Brexit Deal agreed ( updated )

[Cade]

I genuinely worry about the mental state of some posters on Kickback

[Jambo-Jimbo]

5 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Sheer fantasy. There was no and is no consensus on the form of brexit or even that Brexit should happen at all. Those who lost the vote immediately started to try to reverse it.

 

And yet they claim to be democrats.

Democracy only works when the losers of a democratic vote accept the democratic will of the people, they might not like it because who likes losing, but they accept the result, the problems only really start when the elected officials actively resist, thwart and even try to ignore the democratic will of the people, when that happens it's democracy that's the real loser.

[Francis Albert]

20 minutes ago, luckydug said:

Will you and all the other oot at any price Brexiteers be prepared to hold your hands up and admit you were wrong when it all goes tits up ?

I can't understand why some people are so dogmatic in their views about Brexit one way or the other.

The truth is nobody really knows what's going to happen and that is a large part of the problem .

The people of Sunderland voted by a large majority to leave  and now 6000 of them are facing the dole.

How many other towns are going to suffer the same fate ?

6000 aren't facing the dole. 

[Mikey1874]

3 hours ago, Dawnrazor said:

It was made pretty clear right from the off we'd be leaving the custom Union though. 

 

By May

 

May isn't in control of anything 

[Dawnrazor]

1 minute ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

By May

 

May isn't in control of anything 

Like I said, way before May was PM, before the vote. 

[Mikey1874]

3 minutes ago, Dawnrazor said:

Like I said, way before May was PM, before the vote. 

 

By who?

 

Like in the Brexit Leave campaign?

[Boris]

31 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

And yet they claim to be democrats.

Democracy only works when the losers of a democratic vote accept the democratic will of the people, they might not like it because who likes losing, but they accept the result, the problems only really start when the elected officials actively resist, thwart and even try to ignore the democratic will of the people, when that happens it's democracy that's the real loser.

Democracy also allows opposite views to be heard. Otherwise why do we keep having general elections? 

[Toggie88]

5 minutes ago, Boris said:

Democracy also allows opposite views to be heard. Otherwise why do we keep having general elections? 

 

Democracy also allows us to change our mind, especially when the facts have changed significantly. As you as we can't do that, we're no longer living in a democracy. 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

14 minutes ago, Boris said:

Democracy also allows opposite views to be heard. Otherwise why do we keep having general elections? 

 

Opposite views is good and healthy, but to set out to deliberately overturn a result for no other reason than that you don't agree with it isn't good and isn't democratic imo.

 

 

9 minutes ago, Toggie88 said:

 

Democracy also allows us to change our mind, especially when the facts have changed significantly. As you as we can't do that, we're no longer living in a democracy. 

 

If that were the case, then we'd be having General Elections every other year or so, when the elected party starts to renege on their manifesto/election promises, isn't those significantly changed facts/promises from what the electorate thought they were voting for, and lets be honest every party does it, time and time and time again, yet people don't scream and holler for a re-run of the GE.

[Toggie88]

1 minute ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

If that were the case, then we'd be having General Elections every other year or so, when the elected party starts to renege on their manifesto/election promises, isn't those significantly changed facts/promises from what the electorate thought they were voting for, and lets be honest every party does it, time and time and time again, yet people don't scream and holler for a re-run of the GE.

 

We do - every four or five years (or occasionally sooner 2015 & 2017). 

 

[Ulysses]

2 hours ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

I think you have picked me up wrong, or perhaps I haven't made it clear enough.

 

The point I am making is that the precise date didn't matter when A50 was triggered as there was always going to be a two year timeframe, as per the rules, and that is the only point I was making.

 

What I fully accept and agree with you is that the tories didn't have a strategy, a plan, any plan, but I've never said they did nor even inferred such and that is where I think we have crossed wires.

 

I see what you're getting at.  The reason I'm emphasising the point is that your comment about Article 50 and the EU's timeframe was in response to what AlimOzturk said about an extension.  But if the UK government had done its homework properly the question of an extension would never have arisen, so the constraints of the 2-year timeframe wouldn't have mattered to the discussion.

 

In fairness, there has been a desperate rush by Leave supporters recently to try to shift blame from the British government to someone else - the EU as a bloc, the Irish, Barnier, Tusk, Varadkar, and so on.  You may not be swimming with that current, but it is a very strong trend so don't be too put out if others interpret your comments in that way.  But in any case the net point remains: It's an appalling performance by the UK's political leadership.

[AlphonseCapone]

11 hours ago, Dawnrazor said:

It's was stated time and again that voting leave meant leaving the single market, EU, customs union, people knew that and voted leave. 

 

Can you provide some evidence to back it up that this was stated time and time again before the referendum as I genuinely don't remember it coming up? Considering the most searched term in the UK the day after the Brexit Vote was; what is the EU? I think it's more than a little ingenious to claim folk understood the complexities of things little the single market, customs unions. 

 

The fact is people were told things that have turned out to be patently untrue before the referendum, things that can sway votes.

 

We were told how much money we'd save based on the simple maths of not contributing to the EU but it didn't account for money we already committed, the cost of setting up new things to deal with post-Brexit, the cost to businesses and people if there is no deal. The financial benefits, if there ever are any, will be a long time coming. 

 

We were told we'd essentially have various trade deals across the globe, and these would be easy because everyone wants to trade with us. We aren't even able to start any negotiations yet and based on the Government's handling of the exit negotiations, how well do folk think these trade deal ones will go. 

 

We will get immigration under control. Yet there are more non-EU migrants to the UK than EU, this will remain unchanged or potentially increase to make up shortfalls from EU migrants. EU migrants who are net contributors to the economy, with almost 50% already having a job when they arrive. In contrast, just over 40% of non-EU migrants are here to study. 

 

How much discussion was there on the Irish border situation and all its complexities?

 

There was a lot stated before the referendum and most of it was bullshit.

 

9 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

No it isn't. The date is relevant because regardless of what stance the EU 27 took in the negotiations, the UK could never have gained a successful outcome without being thoroughly prepared for the negotiations. The UK was not anywhere nearly as prepared as they should have been.

 

I have previously described the approach of the British government as being reminiscent of the Keystone Cops, and I stand over that.  What they should have done was take the time to work out what they wanted and develop as many strategies and plans as possible to manage a bad deal or no deal - and then invoke Article 50 and start negotiating.  That way they would have gone in to negotiations with a clear view of what they wanted, a clear sense of where they could compromise and where they couldn't, a clear idea of bottom lines, a clear message to their opposite numbers in Europe that they knew what they wanted and what they were prepared to do if they couldn't get it, and a clear signal to the people of the UK that they were in charge of the agenda and on top of their game.

 

Did they do any of that?  Be honest, you don't believe for an instant that they did.  Instead they mooched around the place with no plan, no wishlist, no tactics, and no unity of purpose.  It got so bad that in the end they were only able to go along with a temporary arrangement that would last for less than two years - and that only if your political system could stop convulsing and actually live with it.

 

People want to blame the EU 27 for this situation, but the truth is that the British government has let the country down.

 

Completely spot on. The British have no one but the British to blame. They done **** all preparation beforehand for these negotiations.

 

9 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

While the UK deserves the ridicule it is getting, I think it worth sparing a thought for the Irish PM's toe curling presentation to juncker of a "Thanks from Ireland" card like something out of the Card Shop supposedly sent to the EU by a family in Dublin thanking the EU for making for the first time in history  Ireland more important than the UK.

Juncker to be fair looked a little embarrassed and ignored it.

 

Francis, quite frankly, who gives a shit? It's much more worth our time thinking about businesses and people that are struggling with the current uncertainty or the consequences of no deal. The content of your post isn't worth any thought whatsoever, it's a complete irrelevance. 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

9 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

I see what you're getting at.  The reason I'm emphasising the point is that your comment about Article 50 and the EU's timeframe was in response to what AlimOzturk said about an extension.  But if the UK government had done its homework properly the question of an extension would never have arisen, so the constraints of the 2-year timeframe wouldn't have mattered to the discussion.

 

In fairness, there has been a desperate rush by Leave supporters recently to try to shift blame from the British government to someone else - the EU as a bloc, the Irish, Barnier, Tusk, Varadkar, and so on.  You may not be swimming with that current, but it is a very strong trend so don't be too put out if others interpret your comments in that way.  But in any case the net point remains: It's an appalling performance by the UK's political leadership.

 

Oh, it's not just brexit where this happens on here, example if you criticise Labour then some folks instantly label you as a Tory fan boy, if you criticise the SNP then some instantly label you as a 'yoon' and so on and so forth.

I can criticise everybody as I have no political allegiances to any of them, but people like to stereotype, to pigeon hole people because that's what fits their thinking, their rational, and there is nothing I can do about that, all I can do, is to be as tolerant and as I can and try and get my point across, even if that takes more than one post.

[Dawnrazor]

3 hours ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

Can you provide some evidence to back it up that this was stated time and time again before the referendum as I genuinely don't remember it coming up?

David Cameron said it 28 times in one interview on Sky news alone! 

[Dawnrazor]

12 hours ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

By who?

 

Like in the Brexit Leave campaign?

Cameron and Osborne. 

[AlphonseCapone]

8 minutes ago, Dawnrazor said:

David Cameron said it 28 times in one interview on Sky news alone! 

 

I've had a check since to see whether it was mentioned much but I haven't saw the interview you referenced so can't comment. Overall, it seems it's a pretty complex thing regarding what was or wasn't mentioned, but I'm not sure it was clear, for interest;

 

https://fullfact.org/europe/what-was-promised-about-customs-union-referendum/

 

 

[Dawnrazor]

4 minutes ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

I've had a check since to see whether it was mentioned much but I haven't saw the interview you referenced so can't comment. Overall, it seems it's a pretty complex thing regarding what was or wasn't mentioned, but I'm not sure it was clear, for interest;

 

https://fullfact.org/europe/what-was-promised-about-customs-union-referendum/

 

 

I think for you to say that when someone in an interview said that we'd be out of the single market 28 times "wasn't clear" is a bit disingenuous!!! 

Especially so when that person was the PM and a leading remainer. 

I'm sure you could find interviews where this was pointed out, I googled it and found the interview first time and at the top of the videos and I'm sat in a land rover at the top of a hill in Cumbria in the pissing rain on a dodgy 4g connection!! 

[Boris]

3 minutes ago, Dawnrazor said:

I think for you to say that when someone in an interview said that we'd be out of the single market 28 times "wasn't clear" is a bit disingenuous!!! 

Especially so when that person was the PM and a leading remainer. 

I'm sure you could find interviews where this was pointed out, I googled it and found the interview first time and at the top of the videos and I'm sat in a land rover at the top of a hill in Cumbria in the pissing rain on a dodgy 4g connection!! 

 

But what about the customs union?  Seperate things.

 

And, fwiw, even if Cameron equates leave with leaving the single market, that doesn't mean that leave actually MEANS leaving the SM. e.g. EFTA, EEA option, Switzerland etc etc

 

[Dawnrazor]

7 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

But what about the customs union?  Seperate things.

 

And, fwiw, even if Cameron equates leave with leaving the single market, that doesn't mean that leave actually MEANS leaving the SM. e.g. EFTA, EEA option, Switzerland etc etc

 

?? Aye, ok?

[Boris]

14 minutes ago, Dawnrazor said:

?? Aye, ok?

 

Which part?  The SM bit?  

[Dawnrazor]

2 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

Which part?  The SM bit?  

Pretty much all of it Boris? 

[Dawnrazor]

3 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

Which part?  The SM bit?  

Pretty much all of it Boris?

[Boris]

Just now, Dawnrazor said:

Pretty much all of it Boris?

 

 

But back to the customs union....

[Unknown user]

3 minutes ago, Dawnrazor said:

Pretty much all of it Boris?

So what exactly did Cameron mention 28 times in this interview? It wasn't the customs union was it?

[AlphonseCapone]

30 minutes ago, Dawnrazor said:

I think for you to say that when someone in an interview said that we'd be out of the single market 28 times "wasn't clear" is a bit disingenuous!!! 

Especially so when that person was the PM and a leading remainer. 

I'm sure you could find interviews where this was pointed out, I googled it and found the interview first time and at the top of the videos and I'm sat in a land rover at the top of a hill in Cumbria in the pissing rain on a dodgy 4g connection!! 

 

Did you read the research from the fact searching site? They said specifically that there were barely any references to the custom union so it's incorrect to say it was clear folk knew they were voting to leave the custom union. Single market yes, customs union no. 

[Boris]

Interesting article in the FT

 

https://www.ft.com/content/bfc55820-2ace-11e9-88a4-c32129756dd8

[AlphonseCapone]

1 minute ago, Boris said:

Interesting article in the FT

 

https://www.ft.com/content/bfc55820-2ace-11e9-88a4-c32129756dd8

 

Paywall Boris. 

[Boris]

15 minutes ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

Paywall Boris. 

 

Oh right - I googled it and the link worked for me. 

 

I'll PM you some stuff if that's ok?

 

edit - cut and paste just copies a link!  Grrr!!!!

 

Edited February 8, 2019 by Boris

[AlphonseCapone]

4 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

Oh right - I googled it and the link worked for me. 

 

I'll PM you some stuff if that's ok?

 

edit - cut and paste just copies a link!  Grrr!!!!

 

 

Just googled it and that works. 

 

Interesting. I feel like a complete cut would be better than the proposed Labour option. 

[sairyinthat]

13 hours ago, Cade said:

I genuinely worry about the mental state of some posters on Kickback

If your concern is genuine I find that really touching but sceptic that I am I am pretty sure you are being mendacious,convince me otherwise.

[Unknown user]

25 minutes ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

Paywall Boris. 

Am I the only one that read that in a Sybil Fawlty voice?

[Boris]

Just now, Smithee said:

Am I the only one that read that in a Sybil Fawlty voice?

 

Best post on this thread yet!

 

[Boris]

5 minutes ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

Just googled it and that works. 

 

Interesting. I feel like a complete cut would be better than the proposed Labour option. 

 

If I'm honest, I don't know.

 

I do know I'd rather we didn't have any of this going on and we were still part of the EU.  I'd also like the UK government to take the EU seriously and actually try and use it for our best interests rather than suppinely letting others set the agenda.

 

But, as we seem to be leaving, what damages the economy the least would suit me.  Although part of me wants us to just fall out, no deal, cliff edge, and if it all goes tits up then the Tory Party should never ever again be in power.  But in that scenario, you just know that the Tories will not get blamed - it'll be the EU's intransigence/fault.

 

The UK is a busted flush, has been for years, but this has brought it all out in the open.

[AlphonseCapone]

5 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

If I'm honest, I don't know.

 

I do know I'd rather we didn't have any of this going on and we were still part of the EU.  I'd also like the UK government to take the EU seriously and actually try and use it for our best interests rather than suppinely letting others set the agenda.

 

But, as we seem to be leaving, what damages the economy the least would suit me.  Although part of me wants us to just fall out, no deal, cliff edge, and if it all goes tits up then the Tory Party should never ever again be in power.  But in that scenario, you just know that the Tories will not get blamed - it'll be the EU's intransigence/fault.

 

The UK is a busted flush, has been for years, but this has brought it all out in the open.

 

I agree I'd rather we weren't leaving. But since we are, I don't think the solution should be to remain part of something that we have no real power over which is what I understand the Labour propodal would do. 

[Boris]

Just now, AlphonseCapone said:

 

I agree I'd rather we weren't leaving. But since we are, I don't think the solution should be to remain part of something that we have no real power over which is what I understand the Labour propodal would do. 

 

Brexit means Brexit Al!

 

[NANOJAMBO]

16 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

If I'm honest, I don't know.

 

I do know I'd rather we didn't have any of this going on and we were still part of the EU.  I'd also like the UK government to take the EU seriously and actually try and use it for our best interests rather than suppinely letting others set the agenda.

 

But, as we seem to be leaving, what damages the economy the least would suit me.  Although part of me wants us to just fall out, no deal, cliff edge, and if it all goes tits up then the Tory Party should never ever again be in power.  But in that scenario, you just know that the Tories will not get blamed - it'll be the EU's intransigence/fault.

 

The UK is a busted flush, has been for years, but this has brought it all out in the open.

I agree with so much of this. 

 

I almost want to say "told you so" but their friends who control the media (and so the narrative ) in the UK will simply blame the EU.  Depressing times ahead. 

[Boris]

2 minutes ago, NANOJAMBO said:

I agree with so much of this. 

 

I almost want to say "told you so" but their friends who control the media (and so the narrative ) in the UK will simply blame the EU.  Depressing times ahead. 

 

Yip.

 

And Scotland will no doubt collectively shite itself again if given the chance.

[Cade]

[Unknown user]

7 minutes ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

I agree I'd rather we weren't leaving. But since we are, I don't think the solution should be to remain part of something that we have no real power over which is what I understand the Labour propodal would do. 

It's all about the best compromise now, or it should be anyway. I think there's a strong argument for staying within the customs union with all the benefits that it brings. That doesn't mean we'd need to stay forever though, if things go in a direction that doesn't suit we can always leave after due consideration and preparation. 

[AlphonseCapone]

15 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

Brexit means Brexit Al!

 

 

I have that exact tattoo. 

[AlphonseCapone]

1 minute ago, Smithee said:

It's all about the best compromise now, or it should be anyway. I think there's a strong argument for staying within the customs union with all the benefits that it brings. That doesn't mean we'd need to stay forever though, if things go in a direction that doesn't suit we can always leave after due consideration and preparation. 

 

Maybe. I see the advantages to staying in the custom union, don't get me wrong. But as someone who wanted to remain completely in, I just don't see the point in half arsing leaving. Folk voted to leave so give them that, with all the consequences that entails. Though that's not particularly rational. 

[NANOJAMBO]

1 minute ago, Boris said:

 

Yip.

 

And Scotland will no doubt collectively shite itself again if given the chance.

As a former advocate of indy who has lived down south for over 30 years , I'm not offering any comment on that except to say that if I was back home I really would be considering what it means to be tied to Westminster. The long term economic outlook is potentially very damaging. 

 

Without hijacking the EU debate, some of us Scots down here had a debate about being "bettertogether" with the locals. In light of Brexit , us Scots put the point that Scotland was urged to be "bettertogether" but for England & Brexit it was all about getting out & "taking back control". We made the point - isn't that what the indy debate is about - taking back control  ie England is fed up being ruled by Brussels and Scotland is fed up being ruled by London , so what's the difference?  For some it was a real lightbulb moment in terms of what could happen to their precious UK given the Brexit outcome.  Unfortunately , In the main, based  on my day to day discussions I'd say the majority I speak to voted to leave because they're simply pissed off in general and thought the Brexit ref was a free hit to get back at the Tories .  Amazingly not a single person I know who we debated with pre referendum even mentions Brexit any longer as no  one wants to acknowledge what is coming down the track. 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

20 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

Although part of me wants us to just fall out, no deal, cliff edge, and if it all goes tits up then the Tory Party should never ever again be in power. 

 

And at any other time in history they wouldn't be in power for at least a decade or more, however the Tories have a 'get out of jail free' card in Corbyn.

For many fear of a Corbyn government outweights the fear of the Tories in charge.

IMHO remove Corbyn and most of his cabinet and Labour would win a GE by an absolute landslide.

 

 

12 minutes ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

I agree I'd rather we weren't leaving. But since we are, I don't think the solution should be to remain part of something that we have no real power over which is what I understand the Labour propodal would do. 

 

TBH I'd rather stay in the EU than agree to Corbyn's proposed deal, it's even worse than May's deal.

Wants to leave the EU but still have a say on future EU trade deals, that's enough to make Juncker choke on his gin with laughter.

[Boris]

6 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

And at any other time in history they wouldn't be in power for at least a decade or more, however the Tories have a 'get out of jail free' card in Corbyn.

For many fear of a Corbyn government outweights the fear of the Tories in charge.

IMHO remove Corbyn and most of his cabinet and Labour would win a GE by an absolute landslide.

 

I kind of agree with you on that.

 

6 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

 

 

TBH I'd rather stay in the EU than agree to Corbyn's proposed deal, it's even worse than May's deal.

Wants to leave the EU but still have a say on future EU trade deals, that's enough to make Juncker choke on his gin with laughter.

 

Turkey gets input with the CU it has with the EU.  I doubt the EU would allow us a vote, but not sure if that is what Corbyn is actually asking for?

[The Mighty Thor]

36 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

If I'm honest, I don't know.

 

I do know I'd rather we didn't have any of this going on and we were still part of the EU.  I'd also like the UK government to take the EU seriously and actually try and use it for our best interests rather than suppinely letting others set the agenda.

 

But, as we seem to be leaving, what damages the economy the least would suit me.  Although part of me wants us to just fall out, no deal, cliff edge, and if it all goes tits up then the Tory Party should never ever again be in power.  But in that scenario, you just know that the Tories will not get blamed - it'll be the EU's intransigence/fault.

 

The UK is a busted flush, has been for years, but this has brought it all out in the open.

This is pretty much where i am with the whole thing.

 

I have a real deep curiousity to see what would happen if we crashed out with no deal, but I too have no faith that the Tory party would be hounded forever more as there's a huge rump of the UK actually genuinely want this top happen and be damned with the consequences.

 

The whole mind set that the governement went into the negotiations with was flawed. They went in with the attitude that the UK is somehow relevant and is still a global power and what we are seeing is that our peers tend not to share that view.

 

The Conservative and Unionist partyought to be held to account for gross negligence.

[andrew]

1 hour ago, Boris said:

Interesting article in the FT

 

https://www.ft.com/content/bfc55820-2ace-11e9-88a4-c32129756dd8

 

If it's the one comparing the UK to Singapore it was a very interesting article.

[The Real Maroonblood]

15 minutes ago, NANOJAMBO said:

As a former advocate of indy who has lived down south for over 30 years , I'm not offering any comment on that except to say that if I was back home I really would be considering what it means to be tied to Westminster. The long term economic outlook is potentially very damaging. 

 

Without hijacking the EU debate, some of us Scots down here had a debate about being "bettertogether" with the locals. In light of Brexit , us Scots put the point that Scotland was urged to be "bettertogether" but for England & Brexit it was all about getting out & "taking back control". We made the point - isn't that what the indy debate is about - taking back control  ie England is fed up being ruled by Brussels and Scotland is fed up being ruled by London , so what's the difference?  For some it was a real lightbulb moment in terms of what could happen to their precious UK given the Brexit outcome.  Unfortunately , In the main, based  on my day to day discussions I'd say the majority I speak to voted to leave because they're simply pissed off in general and thought the Brexit ref was a free hit to get back at the Tories .  Amazingly not a single person I know who we debated with pre referendum even mentions Brexit any longer as no  one wants to acknowledge what is coming down the track. 

Very good post.

[ri Alban]

I love brexit. Especially a no deal brexit.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

35 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

I kind of agree with you on that.

 

 

Turkey gets input with the CU it has with the EU.  I doubt the EU would allow us a vote, but not sure if that is what Corbyn is actually asking for?

 

From Corbyn's letter to May.

1. A permanent and comprehensive UK-wide customs union, an agreement on commercial policy that includes a UK say on future EU trade deals

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/07/what-corbyns-terms-back-may-brexit-labour-eu

 

Edited February 8, 2019 by Jambo-Jimbo

[Boris]

35 minutes ago, NANOJAMBO said:

As a former advocate of indy who has lived down south for over 30 years , I'm not offering any comment on that except to say that if I was back home I really would be considering what it means to be tied to Westminster. The long term economic outlook is potentially very damaging. 

 

Without hijacking the EU debate, some of us Scots down here had a debate about being "bettertogether" with the locals. In light of Brexit , us Scots put the point that Scotland was urged to be "bettertogether" but for England & Brexit it was all about getting out & "taking back control". We made the point - isn't that what the indy debate is about - taking back control  ie England is fed up being ruled by Brussels and Scotland is fed up being ruled by London , so what's the difference?  For some it was a real lightbulb moment in terms of what could happen to their precious UK given the Brexit outcome.  Unfortunately , In the main, based  on my day to day discussions I'd say the majority I speak to voted to leave because they're simply pissed off in general and thought the Brexit ref was a free hit to get back at the Tories .  Amazingly not a single person I know who we debated with pre referendum even mentions Brexit any longer as no  one wants to acknowledge what is coming down the track. 

 

I made the same point to an embryonic UKIPer on Dalry Rd prior to a General Election - I think it was the 1997 one, and they weren't even standing!  

 

It's interesting the silence from those who, as you say, voted Leave as a protest rather than down to Eurosceptic conviction.  

 

27 minutes ago, The Mighty Thor said:

This is pretty much where i am with the whole thing.

 

I have a real deep curiousity to see what would happen if we crashed out with no deal, but I too have no faith that the Tory party would be hounded forever more as there's a huge rump of the UK actually genuinely want this top happen and be damned with the consequences.

 

The whole mind set that the governement went into the negotiations with was flawed. They went in with the attitude that the UK is somehow relevant and is still a global power and what we are seeing is that our peers tend not to share that view.

 

The Conservative and Unionist partyought to be held to account for gross negligence.

 

100% agree with you.

 

19 minutes ago, andrew said:

 

If it's the one comparing the UK to Singapore it was a very interesting article.

 

No, it's about Corbyn's customs union idea.  The comparison with Singapore would be interesting to read.  I've heard this comparison come up a few times, especially from ERG types, although were we to go down that route I'm not so sure that these people would be as generous as the Singapore government is to its citizens!