planetf1.com

ALESI wrote:I think one thing that swayed me to leave was the simple fact that I did not believe that the EU can be 'reformed from inside' as the remain camp kept telling us. The EU is power hungry, and money hungry too. I can't see that changing without other countries holding their own referendums and threatening to leave. Also, I think if we had voted to remain, the EU would take that as tacit approval, and I didn't want to wait another 40 years to vote leave. This is why I could not vote to remain.

I am not sure what is that supposed to mean, EU being "power hungry, and money hungry too" in this context of Brexit? Then it would be wise to rather stay within, no? If I am not mistaken, you got the US, Russia, China, and basically anybody else that get any chance, that are "power money hungry". So what the UK is to do? Watch Scotland, NI, Gibraltar siding with EU, and what's left (England + Wales) go practice Zen-Buddhism?

ALESI wrote:I think one thing that swayed me to leave was the simple fact that I did not believe that the EU can be 'reformed from inside' as the remain camp kept telling us. The EU is power hungry, and money hungry too. I can't see that changing without other countries holding their own referendums and threatening to leave. Also, I think if we had voted to remain, the EU would take that as tacit approval, and I didn't want to wait another 40 years to vote leave. This is why I could not vote to remain.

Remember that the people who are telling you the EU is power and money hungry are the ones who want power and money.

They do not like not being able to pass draconian laws because the EU will not allow it and they do not like not being able to spend money on their cronies because it goes to the EU, most of it to be returned, but earmarked for areas or projects outside central London and projects not allocated by the old boy network but by bids



BTW they used the day the referendum results were announced to slip a bill on privacy invasion through the Lords with no one noticing

What annoys me most from all the fallout since the referendum is what a shambles out government is in. Not from how anyone voted, but their reaction to the result. They've all seem yo have thrown the dummy out of the pram and have resorted to school yard politics!

Our 2 big parties are both is disarray and there are people quitting left, right and centre. These are people who were voted into a job by their constituents, their wages are paid by their constituents, yet they seem unable to actually represent their constituents wishes and show them immense disrespect and ungratefulness by quitting.

I voted to stay, but by a small majority of votes, the people have chosen to leave. It's time that all our MP's stopped crying about, put their heads down and get on with it! Our PM stood down cause he wasn't happy about and didn't think he could lead the county out of the EU - tough! He was voted into office to serve this country, with part of his election campaign centered around getting out of Europe. Now he said he doesn't think we should leave and we voted to leave, he doesn't want to do it and has left us with no suitable (in my opinion) candidates to take his place. And Labour are even worse, they are voting out a leader who was one of the only ones who told us the truth through the whole EU campaigns and didn't use scare tactics to sway us. It's not his fault so many people listened to the scare tactics and down right lies from the leave campaign without thinking it through (not all leave voters, but a lot of them). To be honest, I think it reflect well on Corbyn that he didn't stoop to the dishonesty of others and badly on the Labour party as a whole that they want him out for not campaigning hard enough.

So basically, we're stuck with a broken and split government who currently aren't doing what they were voting in or paid for, actually running this country!

I'm afraid I can't hold it against Cameron for resigning. Yes he was voted in to being PM, but this is no small issue. This is the biggest political change for a generation. He strongly disagrees with it and can't instigate it with a quick signature on a bit of paper. The negotiations will take months, probably years.

I would actually feel even more worried if he had stayed in charge because he would be responsible for a mammoth change to our country without actually support or wanting it. That can not be a good thing.

Stepping aside seems only logical. Yes I don't doubt he is in someway passing the buck to someone that wants the hardest political decisions since WW2, but if his heart is not in it, why should he be in change?

minchy wrote:What annoys me most from all the fallout since the referendum is what a shambles out government is in. Not from how anyone voted, but their reaction to the result. They've all seem yo have thrown the dummy out of the pram and have resorted to school yard politics!

Our 2 big parties are both is disarray and there are people quitting left, right and centre. These are people who were voted into a job by their constituents, their wages are paid by their constituents, yet they seem unable to actually represent their constituents wishes and show them immense disrespect and ungratefulness by quitting.

I voted to stay, but by a small majority of votes, the people have chosen to leave. It's time that all our MP's stopped crying about, put their heads down and get on with it! Our PM stood down cause he wasn't happy about and didn't think he could lead the county out of the EU - tough! He was voted into office to serve this country, with part of his election campaign centered around getting out of Europe. Now he said he doesn't think we should leave and we voted to leave, he doesn't want to do it and has left us with no suitable (in my opinion) candidates to take his place. And Labour are even worse, they are voting out a leader who was one of the only ones who told us the truth through the whole EU campaigns and didn't use scare tactics to sway us. It's not his fault so many people listened to the scare tactics and down right lies from the leave campaign without thinking it through (not all leave voters, but a lot of them). To be honest, I think it reflect well on Corbyn that he didn't stoop to the dishonesty of others and badly on the Labour party as a whole that they want him out for not campaigning hard enough.

So basically, we're stuck with a broken and split government who currently aren't doing what they were voting in or paid for, actually running this country!

Doesn’t it just highlight how unqualified, Ill prepared and ineffective our governments and wider political systems actually are though?

I know quite a few MPs personally, and quite honestly most of them are no better equipped to hold their position than your average reasonably well educated person on the street.

minchy wrote:What annoys me most from all the fallout since the referendum is what a shambles out government is in. Not from how anyone voted, but their reaction to the result. They've all seem yo have thrown the dummy out of the pram and have resorted to school yard politics!

Our 2 big parties are both is disarray and there are people quitting left, right and centre. These are people who were voted into a job by their constituents, their wages are paid by their constituents, yet they seem unable to actually represent their constituents wishes and show them immense disrespect and ungratefulness by quitting.

I voted to stay, but by a small majority of votes, the people have chosen to leave. It's time that all our MP's stopped crying about, put their heads down and get on with it! Our PM stood down cause he wasn't happy about and didn't think he could lead the county out of the EU - tough! He was voted into office to serve this country, with part of his election campaign centered around getting out of Europe. Now he said he doesn't think we should leave and we voted to leave, he doesn't want to do it and has left us with no suitable (in my opinion) candidates to take his place. And Labour are even worse, they are voting out a leader who was one of the only ones who told us the truth through the whole EU campaigns and didn't use scare tactics to sway us. It's not his fault so many people listened to the scare tactics and down right lies from the leave campaign without thinking it through (not all leave voters, but a lot of them). To be honest, I think it reflect well on Corbyn that he didn't stoop to the dishonesty of others and badly on the Labour party as a whole that they want him out for not campaigning hard enough.

So basically, we're stuck with a broken and split government who currently aren't doing what they were voting in or paid for, actually running this country!

I believe there was never any intention of exit. It was to rearrange the chairs in the conservative party by creating a divide to push some faction to each side.

I think the result to go was such a stunner that they just plain had not even considered it. I dont know what odds the bookies were giving but I personally would have given 50/1 and I am not as out of touch as the government was.

This jumped up and bit them when they were looking the other way and splitting their own party themselves.

moby wrote:

minchy wrote:What annoys me most from all the fallout since the referendum is what a shambles out government is in. Not from how anyone voted, but their reaction to the result. They've all seem yo have thrown the dummy out of the pram and have resorted to school yard politics!

Our 2 big parties are both is disarray and there are people quitting left, right and centre. These are people who were voted into a job by their constituents, their wages are paid by their constituents, yet they seem unable to actually represent their constituents wishes and show them immense disrespect and ungratefulness by quitting.

I voted to stay, but by a small majority of votes, the people have chosen to leave. It's time that all our MP's stopped crying about, put their heads down and get on with it! Our PM stood down cause he wasn't happy about and didn't think he could lead the county out of the EU - tough! He was voted into office to serve this country, with part of his election campaign centered around getting out of Europe. Now he said he doesn't think we should leave and we voted to leave, he doesn't want to do it and has left us with no suitable (in my opinion) candidates to take his place. And Labour are even worse, they are voting out a leader who was one of the only ones who told us the truth through the whole EU campaigns and didn't use scare tactics to sway us. It's not his fault so many people listened to the scare tactics and down right lies from the leave campaign without thinking it through (not all leave voters, but a lot of them). To be honest, I think it reflect well on Corbyn that he didn't stoop to the dishonesty of others and badly on the Labour party as a whole that they want him out for not campaigning hard enough.

So basically, we're stuck with a broken and split government who currently aren't doing what they were voting in or paid for, actually running this country!

I believe there was never any intention of exit. It was to rearrange the chairs in the conservative party by creating a divide to push some faction to each side.

I think the result to go was such a stunner that they just plain had not even considered it. I dont know what odds the bookies were giving but I personally would have given 50/1 and I am not as out of touch as the government was.

This jumped up and bit them when they were looking the other way and splitting their own party themselves.

Could I refer you to the answers I gave some moments ago (ahem!), neither the MPs nor ‘the people’ are properly qualified to make such decisions. Nevertheless we somehow trust the MPs to do so? We need to urgently change the system rather than bleat about how wrong we were for trusting in those with the same shortcomings as us!!

Biffa wrote:

moby wrote:

minchy wrote:What annoys me most from all the fallout since the referendum is what a shambles out government is in. Not from how anyone voted, but their reaction to the result. They've all seem yo have thrown the dummy out of the pram and have resorted to school yard politics!

Our 2 big parties are both is disarray and there are people quitting left, right and centre. These are people who were voted into a job by their constituents, their wages are paid by their constituents, yet they seem unable to actually represent their constituents wishes and show them immense disrespect and ungratefulness by quitting.

I voted to stay, but by a small majority of votes, the people have chosen to leave. It's time that all our MP's stopped crying about, put their heads down and get on with it! Our PM stood down cause he wasn't happy about and didn't think he could lead the county out of the EU - tough! He was voted into office to serve this country, with part of his election campaign centered around getting out of Europe. Now he said he doesn't think we should leave and we voted to leave, he doesn't want to do it and has left us with no suitable (in my opinion) candidates to take his place. And Labour are even worse, they are voting out a leader who was one of the only ones who told us the truth through the whole EU campaigns and didn't use scare tactics to sway us. It's not his fault so many people listened to the scare tactics and down right lies from the leave campaign without thinking it through (not all leave voters, but a lot of them). To be honest, I think it reflect well on Corbyn that he didn't stoop to the dishonesty of others and badly on the Labour party as a whole that they want him out for not campaigning hard enough.

So basically, we're stuck with a broken and split government who currently aren't doing what they were voting in or paid for, actually running this country!

I believe there was never any intention of exit. It was to rearrange the chairs in the conservative party by creating a divide to push some faction to each side.

I think the result to go was such a stunner that they just plain had not even considered it. I dont know what odds the bookies were giving but I personally would have given 50/1 and I am not as out of touch as the government was.

This jumped up and bit them when they were looking the other way and splitting their own party themselves.

Could I refer you to the answers I gave some moments ago (ahem!), neither the MPs nor ‘the people’ are properly qualified to make such decisions. Nevertheless we somehow trust the MPs to do so? We need to urgently change the system rather than bleat about how wrong we were for trusting in those with the same shortcomings as us!!

I agree with the feeling of what you are saying, but on another level the PM going was probably the best possible thing that could have happened. It means that instead of starting proceedings to post Art 50 the following week, they (we?) now know there is a period of a couple of months to have a sensible look at things before throwing the bathwater out with the baby still in it.

It has allowed some of the heat to go out of the argument and also allowed some people to look at the actual facts and others to withdraw what they presented as facts and maybe actually discuss things instead of shouting slogans across the street. Right now, I suspect there would not bee too much backlash if the government said, "give us a few months so sort our team out, our old guard has gone" and most people would not want an inexperienced team to be pushed in before they are ready. Had the PM said, Right, here we go then, many would have expected it to be all over by Xmas.

On a Personal note, I still hold hope that it will not go through (in the expected form). there are a few things happening in Europe and perhaps an adjustment of the whole block would be a better option.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbFhlfnJep0

Good reading.
(and it takes an Irish)

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/eu ... -1.2707398

ALESI wrote:I think one thing that swayed me to leave was the simple fact that I did not believe that the EU can be 'reformed from inside' as the remain camp kept telling us. The EU is power hungry, and money hungry too. I can't see that changing without other countries holding their own referendums and threatening to leave. Also, I think if we had voted to remain, the EU would take that as tacit approval, and I didn't want to wait another 40 years to vote leave. This is why I could not vote to remain.

You, and every other person who voted leave, voted for the UK to terminate its' [full] membership of the EU, you didn't vote on what comes next, and there is a high probability you, and most of the people who voted to leave, are not going to be at all happy with the eventual outcome.

The vote wasn't about reducing immigration, saving the NHS, regaining full sovereignty, saving tax payer's money, rediscovering our national identity, or any of the other reasons given for voting to leave. The vote was: "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?". What comes next is entirely in the hands of the clowns we voted into power last year - unless of course we're given the opportunity of a second vote, once we know what we're actually voting for...

Curious thing for me with all the talk of loss of control, sovereignty etc is the lack of mention from Leavers of other organisations such as NATO that we're still a part of.

medgar wrote:Curious thing for me with all the talk of loss of control, sovereignty etc is the lack of mention from Leavers of other organisations such as NATO that we're still a part of.

WTO, Council of Europe, ECHR, OSCE, IMF, The Commonwealth, Geneva convention, Boots points club rtc

Porsan wrote:

Prema wrote:

TypingChicane wrote: If Scotland get their second referendum on independence (or declare themselves independent), I think they will have to apply for EU membership just like any other country. But I’m sure they would get it within a relative short period of time.

I suppose, that is why Nicola Sturgeon is in Brussels now, to get some guarantees. The major problem with the first referendum was that by going independent, Scotland would be out of UK but also outside of EU due to the eventual veto vote from Spain. Spain's problem is Basque that would want to emulate Scotland's path, and by closing the door to EU such would be discouraged. But the situation now is very much different due to the UK exiting EU.

Nope, Spanish problem is Catalonia. While some Basque are deeply nationalistic from a cultural point of view, they have a favorable economic arrangement inside Spain (they are virtually economically independent, while being inside the UE thanks to the Spanish umbrella) which works very well for them. In fact, the catalan problem would be solved if the same status was granted to them, but that would be seen as unfair by the rest of Spain.

You are right that Spanish Government would probably be against the EU supporting Scottish independence. That said, we will have a new Government right now and one of their main problem is the Catalan question, I have the feeling that it's going to be some kind of arrangement, probably in the direction of the Basque solution, since both parties have reach a dead end which does not favor anyone.

(From a basque Spaniard who has lived in Catalonia and speaks fluent catalan)

Ha, but about Croatia who was in Yugoslavia - Estonia-Lithuania-Latvia former members of the USSR Spain agreed to let these countries in the EU.

Of course Spain will let a Independent Scotland in the EU, Spain are only acting tough to protect their own interests.

And what about Scotland's new friends Gibraltar who also voted to remain a member of the EU about will be Madrid's thinking on Gibraltar?

So Farage quits because he claims to have done his job of pulling the UK out of Europe.

The alternative view is that he's quit so he can take the glory from it if we end up looking back on this as a good thing, or he can blame the people left to pick up the pieces he and Johnson have left behind if it all goes pear-shaped.

Class Nige. Class!

Asphalt_World wrote:

ALESI wrote:I think one thing that swayed me to leave was the simple fact that I did not believe that the EU can be 'reformed from inside' as the remain camp kept telling us. The EU is power hungry, and money hungry too. I can't see that changing without other countries holding their own referendums and threatening to leave. Also, I think if we had voted to remain, the EU would take that as tacit approval, and I didn't want to wait another 40 years to vote leave. This is why I could not vote to remain.

I have to ask, before voting, were you happy with the plans detailed by the Brexit campaigners for how the country will leave the EU and the long term changes to the UK should we leave?

If you were, fair play, however, if like the rest of us you had no idea, and indeed still have no idea post the referendum how this will happen, then why the heck could you vote for something that you, nor anyone has a plan for?

Talking about saving money and stopping immigrants was the big thing, yet none of this has been shown to have even a hint of a guarantee.

The fact that more people come to our country from none EU countries than they do EU countries says it all really. Barking up the wrong tree comes to mind for those that spearheaded the campaign for leave.

I don't think I believed in Cameron's 'deal' either to be honest. Both campaigns were pretty hopeless and people seem to assume that by voting for staying in 'nothing will change'. I don't believe that, because the EU wants more money, more power etc etc. And if we'd voted in, what chance of another vote when those changes we don't like start happening. I heard on Radio 4 the Italian banks have a £360billion problem, yet another reason to leave if you ask me.

ALESI wrote:

Asphalt_World wrote:

ALESI wrote:I think one thing that swayed me to leave was the simple fact that I did not believe that the EU can be 'reformed from inside' as the remain camp kept telling us. The EU is power hungry, and money hungry too. I can't see that changing without other countries holding their own referendums and threatening to leave. Also, I think if we had voted to remain, the EU would take that as tacit approval, and I didn't want to wait another 40 years to vote leave. This is why I could not vote to remain.

I have to ask, before voting, were you happy with the plans detailed by the Brexit campaigners for how the country will leave the EU and the long term changes to the UK should we leave?

If you were, fair play, however, if like the rest of us you had no idea, and indeed still have no idea post the referendum how this will happen, then why the heck could you vote for something that you, nor anyone has a plan for?

Talking about saving money and stopping immigrants was the big thing, yet none of this has been shown to have even a hint of a guarantee.

The fact that more people come to our country from none EU countries than they do EU countries says it all really. Barking up the wrong tree comes to mind for those that spearheaded the campaign for leave.

I don't think I believed in Cameron's 'deal' either to be honest. Both campaigns were pretty hopeless and people seem to assume that by voting for staying in 'nothing will change'. I don't believe that, because the EU wants more money, more power etc etc. And if we'd voted in, what chance of another vote when those changes we don't like start happening. I heard on Radio 4 the Italian banks have a £360billion problem, yet another reason to leave if you ask me.

The UK has a national debt of over a trillion, £360billion would be nice. Have a look at this. (Tried to embed the clock but can not)

http://www.nationaldebtclock.co.uk/

So it looks like all major players on both sides have now slinked out leaving the mess for someone else to clean up? I knew politicians were full of it but this is a whole new level.

Does anyone on the Leave side of the debate still believe this was the right decision, or at least the right way to go about something like this?

This thing with Farage comes as a strong illustration of Brexit being but a fixed idea disconected from the hard reality. So, the guy has had this personal obsession for 20 years to see GB quit EU. And now when it came out to its fulfillment, there is no more meaning to it anymore. All fun gone. So walk away, look for some other "mission" in life so to make yourself feel like doing something meaningful again.

I notice he is still going to be an MEP and therefore take his €84,000 taxpayer funded salary + expenses to not actually turn up and vote in the Parliament though.

Hero of the working classes that man.

chetan_rao wrote:So it looks like all major players on both sides have now slinked out leaving the mess for someone else to clean up? I knew politicians were full of it but this is a whole new level.

Does anyone on the Leave side of the debate still believe this was the right decision, or at least the right way to go about something like this?

Of course it wasn't done the right way, but part of the problem was that the politicians wouldn't give us a vote for years, and then it was rushed in when they felt confident they could win it and everything could go back to normal. I don't know the answer to that, because on the one hand you can't really have votes every five years because of the uncertainty it causes and on the other, how often is often enough?
Is it something the public should even have voted on? A lot of people seem to think not.
As usual with politics we're getting totally conflicting stories, on the same day I've heard that America are clamouring for a deal with us AND that we will be at the back of the queue for a deal.
And then that Angela woman is saying she will guarantee that all EU citizens currently living here can stay. Well that's a foolish position to take, given that she doesn't know if Spain will be chucking our pensioners out isn't it? Shows a distinct lack of nous if you ask me, a bit like Cameron telling the EU he would definitely win the referendum and he would definitely support Remain BEFORE going to broker a deal. I mean come on Dave, what where you thinking. We'd have been better off sending any professional 'buyer' to talk to them.
Plus when is the cut off for 'currently living in the UK', is it now? Is it before the referendum or is it in three years time when we actually trigger A50, if we ever do. I mean someone should talk to these politicians and recommend they consider their words a bit more carefully, don't you think.
The other thing is, these referendums only work one way, like the Scottish independence referendum. If they vote out next time that will be the end of it, there won't be another one to vote back in will there? So where does that leave the people who voted Remain in the UK? Up the creek I'd say.
As for was it the right decision, in the short term no, probably not. But long term I'd rather be ruled by a power mad, greedy politician I can elect, rather than one I can't. Indeed Junker is coming under pressure to resign, but he's seemingly impervious. There's no system for removing an EU official. And that is the problem with the EU in a nutshell.

ALESI wrote:

Asphalt_World wrote:

ALESI wrote:I think one thing that swayed me to leave was the simple fact that I did not believe that the EU can be 'reformed from inside' as the remain camp kept telling us. The EU is power hungry, and money hungry too. I can't see that changing without other countries holding their own referendums and threatening to leave. Also, I think if we had voted to remain, the EU would take that as tacit approval, and I didn't want to wait another 40 years to vote leave. This is why I could not vote to remain.

I have to ask, before voting, were you happy with the plans detailed by the Brexit campaigners for how the country will leave the EU and the long term changes to the UK should we leave?

If you were, fair play, however, if like the rest of us you had no idea, and indeed still have no idea post the referendum how this will happen, then why the heck could you vote for something that you, nor anyone has a plan for?

Talking about saving money and stopping immigrants was the big thing, yet none of this has been shown to have even a hint of a guarantee.

The fact that more people come to our country from none EU countries than they do EU countries says it all really. Barking up the wrong tree comes to mind for those that spearheaded the campaign for leave.

I don't think I believed in Cameron's 'deal' either to be honest. Both campaigns were pretty hopeless and people seem to assume that by voting for staying in 'nothing will change'. I don't believe that, because the EU wants more money, more power etc etc. And if we'd voted in, what chance of another vote when those changes we don't like start happening. I heard on Radio 4 the Italian banks have a £360billion problem, yet another reason to leave if you ask me.

I understand why peoples' perception of the EU is so negative, we've been fed a diet of negative and biased anti-EU stories for years.
However, despite all its' failings, the realities of the EU do not for the most part live up to the hype.
For example:
6% of the EU budget is spent on administration and 94% is invested in member countries.
Admin costs, including salaries, pensions, buildings, infrastructure, expenses, European schools (?) is €8.95 Billion.
55,000 people are employed by the EU - 1 for every 9,454 EU citizens.

The UK Civil Service employs 439,323 - 1 for every 148 citizens, including temporary migrants.
The annual salaries bill, just salaries, for the UK Civil Service is £11.13 Billion
Approximate 20% (1 in 5) of the UK workforce are employed by the public sector.


In terms of the EU exceeding its' mandate, if you have specific examples of ways in which the EU is exceeding its' powers, then at the very least we should all complain to our MEPs and directly petition the EU.

Extracts from Lisbon Treaty.

Article 1
By this Treaty, the HIGH CONTRACTING PARTIES establish among themselves a EUROPEAN UNION, hereinafter called ‘the Union’, on which the Member States confer competences to attain objectives they have in common.
This Treaty marks a new stage in the process of creating an ever closer Union** among the peoples of Europe, in which decisions are taken as openly as possible and as closely as possible to the citizen...
(**UK opted out of closer union)

Article 5
1. The limits of Union competences are governed by the principle of conferral. The use of Union competences is governed by the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality.

2. Under the principle of conferral, the Union shall act only within the limits of the competences conferred upon it by the Member States in the Treaties to attain the objectives set out therein. Competences not conferred upon the Union in the Treaties remain with the Member States.

3. Under the principle of subsidiarity, in areas which do not fall within its exclusive competence, the Union shall act only if and insofar as the objectives of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States, either at central level or at regional and local level, but can rather, by reason of the scale or effects of the proposed action, be better achieved at Union level. The institutions of the Union shall apply
the principle of subsidiarity as laid down in the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality. National Parliaments shall ensure compliance with that principle in accordance with the procedure set out in that Protocol.

4. Under the principle of proportionality, the content and form of Union action shall not exceed what is necessary to achieve the objectives of the Treaties. The institutions of the Union shall apply the principle of proportionality as laid down in the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality.

ALESI wrote:

chetan_rao wrote:So it looks like all major players on both sides have now slinked out leaving the mess for someone else to clean up? I knew politicians were full of it but this is a whole new level.

Does anyone on the Leave side of the debate still believe this was the right decision, or at least the right way to go about something like this?

Of course it wasn't done the right way, but part of the problem was that the politicians wouldn't give us a vote for years, and then it was rushed in when they felt confident they could win it and everything could go back to normal. I don't know the answer to that, because on the one hand you can't really have votes every five years because of the uncertainty it causes and on the other, how often is often enough?
Is it something the public should even have voted on? A lot of people seem to think not.
As usual with politics we're getting totally conflicting stories, on the same day I've heard that America are clamouring for a deal with us AND that we will be at the back of the queue for a deal.
And then that Angela woman is saying she will guarantee that all EU citizens currently living here can stay. Well that's a foolish position to take, given that she doesn't know if Spain will be chucking our pensioners out isn't it? Shows a distinct lack of nous if you ask me, a bit like Cameron telling the EU he would definitely win the referendum and he would definitely support Remain BEFORE going to broker a deal. I mean come on Dave, what where you thinking. We'd have been better off sending any professional 'buyer' to talk to them.
Plus when is the cut off for 'currently living in the UK', is it now? Is it before the referendum or is it in three years time when we actually trigger A50, if we ever do. I mean someone should talk to these politicians and recommend they consider their words a bit more carefully, don't you think.
The other thing is, these referendums only work one way, like the Scottish independence referendum. If they vote out next time that will be the end of it, there won't be another one to vote back in will there? So where does that leave the people who voted Remain in the UK? Up the creek I'd say.
As for was it the right decision, in the short term no, probably not. But long term I'd rather be ruled by a power mad, greedy politician I can elect, rather than one I can't. Indeed Junker is coming under pressure to resign, but he's seemingly impervious. There's no system for removing an EU official. And that is the problem with the EU in a nutshell.

You are not quoting Angela Merkel, so I may quote Michael Gove instead:
"EU citizens already lawfully resident in the United Kingdom must retain their right of residence."

But I do not think that he is actually giving the actual guarantees at this moment, just like I do not think that Angela Markel would do it. I can't find any exact wording from her, but I find Polish foreign minister, "we will aim to guarantee the rights citizens have acquired”. These are not actually giving the guarantees.

I have no doubt that all of them mean that they would work in that direction that to guarantee the rights to not only EU citizens to remain in UK, but likewise UK citizens to remain in EU. It is the matter of the future negotiations, and Merkel was clear that no such would take place before the Article 50 be activated. So I doubt greatly that she was already now to make a decisions such as giving the actual guarantees that she is not in position to do anyway.

As far as Spain, they would be the part of EU decision and they would not be acting separately outside of that. If EU agrees with GB on this issue, Spain will have to respect it just as any other member of EU.


And Scotland? Well, this would be a referendum on "leave of stay" with just a couple of years in between. And it would go for a substantially different case. In spite of this rather cheep rhetorics that Brexit was about gaining back the sovereignty, GB has been fully sovereign and independent country all this time. If you did not like the membership of the EU (that of course calls for some commonly shared regulations otherwise), all what you were required to get back "sovereignty" was to fill in the form Article 50, your PM signs it, and mail it to Brussels (and look, it is EU that is urging you to actually do it now, but your politicians are stalling it and nobody knows for how long). But in the case of Scotland, that would be actually the case - becoming a sovereign country on their own. To Scotts, it would go for the case of a secession from a sovereign country of GB.
(unlike EU that is not any sovereign country, to legally quit EU, all you need is but a bit of bureaucracy of activating the said exit Article)

Prema wrote:Good reading.
(and it takes an Irish)

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/eu ... -1.2707398

To those people who say things like 'Leavers are idiots who've never even seen an immigrant...' I would say this...

From 1986 to 2012 I worked in Corby, I didn't live there, I live near Leicester. In 2012 I changed my place of work to elsewhere, but a couple of years later I had to go back to Corby for something. Now I worked there for 26 years, but when I went back for that one day I went in the big Asda and it was honestly like being in another country. It brought home to me how some towns are more affected than others (because where I live it's nothing like that), and how the people who grew up in Corby have been inundated with a huge Polish contingent.
I don't have a problem with Polish people, most that I have come into contact with have been nice enough, we have a delivery driver who delivers to my work who is a lovely guy, but that doesn't change the fact that if you grow up somewhere and within the space of a couple of years your 'home' becomes 'different' because of an influx of foreign people (doesn't matter if they are Polish, French, or Norwegian) I can totally understand why people would resent that and feel angry that 'their' town is being overrun.
Especially when I hear that the ruling party of Poland got to power on a platform of anti-immigration. That blows my mind, who is migrating to Poland? Maybe they need migrants cos all their people left?
Maybe the remainers are the stupid ones who've never lived in a town that has seen such an influx.
After all the results show that pretty much every area in the whole of England voted leave, it wasn't just a few militants.

ALESI wrote:To those people who say things like 'Leavers are idiots who've never even seen an immigrant...' I would say this...

From 1986 to 2012 I worked in Corby, I didn't live there, I live near Leicester. In 2012 I changed my place of work to elsewhere, but a couple of years later I had to go back to Corby for something. Now I worked there for 26 years, but when I went back for that one day I went in the big Asda and it was honestly like being in another country. It brought home to me how some towns are more affected than others (because where I live it's nothing like that), and how the people who grew up in Corby have been inundated with a huge Polish contingent.
I don't have a problem with Polish people, most that I have come into contact with have been nice enough, we have a delivery driver who delivers to my work who is a lovely guy, but that doesn't change the fact that if you grow up somewhere and within the space of a couple of years your 'home' becomes 'different' because of an influx of foreign people (doesn't matter if they are Polish, French, or Norwegian) I can totally understand why people would resent that and feel angry that 'their' town is being overrun.
Especially when I hear that the ruling party of Poland got to power on a platform of anti-immigration. That blows my mind, who is migrating to Poland? Maybe they need migrants cos all their people left?
Maybe the remainers are the stupid ones who've never lived in a town that has seen such an influx.
After all the results show that pretty much every area in the whole of England voted leave, it wasn't just a few militants.

I think there is a lot of trying to protect an old way of life which doesn't exist.

I'm originally from a town with very little migrants (mostly because it was near Glasgow, and most migration will centre around the big city). I moved to Glasgow, I was back 6 years later and the whole place had changed. There were still no migrants. People from this town are exactly the type of reprobate who would shout about taking their country back. Small town thinking.

I was watching BBC Breakfast on the Sunday after the vote and an elderly person was asked why they voted Leave - "I remember how things used to be." What does that even mean? There's more of a lack of community, there's more selfishness, there's now ipads, I do my banking online. What did this person want to return to? I suspect she couldn't answer herself, and if she did we'd find it was f*ck all to do with the EU.

Ennis wrote:

ALESI wrote:To those people who say things like 'Leavers are idiots who've never even seen an immigrant...' I would say this...

From 1986 to 2012 I worked in Corby, I didn't live there, I live near Leicester. In 2012 I changed my place of work to elsewhere, but a couple of years later I had to go back to Corby for something. Now I worked there for 26 years, but when I went back for that one day I went in the big Asda and it was honestly like being in another country. It brought home to me how some towns are more affected than others (because where I live it's nothing like that), and how the people who grew up in Corby have been inundated with a huge Polish contingent.
I don't have a problem with Polish people, most that I have come into contact with have been nice enough, we have a delivery driver who delivers to my work who is a lovely guy, but that doesn't change the fact that if you grow up somewhere and within the space of a couple of years your 'home' becomes 'different' because of an influx of foreign people (doesn't matter if they are Polish, French, or Norwegian) I can totally understand why people would resent that and feel angry that 'their' town is being overrun.
Especially when I hear that the ruling party of Poland got to power on a platform of anti-immigration. That blows my mind, who is migrating to Poland? Maybe they need migrants cos all their people left?
Maybe the remainers are the stupid ones who've never lived in a town that has seen such an influx.
After all the results show that pretty much every area in the whole of England voted leave, it wasn't just a few militants.

I think there is a lot of trying to protect an old way of life which doesn't exist.

I'm originally from a town with very little migrants (mostly because it was near Glasgow, and most migration will centre around the big city). I moved to Glasgow, I was back 6 years later and the whole place had changed. There were still no migrants. People from this town are exactly the type of reprobate who would shout about taking their country back. Small town thinking.

I was watching BBC Breakfast on the Sunday after the vote and an elderly person was asked why they voted Leave - "I remember how things used to be." What does that even mean? There's more of a lack of community, there's more selfishness, there's now ipads, I do my banking online. What did this person want to return to? I suspect she couldn't answer herself, and if she did we'd find it was f*ck all to do with the EU.

I think a lot of remainers make a huge jump between 'I like the way my town is and I don't want it to change' and 'these people are backward looking, protectionist, racists...', and it's not just here is it. Other countries are seeing a rise in far Right politics because the politicians didn't listen to peoples concerns and let things go on and on unchecked, eventually people who don't feel listened to will find people who will listen, and by that time they've moved from unhappiness to anger.

ALESI wrote:To those people who say things like 'Leavers are idiots who've never even seen an immigrant...' I would say this...

From 1986 to 2012 I worked in Corby, I didn't live there, I live near Leicester. In 2012 I changed my place of work to elsewhere, but a couple of years later I had to go back to Corby for something. Now I worked there for 26 years, but when I went back for that one day I went in the big Asda and it was honestly like being in another country. It brought home to me how some towns are more affected than others (because where I live it's nothing like that), and how the people who grew up in Corby have been inundated with a huge Polish contingent.
I don't have a problem with Polish people, most that I have come into contact with have been nice enough, we have a delivery driver who delivers to my work who is a lovely guy, but that doesn't change the fact that if you grow up somewhere and within the space of a couple of years your 'home' becomes 'different' because of an influx of foreign people (doesn't matter if they are Polish, French, or Norwegian) I can totally understand why people would resent that and feel angry that 'their' town is being overrun.
Especially when I hear that the ruling party of Poland got to power on a platform of anti-immigration. That blows my mind, who is migrating to Poland? Maybe they need migrants cos all their people left?
Maybe the remainers are the stupid ones who've never lived in a town that has seen such an influx.
After all the results show that pretty much every area in the whole of England voted leave, it wasn't just a few militants.

I agree that immigration isn't handled in the best way.

I live in the Midlands about 30/40 minutes away from Birmingham, in a very rural area. Now where I live it's very white & English, barely any migrants/ethnic minorities at all. However I drive in and out of various areas of Birmingham/Wolverhampton etc. for work and one moment you can be in a very heavily English area and a minute later you'd be excused for thinking you had entered a different country.

I remember once driving down a high street in an area that had clearly had a large influx of middle eastern/Muslim (sorry to generalise) migrants. My initial thought was "how cool is this, it's likes tiny snippet of another country" but since then I have realised that having 'migrant-only' and 'English-only' areas is a big contributing factor in the division, xenophobia and racism that we see. No one is integrating with eachother and no cultural bridges are being crossed when everyone is segregated and divided. As a result it's so easy for bigoted propaganda to take hold as people have no reference point, when all they see from certain "news" outlets is "Muslim man does this", "migrant does this" and they have next to zero interaction with regular, everyday people from these minorities how are they supposed to know it's a load of rubbish? In my experience the most passionately bigoted are those who have had no interaction with those they take issue with, and that's a problem that needs fixing.

There needs to be a better system in place for ensuring areas are more "mixed", what that system could be I don't know, but I think it's important to avoid this segregation in order to tackle ignorance and bigotry.

Do you believe that because you have a good education you should make the decisions for those that haven't?

If the country doesn't connect with everyone don't expect everyone to think the same. Those with power and money have decided they do not need to be accountable to those that haven't. The human species has an innate instinct for fairness. Do not be surprised if anomalies occur as a result of the disconnect.

Cameron decided he wanted a referendum and that by stating doom and gloom would reign if anyone voted leave he would scare everyone into staying in the EU.

Biggest mistake was to make the referendum a one way ticket. We are where we are as a result of that arrogance/miscalculation. Time to go forward having learnt that lesson. Oh...and expect other countries residents to ask the same question of their leaders.

Black_Flag_11 wrote:

ALESI wrote:To those people who say things like 'Leavers are idiots who've never even seen an immigrant...' I would say this...

From 1986 to 2012 I worked in Corby, I didn't live there, I live near Leicester. In 2012 I changed my place of work to elsewhere, but a couple of years later I had to go back to Corby for something. Now I worked there for 26 years, but when I went back for that one day I went in the big Asda and it was honestly like being in another country. It brought home to me how some towns are more affected than others (because where I live it's nothing like that), and how the people who grew up in Corby have been inundated with a huge Polish contingent.
I don't have a problem with Polish people, most that I have come into contact with have been nice enough, we have a delivery driver who delivers to my work who is a lovely guy, but that doesn't change the fact that if you grow up somewhere and within the space of a couple of years your 'home' becomes 'different' because of an influx of foreign people (doesn't matter if they are Polish, French, or Norwegian) I can totally understand why people would resent that and feel angry that 'their' town is being overrun.
Especially when I hear that the ruling party of Poland got to power on a platform of anti-immigration. That blows my mind, who is migrating to Poland? Maybe they need migrants cos all their people left?
Maybe the remainers are the stupid ones who've never lived in a town that has seen such an influx.
After all the results show that pretty much every area in the whole of England voted leave, it wasn't just a few militants.

I agree that immigration isn't handled in the best way.

I live in the Midlands about 30/40 minutes away from Birmingham, in a very rural area. Now where I live it's very white & English, barely any migrants/ethnic minorities at all. However I drive in and out of various areas of Birmingham/Wolverhampton etc. for work and one moment you can be in a very heavily English area and a minute later you'd be excused for thinking you had entered a different country.

I remember once driving down a high street in an area that had clearly had a large influx of middle eastern/Muslim (sorry to generalise) migrants. My initial thought was "how cool is this, it's likes tiny snippet of another country" but since then I have realised that having 'migrant-only' and 'English-only' areas is a big contributing factor in the division, xenophobia and racism that we see. No one is integrating with eachother and no cultural bridges are being crossed when everyone is segregated and divided. As a result it's so easy for bigoted propaganda to take hold as people have no reference point, when all they see from certain "news" outlets is "Muslim man does this", "migrant does this" and they have next to zero interaction with regular, everyday people from these minorities how are they supposed to know it's a load of rubbish? In my experience the most passionately bigoted are those who have had no interaction with those they take issue with, and that's a problem that needs fixing.

There needs to be a better system in place for ensuring areas are more "mixed", what that system could be I don't know, but I think it's important to avoid this segregation in order to tackle ignorance and bigotry.

That is a massive part of the problem. But on the other hand I suppose it's natural for people to want to be with 'their own kind' whether migrants or indigenous people.

In other news, Cluedo have apparently replaced Mrs White with Dr Orchid (an Asian lady botanist). It's Political Correctness gone mad I tell ya. What next a black Miss Marple?

I find some irony in that the countries like UK that once took a pride in being "the empire on which the sun never sets", got these immigration issues and people are getting upset that some folks of other cultural background mixes in. Brits used to rule countries and regions on all the continents, and now some folks from around there find their way to live in UK.

Anyway, everything comes with a price. UK may go out of EU, close the borders and have the immigration regulated as per as need for GB. Good. But you won't have the free single market of EU, nor the same trade deals towards the third parties as the EU is capable to negotiate. And for the industrial export oriented economy like UK, that will leave an impact that would be felt.

Prema wrote:I find some irony in that the countries like UK that once took a pride in being "the empire on which the sun never sets", got these immigration issues and people are getting upset that some folks of other cultural background mixes in. Brits used to rule countries and regions on all the continents, and now some folks from around there find their way to live in UK.

Anyway, everything comes with a price. UK may go out of EU, close the borders and have the immigration regulated as per as need for GB. Good. But you won't have the free single market of EU, nor the same trade deals towards the third parties as the EU is capable to negotiate. And for the industrial export oriented economy like UK, that will leave an impact that would be felt.

As someone who agrees with free movement in principle, and at least as far as the UK is concerned doesn't see a negative impact in practice, I hope the EU stand firm on that.

Another irony, the UK people seam to be complaining most about the refugee situation at their doors. And it was indeed UK that strongly sided with the US' invasion on Iraq that saw hundreds of thousands of people be killed already then, place the country into ruins, destabilized the entire region, opened the space to ISIS, and eventually resulting in the present disastrous situation with millions of people desperately hoping to be able to live somewhere. The very two countries that took up to the war against Iraq, US and UK, are being the least hit by the refugee crisis and are apparently the most vocal about closing the borders. What they have to do with all of that, right? Let Germany and France, that were practically branded as traitors by Bush regime for their refusal to take part in the military aggression on Iraq, handle the problem. And some small nations like Lebanon that got over 1 mil refugees there (which is 1/4 to the country's population).

Prema wrote:Another irony, the UK people seam to be complaining most about the refugee situation at their doors. And it was indeed UK that strongly sided with the US' invasion on Iraq that saw hundreds of thousands of people be killed already then, place the country into ruins, destabilized the entire region, opened the space to ISIS, and eventually resulting in the present disastrous situation with millions of people desperately hoping to be able to live somewhere. The very two countries that took up to the war against Iraq, US and UK, are being the least hit by the refugee crisis and are apparently the most vocal about closing the borders. What they have to do with all of that, right? Let Germany and France, that were practically branded as traitors by Bush regime for their refusal to take part in the military aggression on Iraq, handle the problem. And some small nations like Lebanon that got over 1 mil refugees there (which is 1/4 to the country's population).

Out of the 60 Million or so Brits in the UK (and abroad) how many have you heard complaining? 1? 10? 100? 1,000? 1M?

The British press is not the British people, and they don't speak for the British people, they follow their own agenda.
MP's may pretend or even believe they speak for the British people, but as has been demonstrate recently, most of them have no idea what the British people think, want, or believe.

Opinions based on who shouts the loudest ignore the fact that the moderate majority are actually quite decent, tolerant people, who would welcome the opportunity to help those in need. But then the same can be said for people the world over - regardless of race, country, or religion.

Maybe also should mention that the UK's 'first past the post' electoral systems virtually guarantees the majority of voters never get the government they want, the last time a government received more than 50% of the vote was in 1931, so to say the UK government speaks for the people is also wrong - they speak for the minority who voted them in, and not for the country as a whole.

And 'we' think the EU is undemocratic!

Jimbox01 wrote:

Prema wrote:Another irony, the UK people seam to be complaining most about the refugee situation at their doors. And it was indeed UK that strongly sided with the US' invasion on Iraq that saw hundreds of thousands of people be killed already then, place the country into ruins, destabilized the entire region, opened the space to ISIS, and eventually resulting in the present disastrous situation with millions of people desperately hoping to be able to live somewhere. The very two countries that took up to the war against Iraq, US and UK, are being the least hit by the refugee crisis and are apparently the most vocal about closing the borders. What they have to do with all of that, right? Let Germany and France, that were practically branded as traitors by Bush regime for their refusal to take part in the military aggression on Iraq, handle the problem. And some small nations like Lebanon that got over 1 mil refugees there (which is 1/4 to the country's population).

Out of the 60 Million or so Brits in the UK (and abroad) how many have you heard complaining? 1? 10? 100? 1,000? 1M?

The British press is not the British people, and they don't speak for the British people, they follow their own agenda.
MP's may pretend or even believe they speak for the British people, but as has been demonstrate recently, most of them have no idea what the British people think, want, or believe.

Opinions based on who shouts the loudest ignore the fact that the moderate majority are actually quite decent, tolerant people, who would welcome the opportunity to help those in need. But then the same can be said for people the world over - regardless of race, country, or religion.

Immigration + refugee crisis has been one of the major legs for "out". I would say, perhaps by far the main one. It was not the British press that voted, but British people. I take this vote as the tantamount to "complain". The "getting back our country" slogan is but about that: stop the migrants/refugees flow. It is the same slogan as Trump's when he says that they must built the wall to stop Mexicans, claim the country back. It is what plays well with the folks.

Prema wrote:

Jimbox01 wrote:

Prema wrote:Another irony, the UK people seam to be complaining most about the refugee situation at their doors. And it was indeed UK that strongly sided with the US' invasion on Iraq that saw hundreds of thousands of people be killed already then, place the country into ruins, destabilized the entire region, opened the space to ISIS, and eventually resulting in the present disastrous situation with millions of people desperately hoping to be able to live somewhere. The very two countries that took up to the war against Iraq, US and UK, are being the least hit by the refugee crisis and are apparently the most vocal about closing the borders. What they have to do with all of that, right? Let Germany and France, that were practically branded as traitors by Bush regime for their refusal to take part in the military aggression on Iraq, handle the problem. And some small nations like Lebanon that got over 1 mil refugees there (which is 1/4 to the country's population).

Out of the 60 Million or so Brits in the UK (and abroad) how many have you heard complaining? 1? 10? 100? 1,000? 1M?

The British press is not the British people, and they don't speak for the British people, they follow their own agenda.
MP's may pretend or even believe they speak for the British people, but as has been demonstrate recently, most of them have no idea what the British people think, want, or believe.

Opinions based on who shouts the loudest ignore the fact that the moderate majority are actually quite decent, tolerant people, who would welcome the opportunity to help those in need. But then the same can be said for people the world over - regardless of race, country, or religion.

Immigration + refugee crisis has been one of the major legs for "out". I would say, perhaps by far the main one. It was not the British press that voted, but British people. I take this vote as the tantamount to "complain". The "getting back our country" slogan is but about that: stop the migrants/refugees flow. It is the same slogan as Trump's when he says that they must built the wall to stop Mexicans, claim the country back. It is what plays well with the folks.

As far as I'm aware, no one has published a breakdown of the reasons people gave for voting to leave, and while it may be a valid assumption, there's no actual proof immigration was the main reason.

Immigration was / is an issue for some people, but it was the media / Brexit campaigners who did their very best to turn it into the main issue. Some section of media have been running low, and not so low, anti immigration campaigns for years now, so it's hardly surprising the perception of the 'problem' far exceeds the reality - keep repeating the same lie long enough and people will eventually accept it as fact.

There was a 72% turnout for the referendum, and 52% voted leave, but that does not mean 100% of the leave voters did so because of immigration, and trying to portray an entire nation as xenophobic or racist, purely on the basis of the opinions of an unknown minority, is incredibly short sighted, overly simplistic, and not particularly helpful - but I'm sure that wasn't your intention, was it?

Jimbox01 wrote:

Prema wrote:

Jimbox01 wrote:

Prema wrote:Another irony, the UK people seam to be complaining most about the refugee situation at their doors. And it was indeed UK that strongly sided with the US' invasion on Iraq that saw hundreds of thousands of people be killed already then, place the country into ruins, destabilized the entire region, opened the space to ISIS, and eventually resulting in the present disastrous situation with millions of people desperately hoping to be able to live somewhere. The very two countries that took up to the war against Iraq, US and UK, are being the least hit by the refugee crisis and are apparently the most vocal about closing the borders. What they have to do with all of that, right? Let Germany and France, that were practically branded as traitors by Bush regime for their refusal to take part in the military aggression on Iraq, handle the problem. And some small nations like Lebanon that got over 1 mil refugees there (which is 1/4 to the country's population).

Out of the 60 Million or so Brits in the UK (and abroad) how many have you heard complaining? 1? 10? 100? 1,000? 1M?

The British press is not the British people, and they don't speak for the British people, they follow their own agenda.
MP's may pretend or even believe they speak for the British people, but as has been demonstrate recently, most of them have no idea what the British people think, want, or believe.

Opinions based on who shouts the loudest ignore the fact that the moderate majority are actually quite decent, tolerant people, who would welcome the opportunity to help those in need. But then the same can be said for people the world over - regardless of race, country, or religion.

Immigration + refugee crisis has been one of the major legs for "out". I would say, perhaps by far the main one. It was not the British press that voted, but British people. I take this vote as the tantamount to "complain". The "getting back our country" slogan is but about that: stop the migrants/refugees flow. It is the same slogan as Trump's when he says that they must built the wall to stop Mexicans, claim the country back. It is what plays well with the folks.

As far as I'm aware, no one has published a breakdown of the reasons people gave for voting to leave, and while it may be a valid assumption, there's no actual proof immigration was the main reason.

Immigration was / is an issue for some people, but it was the media / Brexit campaigners who did their very best to turn it into the main issue. Some section of media have been running low, and not so low, anti immigration campaigns for years now, so it's hardly surprising the perception of the 'problem' far exceeds the reality - keep repeating the same lie long enough and people will eventually accept it as fact.

There was a 72% turnout for the referendum, and 52% voted leave, but that does not mean 100% of the leave voters did so because of immigration, and trying to portray an entire nation as xenophobic or racist, purely on the basis of the opinions of an unknown minority, is incredibly short sighted, overly simplistic, and not particularly helpful - but I'm sure that wasn't your intention, was it?

I did not present such as perhaps "proven facts" anyway. It is my strong opinion, based on whatever info I have been exposed to in whatever ways. Thus pointing out that there are no published proofs (yet, in any case), would be unnecessary.

You keep pointing out the media and Brexit campaigners as the ones making that the main issue. And I would really be shocked if such went unsold to people who opted for "out", that they perhaps figured out their own reasons on the strength of their own analytical power, beyond those ones that they had been fed with. As the matter of fact, in all those questionary taken after the Brexit that I have seen, the people asked for their reason behind their "out" vote, quoted that one. Look, you are aiming at me as someone being influenced by the media to think that way. What makes you think that I, who have been exposed to such by an insignificant fraction of what the British public had been exposed to, and not at all by any of those Brexit campaigners (I got to know then only now, after the result was announced) would be any more prone to it than all those folks? When I listen to some of them, they literally simply repeat those silly campaign slogans as "their" reason for voting out.

This is priceless!

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/wa ... spartanntp

Ken Clarke Ridicules Tory Candidates wrote:"I don't think the membership will vote for Gove. I remember being in a discussion about something to do with somewhere like Syria or Iraq and he was so wild that I remember exchanging looks with Liam Fox.

"We were exchanging views and Liam was raising eyebrows.

"I think with Michael as prime minister we'd go to war with at least three countries at once.

"He did us all a favour by getting rid of Boris. The idea of Boris as prime minister is ridiculous."

"I don't think either Andrea Leadsom or Boris Johnson actually are in favour of leaving the European Union.

Sir Malcolm: "Well I don't think they even cared very much either way."

Mr Clarke: "She is not one of the tiny band of lunatics who think we can have a sort of glorious economic future outside the single market.

"So long as she understands that she's not to deliver on some of the extremely stupid things she's been saying."

Can I just spoil the tone of things here for a moment?

1) I voted stay and am very much in the pro EU camp.
2) I have been vocal in my views and stating that the Leave camp are, lets say misguided.

BUT. I would (did) go to war to make sure those people had the right to vote whichever way they chose.

Do not mistake my disagreement with disallowing it.
Thank you

moby wrote:Can I just spoil the tone of things here for a moment?

1) I voted stay and am very much in the pro EU camp.
2) I have been vocal in my views and stating that the Leave camp are, lets say misguided.

BUT. I would (did) go to war to make sure those people had the right to vote whichever way they chose.

Do not mistake my disagreement with disallowing it.
Thank you

Yes, but people also have a responsibility towards other members of society, and misusing your on vote on something as important as this is extremely destructive. Deliberately using your vote out of spite, simply to get back at other sections of society (southerners) or the government, isn't exercising your democratic right, it's really just an act of vandalism.


Anyway, once we leave the EU there will be no automatic rights to anything, only what the government allows.

The UK Parliament is a ‘sovereign parliament’ – this means that the legislative body has ‘absolute sovereignty’, in other words it is supreme to all other government institutions, including any executive or judicial bodies.

This stems from there being no single written constitution, and contrasts with notions of judicial review, where, if the legislature passes a law that infringes on any of the basic rights that people enjoy under their (written) constitution, it is possible for the courts to overturn it.
In the UK, it is still Parliament (and not the judges) that decides what the law is. Judges interpret the law, but they do not make the law.

Rights and responsibilities as a British citizen
There are a wide range of rights within the constitution, covering all aspects of life from human rights, such as freedom of speech and freedom from torture, to more specific rights such as those relating to education and healthcare, and protection from discrimination.

It is important to remember that the human rights incorporated into UK law through the Human Rights Act are not all absolute. They may be limited or withdrawn under certain circumstances.

With these rights come responsibilities such as loyalty, which means not plotting against the state, abiding by the law as a responsible citizen, and certain civic duties such as voting, jury service and giving evidence in court.

I'd like to think our government (once it's free of the EU) would never take away our basic 'rights', but then I'd also have never imagined our government would allow the country to jump off a cliff - in the dark, with no parachute, and without knowing how far we'll fall or what's at the bottom.
Anything, however improbable, is possible now...