Off Topic EU deabte. Which way are you voting ?

May failed as a Home Secretary. Too much non-EU immigration and failure to clamp down on illegal workers. She kept quiet during the referendum campaign so I think she doesn't have what it takes to deal with difficult problems.

 

Whoever takes over is unelected by the populous and does not have a mandate for how they are proposing to deal with the process of Brexit, and what they are aiming to achieve in the negotiations with the EU.

If a new PM went straight to Brussels and signed a deal akin to Norway which left us paying 85% of what we already pay, together with the free movement of people as part of the deal - do you think he'd have a mandate based on the referendum result to come back with that deal? Yes or No?

 

Whoever takes over as PM, takes over the mandate that the conservative party got voted in on. We don't vote in any PM's.

 

Osborne has confirmed that there will be tax hikes and public spending cuts on the back of Brexit

 

No he/she doesn't. The brexit vote has rendered the Tory manifesto that they were elected on defunct. The only democratic way to move forward is to hold a enteral election.

 

It's called passion mate. I make no apology for that nor being completely aghast at the result, the reasons why, I've thoroughly explained since.

The initial shock and anger has gone, to be replaced with weary acceptance that the Nation has signed off on economic suicide.

TBH I've felt a distinct disconnect with this country and what it's seemingly turning into since the result of this poll.

 

Care to point out what part of that mandate covered how they intended actioning Brexit?

EDIT: And answering the yes or no question I posed.

 

My brother used to be a trader. He's made a small fortune trading on the pound and gold in the last few days. He voted Leave in the hope that the markets would become volatile and he could profit off the back of it.

 

So you'd say the same applies if the vote had gone the other way? Incredible to think a political group put a condition in its manifesto that compelled them to a mid term election.

 

But at least we got our country back, right?

 

I think the Gvt is actually frightened of activating clause 50. At the moment we are still full members of the EU.
I think once it is done, and our resignation letter has been handed in, they're worried that the reality of it will cause many banks and businesses to realise that there is no way back. And they will start executing exit strategies.

I think the Gvt will delay implementing as long as possible, hoping things will calm down and future direction a little clearer.

 

If the vote had gone the other way then there'd be nothing to action, so that's a stupid retort.

Care to answer my question now? Yes or No?

 

If the vote had gone the other way then the Tory manifesto would still be congruent to the political landscape. As it is, it's completely defunct now. Osborne has said that there will now be tax rises and public spending cuts. These were clearly not in the manefisto that they were elected on.

 

The mandate was given with the promise of a referendum.

It's a daft question that presupposes you know why people voted as they did,, but I'd probably go with that as an outcome. It's within the mandate, as we'd do that by being outside of the EU. Whether others would like it is a whole other question.

 

They were, as they're empowered by the referendum. If it wasn't, there'd be a good shout out from opponents by now, stating the constitutional case.

 

It's far from a daft question and presupposes nothing.

It was a straightforward question - if the new PM came back from Brussels with a deal akin to Norway i.e. 85% of what we already pay per capita and free movement of people, do you think the PM would be seen to have the mandate of the populous to sign that deal?

I wasn't asking whether you'd personally view it as acceptable, it was a generalist question. I think the answer is obvious personally, and I think it'd be viewed as a complete betrayal by the many who voted with immigration as their prime concern. Therefore, he wouldn't have a mandate to deliver that, ergo he needs to obtain a mandate from the electorate based on what he is prepared to sign and what is off limits. The only way to obtain that mandate is via a GE.

 

We don't have a constitution

 

Some of the FTSE100 shares are like the AIM.

UP 9%!

DOWN 8%!

UP 6%!

What an utter ****ing shambles.

 

Unless you've bailed out of the UK already, yes we do.

 

But, more interestingly, who will be the opposition. If there's a GE?