|
|
Post by supergas on Nov 29, 2024 8:09:44 GMT
Louise Haigh has resigned as Transport Secretary. 😂😂😂 It's not the gravest offence I've ever heard of, but it's not appropriate behaviour and keeping it a secret shows some signs of not being trustworthy, so she's done the right thing, this time. Fraud is pretty bad and (if her former colleagues are to be believed) it wasn't as 'accidental' as she claims...surprised it hadn't come out before.... |
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Nov 29, 2024 8:41:46 GMT
Starmer and others were asking the question after a very short time. But as mentioned, he is relating to his followers so it makes sense. Issue is that a narrow decision the other way just alienates the other 49.5% That's very true. I don't think 50.5% was enough of a mandate to have made such a big decision either way. I get it though, leave won. I respect that and that was why we left the EU. I also agree we have to make that work but as you say more or less half the population are not happy. I do wonder what the results of a referendum would be now with 20/20 hindsight.The bigger problem is the lack of a proper plan from the EU for any country to leave, as well as the UK electorate not having had a proper on political intergration before. Yes I know we were asked in 1975 if we wanted to remain in a trading bloc - if the EU was still just a trading bloc we definitely would have voted to remain in 2016 as well. We should have had a vote on the Maastricht Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty and the reason Major/Blair never put it to the public was the polls said the public would say no...the Guardian ran polls on Maastricht which were roughly pro 20%/anti 30%/don't know 50%, and those against were picking up 3-4% each time a new poll was run. Same with Lisbon, every opinion poll on how people would vote in a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty showed the public would say no, so Blair didn't ask them, pushed it through Parliament and signed it anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on Nov 29, 2024 9:53:22 GMT
That's very true. I don't think 50.5% was enough of a mandate to have made such a big decision either way. I get it though, leave won. I respect that and that was why we left the EU. I also agree we have to make that work but as you say more or less half the population are not happy. I do wonder what the results of a referendum would be now with 20/20 hindsight.The bigger problem is the lack of a proper plan from the EU for any country to leave, as well as the UK electorate not having had a proper on political intergration before. Yes I know we were asked in 1975 if we wanted to remain in a trading bloc - if the EU was still just a trading bloc we definitely would have voted to remain in 2016 as well. We should have had a vote on the Maastricht Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty and the reason Major/Blair never put it to the public was the polls said the public would say no...the Guardian ran polls on Maastricht which were roughly pro 20%/anti 30%/don't know 50%, and those against were picking up 3-4% each time a new poll was run. Same with Lisbon, every opinion poll on how people would vote in a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty showed the public would say no, so Blair didn't ask them, pushed it through Parliament and signed it anyway.  Surely the onus is on the country leaving? We are the ones who messed up negotiations constantly and we can’t blame them for that |
|
|
|
Post by gashead79 on Nov 29, 2024 12:06:13 GMT
The bigger problem is the lack of a proper plan from the EU for any country to leave, as well as the UK electorate not having had a proper on political intergration before. Yes I know we were asked in 1975 if we wanted to remain in a trading bloc - if the EU was still just a trading bloc we definitely would have voted to remain in 2016 as well. We should have had a vote on the Maastricht Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty and the reason Major/Blair never put it to the public was the polls said the public would say no...the Guardian ran polls on Maastricht which were roughly pro 20%/anti 30%/don't know 50%, and those against were picking up 3-4% each time a new poll was run. Same with Lisbon, every opinion poll on how people would vote in a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty showed the public would say no, so Blair didn't ask them, pushed it through Parliament and signed it anyway. Surely the onus is on the country leaving? We are the ones who messed up negotiations constantly and we can’t blame them for that Nah. It should be an agreement on leaving and joining. This finger pointing of blame is what our media do to people and cause division. The negotiations needn't be topics of disagreement, rather agreement on the best course of action for both parties. I don't think the EU wanted us to leave, I also think many of our politicians were against it, so there's your recipe for a messy divorce. |
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on Nov 29, 2024 13:58:02 GMT
Surely the onus is on the country leaving? We are the ones who messed up negotiations constantly and we can’t blame them for that Nah. It should be an agreement on leaving and joining. This finger pointing of blame is what our media do to people and cause division. The negotiations needn't be topics of disagreement, rather agreement on the best course of action for both parties. I don't think the EU wanted us to leave, I also think many of our politicians were against it, so there's your recipe for a messy divorce. That’s far too simplistic though. Firstly the finger pointing goes on each side, both leave and remain, this forum included. What do you do when what’s best for both countries is at odds with each other? It’s then a disagreement. Agreement on leaving would probably make sense for some countries because terms to join now would probably go back to what they were before joining. With us though, we helped form the EU as it evolved so there isn’t a specific time of when we signed up, and we also had Ireland/Northern Ireland which is what caused the biggest mess. |
|
|
|
Post by gashead79 on Nov 29, 2024 21:11:31 GMT
Nah. It should be an agreement on leaving and joining. This finger pointing of blame is what our media do to people and cause division. The negotiations needn't be topics of disagreement, rather agreement on the best course of action for both parties. I don't think the EU wanted us to leave, I also think many of our politicians were against it, so there's your recipe for a messy divorce. That’s far too simplistic though. Firstly the finger pointing goes on each side, both leave and remain, this forum included. What do you do when what’s best for both countries is at odds with each other? It’s then a disagreement. Agreement on leaving would probably make sense for some countries because terms to join now would probably go back to what they were before joining. With us though, we helped form the EU as it evolved so there isn’t a specific time of when we signed up, and we also had Ireland/Northern Ireland which is what caused the biggest mess. Fair points. The second point is where highly intelligent, well paid adults sit down and thrash it out. Otherwise what might be better for one side today can end up being tomorrow's curse and ill feeling. Sadly but inevitably, many people involved in this stuff don't even get to face or feel any consequences. They do their term and move on to the next role or retirement. We had 3 PMs through all that and alot of instability throughout. |
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Nov 29, 2024 22:23:27 GMT
That’s far too simplistic though. Firstly the finger pointing goes on each side, both leave and remain, this forum included. What do you do when what’s best for both countries is at odds with each other? It’s then a disagreement. Agreement on leaving would probably make sense for some countries because terms to join now would probably go back to what they were before joining. With us though, we helped form the EU as it evolved so there isn’t a specific time of when we signed up, and we also had Ireland/Northern Ireland which is what caused the biggest mess. Fair points. The second point is where highly intelligent, well paid adults sit down and thrash it out. Otherwise what might be better for one side today can end up being tomorrow's curse and ill feeling. Sadly but inevitably, many people involved in this stuff don't even get to face or feel any consequences. They do their term and move on to the next role or retirement. We had 3 PMs through all that and alot of instability throughout. It didn't help that one side thought it should be stopped and the other saw it as carte blanche to do as they pleased. Brexit should have been seen as a process, rather than an event with a set date. Stepping into an EFTA temporary state while cooler headed 'grown-ups' (yes, I know) talked longer term. Perhaps May was right. |
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Nov 30, 2024 6:32:49 GMT
The bigger problem is the lack of a proper plan from the EU for any country to leave, as well as the UK electorate not having had a proper on political intergration before. Yes I know we were asked in 1975 if we wanted to remain in a trading bloc - if the EU was still just a trading bloc we definitely would have voted to remain in 2016 as well. We should have had a vote on the Maastricht Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty and the reason Major/Blair never put it to the public was the polls said the public would say no...the Guardian ran polls on Maastricht which were roughly pro 20%/anti 30%/don't know 50%, and those against were picking up 3-4% each time a new poll was run. Same with Lisbon, every opinion poll on how people would vote in a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty showed the public would say no, so Blair didn't ask them, pushed it through Parliament and signed it anyway. Surely the onus is on the country leaving? We are the ones who messed up negotiations constantly and we can’t blame them for that 'We' messed up the negotiations. well, 'some' of 'us' did. Even at the time - but clearly with hindsight - it was obvious neither May nor the government wanted to leave with No Deal (it was the textbook definition of a negotiating position). Yet week after week, month after month of parliamentary deadlock by those trying to stop the government threatening a no-deal Brexit handed all the power back to the EU. Having said that, the EU still should have made things easier post-Brexit, but for internal political reasons chose not to. With no clear plan for a country leaving the EU showed it's true colours - whilst wanting to keep us as an ally for the next time a war breaks out, they also want to hurt us as much as possible economically.... |
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Nov 30, 2024 7:11:42 GMT
That’s far too simplistic though. Firstly the finger pointing goes on each side, both leave and remain, this forum included. What do you do when what’s best for both countries is at odds with each other? It’s then a disagreement. Agreement on leaving would probably make sense for some countries because terms to join now would probably go back to what they were before joining. With us though, we helped form the EU as it evolved so there isn’t a specific time of when we signed up, and we also had Ireland/Northern Ireland which is what caused the biggest mess. Fair points. The second point is where highly intelligent, well paid adults sit down and thrash it out. Otherwise what might be better for one side today can end up being tomorrow's curse and ill feeling. Sadly but inevitably, many people involved in this stuff don't even get to face or feel any consequences. They do their term and move on to the next role or retirement. We had 3 PMs through all that and alot of instability throughout. Completely agree. Not one of our politicians of either colour really gives a sh** because, no matter what the outcome, they will be just fine living in a comfortable position in life. Meanwhile us proles have to just suck it up. |
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Nov 30, 2024 13:23:20 GMT
Surely the onus is on the country leaving? We are the ones who messed up negotiations constantly and we can’t blame them for that 'We' messed up the negotiations. well, 'some' of 'us' did. Even at the time - but clearly with hindsight - it was obvious neither May nor the government wanted to leave with No Deal (it was the textbook definition of a negotiating position). Yet week after week, month after month of parliamentary deadlock by those trying to stop the government threatening a no-deal Brexit handed all the power back to the EU. Having said that, the EU still should have made things easier post-Brexit, but for internal political reasons chose not to. With no clear plan for a country leaving the EU showed it's true colours - whilst wanting to keep us as an ally for the next time a war breaks out, they also want to hurt us as much as possible economically.... Think of it as a bitter divorce. |
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Nov 30, 2024 17:25:48 GMT
'We' messed up the negotiations. well, 'some' of 'us' did. Even at the time - but clearly with hindsight - it was obvious neither May nor the government wanted to leave with No Deal (it was the textbook definition of a negotiating position). Yet week after week, month after month of parliamentary deadlock by those trying to stop the government threatening a no-deal Brexit handed all the power back to the EU. Having said that, the EU still should have made things easier post-Brexit, but for internal political reasons chose not to. With no clear plan for a country leaving the EU showed it's true colours - whilst wanting to keep us as an ally for the next time a war breaks out, they also want to hurt us as much as possible economically.... Think of it as a bitter divorce. Could anyone possibly have expected anything else? Like the EU saying "You want to leave? Certainly, British chums. Just tell us when you'd like it to happen and set out your terms for the future. We will then make sure it happens. Au revoir, Englanders". |
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Dec 1, 2024 6:36:54 GMT
'We' messed up the negotiations. well, 'some' of 'us' did. Even at the time - but clearly with hindsight - it was obvious neither May nor the government wanted to leave with No Deal (it was the textbook definition of a negotiating position). Yet week after week, month after month of parliamentary deadlock by those trying to stop the government threatening a no-deal Brexit handed all the power back to the EU. Having said that, the EU still should have made things easier post-Brexit, but for internal political reasons chose not to. With no clear plan for a country leaving the EU showed it's true colours - whilst wanting to keep us as an ally for the next time a war breaks out, they also want to hurt us as much as possible economically.... Think of it as a bitter divorce. Well we can all agree that both sides lose out in the deal we currently have - and that puts the EU in breach of one of it's own treaties. Article 8 of the Lisbon Treaty says "...the Union shall develop a special relationship with neighbouring countries, aiming to establish an area of prosperity and good neighbourliness..." |
|
