like me trying to pass off my 900 quid Focus by sticking an ST badge on it and putting it on at 5000.

[tobyjugg2]

21 minutes ago, London1971 said:

 

It was plain lies, like me trying to pass off my 900 quid Focus by sticking an ST badge on it and putting it on at 5000.

 

I agree, but we didn't know that for certain at the time.

We might have thought that was likely to be the case, but we didn't KNOW.

Now they have failed to deliver and we do know.

 

That they fail to deliver but still claim that something else is not only honouring the will of the people, but also that this alternative MUST be delivered is nothing short of criminal.

 

That is what makes a complete mockery of the UK's political system,

...

although of course politicians from all sides will claim its the failure to deliver their interpretation that is failing 'the people'

 

 

The simple fact is that what was presented and voted for - is NOT on the table.

The whole thing is now a disgrace and a mockery of the British people.

 

 

 

 

[tobyjugg2]

Not even close to neck and neck any more. Remain WAY ahead and gaining most of the ex May deal supporters.

 

 

- but I cant insert or attach the jpg or the link

 

LOL

Does anything work properly here now?

[London1971]

Of course TM has seen the confidential no deal papers, only some of it that has been leaked out in the public domain. There is no way that she is going to tarnish her legacy with that.  Far easier for a long extension and to pass this to the next mug who wants to deal with this.

 

[honeybee13]

Interesting article here by Peter Oborne who was for Brexit and now seems to have changed his mind.

 

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/i-was-strong-brexiteer-now-we-must-swallow-our-pride-and-think-again/

[tobyjugg2]

23 hours ago, honeybee13 said:

Interesting article here by Peter Oborne who was for Brexit and now seems to have changed his mind.

 

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/i-was-strong-brexiteer-now-we-must-swallow-our-pride-and-think-again/

 

 

Yes, a few Tories are coming in from the rain, and Corbyn is feeling the pressure - but clearly still resisting it.

 

I have no idea what corbyn is doing with May other than running out the clock,

as any agreement they make (same on any requests to the EU) have already been targeted by the ERG and vote leave as reversible/renege-able

and as they have been happy to say one thing and deliver either another or nothing throughout - why would we, Corbyn and the EU  think they wouldn't

 

It is a British problem which only Britain can address

We need record voting in the MEP elections, and need to ensure that the ERG representatives and Farage DO NOT get in.

 

Then we need the Johnsons and Rees Moggs (and Corbyns) to be voted out. NONE are trustworthy or fit to lead us.

 

We need those who use foreign finance and foreign facilities to influence our electorate sought out and prosecuted. It is an attack on our democracy, flawed as it is.

 

We need some message of sanity returning to our Parliament, and we need to take maximum advantage of every opportunity to address that.

 

 

 

 

 

Michel Barnier:

"here is one point that needs to be stated quite clearly; that these ambitions, with regard to future relations, which could for example consist of adding to a free trade agreement ... for example a customs union - we are willing to improve and amend the political declaration rapidly, within a few hours or days.

 

But the request we await and expect from the UK as a result of this cross-party dialogue is one that needs to respect the principles underlying the approach of the European council and the European parliament, and respect what we are and what we will continue to be. This is something worth recalling; we are talking about the integrity of the internal market, the decision making autonomy of the 27 and the indivisibility of the four freedoms ...

That’s a point that needs to be understood very clearly."

[London1971]

May is negotiating with Corbyn because she is out of options.

[tobyjugg2]

Well, the EU have granted an extension until...

Halloween

 

who said the Europeans have no sense of humour.

 

What's now needed is for EVERYONE who doesn't want a hard No deal Brexit and the accompanying bonfire of workers, human and environmental rights to get out there and VOTE in the european elections for a pro EU representative - It WILL make a difference.

... you can be sure the Brexit extremists will be out in force.

 

Get out and cast your vote

Make a difference.

 

[London1971]

Absolutely !

[unclebulgaria67]

Parents of a baby born on the day this thread was started would be planning a third birthday !

 

Have consistently said that Brexit won't happen. Too complicated and risky.

 

Withdrawal deal is the easy part, which won't be agree to, without agreement on future trading relationship with the EU. Tories and most opposition parties have different views on this. Not sure there is any compromised position.

 

My prediction is that EU elections to elect MEP's will take place. Theresa May will stay as PM and her deal will be subject to a second referendum in early July 2019, with the alternative remain option offered. Remain will win by a significant margin, as people are now totally fed up with Brexit and know that voting for May's deal would just lead to years of more political mess, as politicians argued over trade deals.

[London1971]

Yup,

 

I think in the last few days it's become hugely more likely that Brexit will never happen.  Logically, there is no way either Labour or the Conservatives will ever risk destroying their own parties by compromising with each other.  There is zero chance of the Labour, the DUP , some of the ERG backing May's deal.  There is zero chance of any changes being made to the backstop. Not even a new theoretical Brexit prime minister (despite their hard words) is going to fling us over the cliff edge to a no deal, there is too much danger of a 2022 Tory wipeout if it all goes wrong.  The EU despite Macron's bluster is not going to throw Ireland under a bus by chucking us out at the next cliff edge. A general election, is way to risky for the Tories, they could so easily lose.

 

So the only way out is a referendum, or to revoke, revoking would probably destroy the Tory party for ever.

[honeybee13]

I see they've stood down 6,000 civil servants who have been working on 'no deal' arrangements - at a cost of £1.5bn. All that so that May could use no deal as a negotiating threat.

 

David Davis seems to have woken up and is suggesting rewriting everything in the agreement with the EU. They'll be pleased... But I think they're hoping that someone like Boris or Rees Mogg isn't elected, should there be a general election.

[snowdragon]

I so hate politics  and tbh if there is a General election  would not know who to vote for, definitely not Corbyn  or May , am sure she has lost the plot along with the rest of the political parties!

 

 

[tobyjugg2]

Serious though the economic impacts of Brexit is to us mere citizens, this is the real issue that needs addressing above all else, and those guilty prosecuted to the FULL extent of the law:

 

why the Electoral Commission didn’t investigate Vote Leave and DUP donation

"The UK’s election watchdog doesn’t think it’s worth finding out if the Brexit campaign broke the law more than once. MPs have called on the regulator to look again."

 

 

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/dark-money-investigations/not-in-the-public-interest-why-the-electoral-commission-didnt-investigate-vote-leave-and-dup-donation/

 

 

" Internal documents prepared by the Electoral Commission after the BBC Northern Ireland documentary reveal little appetite to investigate potential Vote Leave coordination in the DUP’s referendum spending. As Vote Leave had already been fined for a breach of electoral law after giving money to BeLeave “it would not therefore be in the public interest to investigate even if there was evidence of an offence”, the regulator said. "

 

 

 

 

“How many other times did the Electoral Commission fail to investigate because it didn’t think it was in the public interest for us to know? What else is out there that they wrongly closed their eyes to? How many other times did Vote Leave break the law?”

 

 

 

 

Edited April 24, 2019 by tobyjugg2

[London1971]

They just mumble some cr@p about it being the will of the people.

[honeybee13]

TJ, I totally agree that election tampering should be investigated. I wonder if some people think that what Trump did [allegedly] with help from the Russians is wrong but don't worry about possible misbehaviour by organisations during our referendum.

 

London, I've probably said before that I don't understand how Treeza and the ERG decided what kind of Brexit people voted for, given that the question was only Yes or No. If she hadn't decided on red lines dictated by the ERG as I understand it, we would have stood a chance of getting a decent deal.

[tobyjugg2]

17 hours ago, honeybee13 said:

TJ, I totally agree that election tampering should be investigated. I wonder if some people think that what Trump did [allegedly] with help from the Russians is wrong but don't worry about possible misbehaviour by organisations during our referendum.

 

 

Just imagine what you could do to these politicians, after 'illegally parking at a political rally, and after immediately admitting guilt and agreeing to pay the small discounted fine.

 

Well Rees-Mogg, Me and this baseball bat are making some good use of my free pass....

You just wait your turn there while I serve some rough justice to Johnson first.

Don't worry - Its all agreed as paid for.

 

Edited April 25, 2019 by tobyjugg2

[tobyjugg2]

as the The International Commission of Labour’s National Policy Forum - which consists of MPs, trade unionists, MEPs, and constituency representatives - has just voted UNANIMOUSLY that Labour’s manifesto for EU elections should pledge to hold a confirmatory referendum

adding to the parties membership votes for a second referendum to be part of any policy ...

 

 

Corbyn European Elections Leaflet Suggests Labour Backs Brexit

 

" Shadow Brexit secretary Keir Starmer, deputy leader Tom Watson and shadow foreign secretary Emily Thornberry were not consulted on the wording, even though they form part of the party’s Brexit sub-committee. "

 

 

" A senior shadow ministerial source added: “Keir is absolutely furious about the leaflet. He knows very well that it doesn’t reflect the party’s policy, the views of the membership or our candidates. It will have to change.” "

 

" HuffPost UK also understands that staunch pro-European former minister Lord Adonis, who is standing for Labour in the South West region, was forced to sign a ‘loyalty’ statement or face being blocked as an MEP candidate. "

 

 

Corbyn changing politics? Corbyn listening to the members?  LOL

- same old same old personal agendas.

 

Makes May and the Tories look open and honest in comparison.