Off Topic UK / EU Future

Why does it take a comedienne to talk perfect sense? On Friday night's The Last Leg, guest Sue Perkins stated that in the first session of Parliament after the Referendum, Teresa May should have said to Jeremy Corbyn that due to the vote being so close, they should work together on Brexit for the good of the country. I think that idea could have been taken further and opened up to all the party leaders. If the leader isn't an MP (e.g. Nicola Sturgeon), then include the senior party member in the House. As Gibraltar had the vote, also include their First Minister where possible, although the communication may have to be through their representative in the House. I think that he may be the representative for all the CDTs and BOTs, so that would mean that they could all provide their input, especially the Channel Islands, as we're so close to France.
I appreciate that there is still the issue of the other 27 countries, but showing willingness to put the country before political differences and have cross-party discussions, could have strengthened her bargaining position with them and also her domestic position. There would still be those within her own party who would be opposed to her, but I think they would be less vocal, with 2 notable exceptions. I also appreciate that the process has gone too far for that to happen, so it would be seen as a sign of weakness or desperation to do it now.

 

Sue Perkins, a third rate comedienne, should hang her head in shame for compering the PM to 'sh*t on a shoe', This kind of comment is both not funny and devalues our democracy. You can disagree with politicians and their views but there should be a decency level especially on TV.

Her ideas of involving more than the government is just another attempt at avoiding Brexit. If it is difficult for members of one party to agree, imagine how difficult it would be for several views, most as far away from each other as possible.

Most political and light entertainment programmes and stuffed with remainers and rich lefty luvvies. If the world listened to idiots like Perkins we really would be in a mess.

 

Parliament is sovereign in the UK and so it is essential that they are all involved in finding a position which has a majority in the Commons. To do otherwise constitutes a serious threat to our democratic traditions. The Hard Brexit which you dream of does not have a majority, either in the Commons or amongst the electorate, and could only come about through default - ie. through obstructing democracy hoping that time simply runs out in the meantime.

 

Parliament passed the withdrawal bill so the government can negotiate on behalf of the country. The government is now free to decide, May's option or no deal. Any amendment to the withdrawal bill is only advisory. May is trying to build pressure for MPs to accept her dodgy bill or leave without a deal.

 

Perhaps this would be a good moment to remind you that the 2016 referendum was , in sovereignty terms only advisory, whatever it said on the ballot paper. In the Uk, parliament is sovereign, above the government, (although this is regularly abused by the government, using various devices e.g. cancelling votes if a loss is forecast). This sovereignty is bestowed on the Parliament by general elections, NOT by referendums.

 

The government has been handed the say on the withdrawal bill by parliament. This has already been done and dusted. In legal terms any further amendments by parliament can be ignored by the government. Politically the government may or may not take notice of any decision by parliament. So in this particular case the government will be sovereign over parliament's previous decisions.

 

I remember well the last days of Thatcher and how she lost the plot, with government ministers going behind her back to either make her change her policies or resign. There are undoubted similarities between the current situation and what happened all those years ago. One should remember that when she was forced out a far more moderate approach was adopted, rather than the hard line ones she wished to pursue. By then the Tory party had shot itself in the foot and they never really recovered for a decade. To keep flogging a dead horse that no one likes seems foolish in the extreme. No one voted for this Brexit, they could not as they hadn't seen the details that have emerged. I can only suggest that people take what is on offer, or rescind Article 50 until it is established what other course is open. But how do you find out is the question?

 

The UK government's cabinet is currently lining up like a spaghetti western with a shootout between the remainers and leavers. I would like to officially call the remoaners the bandits and the Brexiteers John Wayne's gang.

If only life was that simple.

 

Last week the PM was off asking the EU to help her out, but didn't actually have a clue what she wanted. Now having failed yet again she is going to call in the Ambassadors to see if they can suggest any way out of her difficulties. Strong and stable government? All a bit like asking the opposition team how to score goals when your forwards have forgotten what they are on the field for.

 

May knew exactly what she wanted, she needed to repair the damage her and Robbins did last December. The EU obviously said no to having a time limit on the backstop as it would invalidate the whole thing.

 

May wants something that is not on offer. What is there to talk about then? Offer something different, but don't keep flogging the same dead horse.
The extremists on the right of the Tory party have been marginalised by seeing the vote of Tory MPs going against them with two thirds expressing support for the PM. Surely looking at the margin they should start to give her their support now rather than continue to oppose her. Strange that a difference of 4% is fine, but 30% isn't.

 

In addition to the £4.2 billion that has been used for Brexit planning, it seems that another £2 billion has been put up for the same cause today. How many potholes would that have fixed, how many care assistants would that have paid, how many beds in hospitals would that have kept open, how many other basic services could have been kept running by cash starved local councils? This doesn't seem like a good way to spend the taxpayers money, so is it still the will of the people?

 

More than half of Tory backbenchers voted against May in the recent no confidence vote. This is a clear indictment against her remoaner sell out deal to the EU.The Tory grassroots are clearly behind the vision the ERG is currently showing. The backstop must not be included within any withdrawal bill.

 

The ERG are dead in the water as anything other than a Tory pressure group. They will never hold power...

Sent from my F8331 using Tapatalk

 

I will make a suggestion that might concentrate a few minds. Instead of continuing to rob our public services of much needed money, let the government introduce a Brexit tax. It can be ring fenced so that every last penny raised will be spent on preparations. Let the public know that their hard earned taxes are going to providing the £ billions needed, but it will enable the government to restart funding in a proper way. No one who still supports leaving the EU can object to such a suggestion can they? This way services will be restored and they will still carry on preparing for whatever turns up. An extra 2p on income tax across the board would cover the £6.2 billion spent so far, and leave a bit for further planning.

 

The government has already made allowances to provide enough resources for public services and any required Brexit costs. They have delayed the date for the elimination of the structural deficit. I would have thought living in France you were well schooled on government borrowing, the French excel at that.

 

You are saying that everything is fine with public services. I rather doubt that many will agree with you.

 

No, I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying the UK government has the option to borrow more or less according to its priorities, similar to most Western governments. Thankfully our government has taken a responsible attitude towards not leaving our grandchildren with too much of our debt. Others countries in Europe like Italy and France just borrow masses and hope for the best with little regard for those following.

 

So are you admitting that the government is not fine looking after the public services? You need to make that point clear. So rather than pay the Tory Brexit tax, you want the government to borrow more money. They have already taken a £12 billion hit today, but you seem to want to more.