J Mysterio wrote: » Nonsense. Blair and Major are entitled to their opinion. If May hadn't made such a hames of the last few years, i'm sure they would be more than happy to keep schtum. The UK should listen to it's wizened elder statesmen. This is an existential crisis!British prime minister Theresa May has accused Tony Blair of “insulting” the British people and the office of prime minister by “undermining” Brexit talks with calls for a second referendum. The talks are over! The deal has been agreed and won't be renegotiated!
J Mysterio wrote: » Offering no deal on the ballot is playing Russian Roulette (pun not intended). The people - largely uniformed still - are seemingly so vexed and tired of the EU and Brexit, they are likely to vote 'no deal' to bring this to a conclusion (and finally destroy Britain).
correct horse battery staple wrote: » There has been 2 years of debate, even the most blinkered strictly come dancing watching airheads would have heard some of the arguments, if there's a no deal vote well then thats that imho
ancapailldorcha wrote: » Depends. Say you run it as a three-way FPTP referendum. What happens if Remain wins with 35% of the vote while No deal takes 34% with the deal taking 31%? I like the French-style option where you run Remain vs Leave and then another referendum of Deal or no Deal.
J Mysterio wrote: » There's a reason that May keeps on repeating 'the people just want me to get on with it'. It's because they do. They are tired of the process, tired of the EU and tired of people talking the UK down. In so many of the vox pops people still say they don't understand the complexities but that the UK 'can be great again'. Leave the EU and make the UK great again.
prawnsambo wrote: » Three way referendums are a spectacularly bad idea. Especially in the UK where the electoral system is so technically simple. FPTP wth single seat constituencies is about as simple as it gets. No deal as an option should be off the table and robustly debunked from on high. It staggers me that it is even being considered and the only reason for it, is that those who want to leave the EU most, have basically fallen back on it since they can't come up with an alternative that actually makes sense. And I think for a referendum to even happen, May has to go. She is the single biggest impediment to it because of her red lines and no deal is better than a bad deal rhetoric. She can't row back and she can't go forward, so she has to go.
J Mysterio wrote: » I agree with the first paragraph, not so much on the second. While May has been a disaster, who could replace her and agree a deal in the time alotted? Unbelievably, the other Tories are mostly worse then her when it comes to blinkered thinking and unreasonable demands. I see that it has to be May to conclude this, unless there is to be a GE, which of course isnt to be reccommended either. May has finally accepted that the deal is as good as it gets, which is something that probably hasnt got the attention it deserves. In Brussels, she had no more demands and only sought clarification. On the EU side, they are so frustrated, they could barely gather the energy or will to even offer that.
Peter Flynt wrote: » Anthracite wrote: » We have a choice of having higher corpo tax rates and fewer good jobs. Let's not pretend that this is a simple equation. It was the corporation tax cuts driven largely by the Progressive Democrats that have made Ireland a global tech hub. Germany has a CT rate of 32% and I doubt anyone would seriously argue that they have few "good jobs". The Irish are beholden to the foreigner.
Anthracite wrote: » We have a choice of having higher corpo tax rates and fewer good jobs. Let's not pretend that this is a simple equation. It was the corporation tax cuts driven largely by the Progressive Democrats that have made Ireland a global tech hub.
correct horse battery staple wrote: » Germany was building world's most advanced industrial economy while our predecessors were digging for potatoes. Ireland is beholden to our position on periphery.
J Mysterio wrote: » If they must.. May Deal VS Revoke Article 50. It cant be anything else. The Government would be grossly irresponsible to offer a 'No Deal' that could destroy Britian for generations. It must be May Deal referendum or not I feel. Some thoughts on this:* The EU wont renegotiate with this government. * May is now near unimpeachable for a year as Prime Minister following Tory confidence vote unless Labour call no confidence in PM * I suspect Labour won't call confidence in PM with Corbyn as leader as he knows his party would not enable him to deliver a hard Brexit (he wants the Tories to deliver and then be outcast). * Only circumstance were I see the EU agreeing to renegotiate is with a new UK government and so a GE would have to be called. * Were a GE to be considered, the UK would have to ask EU to extend A50 and thus risk accepting stipulations for that. There is no time to campaign on the issue, form a government and renegotiatie prior to Brexit Day. * I think an extension of A50 and a GE would make Brexit less likely to ever happen. So May Deal or Revoke A50, if they must have another referendum. But for gods sake, have a referendum commission and inform the people.
prawnsambo wrote: » That's about how I see his stance too. He doesn't want to be the one with the smoking gun at the murder scene, but he's happy to stand back and let the Tories pull the trigger so he can come riding in on his white charger to build his socialist utopia on the bones of the victims.
J Mysterio wrote: » Agreed. But how grossly irresponsible. Maybe is is Corbyn who needs ousting.
Capt'n Midnight wrote: » If either Leave or Remain get eliminated first then Deal wins because it's the least worst alternative for both of those. If Deal gets eliminated first then it could go either way. Which means Brexit is right back where it started of because they forget the rule of only asking a question if you already know the answer. The problems are that there has been no consensus building, and completely irrelevant stuff like the divorce bill and immigration and on-demand FTA's are still clouding the issue.Divorce Bill The economy is already down £26Bn a year and besides any shortfall could easily be made up by EU tariffs or other charges.Immigration May set a target of 100,000 , so did she A - shaft the UK economy so badly that nett migration from Poland falls to zero. B - allow more than 100,000 in from just China and India. She chose option C, do both
Shelga wrote: » Chuka Umunna in Andrew Marr saying he thinks the question on the ballot paper in a second vote should be: No Deal, or Remain. Odd but interesting position to take. Dangerous, in my opinion- there’s a real chance No Deal could win??
We have essentially sacrificed all ambition on services sectors in return for ending free movement, sold the latter as a boon (when amongst other things, it clearly diminishes the value of a UK passport), and presented the former as a regaining of sovereignty, when it guarantees a major loss of market access in much our largest export market.
J Mysterio wrote: » Bizarre suggestion from someone who should know better.
https://news.liverpool.ac.uk/2018/12/13/full-speech-sir-ivan-rogers-on-brexit/ There's Leavers who'd rather Remain than have this deal.
What a tedious, unimaginative little man, with zero faith in his country. The ONLY reason there may be some disruption under a WTO Brexit is that the unelected psychopaths in power in the EU are happy to inflict any misery on their own people for their own ideological ends.
Amazing how Canada and Australia can even survive outside the EU.
this is from the europhile coward who ran away, rather than do his job