Brexit negotiations

wanderlust wrote:

Hipster_Nebula wrote:

wanderlust wrote:Meanwhile the "leave the EU without a deal' petition has nearly reached half a million.
Make of that what you will.

That a lot of the same people who voted remain still want to remain?

Hardly a shock is it.

So by your logic, not many of the people who voted to leave still want to leave now that the facts are coming out?

Eh?

T.R.O.Y wrote:

Hipster_Nebula wrote:

T.R.O.Y wrote:I don’t think I could vote for something I thought was seriously damaging to the country. And don’t expect our politicians to.

But you vote labour?

Good gag.

Has there ever been a more damaging UK government than Cameron followed by May? An absolute disaster.

Blair and then brown?

Hipster_Nebula wrote:

T.R.O.Y wrote:

Hipster_Nebula wrote:

T.R.O.Y wrote:I don’t think I could vote for something I thought was seriously damaging to the country. And don’t expect our politicians to.

But you vote labour?

Good gag.

Has there ever been a more damaging UK government than Cameron followed by May? An absolute disaster.

Blair and then brown?

Hardly. The greedy bankers fucked us not Blair and Brown.

It was Brown that relaxed the fiscal regulations that enabled the financial crash to have as bad an effect as it did. Need we say anything more about how duplicitous Blair was, and still is by guiding the EU on how to block all our attempts at negotiating a better Brexit.

Difficult to think of what more damage could have been done over the last last decade.

Brown relaxed the fiscal regulations at the urging of the bankers who then proceeded to almost bankrupt the country with their greed. Taxpayers had to spend billions bailing them out and they weren't even punished. The bankers were culpable, Brown was naive to believe them.

As for Blair what impact has he had on any negotiations with the EU?

xmiles wrote:

gloswhite wrote:

T.R.O.Y wrote:I don’t think I could vote for something I thought was seriously damaging to the country. And don’t expect our politicians to.

No, they are voting for their own interpretations of what is right or wrong, whilst playing politics. But never mind that, my point is that the way everything has been handled shows, to me, that they haven't done anything good for the country, short or long term, and they have all done exactly the opposite of what they purported to do. Not all the mistakes and bad behaviour can be put at the PM's door.

I don't understand your point glos.

"Voting for their own interpretations of what is right or wrong" is what MPs should do. MPs are representatives not delegates. Normally the party system stops them from voting for what they think is right or wrong but May's shambolic brexit negotiations and Corbyn's posturing have broken at least temporarily this system.

I am not sure what you expect MPs to do.

My point XM is that their electorate wanted a specific outcome, and they have interpreted that instruction in a way that does not reflect the original request. It is not democratic, and has damaged this country far more than if they had just accepted it, (and negotiate further when the new talks began). 
I accept they have a mind of their own, and should use it, however, the way they have conducted themselves with this issue, (all parties), they have made a much bigger problem for years to come, and nobody wins. Standing on your principles is always a costly exercise, but to do it at the cost of your countries standing in the world just isn't good enough.

xmiles wrote:Brown relaxed the fiscal regulations at the urging of the bankers who then proceeded to almost bankrupt the country with their greed. Taxpayers had to spend billions bailing them out and they weren't even punished. The bankers were culpable, Brown was naive to believe them.

As for Blair what impact has he had on any negotiations with the EU?

Are you unaware that Blair has been advising the EU negotiators that because of the in-fighting with the Tories and Labours' sitting on the fence, that they only had to sit tight and the UK effort would crash in confusion and chaos.
I've seen him tackled on this twice on TV, and each time he admitted it, but of course put a different slant on it.
Letting Brown off by just calling him naive is a bit farcical isn't it? He let them off with far too much, and didn't step in when he should have.

gloswhite wrote:

xmiles wrote:

gloswhite wrote:

T.R.O.Y wrote:I don’t think I could vote for something I thought was seriously damaging to the country. And don’t expect our politicians to.

No, they are voting for their own interpretations of what is right or wrong, whilst playing politics. But never mind that, my point is that the way everything has been handled shows, to me, that they haven't done anything good for the country, short or long term, and they have all done exactly the opposite of what they purported to do. Not all the mistakes and bad behaviour can be put at the PM's door.

I don't understand your point glos.

"Voting for their own interpretations of what is right or wrong" is what MPs should do. MPs are representatives not delegates. Normally the party system stops them from voting for what they think is right or wrong but May's shambolic brexit negotiations and Corbyn's posturing have broken at least temporarily this system.

I am not sure what you expect MPs to do.

My point XM is that their electorate wanted a specific outcome, and they have interpreted that instruction in a way that does not reflect the original request. It is not democratic, and has damaged this country far more than if they had just accepted it, (and negotiate further when the new talks began). 
I accept they have a mind of their own, and should use it, however, the way they have conducted themselves with this issue, (all parties), they have made a much bigger problem for years to come, and nobody wins. Standing on your principles is always a costly exercise, but to do it at the cost of your countries standing in the world just isn't good enough.

But as I have said many times the electorate did not vote for a specific outcome. They voted for a range of outcomes ranging from a no deal brexit to a Norway style brexit.

MPs are just doing their job. It is not anti democratic to reject May's pathetic attempt at a deal. If brexiteers really believed in democracy they would welcome a second referendum. If they won that it would be game over. Oddly enough they resist asking people to vote now that they know what brexit really means and there is no £350m for the NHS, etc.

gloswhite wrote:

xmiles wrote:Brown relaxed the fiscal regulations at the urging of the bankers who then proceeded to almost bankrupt the country with their greed. Taxpayers had to spend billions bailing them out and they weren't even punished. The bankers were culpable, Brown was naive to believe them.

As for Blair what impact has he had on any negotiations with the EU?

Are you unaware that Blair has been advising the EU negotiators that because of the in-fighting with the Tories and Labours' sitting on the fence, that they only had to sit tight and the UK effort would crash in confusion and chaos.
I've seen him tackled on this twice on TV, and each time he admitted it, but of course put a different slant on it.
Letting Brown off by just calling him naive is a bit farcical isn't it? He let them off with far too much, and didn't step in when he should have.

I am not letting Brown off just pointing out that the people who wrecked our economy with their greed were the bankers not Brown.

Do you really think the EU negotiators listen to Blair? Do you have any evidence to support this bizarre idea? With May leading the negotiations what did they have to worry about? She can't even get her own party to support her.

T.R.O.Y wrote:I don’t think I could vote for something I thought was seriously damaging to the country. And don’t expect our politicians to.

Well said.

My sentiment also.

T.R.O.Y wrote:Difficult to think of what more damage could have been done over the last last decade.

We could have spent billions in illegal wars and put the county into a massive recession. Could have had a run on a bank?

xmiles wrote:

gloswhite wrote:

xmiles wrote:

gloswhite wrote:

T.R.O.Y wrote:I don’t think I could vote for something I thought was seriously damaging to the country. And don’t expect our politicians to.

No, they are voting for their own interpretations of what is right or wrong, whilst playing politics. But never mind that, my point is that the way everything has been handled shows, to me, that they haven't done anything good for the country, short or long term, and they have all done exactly the opposite of what they purported to do. Not all the mistakes and bad behaviour can be put at the PM's door.

I don't understand your point glos.

"Voting for their own interpretations of what is right or wrong" is what MPs should do. MPs are representatives not delegates. Normally the party system stops them from voting for what they think is right or wrong but May's shambolic brexit negotiations and Corbyn's posturing have broken at least temporarily this system.

I am not sure what you expect MPs to do.

My point XM is that their electorate wanted a specific outcome, and they have interpreted that instruction in a way that does not reflect the original request. It is not democratic, and has damaged this country far more than if they had just accepted it, (and negotiate further when the new talks began). 
I accept they have a mind of their own, and should use it, however, the way they have conducted themselves with this issue, (all parties), they have made a much bigger problem for years to come, and nobody wins. Standing on your principles is always a costly exercise, but to do it at the cost of your countries standing in the world just isn't good enough.

But as I have said many times the electorate did not vote for a specific outcome. They voted for a range of outcomes ranging from a no deal brexit to a Norway style brexit.

MPs are just doing their job. It is not anti democratic to reject May's pathetic attempt at a deal. If brexiteers really believed in democracy they would welcome a second referendum. If they won that it would be game over. Oddly enough they resist asking people to vote now that they know what brexit really means and there is no £350m for the NHS, etc.

Why would a second leave win be game over.

Aren't people allowed to change their minds

I can tell what would have been game over, a remain win.

Hipster_Nebula wrote:

T.R.O.Y wrote:Difficult to think of what more damage could have been done over the last last decade.

We could have spent billions in illegal wars and put the county into a massive recession. Could have had a run on a bank?

The greed of the bankers put the country into a massive recession.

Hipster_Nebula wrote:

T.R.O.Y wrote:Difficult to think of what more damage could have been done over the last last decade.

We could have spent billions in illegal wars and put the county into a massive recession. Could have had a run on a bank?

If you believe Labour caused a global recession then it's no wonder you're a Tory voter.

gloswhite wrote:My point XM is that their electorate wanted a specific outcome, and they have interpreted that instruction in a way that does not reflect the original request. It is not democratic, and has damaged this country far more than if they had just accepted it, (and negotiate further when the new talks began). 
I accept they have a mind of their own, and should use it, however, the way they have conducted themselves with this issue, (all parties), they have made a much bigger problem for years to come, and nobody wins. Standing on your principles is always a costly exercise, but to do it at the cost of your countries standing in the world just isn't good enough.

I don't believe for one second that those who voted for Leave "wanted a specific outcome" as has been so eloquently argued by Hipster. The vague concept put to the electorate invariably meant that the Leave campaign garnered a huge amounts of votes from a wide range of voters who were united in the concept of "leaving the EU", but were and are still divided in how it should be achieved and what they think a post EU Britain should be.
As for our country's "standing in the world", we are a laughing stock already and have already taken a battering financially with far worse to come, but that is in part the fault of the politicians who were left with the unenviable task of reinterpreting what people actually voted for above and beyond the tired cliche, and then underlining their incompetence by playing politics and poor negotiation. Equally it is the fault of the Brexit concept itself which is internationally viewed as economic suicide thereby undermining confidence in the markets. And unfortunately, in a capitalist dominated world, confidence in the economy is a cornerstone of actual value.
The politicians have had a shocker, but the current situation isn't entirely their fault.

T.R.O.Y wrote:

Hipster_Nebula wrote:

T.R.O.Y wrote:Difficult to think of what more damage could have been done over the last last decade.

We could have spent billions in illegal wars and put the county into a massive recession. Could have had a run on a bank?

If you believe Labour caused a global recession then it's no wonder you're a Tory voter.

They contributed to our lack of ability to react to it as a country. If you don't think they held any responsibility then no wonder you vote labour.

wanderlust wrote:

gloswhite wrote:My point XM is that their electorate wanted a specific outcome, and they have interpreted that instruction in a way that does not reflect the original request. It is not democratic, and has damaged this country far more than if they had just accepted it, (and negotiate further when the new talks began). 
I accept they have a mind of their own, and should use it, however, the way they have conducted themselves with this issue, (all parties), they have made a much bigger problem for years to come, and nobody wins. Standing on your principles is always a costly exercise, but to do it at the cost of your countries standing in the world just isn't good enough.

I don't believe for one second that those who voted for Leave "wanted a specific outcome" as has been so eloquently argued by Hipster. The vague concept put to the electorate invariably meant that the Leave campaign garnered a huge amounts of votes from a wide range of voters who were united in the concept of "leaving the EU", but were and are still divided in how it should be achieved and what they think a post EU Britain should be.
As for our country's "standing in the world", we are a laughing stock already and have already taken a battering financially with far worse to come, but that is in part the fault of the politicians who were left with the unenviable task of reinterpreting what people actually voted for above and beyond the tired cliche, and then underlining their incompetence by playing politics and poor negotiation. Equally it is the fault of the Brexit concept itself which is internationally viewed as economic suicide thereby undermining confidence in the markets. And unfortunately, in a capitalist dominated world, confidence in the economy is a cornerstone of actual value.
The politicians have had a shocker, but the current situation isn't entirely their fault.

Very good, Lusty.

The Maybot needs to look at Jacinda Ardern for a perfect example of what a true leader looks like. The vicar's daughter can't get even close to the innate humanity and love for others that Ardern demonstrates..... backed up by immediate, decisive action on gun laws. An example to all the world's leaders.

xmiles wrote:

gloswhite wrote:

xmiles wrote:Brown relaxed the fiscal regulations at the urging of the bankers who then proceeded to almost bankrupt the country with their greed. Taxpayers had to spend billions bailing them out and they weren't even punished. The bankers were culpable, Brown was naive to believe them.

As for Blair what impact has he had on any negotiations with the EU?

Are you unaware that Blair has been advising the EU negotiators that because of the in-fighting with the Tories and Labours' sitting on the fence, that they only had to sit tight and the UK effort would crash in confusion and chaos.
I've seen him tackled on this twice on TV, and each time he admitted it, but of course put a different slant on it.
Letting Brown off by just calling him naive is a bit farcical isn't it? He let them off with far too much, and didn't step in when he should have.

I am not letting Brown off just pointing out that the people who wrecked our economy with their greed were the bankers not Brown.

Do you really think the EU negotiators listen to Blair? Do you have any evidence to support this bizarre idea? With May leading the negotiations what did they have to worry about? She can't even get her own party to support her.

Did you not read the part where I mentioned this? It was on the television when Andrew McNeill and later Andrew Marr raised the subject. Only bizarre in your world XM, a reality in everybody elses. As ever, don't let facts get in your way, (as you often tell us Brexiters) 

gloswhite wrote:

xmiles wrote:

gloswhite wrote:

xmiles wrote:Brown relaxed the fiscal regulations at the urging of the bankers who then proceeded to almost bankrupt the country with their greed. Taxpayers had to spend billions bailing them out and they weren't even punished. The bankers were culpable, Brown was naive to believe them.

As for Blair what impact has he had on any negotiations with the EU?

Are you unaware that Blair has been advising the EU negotiators that because of the in-fighting with the Tories and Labours' sitting on the fence, that they only had to sit tight and the UK effort would crash in confusion and chaos.
I've seen him tackled on this twice on TV, and each time he admitted it, but of course put a different slant on it.
Letting Brown off by just calling him naive is a bit farcical isn't it? He let them off with far too much, and didn't step in when he should have.

I am not letting Brown off just pointing out that the people who wrecked our economy with their greed were the bankers not Brown.

Do you really think the EU negotiators listen to Blair? Do you have any evidence to support this bizarre idea? With May leading the negotiations what did they have to worry about? She can't even get her own party to support her.

Did you not read the part where I mentioned this? It was on the television when Andrew McNeill and later Andrew Marr raised the subject. Only bizarre in your world XM, a reality in everybody elses. As ever, don't let facts get in your way, (as you often tell us Brexiters) 

Just because Blair claims he said something to EU negotiators doesn't mean they took any notice of him. I asked you to provide evidence that they listened to him. You still haven't provided any evidence that they did or that Blair had any effect whatsoever on the EU negotiations. You haven't even given any details of what was said or when.

Just stick to the facts glos.