Brexit Deal agreed ( updated )

[redjambo]

1 minute ago, Brighton Jambo said:

I see we are still pretty much all arguing about whether we should be leaving or not rather than how and when we leave.

 

I voted remain and am sick at the result but the amount of people who are solely focused on overturning the referendum result is amazing.

 

I would be fascinated to see what some posters on here would do if Scotland voted for independence and three years later it was looking like being delayed again and maybe another vote being discussed that could overturn it.  They would be apoplectic and screaming for the democratic vote to be respected, hypocrites of the highest order.

 

This is a really old argument in the debate now, BJ. What those who want another referendum are generally arguing though is that the nature of an exit from the EU has changed materially now that we know what it will entail, and there are still many things to work out e.g. customs and free movement relationships. What they're saying is that we should work out a deal and then go back to the UK population and ask them "Is this what you want?". I personally don't see a problem with that, and wouldn't if it related to independence either.

[Howdy Doody Jambo]

So hopefully we get a bit peace and quiet about Brexit for a month 

[Brighton Jambo]

2 hours ago, dobmisterdobster said:

The NHS (in England) gets more funding than ever before. But they chosen to squander it on a convoluted management structure and the salaries that come with it.

Nobody is willing to have a grown up discussion about the NHS because its too valuable as a political football.

I couldn't agree with this more.  There is almost no level of realistic funding at that would be enough but people will never admit that because as you say its a political hot potato.

 

We also need to be honest that privatising certain back office functions to expert companies might actually save some money.  As long as it's still free at the point of use for patients, who cares.  But people hear the word privatised and their ignorance kicks in and immediately assume we are moving to a US system of healthcare.

 

There are too many big topics that are not discussed because of our politicians being short sighted opportunities.  Social care is a time bomb that this country needs to address.  Say what you want about May but at least she had the nerve to raise it in her last manifesto.  Sure the solution wasn't ideal but at least she put the big topic on the table. Labour immediately called it a dementia tax and the whole thing gets kicked into the long grass when all parties know we need a long term solution agreed across the parties.  Makes me sick.

[Brighton Jambo]

3 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

Are you suggesting it’s only Yes voters who want it overturned? 

 

No I am asking how yes voters would feel if having won a referendum there was going to be a second vote that could see it overturned?  They would be absolutely raging.

[jake]

31 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

Less of the homophobic comments, please, Jake.

Wasnt meant as such but point taken.

[redjambo]

Just now, jake said:

Wasnt meant as such but point taken.

 

Cheers.

[Brighton Jambo]

4 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

This is a really old argument in the debate now, BJ. What those who want another referendum are generally arguing though is that the nature of an exit from the EU has changed materially now that we know what it will entail, and there are still many things to work out e.g. customs and free movement relationships. What they're saying is that we should work out a deal and then go back to the UK population and ask them "Is this what you want?". I personally don't see a problem with that, and wouldn't if it related to independence either.

I do understand and I am not personally adverse to a second referendum.    I also think there are clear parallels to independence as it was evidenced last time that people did not have all the information they needed when they went to vote in the Independence Referendum.

 

I just cant see the majority of yes voters being as open minded about a second referendum in the event they have secured a successful Yes vote. 

[jake]

1 hour ago, XB52 said:

Yet again you post a bunch of lies

So majority ruling isn't being brought in and several other member states will not be adopting the Euro ?

 

 

 

Edited September 9, 2019 by jake

[redjambo]

6 minutes ago, Brighton Jambo said:

I do understand and I am not personally adverse to a second referendum.    I also think there are clear parallels to independence as it was evidenced last time that people did not have all the information they needed when they went to vote in the Independence Referendum.

 

I just cant see the majority of yes voters being as open minded about a second referendum in the event they have secured a successful Yes vote. 

 

True. As a remainer, I imagine that I would be spitting tacks if I had voted to leave and we hadn't left by now. So, although disagreeing fundamentally with the Leave opinion that Brexit is in the national interest, I do understand how they feel. However I'm also of the opinion that we need to get this right and achieve the best deal and EU relationship that we can for the country (and the EU), and we should take enough time to do this properly.

[redjambo]

15 minutes ago, jake said:

So majority ruling isn't being brought in and several other member states will not be adopting the Euro ?

 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47523168

 

[ri Alban]

34 minutes ago, Brighton Jambo said:

No I am asking how yes voters would feel if having won a referendum there was going to be a second vote that could see it overturned?  They would be absolutely raging.

One was legally binding and one wasn't.

[XB52]

32 minutes ago, jake said:

So majority ruling isn't being brought in and several other member states will not be adopting the Euro ?

 

 

 

Correct. No country can be forced to join the euro and you know that 

[jack D and coke]

41 minutes ago, Brighton Jambo said:

No I am asking how yes voters would feel if having won a referendum there was going to be a second vote that could see it overturned?  They would be absolutely raging.

Cool mate just seemed like you aimed that at Yes voters tbh. Plenty Yes voters voted Brexit too incidentally. 

But any referendum where the result isn’t honoured will rightly have people angry.  

 

 

 

[Brighton Jambo]

14 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

One was legally binding and one wasn't.

A confirmatory referendum on Scottish independence could be equally legally binding.   If I were the UK government I would mandate that if Scotland wants a second indy ref it has to agree to a confirmatory referendum on whatever deal is eventually agreed.

 

Lucky for you I am not the UK government!!

[Martin_T]

2 hours ago, Lee_Mellon said:

 

I like the idea of a Common Market and I voted to stay in when the first referendum happened back in the 70s, but the moves toward ever closer political integration (Maastricht) don't sit well with me. Incidentally,Johnson removing the whip from MPs who voted against the government is reminiscent of the Maastricht vote, when John Major removed the whip from Conservative MPs who... you get the picture.

 

I don't like the waste - for me, the monthly EU Parliament move from Brussels to Strasbourg and back is lunacy. MEPs are an extra layer of government that I believe we can do without.

 

Do they really think that the 17.4 million people who voted Leave had no idea what they were voting for?

 

I don't believe that the EU automatically brings peace (Irish Republican violence has never gone away, the far right are on the rise in the former East Germany) or prosperity (Greece, Germany perilously close to recession)

 

In the UK, we have a multicultural society that happened long before the EU was born, so I don't think the EU can claim credit for that. I also don't recall many labour shortages until UK citizens got uppity and refused to work for pittance wages. Freedom of movement would probably be a good thing if it wasn't discriminatory.

 

Since the referendum, my views have certainly become more entranched, mainly due to the superior, "we know best" attitude of many Remainer MPs - 

Dominic (Legion D'Honneur) Grieve,

Oliver Letwin (suggested to Thatcher that bringing the Poll Tax in to Scotland early was a wonderful wheeze, blamed the Broadwater Farm riots on the "bad moral attitudes" of the residents).

Anna Soubry

Dr Sarah Wollaston

etc, etc

 

I keep reading about the misinformation from the Leave campaign, but the Remain side was just as bad - apparently, voting Leave was in itself enough to cause "financial chaos" and force George Osborne to have an emergency budget. Well, my (modest) share portfolio is up 20% since the referendum so you'll forgive me if I don't give too much credence to the latest gloomy predictions.

 

Sorry for a long, unfocused  rant, but you did ask...

 

 

I actually agree with a lot of this. I think a lot of the closer political and fiscal integration is wholly unnecessary and monetary union is an impractical farce, it is never going to be possible to set a common interest rate that mutually benefits a manufacturing powerhouse like Germany, and the states of southern Europe which have larger black economies and are primarily service/tourism driven.

 

There is undoubtedly those who exaggerate on both sides of the debate and it is deeply unhelpful, part of the reason why there is such a schism in this debate, is that in the 140 character limit of the Twitter-sphere, discourse often takes the course of short and terse statements.

 

I am however a pragmatist and the 'deal' which Britain already has, which I think I read on here described as Germany ++ the other day, enables us to have full access to the single market, it enables us to opt out of monetary union, opt out of Schengen and unrestricted freedom of movement and apply quotas to incoming workers. In essence we already have cherry picked the good bits and have opted out of the less desirable. Hyperbolic scare stories like the EU army only serve to undermine some valid points, for example it makes perfect sense for Britain and France to share an aircraft carrier because the changing nature of military conflict means that neither nation probably needs an aircraft carrier at all anyway.

 

We are now so tied in to this through our 40 odd year membership, that there will be significant economic and social disruption if we leave in an abrupt way, job losses, people losing their homes and other associated social costs, is that really a price worth paying?

 

I saw it quoted, although I don't have access to the specific source, that as recently as 2015 only 1% of the British electorate survey considered EU membership to be a priority issue. It is through the utter incompetence and self interest and ambition of David Cameron and the Conservative party that something that was largely inconsequential to most people just a few years ago has now become a dis-proportionately important issue.

 

The fundamental problem with this whole issue is that the original referendum was far too simplistic. I don't necessarily agree that there should have been a threshold of say 60% to merit action, but I think that the government should have made it clear that it was advisory and that once the economic and social impact was established and the options available were defined, that it would be subject to a second confirmatory referendum where the people chose what route they wanted to go down in more full possession of the facts and options available.

[Cade]

Parliament could sit as late as 8am tomorrow, depending on length of debates and if anything gets through without a vote.

Popcorn time for the rest of the day.

 

 

 

[ri Alban]

55 minutes ago, Brighton Jambo said:

A confirmatory referendum on Scottish independence could be equally legally binding.   If I were the UK government I would mandate that if Scotland wants a second indy ref it has to agree to a confirmatory referendum on whatever deal is eventually agreed.

 

Lucky for you I am not the UK government!!

Remind me, when did we have a second vote on the advisory question of EU membership? 

Oh and a confirmation vote is ok with me.

[Victorian]

Another reported ploy is that they will formally request the extension in writing... but with a side letter saying they don't want one.    

 

Or attempt to buy a veto from an EU member.       

 

Some people are going to get jailed at this rate.

[RobboM]

27 minutes ago, Martin_T said:

 

........

 

The fundamental problem with this whole issue is that the original referendum was far too simplistic. I don't necessarily agree that there should have been a threshold of say 60% to merit action, but I think that the government should have made it clear that it was advisory and that once the economic and social impact was established and the options available were defined, that it would be subject to a second confirmatory referendum where the people chose what route they wanted to go down in more full possession of the facts and options available.

This feels sensible but I don't think it would ever have happened. Cameron wanted to make it a stark choice gambling that such a choice would be far too risky and poeple would have voted Leave more readily with a safety blanket of a second referendum. On the other hand Brexiteers would have argued that any deal negotiated with the EU would never be their (imagined) optimum as the EU would be under no pressure to acquiesce to any UK demands ... this is still the bizarre logic of No Deal

[kingantti1874]

5 minutes ago, Victorian said:

Another reported ploy is that they will formally request the extension in writing... but with a side letter saying they don't want one.    

 

Or attempt to buy a veto from an EU member.       

 

Some people are going to get jailed at this rate.

hopefully. 

[DETTY29]

Liked th ftom Philip Sim.

 

 

[DETTY29]

Leo Varadkar trolling Boris Johnson saying that he faced a Herculean task, but Ireland stand ready to be Britain’s Athena.

 

Athena rescued Hercules after he went mad.

[Mikey1874]

Bercow standing down as Speaker close of business October 31st. 

 

Means new Speaker elected before next election. (Would stand down before if election agreed later today).

 

A little emotional as he thanks his family. But thanks everyone in Parliament for their support. 

 

Good speech speaking up for Parliament. 

Edited September 9, 2019 by Mikey1874

[Lee_Mellon]

55 minutes ago, Martin_T said:

 

I actually agree with a lot of this. I think a lot of the closer political and fiscal integration is wholly unnecessary and monetary union is an impractical farce, it is never going to be possible to set a common interest rate that mutually benefits a manufacturing powerhouse like Germany, and the states of southern Europe which have larger black economies and are primarily service/tourism driven.

 

There is undoubtedly those who exaggerate on both sides of the debate and it is deeply unhelpful, part of the reason why there is such a schism in this debate, is that in the 140 character limit of the Twitter-sphere, discourse often takes the course of short and terse statements.

 

I am however a pragmatist and the 'deal' which Britain already has, which I think I read on here described as Germany ++ the other day, enables us to have full access to the single market, it enables us to opt out of monetary union, opt out of Schengen and unrestricted freedom of movement and apply quotas to incoming workers. In essence we already have cherry picked the good bits and have opted out of the less desirable. Hyperbolic scare stories like the EU army only serve to undermine some valid points, for example it makes perfect sense for Britain and France to share an aircraft carrier because the changing nature of military conflict means that neither nation probably needs an aircraft carrier at all anyway.

 

We are now so tied in to this through our 40 odd year membership, that there will be significant economic and social disruption if we leave in an abrupt way, job losses, people losing their homes and other associated social costs, is that really a price worth paying?

 

I saw it quoted, although I don't have access to the specific source, that as recently as 2015 only 1% of the British electorate survey considered EU membership to be a priority issue. It is through the utter incompetence and self interest and ambition of David Cameron and the Conservative party that something that was largely inconsequential to most people just a few years ago has now become a dis-proportionately important issue.

 

The fundamental problem with this whole issue is that the original referendum was far too simplistic. I don't necessarily agree that there should have been a threshold of say 60% to merit action, but I think that the government should have made it clear that it was advisory and that once the economic and social impact was established and the options available were defined, that it would be subject to a second confirmatory referendum where the people chose what route they wanted to go down in more full possession of the facts and options available.

I agree that the current deal we have with the EU is better than any deal we’re likely to bring back now. However, any exit seems to me to be better than staying in. I would rather that we spent our money on things that we want, rather than pool and share it with a pool  of 27 other countries. Any money that goes toward closer European union is money wasted in my view.

 

You say that extricating ourselves from a 40 year old union would cause “significant economic and social disruption” -  would that hold good for Scottish independence?

 

The Conservative party have always been split down the middle on the EU, as has Labour, although they hide it better. I think it’s actually a good thing that these divisions are now out in the open and a realignment of UK politics is on the cards. (By the way, I’ve also seen the 1% you quoted).

 

Where I disagree with you is that the original referendum was far too simplistic - it was a line in the sand, remain or leave, very easy to understand once you read Cameron’s booklet. It made clear that we would  not be able to secure significant access to the Single Market without having to adhere to EU rules. Despite that, we voted to leave. Of course, Remainers would probably say that the 17.4 million Leavers, as well as being racist and hankering after Empire, could not possibly know that, since they cannot read...

 

When I was a callow youth I was full of crazy anarchist ideas - 50 years later, when domestic responsibilities have moved my political stance somewhat  to the right, it finally looks like we may, at last, get some anarchy in the UK!

[Cade]

Lots of other Tory MPs also announcing that they're standing down at the next election.

 

The centre ground is wide open for anybody to take, the Tories have been taken over by the rabid right and all their one nation MPs are legging it.

[The Real Maroonblood]

3 minutes ago, Cade said:

Lots of other Tory MPs also announcing that they're standing down at the next election.

 

The centre ground is wide open for anybody to take, the Tories have been taken over by the rabid right and all their one nation MPs are legging it.

[Mikey1874]

Despite a lot of the Tories hating him Michael Gove and David Liddington have both just made nice comments in Parliament about John Bercow following his resignation statement. 

 

Maybe a bit of a One Nation message too. 

Edited September 9, 2019 by Mikey1874

[Pans Jambo]

4 hours ago, jake said:

Come 2020 and come 2022 the Lisbon treaty will trigger other new laws .

The right to veto gone .

And the use of the euro mandatory by 22.

Just a couple of things people may or may not be aware of.

People holding up the EU as a bull work against big business and the rich is amusing.

Fake news!

[Cade]

Government party announces plan to run an MP against the Speaker in breach of convention (that word again).

 

Next day, Speaker announces he's fecking off.

Government dicks pretend to like him.

 

 

[The Mighty Thor]

27 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

Bercow standing down as Speaker close of business October 31st. 

 

Means new Speaker elected before next election. (Would stand down before if election agreed later today).

 

A little emotional as he thanks his family. But thanks everyone in Parliament for their support. 

 

Good speech speaking up for Parliament. 

Bercow has been top quality entertainment of late and he'll be a loss. 

 

Hopefully he'll keep jamming it up the Rees Mogg types in his last few weeks 

[Mikey1874]

4 minutes ago, Cade said:

Government party announces plan to run an MP against the Speaker in breach of convention (that word again).

 

Next day, Speaker announces he's fecking off.

Government dicks pretend to like him.

 

 

 

The telling, recorded statement was no one in government applauded as others clapped after his statement.

 

It's a powerful intervention. 

 

Not sure how his replacement is elected but has influenced that a bit..

Edited September 9, 2019 by Mikey1874

[Cade]

Who'll replace Bercow?

 

Skinner?

Mogg?

 

Clarke?

[ri Alban]

I for one will miss John Bercow.

[Mikey1874]

2 minutes ago, Cade said:

Who'll replace Bercow?

 

Skinner?

Mogg?

 

Clarke?

 

Someone in a safe seat so can continue after the election. SNP would be good. I think there was someone interested. 

Edited September 9, 2019 by Mikey1874

[Cade]

1 minute ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Someone in a safe seat. SNP would be good. I think there was someone interested. 

[ri Alban]

2 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Someone in a safe seat so can continue after the election. SNP would be good. I think there was someone interested. 

Pete Wishart The Tories would be raging.

[Cade]

[Mikey1874]

2 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

Pete Wishart The Tories would be raging.

 

Yeah. Was he the one who said he was interested? 

[ri Alban]

2 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Yeah. Was he the one who said he was interested? 

I think so. But I think he was trolling.

[Cade]

Now that Boris has reduced his own minority to -43, the DUP don't matter any more.

 

Rumours are that he's already decided to put the border down the middle of the Irish sea, accept the backstop, ignore the DUP and try to get May's Deal through when Parliament returns.

 

*breaking*

Queen has given assent to the anti-No-Deal bill.

It's now LAW.

Edited September 9, 2019 by Cade

[Pans Jambo]

31 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

I for one will miss John Bercow.

Seconded.

 

Decent bloke for a Tory.

[redjambo]

31 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

I for one will miss John Bercow.

 

Me too, ri. Seemed like a good guy and humorous with it too.

[Boris]

8 minutes ago, Cade said:

Now that Boris has reduced his own minority to -43, the DUP don't matter any more.

 

Rumours are that he's already decided to put the border down the middle of the Irish sea, accept the backstop, ignore the DUP and try to get May's Deal through when Parliament returns.

Wouldn’t surprise me and perhaps explains the Kinnock amendment the other day.

[RobboM]

14 minutes ago, Cade said:

Now that Boris has reduced his own minority to -43, the DUP don't matter any more.

 

Rumours are that he's already decided to put the border down the middle of the Irish sea, accept the backstop, ignore the DUP and try to get May's Deal through when Parliament returns.

 

*breaking*

Queen has given assent to the anti-No-Deal bill.

It's now LAW.

It's interesting, wasn't this the starting position for the EU?  May couldn't get any progress with it because of her reliance on the DUP. Surely Rees Mogg and the ERG within the cabinet and Tory party would resign en masse at the betrayal of their DUP allies?

[Cruyff Turn]

Bercows been a brilliant speaker. Shame he’s gone. He’ll be a hard man to replace. 

[Don Dan]

Bercow was certainly good as a speaker but went off the rails in recent months where Brexit was concerned. He lost his impartiality and has been threatened with direct competition when and if he stands at the next election.

A speaker needs to be totally impartial.

[AlimOzturk]

19 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:

Bercow was certainly good as a speaker but went off the rails in recent months where Brexit was concerned. He lost his impartiality and has been threatened with direct competition when and if he stands at the next election.

A speaker needs to be totally impartial.

 

It is impossible to get a speaker who is totally impartial. Bercow did a good job of maintaining a degree of ORDER in the house. 

[redjambo]

28 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:

Bercow was certainly good as a speaker but went off the rails in recent months where Brexit was concerned. He lost his impartiality and has been threatened with direct competition when and if he stands at the next election.

A speaker needs to be totally impartial.

 

Please give examples of where he "lost his impartiality", and that doesn't includes actions he has taken which have consequences which don't agree with your own particular political stance.

[Mikey1874]

Just on BBC Parliament now again.

 

Debating Prorogation and Yellowhammer.

 

An MP has just quoted Daily Mail Online while Dominic Grieve is making case, that 'Downing Street source' says they will ignore Parliament. 

[Mikey1874]

36 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:

Bercow was certainly good as a speaker but went off the rails in recent months where Brexit was concerned. He lost his impartiality and has been threatened with direct competition when and if he stands at the next election.

A speaker needs to be totally impartial.

 

It's a view. Andrea Leadsom's view for example.

 

But Bercow has said he is standing up for Parliament and Parliament for example has made it clear it rejects No Deal. So he has given Parliament the opportunity to debate that. That is all. 

 

Government has had ample opportunity to get Brexit implemented. 

Edited September 9, 2019 by Mikey1874