nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

ancapailldorcha

This is the twelfth incarnation of our Brexit discussion thread.

I appreciate that the end of Brexit is or may be in sight (insofar as one can be certain) but please bear the following in mind before posting:

Insults directed at popular figures are not acceptable in this forum
Please do not post memes, videos or comedy links here
Please do not be uncivil to other posters
Please use the report function to alert the mods when necessary
Discussion of Sinn Féin's longstanding policy of abstention from Westminster is not suitable for this thread. Posts on this subject may be deleted

Previous thread is here:

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058016732

United Ireland thread:

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058014553

Scottish Independence thread:

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058023269

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

CelticRambler

Deleted User wrote: »

As for what Remainers have done to create the mess in the UK, how about using every means possible to defy the will of the British people and the 2016 referendum result? If it wasn't for all their parliamentary shenanigans, the UK would have exited the EU by now.

Reminder: Parliament approved Johnson's WA and were about to move it to a Second Reading when he had a hissy fit and withdrew it, making it impossible to ratify.

That'd be the same Johnson that you idolise, so any delay to the current Brexit timetable is 100% his fault.

[Deleted User]

CelticRambler wrote: »

Reminder: Parliament approved Johnson's WA and were about to move it to a Second Reading when he had a hissy fit and withdrew it, making it impossible to ratify.

That'd be the same Johnson that you idolise, so any delay to the current Brexit timetable is 100% his fault.

From a parliament who signed the Benn Act in case Johnson came back with No Deal.

Johnson came back with a Deal.

Yet, an extension was still sought by parliament.

Absolutely disgraceful behavior.

ancapailldorcha

Deleted User wrote: »

From a parliament who signed the Benn Act in case Johnson came back with No Deal.

Johnson came back with a Deal.

Yet, an extension was still sought by parliament.

Absolutely disgraceful behavior.

Why did the voters of this country vote for such a Parliament do you think?

[Deleted User]

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Why did the voters of this country vote for such a Parliament do you think?

The 2017 Labour Manifesto claimed that a vote for Labour was a vote to "implement and respect the referendum result".

A blatant electoral lie.

I believe the Liberal Democrats at the time stated the same "respect".

Add in Theresa May to the pot, and political oblivion ensues.

This election offers far more clarity and I suspect will, for want of a better phrase, Get Brexit Done.

ancapailldorcha

Deleted User wrote: »

The 2017 Labour Manifesto claimed that a vote for Labour was a vote to "implement and respect the referendum result".

A blatant electoral lie.

I believe the Liberal Democrats at the time stated the same "respect".

Add in Theresa May to the pot, and political oblivion ensues.

This election offers far more clarity and I suspect will, for want of a better phrase, Get Brexit Done.

So you're conceding that it's possible to mislead the public then, as they were in 2016.

[Deleted User]

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

So you're conceding that it's possible to mislead the public then, as they were in 2016.

Labour misled the public.

They're almost doing the same thing now; almost appearing to be democratic with a "second referendum", with that referendum being a choice of Remain versus Remain without Rights.

In other words, it's a rigged referendum choice and Labour Leave voters are seething with rage at the complete and abject betrayal of their 2017 votes.

CelticRambler

Deleted User wrote: »

Osbourne and Co. claimed that a "mere vote to Leave" would cause untold economic catastrophe on a Biblical scale.

If you study Biblical or other catastrophes immortalised in any civilisation's mythology, you will realise that what happens in "the blink of an eye" in the modern-day account generally unfolded over a much longer period (the exception being catastrophic volcanic eruptions and tsunamis and the like).

We did see an immediate reaction to the referendum: the pound lost 10-15% of its value, and it hasn't regained it since. If you don't think that's had an serious effect on people living off a GBP income in the Eurozone, or businesses selling GBP-denominated products into the Eurozone, then you need to get out more.

That's fact, by the way - you can look it up on any currency exchange website. You'll see a similar fall against the US dollar - which is one reason why GB assets (e.g. Gatwick Airport, British Steel) are being bought by foreign companies.

Take back control, eh?

ancapailldorcha

Deleted User wrote: »

Labour misled the public.

They're almost doing the same thing now; almost appearing to be democratic with a "second referendum", with that referendum being a choice of Remain versus Remain without Rights.

In other words, it's a rigged referendum choice and Labour Leave voters are seething with rage at the complete and abject betrayal of their 2017 votes.

The public can be misled. I'm glad that we can agree on this. It was fairly blatant that this happened in 2016 as well. How come this doesn't elicit the same response from you?

[Deleted User]

CelticRambler wrote: »

If you study Biblical or other catastrophes immortalised in any civilisation's mythology, you will realise that what happens in "the blink of an eye" in the modern-day account generally unfolded over a much longer period (the exception being catastrophic volcanic eruptions and tsunamis and the like).

We did see an immediate reaction to the referendum: the pound lost 10-15% of its value, and it hasn't regained it since. If you don't think that's had an serious effect on people living off a GBP income in the Eurozone, or businesses selling GBP-denominated products into the Eurozone, then you need to get out more.

That's fact, by the way - you can look it up on any currency exchange website. You'll see a similar fall against the US dollar - which is one reason why GB assets (e.g. Gatwick Airport, British Steel) are being bought by foreign companies.

Take back control, eh?

That's absolutely fine.

You're welcome to trust George Osbourne and David Cameron as beacons of honesty and Tory truth.

I happen to take a different opinion.

Though we're seeing much of the same scaremongering these days, with medicine shortages and flights being grounded and so on.

More nonsense on stilts.

CelticRambler

Deleted User wrote: »

From a parliament who signed the Benn Act in case Johnson came back with No Deal.

Parliament is sovereign. They took control - exactly as promised to Leavers.

Deleted User wrote: »

The 2017 Labour Manifesto claimed that a vote for Labour was a vote to "implement and respect the referendum result".

And thanks to Labour, the WA was heading for a Second Reading ... until that dastardly Johnson threw a spanner in the works and stopped Brexit from getting done.

[Deleted User]

CelticRambler wrote: »

Parliament is sovereign. They took control - exactly as promised to Leavers.

And thanks to Labour, the WA was heading for a Second Reading ... until that dastardly Johnson threw a spanner in the works and stopped Brexit from getting done.

Do you even accept that the Benn Act was passed (with its proposed extension clause) in case Johnson came back with No Deal?

robinph

Deleted User wrote: »

Do you even accept that the Benn Act was passed (with its proposed extension clause) in case Johnson came back with No Deal?

That was the whole point of the Benn Act wasn't it, to prevent a sneaky no-deal.

Now where is the results of the vote saying that the population voted for no-deal and therefore parliament was going against the wishes of the population?

[Deleted User]

robinph wrote: »

That was the whole point of the Benn Act wasn't it, to prevent a sneaky no-deal.

Now where is the results of the vote saying that the population voted for no-deal and therefore parliament was going against the wishes of the population?

The Benn Act was passed in case Johnson came back with no deal - to prevent a No Deal exit on 31 October.

Yet Johnson did come back with a deal - and yet was still forced to seek an extension.

Clear duplicity by parliamentary Remainers; an egregious affront to the way a sovereign parliament should operate. They intentionally forced Johnson to seek an extension until 31 January in the hope that the public would blame Johnson, not them.

Parliamentary Remainers seriously miscalculated that, hence why Johnson is rocketing in the polls, not labouring behind Labour.

gooch2k9

Deleted User wrote: »

The Benn Act was passed in case Johnson came back with no deal.

Yet even with the deal, Johnson was forced to seek an extension.

Clear duplicity by parliamentary Remainers; an egregious affront to the way a sovereign parliament should operate.

Because the deal couldn't be given proper scrutiny before the deadline. It's not hard to understand.

Professor Moriarty

Deleted User wrote: »

The Benn Act was passed in case Johnson came back with no deal.

Yet even with the deal, Johnson was forced to seek an extension.

Clear duplicity by parliamentary Remainers; an egregious affront to the way a sovereign parliament should operate.

Tell me, how many pages were in the deal? How long were MPs given to assess the deal?

[Deleted User]

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Tell me, how many pages were in the deal? How long were MPs given to assess the deal?

The Johnson Deal is manifestly the same as the May Deal in many respects.

The "we need more time" argument is a cover for just excusing the need to provoke an unneeded extension.

It's quite amazing how you attribute falsity to Johnson almost conclusively, but never apply the same scepticism to how Remainers operate in parliament.

Enzokk

Deleted User wrote: »

The Benn Act was passed in case Johnson came back with no deal - to prevent a No Deal exit on 31 October.

Yet Johnson did come back with a deal - and yet was still forced to seek an extension.

Clear duplicity by parliamentary Remainers; an egregious affront to the way a sovereign parliament should operate. They intentionally forced Johnson to seek an extension until 31 January in the hope that the public would blame Johnson, not them.

Parliamentary Remainers seriously miscalculated that, hence why Johnson is rocketing in the polls, not labouring behind Labour.

Johnson pulled his own deal before it could complete the steps to become law, not Labour.

You are trying to spread lies when we know what happened. Labour did nothing to stop Johnson's deal, they only prevented a no deal from happening.

Enzokk

Deleted User wrote: »

The Johnson Deal is manifestly the same as the May Deal in many respects.

The "we need more time" argument is a cover for just excusing the need to provoke an unneeded extension.

It's quite amazing how you attribute falsity to Johnson almost conclusively, but never apply the same scepticism to how Remainers operate in parliament.

Okay, show me a link to the published bill of May's deal. I will save you time, you will not be able to because she never published her deal as a bill. So the first people saw of the deal as a bill was Johnson trying to ram it through parliament.

Please don't try to post items that isn't factual, you will be caught out.

Professor Moriarty

Deleted User wrote: »

The Johnson Deal is manifestly the same as the May Deal in many respects.

The "we need more time" argument is a cover for just excusing the need to provoke an unneeded extension.

It's quite amazing how you attribute falsity to Johnson almost conclusively, but never apply the same scepticism to how Remainers operate in parliament.

Rubbish. I saw staunch Tory MPs on TV stating that they didn't have enough time to read it.

Johnson is a liar. To think otherwise is ignorance or self-delusion.

Regarding Brexiteers vs Remainers, all I have to do is listen to what they say and watch what they do. Then I know that Brexiteers tend to be elitist Little Englanders whereas Remain MPs tend to be people of principle.

Letwin_Larry

Deleted User wrote: »

On Scotland, it's worth considering that the SNP got 977,569 votes (36.9%) at the last General Election, and 1,018,322 (38.00%) voted to leave the EU.

So, this idea that the SNP are the "voice of Scotland" is absurd.

SNP are deluded if they think a breakaway from the UK will automatically guarantee a place in the EU.
it could take decades to transpire, if indeed it ever does.

the Scots could be left in a very isolated place.

GM228

I said weeks ago this would happen:-

European Commission launches infringement proceedings against the UK following its failure to name a candidate for EU Commissioner

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_19_6286

Following the UK's reply on 13 November to the two letters sent by President-elect Ursula von der Leyen recalling the UK's obligations under the EU Treaty – and the European Council decision of 29 October 2019 extending the Article 50 period (1) –, the Commission has now analysed this reply and considers that the UK is in breach of its EU Treaty obligations.

CelticRambler

Deleted User wrote: »

Do you even accept that the Benn Act was passed (with its proposed extension clause) in case Johnson came back with No Deal?

Uh, yeah. What's not to accept? It's a fact, recorded in the annals of the House of Commons.

Given that the referendum ballot did not include any description of that "Leave the EU" meant, it was perfectly reasonable for Parliament to exercise its sovereignty so as to prevent a rogue agent from selling the country out for a penny.

Deleted User wrote: »

The Johnson Deal is manifestly the same as the May Deal in many respects.

Is it? You're sure about that?

If so, why did a certain Boris Johnson twice vote against May's deal? Are you suggesting he's a hypocrite - or just confirming it?

Or could it be that the Johnson WA is not manifestly the same as May's WA, and required careful reading?

Either way, Parliament voted to progress the WA towards ratification and the Leaver Johnson stood in their way and (pending the outcome of this not-Brexit election) almost certainly made sure that Brexit is delayed yet again.

robinph

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The Benn Act was passed in case Johnson came back with no deal - to prevent a No Deal exit on 31 October.

Yet Johnson did come back with a deal - and yet was still forced to seek an extension.

Clear duplicity by parliamentary Remainers; an egregious affront to the way a sovereign parliament should operate. They intentionally forced Johnson to seek an extension until 31 January in the hope that the public would blame Johnson, not them.

Parliamentary Remainers seriously miscalculated that, hence why Johnson is rocketing in the polls, not labouring behind Labour.

So the Benn Act did exactly what it was intended to do then and prevented no deal at the end of October. What's the problem.

Johnson had withdrawn his bill before the 31st, so if parliament hadn't made him ask for the extension what would then have happened? No deal would, which is what the Benn Act was to prevent.

BorneTobyWilde

Pretty incredible that the Tories are trying to bribe Brexit Party members into standing down, and they can simply deny it and get on with it like it never happened.

Joe_ Public

robinph wrote: »

So the Benn Act did exactly what it was intended to do then and prevented no deal at the end of October. What's the problem.

Johnson had withdrawn his bill before the 31st, so if parliament hadn't made him ask for the extension what would then have happened? No deal would, which is what the Benn Act was to prevent.

There's no problem whatsoever. And not forgetting the incessant yodelling from brexiteers about the benn act, by removing their supposed massive leverage, making it impossible for them to get a deal which turned out to be a load of cobblers.

Enzokk

Did Farage just say that people in No.10 tried to offer peerages for the Brexit Party to stand down? Another day another illegal act from the people of Vote Leave.

https://twitter.com/mrjamesob/status/1195028810418266113?s=20

Deleted User wrote: »

I have always stated that Boris Johnson is a liar, like most career politicians. And if we're truly honest, all of us are liars to some extent, just politicians have a tendency to professionalise that.

But I think effective leadership can justify lying in given circumstances, however unpopular that view may be.

As for what you can't wait for, all I know that I can't wait for is Brexit.

Not this again, I suspect you will not have evidence of Corbyn lying like Johnson to the face of a voter in a hospital. Or how about Sturgeon avoiding a vote on an issue he said she would 'lie in front of the bulldozers for'.

I think it says a lot that you cannot wait for Brexit, a policy that will only cause damage but was sold on how great it would be. You seem to not mind being lied to and try hard to justify it. That's okay, just don't expect to come on here and rehash those lies to others. This world could do with less lies and more honesty, people just shrugging their shoulders to those lies and those that perpetuate the lies is the reason you have someone in charge of Brexit who doesn't even seem to know the words of 'The wheels if the bus'.

[Deleted User]

Enzokk wrote: »

Did Farage just say that people in No.10 tried to offer peerages for the Brexit Party to stand down? Another day another illegal act from the people of Vote Leave.

https://twitter.com/mrjamesob/status/1195028810418266113?s=20

Not this again, I suspect you will not have evidence of Corbyn lying like Johnson to the face of a voter in a hospital. Or how about Sturgeon avoiding a vote on an issue he said she would 'lie in front of the bulldozers for'.

They're all liars, all of them.

The biggest con by Corbyn was his claim that he was Eurosceptic all his political life yet, when he comes to power in the form of Opposition Leader, he reneges on that position and now adopts a pro-EU stance; a clear, unadultered lie in order to placate forces within his own party. He claims to be a beacon of honesty, yet is just as guilty as the rest of the major politicians.

He claims not to have sympathies for the terrorist enemies of the UK, yet his actions spell out precisely the opposite.

His lies and hypocrisy knows no bounds.

At least with Boris, we know he's a liar. But Corbyn comes across as genial and hopeful, and so gets a free pass on his own lies and hypocrisies.

As for the peerage claim, I well believe it. Now that would be a grave injustice if it turns out to be as true as Farage claims. I think that's the difference here: I'm willing to admit the failures of those politicians on my side of the argument, yet we never hear almost any significant criticism of pro-EU politicians from the other side of the argument.

It leads to a myopic, almost dogmatic form of politics.

Stop moaning ffs

This Russian thing is far bigger and goes far deeper than previously thought
Thread worth a read

https://twitter.com/mandoline_blue/status/1195044020701073408?s=21

Stop moaning ffs

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

SNP are deluded if they think a breakaway from the UK will automatically guarantee a place in the EU.
it could take decades to transpire, if indeed it ever does.

the Scots could be left in a very isolated place.

Scotland is currently a member being removed against its will. They’ll be fast tracked back in it independent. Just a copy and paste of the existing rules their under. They’ve been told they’d be welcomed back in too.

briany

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Scotland is currently a member being removed against its will. They’ll be fast tracked back in it independent. Just a copy and paste of the existing rules their under. They’ve been told they’d be welcomed back in too.

And before anyone else says it, no, Spain would not veto Scotland's application. That was something said by the Spanish Popular Party who are very much into Spanish unity. They're also not in government.

Besides, Spain would have no basis to veto Scotland. The only reason they would have is that they cannot keep their own house in order, and that's not Scotland's problem. Therefore it would be no reason at all.