Will Britain ever just piss off and get on with Brexit? -mod warning in OP (21/12)

knipex

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Thats the thing, the majority of Brits dont want amything from the EU, it is the political elites who are dragging their heals.

The majority of Brits including the Elites have no idea what they get from the EU.

They have no idea of the impact of loosing access to trade agreements, transport agreements etc currently agreed between EU members and the EU and other states. Its not just the EU markets they are loosing its all the markets they currently trade with due to the EU trade agreements.

All their regulatory, safety, environmental standards are all based on EU standards and agreements. Once Brexit happens these are gone..

Thats just the obvious stuff, its the non obvious stuff that going to bite everyone in the ass.

FrancieBrady

knipex wrote: »

No one said that the EU was perfect.



The EU cannot stop Brexit, they cannot delay Brexit, they cannot do anything about Brexit. Only the UK can request a delay, only the UK can stop the process.

EU officials are allowed to have opinions and to my knowledge are allowed to express them.

The so called "Divorce Bill" was agreed by the UK. Not imposed on them.

As was the deal...which only Britain can ratify so that everyone can proceed to the next stage.

We are all waiting...

Berserker

Dytalus wrote: »

Then they would be wrong.

Ireland: Votes no to the Nice Treaty.
EU: "Why did you vote no? We talked over this beforehand."
Ireland: "A lot of us have problems with X, Y, and Z. Please to be fixing them."
EU: "Okay. We've changed the treaty and have legally binding documents which address your concerns. Are you happy with the new treaty?"
Ireland: "Yes, thank you. You are a good friend, Europe."

The same happened with Lisbon as well. Neither Nice 2.0, nor Lisbon 2.0, were reruns of the same treaty.

I'm laughing. What percentage of voters knew what x,y and z were? They were told to vote again and come back with the correct response in the second referendum and they did exactly that. How good a friend were Europe when Ireland was in financial trouble?

Strumms

There will be a groundswell now of the right, who now that the party and high fives, and back slapping have all stopped, the reality and hangover is sinking in, it’s hanging over them the reality of what they voted for and how it will impact them for decades. Both from a social and economic point of view. The blame game will start...having CHOSEN to exit Europe they complain they didn’t get the exit they WANTED. Ohhh well.

Sleepy

At this point it's probably best to let Brexit happen. The idiots in favour of it are the very ones who'll suffer most from it and, tbh, at this stage they probably deserve the pain that's coming to them.

Once they've lost Scotland and Northern Ireland and suffered a decade of recession, they can apply to re-join the EU under far less favourable terms than they have now.

The alternative (a second referendum that votes to remain) would no doubt lead to civil war as the idiots line up behind Farage's ideology while he ****s off abroad.

dudara

ArchXStanton wrote: »

Another fella, toys out of the pram... Its a fairly straight forward simple question... What happened to the French and Dutch votes on an EU constitution?

ArchXStanton wrote: »

I'm sensing you're getting uncomfortable..

ArchXStanton wrote: »

Toys everywhere on this thread...

ArchXStanton wrote: »

And there we have it... Watch out for the flying rattler... Wahhh

ArchXStanton wrote: »

Pfft that's some cop out, has the cat got your tongue?

ArchXStanton wrote: »

Aye I see you're still pontificating on here after allthese years...I'd put money on it you'll throw your toys out of the pram in the next few posts

I'm well versed in how the EU operates, I was a no campaigner here during the Lisbon revote

You need to seriously up your standard of response. Otherwise I will assume that your repeated references to toys and prams is intended to inflame or troll other posters.

dudara

FrancieBrady

Berserker wrote: »

I'm laughing. What percentage of voters knew what x,y and z were? They were told to vote again and come back with the correct response in the second referendum and they did exactly that. How good a friend were Europe when Ireland was in financial trouble?

Can you link to where they were 'told' anything?

We had every right to come back the 2nd time with a No vote too btw. I suppose you have some sensationalist conspiracy theory about that as well.

ancapailldorcha

Sleepy wrote: »

At this point it's probably best to let Brexit happen. The idiots in favour of it are the very ones who'll suffer most from it and, tbh, at this stage they probably deserve the pain that's coming to them.

Once they've lost Scotland and Northern Ireland and suffered a decade of recession, they can apply to re-join the EU under far less favourable terms than they have now.

The alternative (a second referendum that votes to remain) would no doubt lead to civil war as the idiots line up behind Farage's ideology while he ****s off abroad.

It'll be the working classes that suffer most. Brexit is an attempt to foist more globalisation upon the UK's working classes, not less. Sure, the pensioners and oligarchs will be fine but it's the next generation who'll suffer most as they'll have their life chances decimated while losing the chance to live and work abroad. Then there's the millions of EU migrants living in the UK to consider including several Irish people.

The Schadenfreude is tempting, God knows it is but real people who didn't vote for this stupidity and often couldn't vote either way will suffer. If Brexit can't be stopped then I hope the Scots and Northern Irish can extricate themselves from this dead union which is slowly sinking.

source

Berserker wrote: »

I'm laughing. What percentage of voters knew what x,y and z were? They were told to vote again and come back with the correct response in the second referendum and they did exactly that. How good a friend were Europe when Ireland was in financial trouble?

Well I’d say a fair percentage knew what they were voting for.

The first Lisbon Treaty referendum failed marginally on a 53% turn out, 53.2% against 46.42% for. The second referendum, with a 59% turnout resulted in 67.13% in favour and 32.87% against, showing a clear majority.

I would say from those figures that the people knew exactly what they were voting for, and understood the changes in the text provided to have a swing of over 20% in the difference between the 2 votes….not an insignificant figure.

The Nice treaty was a similar affair with the initial turnout only being 34.79%, and the referendum being rejected by 53.87% to 46.13%. The second referendum saw the turnout jump to 49.17% with 62.89% voting yes and 37.11% voting no, again another clear majority from an initial marginal defeat.

Simply looking at the numbers involved in both votes shows that the narrative that the electorate didn’t understand what they were voting on is blatantly incorrect.

Now can we please drop the myths that have grown up surrounding these votes?

ArchXStanton

Berserker wrote: »

I'm laughing. What percentage of voters knew what x,y and z were? They were told to vote again and come back with the correct response in the second referendum and they did exactly that. How good a friend were Europe when Ireland was in financial trouble?

In the Words of Big JC... Jean Claude Juncker

"there can be no democratic choice against the European treaties"

"If it's a Yes, we will say 'on we go', and if it's a No we will say 'we continue'."

"We decide on something, leave it lying around and wait and see what happens. If no one kicks up a fuss, because most people don't understand what has been decided, we continue step by step until there is no turning back."

Sounds par for the course with the EU...

ArchXStanton

source wrote: »

Well I’d say a fair percentage knew what they were voting for.

The first Lisbon Treaty referendum failed marginally on a 53% turn out, 53.2% against 46.42% for. The second referendum, with a 59% turnout resulted in 67.13% in favour and 32.87% against, showing a clear majority.

I would say from those figures that the people knew exactly what they were voting for, and understood the changes in the text provided to have a swing of over 20% in the difference between the 2 votes….not an insignificant figure.

The Nice treaty was a similar affair with the initial turnout only being 34.79%, and the referendum being rejected by 53.87% to 46.13%. The second referendum saw the turnout jump to 49.17% with 62.89% voting yes and 37.11% voting no, again another clear majority from an initial marginal defeat.

Simply looking at the numbers involved in both votes shows that the narrative that the electorate didn’t understand what they were voting on is blatantly incorrect.

Now can we please drop the myths that have grown up surrounding these votes?

Fairly dubious democracy you got going on there..

https://m.imgur.com/gallery/bZnoegk

storker

Berserker wrote: »

I'm laughing. What percentage of voters knew what x,y and z were?

A hell of a higher percentage than knew what x, y and z were in the Brexit referendum.

dudara

ArchXStanton wrote: »

Fairly dubious democracy you got going on there..

https://m.imgur.com/gallery/bZnoegk

That image made me go do some research as I hadn’t been aware of the result of, say the the French referendum.

Following the French No result, there were various political changes, and Sarkozy was elected President in 2007. From Wikipedia ...

Amongst his pledges was a re-negotiation and ratification of a mini-treaty without a referendum. Eventually, the new version of the text, the Lisbon Treaty, was voted by the Parliament.

So to say that the results of the French referendum were “Ignored” is incorrect, and actually IMO shows the bias of the book’s author.

kunst nugget

dudara wrote: »

That image made me go do some research as I hadn’t been aware of the result of, say the the French referendum.

Following the French No result, there were various political changes, and Sarkozy was elected President in 2007. From Wikipedia ...

So to say that the results of the French referendum were “Ignored” is incorrect, and actually IMO shows the bias of the book’s author.

The Constitution was dropped after the French and Dutch referendums and they concentrated on amending existing treaties.

dudara

^Thanks, am actually learning a good bit through this discussion.

ArchXStanton

dudara wrote: »

That image made me go do some research as I hadn’t been aware of the result of, say the the French referendum.

Following the French No result, there were various political changes, and Sarkozy was elected President in 2007. From Wikipedia ...



So to say that the results of the French referendum were “Ignored” is incorrect, and actually IMO shows the bias of the book’s author.

Subsequent referendums in 5 other countries were cancelled when they seen the French and Dutch results, it came back as the Lisbon treaty were it was ratified in most countries(apart from Ireland were we got to vote on it.. And we all know what happened there) the EU turned back to Monnet style behind the scenes further integration... You'll notice a trend with the EU from that image, anything that goes against it is either ignored or made to vote again

What's laughable is it masquerades as some world leader in democracy and even has the neck to lecture others about it.

I can remember quite well how they were frothing at the mouth over Mugabe and his one man candidate election... Meanwhile back in Ireland the plebs had to vote again on Lisbon..

Dytalus

Dytalus wrote: »

Then they would be wrong.

Ireland: Votes no to the Nice Treaty.
EU: "Why did you vote no? We talked over this beforehand."
Ireland: "A lot of us have problems with X, Y, and Z. Please to be fixing them."
EU: "Okay. We've changed the treaty and have legally binding documents which address your concerns. Are you happy with the new treaty?"
Ireland: "Yes, thank you. You are a good friend, Europe."

The same happened with Lisbon as well. Neither Nice 2.0, nor Lisbon 2.0, were reruns of the same treaty.

Actually Lisbonwent more like this.

Ireland; we voted no to Lisbon becaus we don’t want abortions and we don’t want to be forced to join a European army.

Eu: what the **** are you on about? That has nothing to do with the Lisbon treaty.

Ireland: oh, ok. So we don’t look stupid can we change it and vote again?

Eu: ok, we’ll add some pointless words in there and you tell everyone it will bring jobs and prosperity.

Ireland: done

source

ArchXStanton wrote: »

Fairly dubious democracy you got going on there..

https://m.imgur.com/gallery/bZnoegk

Nothing dubious about it, just simple facts and figures.

FrancieBrady

Aegir wrote: »

Actually Lisbonwent more like this.

Ireland; we voted no to Lisbon becaus we don’t want abortions and we don’t want to be forced to join a European army.

Eu: what the **** are you on about? That has nothing to do with the Lisbon treaty.

Ireland: oh, ok. So we don’t look stupid can we change it and vote again?

Eu: ok, we’ll add some pointless words in there and you tell everyone it will bring jobs and prosperity.

Ireland: done

Your absolutely arrogant snivelling derision about this country fully exposed in your contributions to this thread.

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Your absolutely arrogant snivelling derision about this country fully exposed in your contributions to this thread.

Maybe the people who voted against Lisbon were thick *****?

What do you think?

ArchXStanton

source wrote: »

Nothing dubious about it, just simple facts and figures.

You might have a point if every referendum was run twice... Just to make sure like, or what's next a best of 3? How about digging up referendums from 20 years ago

Funny how these revotes only happen when the EU doesn't get the desired result... When they do then it's case closed, never to be revisited, its dubious democracy and well they know it, I'm glad it's coming back to bite them, will we ever forget Sarkozy "the Irish must vote again!". That's some neck in fairness and was a sign of things to come..

FrancieBrady

ArchXStanton wrote: »

You might have a point if every referendum was run twice... Just to make sure like, or what's next a best of 3? How about digging up referendums from 20 years ago

Funny how these revotes only happen when the EU doesn't get the desired result... When they do then it's case closed, never to be revisited, its dubious democracy and well they know it, I'm glad it's coming back to bite them, will we ever forget Sarkozy "the Irish must vote again!". That's some neck in fairness and was a sign of things to come..

Sorry...run this by me again....what is undemocratic about having a vote?

FrancieBrady

Aegir wrote: »

Maybe the people who voted against Lisbon were thick *****?

What do you think?

What?


Could you ever deal with the reality about what happened and not some invented fiction from a perpetually anti Irish fantasist?

ArchXStanton

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Can you link to where they were 'told' anything?

We had every right to come back the 2nd time with a No vote too btw. I suppose you have some sensationalist conspiracy theory about that as well.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland-will-have-to-vote-again-on-lisbon-says-sarkozy-1.945091%3fmode=amp

storker

ArchXStanton wrote: »

Subsequent referendums in 5 other countries were cancelled when they

I can remember quite well how they were frothing at the mouth over Mugabe and his one man candidate election... Meanwhile back in Ireland the plebs had to vote again on Lisbon..

I hope you find a matching sense of perspective donor soon; there's a world of difference between re-running an referendum and rigging an election so it has a single candidate. For one thing, in the EU referendums people always had the choice of voting "No" again. It's not that difficult, just walk in the polling station as per normal and put the tick in a different box. Hardly fraught with difficulty, is it? And if asked to vote again, just say no again. But we voted yes, because the second time around we had a better understanding of what we were voting for, which is exactly the reason why the Brexiteers are so firmly set against a second referendum.

It's back to the old question of "when the the facts change, I change my mind, what do you do?" Of course, when if comes to Brexiteers, we know what the answer to that is.

ArchXStanton

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Sorry...run this by me again....what is undemocratic about having a vote?

Nothing as long as its respected, like Cowen told us it would be on the first vote.... Only to be summoned to the EU Council were he looked like a whipped spaniel..

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What?


Could you ever deal with the reality about what happened and not some invented fiction from a perpetually anti Irish fantasist?

Aah poor Francie.

He can give it, but goes crying to mummy when the truth comes back and hits him right between the eyes.

What did I post that was wrong? The Irish were told to vote against Lisbon because it would bring in abortion and force Ireland to join an Eu army.

Those were simple lies, mainly told by Sinn Fein.

I accept that most Sinn Fein followers are thick *****, but would you agree that all the people who voted against Lisbon were thick *****, simpletons or just useful idiots?

FrancieBrady

ArchXStanton wrote: »

Nothing as long as its respected, like Cowen told us it would be on the first vote.... Only to be summoned to the EU Council were he looked like a whipped spaniel..

That is your perception.
What I seen was an EU that wanted to advance, we had concerns which were addressed and we voted again in a referendum where we could have easily voted against.

Unless you have evidence of people being led to polling booths at gunpoint I don't see how that is not democracy.

ArchXStanton

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That is your perception.
What I seen was an EU that wanted to advance, we had concerns which were addressed and we voted again in a referendum where we could have easily voted against.

Unless you have evidence of people being led to polling booths at gunpoint I don't see how that is not democracy.

Aye the "concessions" that were tacked on and used as an excuse for a revote while the bulk of the treaty remained... "vote yes for jobs!" the proverbial golden carrot on a stick to try sway voters... Its actually a bit sick

FrancieBrady

Aegir wrote: »

Aah poor Francie.

He can give it, but goes crying to mummy when the truth comes back and hits him right between the eyes.

What did I post that was wrong? The Irish were told to vote against Lisbon because it would bring in abortion and force Ireland to join an Eu army.

Those were simple lies, mainly told by Sinn Fein.

I accept that most Sinn Fein followers are thick *****, but would you agree that all the people who voted against Lisbon were thick *****, simpletons or just useful idiots?

Your usual anti Irish bile again.

The concerns that were addressed in the second Lisbon vote were:

1.The possibility that Ireland would lose its member in the European
Commission
2. Its military neutrality,
4. Control over taxation
5. Concerns about ethical and social issues.

All legitimate concerns for anybody to have.

Nobody 'told' anybody anything. Different political parties campaigned on issues as they do in every election under the sun.