PM Boris
#361
Re: PM Boris
I disagree. In or out were the only options. It is only after the result that the losing side has attempted to argue that leaving didn't actually mean leaving.
In any event, there can be no disputing what the options are now and an election would provide all those that campaign with a clear mandate and, if the result of the election is as close as you believe it will be, that will give those that are elected support for the whole "leave didn't actually mean leave" argument. However, if the result massively favours the PM's current position, they should then respect both of the results.
In any event, there can be no disputing what the options are now and an election would provide all those that campaign with a clear mandate and, if the result of the election is as close as you believe it will be, that will give those that are elected support for the whole "leave didn't actually mean leave" argument. However, if the result massively favours the PM's current position, they should then respect both of the results.
#362
Re: PM Boris
Because Boris wants a snap election before the EU Commission meeting on Oct17-18th, or so he says. Nobody trusts him not to move the date to November if the opposition were stupid enough to approve an election under the Fixed Term Election Act prior to no-deal being ditched. That may well be the ditch that Boris dies in,
#363
Re: PM Boris
I accept that. But I would assume that those clever people in Parliament would have been able to come upon with a way that ensured that the election had to occur by mid October. It seems they couldn't and, if Boris is the crafty bastard they believe him to be, I can foresee that he will find a way to ensure that, come October 31, 2019, the UK leaves the EU with no deal.
It's not that hard to follow the events of today.
#364
Re: PM Boris
I disagree. In or out were the only options. It is only after the result that the losing side has attempted to argue that leaving didn't actually mean leaving.
In any event, there can be no disputing what the options are now and an election would provide all those that campaign with a clear mandate and, if the result of the election is as close as you believe it will be, that will give those that are elected support for the whole "leave didn't actually mean leave" argument. However, if the result massively favours the PM's current position, they should then respect both of the results.
In any event, there can be no disputing what the options are now and an election would provide all those that campaign with a clear mandate and, if the result of the election is as close as you believe it will be, that will give those that are elected support for the whole "leave didn't actually mean leave" argument. However, if the result massively favours the PM's current position, they should then respect both of the results.
I though the discussion on Newsnight last Friday was quite a reasonable summing up of the situation, at least from the non conservative/labour members of the panel. Parliament hasn’t been up to the task so far.
#365
Re: PM Boris
By being glad I'm not living there I meant with reference to things like being at work, hearing a couple of people talking about it in daily mail or sun style and trying not to react.
#366
Re: PM Boris
This is whole problem with leave, it means different things to to different leave voters. Some wanted out of everything, some only wanted out of the political institutions, some only the economic.
#367
Re: PM Boris
Maybe. But leaving meant to leave. If that wasn't researched properly by people before they voted, or if the remain campaign didn't make that abundantly clear, it doesn't alter the fact that it is impossible to remain and also to leave. It appears to me that the remain campaign dropped the ball. I accept that some will try to argue about the lies the leave campaign put forward, but, if the benefit of staying were so good, that should have been made clear by the remain campaign, such that no one in their right mind would have voted to leave.
#368
Re: PM Boris
The main problem with the referendum is that it was 25 years too late. There should have been a referendum to approve the transfer of parliamentary power out of the country then. I seem to remember that one item in the Maastricht Treaty originally was to delete citizenship of the nation state and replace it with citizenship of the EU alone. Fortunately Denmark had a referendum on the treaty and it was removed. Labour also promised a referendum in the 2005 manifesto but didn’t follow through.
I though the discussion on Newsnight last Friday was quite a reasonable summing up of the situation, at least from the non conservative/labour members of the panel. Parliament hasn’t been up to the task so far.
#369
Re: PM Boris
Fascinating long read article on David Cameron which rather agrees with that here:: https://members.tortoisemedia.com/20...rding_20190907
#370
Re: PM Boris
Maybe. But leaving meant to leave. If that wasn't researched properly by people before they voted, or if the remain campaign didn't make that abundantly clear, it doesn't alter the fact that it is impossible to remain and also to leave. It appears to me that the remain campaign dropped the ball. I accept that some will try to argue about the lies the leave campaign put forward, but, if the benefit of staying were so good, that should have been made clear by the remain campaign, such that no one in their right mind would have voted to leave.
If that's a bit too heavy for you to deal with, try 50 Shades of Grey.
#371
Re: PM Boris
Maybe. But leaving meant to leave. If that wasn't researched properly by people before they voted, or if the remain campaign didn't make that abundantly clear, it doesn't alter the fact that it is impossible to remain and also to leave. It appears to me that the remain campaign dropped the ball. I accept that some will try to argue about the lies the leave campaign put forward, but, if the benefit of staying were so good, that should have been made clear by the remain campaign, such that no one in their right mind would have voted to leave.
#372
Re: PM Boris
No mention that here https://www.ecb.europa.eu/explainers...tricht.en.html
#373
Re: PM Boris
Converted? I've called AC a black & white thinker so many times over the years that I'm embarrassed to keep pointing it out.
#374
Re: PM Boris
It's quite a challenge to explain to the public the extent of economic and legal integration that exists between the two countries. Even you as a lawyer do not seem to grasp that this is different from a divorce between two individuals. We're not going to stop trading with the EU, we're not going to stop investing in each others markets or employing each others citizens. So it becomes a question of the most efficient way to do that. What is the point of a complete break if we then need to spend a decade trying to replicate what we already have.
Last edited by Atlantic Xpat; Sep 10th 2019 at 4:15 pm.
#375
Re: PM Boris
I suggest you give your head a shake and then review the question that was posed in 2016.