Brexit Deal agreed ( updated )

[Victorian]

4 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

The Observer has given up any pretence of being a newspaper rather than a propaganda sheet. It's front page headline "A million march against Brexit" is not supported by anything in the text of the article and the rest of the multi-page coverage of this event. In fact the report says that  the organisers say it is very difficult to estimate the numbers. The inner page headline above the rest of the news story goes further and says "More than a million march against Brexit".

 

 

Does it actually matter?     I think we can all determine that it was not every person in the UK.     Equally it can determined that it was more people than you can get in a taxi.     

 

Proving that the number was more or less than any given estimate/claim seems to me to be a complete irrelevance.     

[redjambo]

3 hours ago, Class of 75 said:

Maybe not  a 100% of constituencies but their vote is decreasing. If it wasn't why are they are minority government being propped up by the Greens? Sure they have 56% of the vote in Aberdeen Donside as you suggest but in other areas the Unionist vote is split 3 ways giving them an advantage. There are several seats where their majority is in single figures.

 

And nary an admission that you were incorrect with your original assertion.

 

You can tell that you have a politics degree. Humility and facts are both very prized possessions indeed among the political class.

 

[Francis Albert]

4 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

 

Does it actually matter?     I think we can all determine that it was not every person in the UK.     Equally it can determined that it was more people than you can get in a taxi.     

 

Proving that the number was more or less than any given estimate/claim seems to me to be a complete irrelevance.     

The Observer seems to think it matters. It matters so much they splash made up numbers in large headlines.

And its sister paper seems to think that the number signing the Revoke petition is so important that they give daily if not hourly updates on the numbers who have signed.

That it doesn't matter was part of my point.

Edited March 24, 2019 by Francis Albert

[Victorian]

1 minute ago, Francis Albert said:

The Observer seems to think it matters. It matters so much they splash made up numbers in large headlines.

And its sister paper seems to think that the number signing the Revoke petition is so important that they give daily if not hourly updates on the numbers who have signed.

 

So?      Does it diminish the view of the large number of people who were there?     Oh a newspaper exaggerated a number... the whole thing can be ignored.    Let's just go straight to no deal 'cos not enough people are bothered if we do or don't.

[Unknown user]

Made up numbers in large headlines? Rings a bell.

 

Ding! Ding!

 

No, but marching numbers are definitely the thing to be outraged about here, shocking!

[Francis Albert]

26 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

So?      Does it diminish the view of the large number of people who were there?     Oh a newspaper exaggerated a number... the whole thing can be ignored.    Let's just go straight to no deal 'cos not enough people are bothered if we do or don't.

I posted too soon. The "more than a million" had grown to "The people have marched" by the time I got to the Leader. Not some of or a lot of the People but just the People. It doesn't greatly matter except as illustrating how far the media have come from any attempt at reporting facts rather than opinions. And I think that does matter.

And why do you put the emboldened words into my mouth. I didn't say or suggest any of that. But I suppose if the Observer is free to make things up ...

Edited March 24, 2019 by Francis Albert

[Victorian]

4 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

I posted too soon. The "more than a million" had grown to "The people have marched" by the time I got to the Leader. Not some of or a lot of the People but just the People. It doesn't greatly matter except as illustrating how far the media have come from any attempt at reporting facts rather than opinions. And I think that does matter.

 

So you think that it matters if media sources provide accurate estimates of people on a march... but don't seem keen to consider the information provided by various economic and industry experts regarding the effects of no deal.

[Francis Albert]

8 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

So you think that it matters if media sources provide accurate estimates of people on a march... but don't seem keen to consider the information provided by various economic and industry experts regarding the effects of no deal.

Making things up seems catching. I have considered the views of "various economic and industry experts". Some of these views seem to me on the basis of how they have been reported simplistic and misleading. I have explained on numerous occasions why I have that view.

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

The revoke article 50 petition now about equal to the Scottish population. Maybe it will be revoked and Scotland gets the democratic outcome it voted for?

[Francis Albert]

3 minutes ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

The revoke article 50 petition now about equal to the Scottish population. Maybe it will be revoked and Scotland gets the democratic outcome it voted for?

Scotland got the democratic outcome it voted for when it mattered. Remain in the UK.

Edited March 24, 2019 by Francis Albert

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

Just now, Francis Albert said:

Scotland got the democratic outcome it voted for when it mattered. Remain.

To remain in a union of equals? Is what I assumed you would have ended that with. Only half of the union voted to leave.

[Victorian]

1 minute ago, Francis Albert said:

Scotland got the democratic outcome it voted for when it mattered. Remain in the UK.

 

Yeah but the no campaign insisted that would mean remaining in the EU as a result.

[Cade]

2014: "the only way for Scotland to remain in the EU is to vote to stay in the UK"

 

whoops

[AlimOzturk]

23 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Scotland got the democratic outcome it voted for when it mattered. Remain in the UK.

 

Wasn't one of the main arguments for staying the UK was that was the only way scotland would remain the EU. 

 

More blatant lies  

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

4 minutes ago, AlimOzturk said:

 

Wasn't one of the main arguments for staying the UK was that was the only way scotland would remain the EU. 

 

More blatant lies  

It was, but the English lickspittle often choose to ignore this.

[Francis Albert]

31 minutes ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

To remain in a union of equals? Is what I assumed you would have ended that with. Only half of the union voted to leave.

Anyone who voted no in the indyref in the belief that Scottish votes would (or ever had) equal weight with English votes on UK issues should probably be disqualified from voting in the next indyref!

Edited March 24, 2019 by Francis Albert

[Francis Albert]

28 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Yeah but the no campaign insisted that would mean remaining in the EU as a result.

Yes and that would be good grounds (as a major change of circumstance) for holding Indyref2 if and when the UK leaves the EU.

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

1 minute ago, Francis Albert said:

Anyone who voted yes in the indyref in the belief that Scottish votes would (or ever had) equal weight with English votes on UK issues should probably be disqualified from voting in the next indyref!

Lickspittle.

[Francis Albert]

Just now, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

Lickspittle.

Thanks for that. At least I am not an English lickspittle!

I of course meant No (or remain in the UK) rather than yes and have edited my post accordingly.

[Victorian]

2 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Yes and that would be good grounds (as a major change of circumstance) for holding Indyref2 if and when the UK leaves the EU.

 

It is.   But it was a major grounds the day after the European referendum.    As of that day,    the UK was leaving the EU.     We are incessantly told that we are and that that wish of the people must be actioned.

 

Why on earth would it only become grounds after the day the UK leaves?    

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

2 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Thanks for that. At least I am not an English lickspittle!

I of course meant No (or remain in the UK) rather than yes and have edited my post accordingly.

So it is a union of equals, then? You're all over the place.

[Francis Albert]

7 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

It is.   But it was a major grounds the day after the European referendum.    As of that day,    the UK was leaving the EU.     We are incessantly told that we are and that that wish of the people must be actioned.

 

Why on earth would it only become grounds after the day the UK leaves?    

Yes I think it would have been grounds the day after the leave vote. 

I guess Nicola has not pursued that because she has not been confident of winning.

 

[Francis Albert]

10 minutes ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

So it is a union of equals, then? You're all over the place.

It depends what you mean by a union of equals. I don't think many really believed it meant that Scottish votes in aggregate counted as equal to aggregate English votes on UK issues. That a decision to go to war for example could be vetoed by Scotland and Wales.

[Victorian]

7 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Yes I think it would have been grounds the day after the leave vote. 

I guess Nicola has not pursued that because she has not been confident of winning.

 

 

Aye?     So the SNP putting a referendum vote through Holyrood and then submitting the request to the government was what then?     A dream?    A mirage?

[Francis Albert]

1 minute ago, Victorian said:

 

Aye?     So the SNP putting a referendum vote through Holyrood and then submitting the request to the government was what then?     A dream?    A mirage?

Sorry I missed or had forgotten that. Is it fair to say that the SNP hasn't pursued it vigorously?

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

7 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

It depends what you mean by a union of equals. I don't think many really believed it meant that Scottish votes in aggregate counted as equal to aggregate English votes on UK issues. That a decision to go to war for example could be vetoed by Scotland and Wales.

It means it's 2-2 and the population of England is irrelevant.

[The Comedian]

1 hour ago, Cade said:

2014: "the only way for Scotland to remain in the EU is to vote to stay in the UK"

 

whoops

 

Also 2014: "If part of the territory of a member state would cease to be part of that state because it were to become a new independent state, the (EU) treaties would no longer apply to that territory," Barroso said, meaning an independent Scotland would no longer be part of the EU."

 

 

Out the EU & UK on the same day. A cakewalk, I'm sure you'll agree.

[XB52]

Hilarious reading the last few pages as fa argues with himself, and ties himself in knots while doing it. I salute the few, very few, posters with the fortitude to still attempt to argue with him but, as most realised years ago, facts and logic are no use. Then, to add to the fun, back comes our resident expert in everything to give us all the benefit of his years living in South America/his mum's spare room. Will check back tomorrow, really is a good way to cheer myself up 

[Victorian]

23 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Sorry I missed or had forgotten that. Is it fair to say that the SNP hasn't pursued it vigorously?

 

After the democratically derived request to the government was denied,    what else was there to do for the SNP?     A mandate for a referendum was obtained via the result of the Holyrood elections and the vote that was held in the parliament.    The democratic part of the process ended with the refusal to have a referendum.    There is no other route to getting one.

[Victorian]

Anyway back on Brexit..

 

What did the PM do during a crucial Sunday out of the commons?     Precious time to try to build a consensus and/or formulate an alternative strategy.     Spent the day at Chequers talking to Tory MPs.     

 

I will venture that the true purpose of these Tory-centric discussions was not entirely Brexit.       It will have been,    as it's always been,    about ensuring a certain person gets more time in Chequers / Downing St.     

[shaun.lawson]

2 hours ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

The revoke article 50 petition now about equal to the Scottish population. Maybe it will be revoked and Scotland gets the democratic outcome it voted for?

 

If the People's Vote campaign was properly organised, it ought to be taking that petition door to door. Not everyone has internet access; not everyone will be aware of it. And there's certainly a lot more than 5m Brits who'd support revocation. 

[shaun.lawson]

3 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

The Observer has given up any pretence of being a newspaper rather than a propaganda sheet. It's front page headline "A million march against Brexit" is not supported by anything in the text of the article and the rest of the multi-page coverage of this event. In fact the report says that  the organisers say it is very difficult to estimate the numbers. The inner page headline above the rest of the news story goes further and says "More than a million march against Brexit".

 

I reckon it was probably more than a million, to judge by this.

 

 

You're quite right that the Observer and Guardian are propaganda rags though. Like. y'know, all of our press, and the BBC. The latter, and the Guardian/Observer, did once have some semblance of journalistic integrity. Now, none of them do. With the Observer especially becoming a People's Vote propaganda outlet, commissioning regular rigged polls, and blaming Corbyn for everything under the sun since he became Labour leader.

 

The Guardian/Observer are middle class, centrist newspapers. Not only that, but the Observer is a frankly rubbish newspaper, which doesn't compare in quality in any way to the Sunday Times.

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

6 minutes ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

If the People's Vote campaign was properly organised, it ought to be taking that petition door to door. Not everyone has internet access; not everyone will be aware of it. And there's certainly a lot more than 5m Brits who'd support revocation. 

Correct. The true figure is even higher. 

[shaun.lawson]

6 hours ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

So what are the 'extreme' or 'left wing' policies?

 

 

 

I wouldn't hold your breath in waiting on an answer to that one. The idea that Labour's 2017 manifesto was anything other than moderate would certainly be news to most of the countries in Western Europe.

[Mikey1874]

9 minutes ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

I reckon it was probably more than a million, to judge by this.

 

 

You're quite right that the Observer and Guardian are propaganda rags though. Like. y'know, all of our press, and the BBC. The latter, and the Guardian/Observer, did once have some semblance of journalistic integrity. Now, none of them do. With the Observer especially becoming a People's Vote propaganda outlet, commissioning regular rigged polls, and blaming Corbyn for everything under the sun since he became Labour leader.

 

The Guardian/Observer are middle class, centrist newspapers. Not only that, but the Observer is a frankly rubbish newspaper, which doesn't compare in quality in any way to the Sunday Times.

 

Yeah.

 

The Times and Sunday Times have a clearer purpose.

 

To stop Jeremy Corbyn.

[The Doc]

47 minutes ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

I reckon it was probably more than a million, to judge by this.

 

 

You're quite right that the Observer and Guardian are propaganda rags though. Like. y'know, all of our press, and the BBC. The latter, and the Guardian/Observer, did once have some semblance of journalistic integrity. Now, none of them do. With the Observer especially becoming a People's Vote propaganda outlet, commissioning regular rigged polls, and blaming Corbyn for everything under the sun since he became Labour leader.

 

The Guardian/Observer are middle class, centrist newspapers. Not only that, but the Observer is a frankly rubbish newspaper, which doesn't compare in quality in any way to the Sunday Times.

 

Seen more on the streets on the 17th May 98 tbh  

[Francis Albert]

1 hour ago, The Doc said:

 

Seen more on the streets on the 17th May 98 tbh  

Me too. Some even claimed it was 250000 that day. Less than half that in fact. 

[Dunks]

2 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

Me too. Some even claimed it was 250000 that day. Less than half that in fact. 

 

Did you count them?

[LeftBack]

Front page of daily telegraph has BJ quoting moses and asking the pharaoh in Brussels to 'let my people go'... This must be a dream.... 

[Mikey1874]

As things stand we are leaving 11pm on 29 March. Government needs to bring legislation ('statutory instrument') before then to change that either to 12 April or 22 May. 

 

Could this be frustrated. Might government avoid doing this or others frustrate/ stop it? 

[Cade]

Liam Fox says Govt may just ignore the indicative votes.

 

Govt would then again be held in contempt of Parliament. 

Which really means every little.

Westminster is not set up in any way to stop an authoritarian govt doing whatever it wants.

There is no mechanism of recall or forcing step downs.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

May’s only strategy seems to be the hope that for some reason, lots of people who hate her deal suddenly decide to vote for it. It’s quite scary that someone so delusional and incapable of finding common ground is in her job.

 

Also, this idea that MPs will back the deal if May agrees to resign is outrageous. You either like the deal or you don’t. It can’t be used as some sort of leadership tool FFS

[Victorian]

2 hours ago, Cade said:

Liam Fox says Govt may just ignore the indicative votes.

 

Govt would then again be held in contempt of Parliament. 

Which really means every little.

Westminster is not set up in any way to stop an authoritarian govt doing whatever it wants.

There is no mechanism of recall or forcing step downs.

 

Is what I've been saying for a long time.    This is a minority government as well.    A minority government that has no whip authority in commons votes.     A government that doesn't even have a cohesive cabinet following collective responsibility.

 

The executive arm of government has full control of the business agenda.    You might think that in itself includes enough in the way of checks and balances to ensure democracy at work.     An executive accountable to a policy making cabinet.      The reality is that it is only a very small number of people continuing to control what comes before the house,    not checked and balanced by a united cabinet,    but steered,   influenced and strong armed by cabinet members following their own agendas.

 

Westminster has been exposed as a hopelessly weak institution.     There is no current government.     It's little more than a gang power struggle.

[Francis Albert]

11 hours ago, Dunks said:

 

Did you count them?

No it was my estimate or more accurately guesstimate. I was surprised when I took my place in Princes Street near the Mound to see not the throngs I expected but people standing on average two deep. The fact that I and most others then joined the bus, walking behind or alongside meant that from then on there was always a large crowd around the bus. Haymarket was the first place where the streets themselves were thronged with people lining the pavements waiting for the parade. My guesstimate is based on being in other crowds - the Hogmanay Street party, fireworks displays, Hampden with over 120,000. I think 100,000, maybe 150,000at the very  high end. Not 250,000 or close.

[doctor jambo]

3 hours ago, LeftBack said:

Front page of daily telegraph has BJ quoting moses and asking the pharaoh in Brussels to 'let my people go'... This must be a dream.... 

How we loved a turncoat of many colours

[Cade]

Maybot trying to push for a 3rd (doomed) vote on her plan tomorrow!

[i8hibsh]

On 24/03/2019 at 09:39, ri Alban said:

I see Nigel's March is going well. 100 people at the last count.

 

 

The people who support Nigel and his politics will more than likely be at work right now.

[LeftBack]

2 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

How we loved a turncoat of many colours

Have you seen the front page... It is genuinely surreal. 

[LeftBack]

In a few weeks this could be a major diplomatic incident.... 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47691478

[Mikey1874]

5 minutes ago, LeftBack said:

Have you seen the front page... It is genuinely surreal. 

 

Lol