Hello H. Sorry I have to disagree in this way but with one fell swoop Cameron has shown us what an idiot he has been and Britain has shown itself up as being immature in political/democratic terms. Why, because there is no other democracy in the World that would have placed the future of the next 20 odd years in the balance on the basis of a one off decision made by only 37% of its electorate. If remain had won then it would have been 'business as usual', though the carrot crunchers of middle England would have crunched a little louder as a result. But a 'leave' result leaves us with the question of 'what happens now' - which is a difficult one considering that most of the Brexit campaigners never had a plan, and have distanced themselves from all responsibility. So, what does happen now ? In all fairness both sides of the debate should have been required to produce a written manifesto before the referendum (as at a general election), but that wasn't the case - which again showed the immaturity of British politics, and the media. What happens now is that in order to erase EU. law from the Scottish statute book (unless by agreement of the Scottish Parliament) it would lead to the anullment of the devolution act - the consequences of which would be predictable. So the next step is to ask all those who want to invoke Article 50, whether they also want to break up the United Kingdom and Great Britain ? Do you ? Do you think it would be an exercise in democracy to force 2 of the constituent nations which make up the UK. to leave the EU. against their will ? It has been said that the Parliament in Westminster agreed to the referendum (and the terms of it) - although many in fact abstained from voting, and so must accept the result. But was the parliament in Edinburgh asked to accept the referendum, and its result ?
There are over 60 million people in the UK and also far more than 1 million were either aged 16 to 18 (the young were the highest percentage supporters of Remain) or those disenfranchised overseas who would have been almost 100% Remain - that means it was a slim majority - if even a valid majority. This is not a vote for a 5 year Parliament but a vote that ended 43 years of history - with no chance of going back if we changed our minds. I suspect you are too young to remember the 70s and how awful Britain was economically then - power cuts and three day weeks, inflation near 20% and monthly pay changes - hopefully we will not return to those disastrous days. Other countries with referenda of such significance do not allow such a simple majority without at least qualifying it to mean at least 50% of the electorate. In the run up to an election it is inevitable that decisions are delayed - the outcome would require different policies. Don't peddle the £350m lie - there is a poster stating unequivocally that we could use the £350m for the NHS - it did not say part of it. There was of course no £350millipn anyway. This is not a lie by Remain after the vote - Brexiters are those who have retreated from their lies - Gove Johnson and Farage. A lie is a deliberate untruth - We send £350m per week to the EU - 100% lie. Turkey is about to join the EU - 100% lie A forecast based on assumptions is only ever a forecast - both sides gave their own (for them) convenient forecasts. The difference is that almost every economist and national and international body forecast a worse economic outcome post exit - Brexit just called it Project Fear and said "trust us" You would have to be very naive to believe that UKIP and many others on the Leave side would have accepted the verdict. Like the SNP - they would have gone for a second bite of the cherry - Remain do not have that option - we stop exit now or it is never. No referendum will ever get us back into the EU on such favourable terms as we currently have. If you believe your house is about to explode because someone has done something terrible to the gas pipe - would you shrug and say - oh well what is done is done? Brexiters have destroyed our economy and are surprised that people like me with a finance, economics and accountancy background are horrified. I loathe UKIP and am convinced many are racist, homophobic, anti-semitic and anti muslim - what a shame good ordinary people were duped by the affable Boris - our friendly uncle - who switched sides to be a gallant loser and become PM.
Not to mention... 1) In using the example of the Greeks, he states that " the Greek people now know that there is no longer any point in voting in Elections, because whatever they vote for, they're not going to get it... there is no choice, no democracy, this is the European Union". In saying that, he totally ignores the fact that this is also the lot of the 'smaller partners' within the UK, each of which is a country in its own right yet has to bow down to a dominant English parliament. The common cry that 'Scotland never gets what it voted for' is most certainly true, but he comes across as unwilling to recognise that they too have the right to make their own choice. 2) His claim that "..this is why Britain voted to leave.." is both false and ignorant. False in that Scotland voted unanimously for Remain - and ignorant because he is apparently unaware that Northern Ireland, who also voted for Remain, are not part of Britain. I guess he doesn't care about the wishes of Gibraltar either? 3) "..and not to have laws imposed on us from outside by people we haven't elected and can't remove.." A strange thing for a UKIP supporter to say - the party with 22 elected MEPs, each with voting powers within the European Parliament. But I suppose that the laws 'imposed' upon us are done so because the UKIP MEPs never seem to turn up to do what they're paid to do... For him to even use Greece as a yardstick for comparison is ridiculous as the situation in the UK is entirely different from what transpired there. The Greek crisis was manufactured entirely by the IMF, not the EU - a crisis that started when they insisted that Andreas Georgiou, one of their own HQ employees, be appointed as head of the ELSTAT, the Hellenic Statistics Agency responsible for keeping track of the national debt. Unsurprisingly, their '% debt level' skyrocketed not long after, leaving the door open for the IMF to move in and asset strip.
The UK in the 70's is how some in Europe are living now due to the EU. Massive unemployment amongst the young. It is a failed model, we can thrive by concentrating on the UK's interest. There are plenty of people with economic and business backgrounds that look forward to better times outside of the straightjacket of the EU. You cannot stop Brexit, it is a done deal.
It was full of errors and perjorative remarks about just about any group of the population who did not vote Brexit..... really a most odd diatribe......
Whatever you might choose to believe about the future economic situation, there is little doubt that the country is now faced with a constitutional crisis. It is set out in this article quite well. http://www.theguardian.com/politics...ecision-on-whether-to-leave-eu-barristers-say
Yes a sound article..... The whole process was based on misrepresentations of fact and promises that could not be delivered... and as Cologne says to make the most important change for our UK in centuries in this way is sheer madness (my words) http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-legally-binding-lawyers-letter-a7129626.html
Theresa May confirmed today that "Brexit means Brexit and we're going to make a success of it" The rest of her statement could have been straight out of The Labour Party's manifesto, it won't go down too well with the blue rinse brigade.
Theresa May as well as most other Tories are so desperate to have a united party for the first time in 50 years that they have caved in. It will only be all over when Article 50 is legally tabled - and I mean legally which may mean after a vote in Parliament.
What she was saying is more about uniting the country, the content was a bit premature as she needs to convince the Tory party faithful first, then convince the general public that she will govern for all. I'm sure she wants to improve the image of the Tory Party, away from the present perceived privilege, to one of enterprise and fairness. Article 50 will be invoked when the new PM decides, not parliament.
I completely agree with those sentiments. It was fine for the UK to have one Parliament perhaps in the past (or perhaps not) but there is no need for that now. Why oh why can we not have a federal system where each part of the UK has an Assembly or a Parliament entirely for its own affairs. (In the future if the demand was strong enough this could even be extended to Cornwall). Each Assembly would have equal rights and powers over a select number of issues. A federal Parliament - hopefully based in the Midlands or North West of England - certainly not Westminster - would have only powers over matters that were deemed essential for the UK to be common. I would put defence and probably foreign affairs into the Federal pot but not much else. Each Assembly could have its own laws and taxation. If too costly to create say a Welsh legal system they could chose to use English law (or perhaps Scottish if preferred). The cost of Federal matters would be subject to a Federal taxation but everything else would be left to the Assemblies to raise and spend. I would guess due to existing inequality there would need to be a part of the Federal tax that would be raised across all four nations but then used - much as the EU does - to benefit certain areas over and above what the individual nations could afford. (I am thinking here mostly of Wales and N Ireland).
Bad news for Remain - Leadsom expected to pull out in a speech at 12.15. That will curtail the time to mount a legal challenge
I could foresee only two arguments arising over the idea for a Federal Parliament. 1 - the make up of the beast. Would there be equal representation for each country - or would there be an expectation of representation according to population share? Either way there would be arguments, and if the latter were to be chosen then nothing would change for the other three partners. 2 - defence. I admittedly have no idea how NI & Wales view nuclear weapons/Trident, but Scotland are totally against. Even if England agreed to relocate Trident to their own patch, I doubt that Scotland would agree to paying any share of the cost of keeping it. Which probably leads to a third point - with Cameron's heir apparent, Mother Theresa, apparently hell-bent on pushing through Trident renewal with unseemly haste, would there be any scope at all for a Federal Parliament?
Are we going to see the Labour Party choose another loser instead of Comrade Corbyn? Angela Eagle has the personality of a hamster.
Always the same old crap SH. Either debate like an adult on here or leave it out altogether - this is a place for debate, not your incessant provocation designed only to irritate others and cause a reaction.
I was trying to help the Labour Party, they are in such a mess they need all the good advice they can get. Eagle is a poor quality temporary alternative to the hapless Corbyn. The PLP need a single heavyweight politician from the right of the party to stand any chance of being taken seriously in 2020. At least you have given the 'party membership' crap a rest for a while.
