Brexit - the next steps

[jakswan]

Its simple. I dont think there will be another referendum. There is the option for Mrs May to do the right thing in her political life and say this is not possible without damaging the UK irreparably,  therefore we will stop the move to leave. Unlikely granted. I see no other option. As 5his is how I see it I voted largely on the basis of not accounting for the decision to leave. I cannot change the economic suicide taking place. I can, therefore only vote on which party I see as being the best for this country going forward regardless of that decision. I favoured the Labour party.  This is not though as you seem to want to paint it a whole hearted endorsement of JC. Its more a case of choosing the least worst option.

PS my main worry re another referendum is the very real threat of civil unrest on a large scale.

So its 'economic suicide' but you don't want to stop it by means of a referendum because you are scared of civil unrest.

A Corbyn Labour government would result in economic devastation we've not seen since the 1970's.

[Anchorman]

Is tis a case of the little vermin leaving the bigger vermin before the bigger vermin leave the sinking ship? https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/oct/02/brexit-eu-hits-out-irresponsible-uk-northern-ireland?CMP=share_btn_fb

[Aruntraveller]

So its 'economic suicide' but you don't want to stop it by means of a referendum because you are scared of civil unrest.

A Corbyn Labour government would result in economic devastation we've not seen since the 1970's.

You are obtuse. I'd love to see a referendum. I don't think it is possible. I think one of the outcomes of a further referendum would be civil unrest and that is based on observation of the vehemence and vitriol of some on the leave side. Am I wrong to worry about civil unrest?  Is that so hard to understand.

As to your second point, your opinion. Other opinions are available I believe.

[Udayana]

You are obtuse. I'd love to see a referendum. I don't think it is possible. I think one of the outcomes of a further referendum would be civil unrest and that is based on observation of the vehemence and vitriol of some on the leave side. Am I wrong to worry about civil unrest?  Is that so hard to understand.

As to your second point, your opinion. Other opinions are available I believe.

Same here ... Can't see how another referendum could be held. If the meaningful debate on the proposed deal fails to approve it (as is most likely) then either negotiations continue, possibly under a new PM or there is an election - can't see a vote for a referendum passing with the way the Tories are split. Labour would try for an election. Neither Tories nor Labour would have another referendum in their manifestos, and it is very unlikely that the other parties would win enough seats to force one on them. If time runs out with no extension, we are left with no-deal.

[Gordon]

The court case that started here in Scotland regarding whether or not Article 50 is revocable, which has now gone up the legal food chain, could yet provide an option for Parliament to halt the process: if so then some of the hapless and hopeless Tory party might need to find the guts to pull the plug on what looks like an impending disaster, but I doubt they are capable of conceding that Brexit is a mistake.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/21/article-50-european-court-of-justice

I can't see a problem with a second referendum personally, given that the first one was called for the wrong reasons, and since it is now clear that the simplistic in/out question was inadequate given the mess we are in now: people then voted for an idea the and the reality, as we are now seeing on a daily basis isn't how Brexit was portrayed back in 2016. Given the developments since, and lack thereof, I think we should get the chance the re-visit it and, ideally, bin Brexit.

Sure some Brexit enthusiasts would be pissed off at the prospect of a different result but if Brexit goes ahead people will get pissed off anyway once the effects become clear - and it won't be pretty (even if we get blue passports and some stupid festival). Far better to prevent catching the disease in the first place, even if some find the medicine hard to swallow, so as to avoid the symptoms - and especially if it turns out the disease is both chronic and incurable.

Ideally this would follow a general election and perhaps it would take a coalition of all the non-Tory/DUP parties to find a way back from this madness.

   

[Aruntraveller]

This is from Frank Bough on Twitter:

Theresa May: "We will prevent unskilled workers coming from EU and will fill the gap by training British workers"

So, we're going to *train* British workers to have *no skills*? 

Interesting concept.

[jakswan]

You are obtuse.

Evidence?

I'd love to see a referendum. I don't think it is possible.

Eh? If at the last election the LibDems had won more seats they could have entered into another coalition with Lab or Con and forced another vote with leave being an option.

So very possible, however since you did not vote that way it made another vote unlikely, or as you put it, impossible.

I think one of the outcomes of a further referendum would be civil unrest and that is based on observation of the vehemence and vitriol of some on the leave side. Am I wrong to worry about civil unrest?  Is that so hard to understand.

The implication from what you said its that you didn't want another vote because of the possibility of civil unrest. So can we assume if a far right party emerges threatening civil unrest you will vote for them to stop it happening.

As to your second point, your opinion. Other opinions are available I believe.

Be happy to debate the merits of Corbyn with you, when I've challenged you in the past  your comebacks have amounted 'yeah well the Tories suck', so won't hold my breath for  an enlightening debate anytime soon.

[jakswan]

Neither Tories nor Labour would have another referendum in their manifestos, and it is very unlikely that the other parties would win enough seats to force one on them. If time runs out with no extension, we are left with no-deal.

Current Labour Brexit plans are almost the same as May's deal.

Only option is the LibDems, if you listen to the horrors that will come from Brexit according to some you would have thought putting an X in the right place in an election would be the least they could do.

Maybe its better for some to have Brexit in play so they can weaponise it.

[ProfessorDavey]

Current Labour Brexit plans are almost the same as May's deal.

No they aren't - May's position is that there is only one option on the table (Chequers), Labour's position is that all options remain on the table.

What is interesting is that Tory rank and file want May to bring other options onto the table (e.g. Canada+++, Norway), while Labour's rank and file want to take options off the table and commit to a people's vote.

Interesting times.

[Udayana]

The court case that started here in Scotland regarding whether or not Article 50 is revocable,
...
...
Ideally this would follow a general election and perhaps it would take a coalition of all the non-Tory/DUP parties to find a way back from this madness.

I don't have anything against a second ref. in principle, however I think it is wishful thinking to think one would result in a different outcome or resolve any issues. 

Given what has already occurred I expect that economically the UK is in for a tough ride and, politically, a swing to the right and nationalist policies.

[Udayana]

...
Only option is the LibDems, if you listen to the horrors that will come from Brexit according to some you would have thought putting an X in the right place in an election would be the least they could do.
...

Have voted Liberal in every election since I was able to vote but has made f-all difference to anything.

[Nearly Sane]

Current Labour Brexit plans are almost the same as May's deal.

Only option is the LibDems, if you listen to the horrors that will come from Brexit according to some you would have thought putting an X in the right place in an election would be the least they could do.

Maybe its better for some to have Brexit in play so they can weaponise it.

Viewers in Scotland have their own programme.

[Aruntraveller]

your comebacks have amounted 'yeah well the Tories suck', so won't hold my breath for  an enlightening debate anytime soon.

Again confusing me with another poster. I stated quite recently that my concern about Corbyn was that he is not strong enough and not able to deal with issues in a way that other leaders would - for instance thw whole anti-Semitism issue. Can you imagine Blair letting that get out of hand?

Post #26 here: http://www.religionethics.co.uk/index.php?topic=16003.25

So go stuff your misrepresentation (once again) where the sun don't shine.

PS The Tories do suck.

[SteveH]

Current Labour Brexit plans are almost the same as May's deal.

Only option is the LibDems, if you listen to the horrors that will come from Brexit according to some you would have thought putting an X in the right place in an election would be the least they could do.

Maybe its better for some to have Brexit in play so they can weaponise it.

I have voted Lib Dem in the past, but never again, after the great betrayal of May 2010.

[jakswan]

Again confusing me with another poster.

Don't think so.

I stated quite recently that my concern about Corbyn was that he is not strong enough and not able to deal with issues in a way that other leaders would - for instance thw whole anti-Semitism issue. Can you imagine Blair letting that get out of hand?

Post #26 here: http://www.religionethics.co.uk/index.php?topic=16003.25

Not sure what you think that refutes?

So go stuff your misrepresentation (once again) where the sun don't shine.

I would be misrepresenting you if you never said something like 'the Tories suck', if you never said that, fair accusation, if you did going to make yourself look rather stupid.

PS The Tories do suck.

LOL thanks!

[Aruntraveller]

Not sure what you think that refutes?

So you think that me stating I don't think Corbyn is strong enough to deal with issues is a ringing endorsement then?

You obviously have a completely different understanding of the English language than most other people. Perhaps you and Sass should get together and form a group to promote alt-eng.

As to the Tories sucking - you misrepresented me by saying:


Be happy to debate the merits of Corbyn with you, when I've challenged you in the past  your comebacks have amounted 'yeah well the Tories suck', so won't hold my breath for  an enlightening debate anytime soon.

As I have given a direct example above where I criticised (and it is not the only post where I have criticised him, search if you don't believe me) the merits or otherwise of Corbyn, which did not involve saying the Tories suck yes I would say it is misrepresentation.

PS the Tories still suck.

PPS Further example for you #19: http://www.religionethics.co.uk/index.php?topic=15110.msg715870#msg715870

[jakswan]

So you think that me stating I don't think Corbyn is strong enough to deal with issues is a ringing endorsement then?

You obviously have a completely different understanding of the English language than most other people. Perhaps you and Sass should get together and form a group to promote alt-eng.

When did you ask for a 'ringing endorsement'?

I won't get involved in trading insults thanks.

As to the Tories sucking - you misrepresented me by saying:

Be happy to debate the merits of Corbyn with you, when I've challenged you in the past  your comebacks have amounted 'yeah well the Tories suck', so won't hold my breath for  an enlightening debate anytime soon.

As I have given a direct example above where I criticised (and it is not the only post where I have criticised him, search if you don't believe me) the merits or otherwise of Corbyn, which did not involve saying the Tories suck yes I would say it is misrepresentation.

The only way my statement could viewed as misrepresenting you would be to claim you had said something you had not, e.g. 'the Tories suck'. The level of debate I've experienced from you has been at this level, i.e. you do say things like 'the Tories suck'.

PS the Tories still suck.

Case closed, drop mic.

[Aruntraveller]

Case closed eh? You accuse me of not engaging in debate and then run off. I supplied you with examples of me  expressing doubts abouut  Corbyn with no calling the Tories shit and yet I have somehow done that (we will leave aside the fact that they are shit for now).

Clearly, you have formed a view of me based on an internal dialogue you have had. To be clear until you coined the phrase I hadnt used it, but now you have suggested it I think I am going to use it as my signature. Dont worry I will credit you. Many thanks for the suggestion.

[jakswan]

Case closed eh?

I thought so, looks like you don't understand when you lost and want to lose some more.

You accuse me of not engaging in debate

Misrepresentation makes you a liar and a hypocrite. 

and then run off.

Hello, refuted.

I supplied you with examples of me  expressing doubts abouut  Corbyn with no calling the Tories shit and yet I have somehow done that (we will leave aside the fact that they are shit for now).

Do you read what is written?

To refute:-
'the level of debate from is to use phrases like "the Tories suck"

You offered a link in which you say 'my main worry with Corbyn is that he would be every bit as paralysed as May is currently', not seeing how that works.

Clearly, you have formed a view of me based on an internal dialogue you have had. To be clear until you coined the phrase I hadnt used it, but now you have suggested it I think I am going to use it as my signature. Dont worry I will credit you. Many thanks for the suggestion.

So I claim the level of debate from you amounts to using phrases like 'the Tories suck' and now you have confessed you will explicitly do so in future.

Suggest we park this here not least because I'm getting embarrassed for you.

[Aruntraveller]

I dont see how me saying Corbyn and May are similarly ineffectual amounts to me saying the Tories suck. Quite happy to park it here but the embarrassment, like the misrepresentation, is not mine.

[ad_orientem]

I dont see how me saying Corbyn and May are similarly ineffectual amounts to me saying the Tories suck. Quite happy to park it here but the embarrassment, like the misrepresentation, is not mine.

To be fair, both suck. As a working class person I could never bring myself to vote Tory. As for Labour, they've for a long time no longer a traditional working class movement, but a hub for middle class wankers obsessed with identity politics.

[Gordon]

The case regarding whether or not the UK Parliament can revoke Article 50 without the consent of the EU to come up next month - should be interesting.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-45760209

[Gordon]

Looks like attempts to find a fudge to the NI border complication isn't going well: how surprising!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-45753188

[jeremyp]

OK, bringing this back on topic. David Davis has stuck his oar in again. Apparently the rat that left the sinking ship thinks May will face a backlash over her plan.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45795833

I really think he should shut the fuck up.

[Gordon]

Moderator:

There were a number of posts in this thread on the subject of Same Sex Marriage and these have been moved to a new thread:

http://www.religionethics.co.uk/index.php?topic=16219.msg750654#new