Off Topic UK / EU Future

oh FFS!

 

1) And we have further checks and balances and can change our minds... goodness even your God MT did
2) The term was created by the BREXIT camp to devalue the real concerns expressed by many.....
3) Would you like to expand on that..... or are we drifting into abuse here?

 

I know! Sad eh...... Project paranoia

 

Unfortunately that’s an actual fact imo. The older the voter the higher the percentage who voted Leave.

People of your generation thinking about the War, never trust the Hun, that kind of shizzle.

Just shows how shallow many peoples votes actually were.

 

That’s why Brexiteers are terrified of the idea of a people’s vote. As they know fine we’ll that if there’s a no deal / Remain vote, then it’ll be a landslide. Many people actually swallowed the jarg they were served up. The likes of SH’s here was one of the entrenched who was always going to vote out. But there were millions who only made their minds up in the run up to the vote, and it’s these people who feel conned imo.

 

Are you an expert on the constitution? No - as shown by your first sentence. Our democratic system works by having elections every few years. More recently we have had a few referenda with various degrees of success.
It is not about easy - it is about in a democracy the people get to make a choice but also to change their minds - it does not work on one vote freezes all for all time.
Never mind easy, project fear, brexit lies etc. We are allowed to vote and if we choose to vote again - that is how our democratic system works.

 

Our democratically elected government and parliament has so far fully agreed with me and stuck by the result of the referendum. They still maintain there will not be another referendum. So the fact is you will not be allowed to vote again until the government agrees, that is how democracy works. It is quite easy, you don't need to an expert to follow it.

 

Actually one of the first people to raise the idea of a 'United States of Europe' was Winston Churchill.

 

Yes, without the UK included.

 

The City of London have revised down their fears of job losses in the financial sector from 200,000 to a 5,000.

God damn 'project fear' unravelling again.

 

Churchill advocated the U.K. forming part of a European free trade area back in the ‘50’s, so you’re wrong again.

 

A free trade area and a United States of Europe are different things, even you should know that.

 

He actually advocated a union of the UK. and France in 1940, where all citizens of both countries would have dual nationality.

 

Is that after he sunk the French ships?

 

This idea of the 'United States of Europe' rings alarm bells time and again and really should be cleared up. We need a written constitution which sets out exactly which functions are best left at the national level, and which are best performed at the EU. level - exactly as they have in the USA. or in Germany. This should involve the electors of Europe from stage one. The fact that there was absolutely no imput whatsoever from Europe during the Brexit referendum debate must tell you that the EU. has a reluctance to interfere in the political structures of it's members.

 

The EU had no reservation interfering with member states when they dared to vote against the eurocrats, they told them to vote again until they came up with the correct result. They also tried to force Ireland to remove it's successful generous tax incentives to attract foreign companies, something France is trying at the moment. The eurocrats intention is to harmonise tax rates across the EU. The UK could never agree to that.

 

Nobody was told to vote again SH. The EU. went away, and then modified it's aims until they were acceptable to the electorate concerned - nothing wrong in that. There is also nothing wrong in the EU. not wanting the development of tax oases within its territories.

 

Imagine if you will that you are rather taken with a shiny new smart phone with all the latest bells and whistles. So you pop along to a shop and take out a contract which seems a bit expensive, but having seen what it can do you think it is great. After six months your income falls and you start to look for savings. The phone will have to go, so you try to cancel the contract, only to find that you have signed up for three years and will have to keep paying, so no chance of pulling your budget back into line with that route.
Now look at Northamptonshire County Council who signed contracts with outside providers for just about everything that was in their remit. The government reduced their funding and now that they need to make savings they find they have no control over the contracts they have signed. Like our phone owner they have handed over control to someone else. NCC is a Tory Council, in fact the seven MPs in the county are all Tories, and they have followed religiously the sell off what you can to raise funds, but now they have nothing left, and are bankrupt.
Just one more step to look at how our government has delegated many of its powers to the EU. So many of the services that we don't even give a second thought to have been provided by pooling resources which has been good for millions throughout the whole continent. These have evolved over many years under different administrations in Westminster so it is not a party thing at all. It has meant that the UK has had to sign contracts to ensure they pay their share. Now the current government wishes to end these contracts and are finding that they are committed to pay up the full value. Many things that the country had an interest in have been sold off by Tory governments to foreign buyers to raise more cash. Look around and you will find little owned by the nation any more, manufacturing, telecoms, transport etc. Now we are seeking means of attracting more funding by a race to the bottom, another desperate measure to raise more cash. There is a big difference between selling your assets and pooling limited resources. To say that we should withdraw from the good things to take more of the bad is daft.

 

Our government hardly knows you exist - I can assure you they do not agree with you - they may or may not believe in the same policy but that is rather different.
Nobody is arguing that the government at the moment does not want another referendum. You though now seem finally to have understood that if the government change their mind then they can have another one - democratically. Well done. Took some time but you got there. You finally have understood that a one time vote does not bind anyone forever in a democracy.

 

There is no sign at the moment that the government has any intention of straying from it's promised path to honour the referendum result. Of course anything is possible in politics but you seem to be no nearer your wish to scupper the result. The PM has spent the last two years spelling out her policy of ensuring the UK leaves the EU, this is exactly my view.