The consequence thread (Brexit)

We have always had the ability to control immigration from outside the EU, we can do it.

Ask yourself why Theresa May failed to do it.

Choosing to' remain' meant having to accept anyone and everyone who wished to come here from the EU. How would that help to deal with any future problems associated with immigration?

It is relevant, in stated that there would be financial ramifications, out promised the world and then some. Are you ignoring that when the figures come out and say - In only said it to scaremonger?

I didn't say figures weren't relevant - I said how does that answer what I said, because it was almost as if you quoted the wrong bit, it was so off target.

but, on this point - 'Out' might have promised the world, but not in 17 days or so

In fact, I also did heard a TV debate where an OUT person said there would be a short term issue, I can't recall who it was, but I remember agreeing [with the screen:hihi:], because I had written exactly the same thing (though I wrote that it was unlikely - meaning the brexit was unlikely, which I thought it was).

Regarding the rest of your post, I couldn't care less which political party it was that lied, as far as I am concerned both Labour and Tory are to blame for that.

If both are to blame then what's the point in debating it? - they are the government and the opposition!

These are the people we vote in to run the country/and be the opposition to keep a stable democracy! Although the OUT campaign wasn't entirely left OR right party orientated (i.e both stances were remain!), obviously the right has the 'further right' on the OUT side.

This to me, means you are dismissing what I'm trying to say that the left (generally politically 'IN') were represented by a party who's all over the place, and that has to influence the voting. I think UKIP got about 4 million voters in the last election, how many were ex-labour? A lot I bet. Certainly enough to help swing the vote.

What you lot can't see is that this bus lie, and immigration bus lie, were just influencing the people who already would have cast an OUT vote even if the REMAIN offered them all £1000. In other words, the Milliband and Corbyn disaster handed over up to 4 million OUT votes before Dimbleby had put on his tie!

But, when reading your post, it is clear why that is occurring, you pick me up on my 'patronising' statement and completely ignore the point I made about immigration.

No I didn't, but let's not argue on semantics. I wrote something, you quoted it with some other point which wasn't mine.

Keep your head in the sand ash, one day you will have exhausted all protest options without choosing for anything.

I don't know sometimes if comments like this keep me posting or put me off.

ok... clearly the former

Keep your head in the sand ash, one day you will have exhausted all protest options without choosing for anything.

Keep your head in the sand ash, one day you will have exhausted all protest options without choosing for anything.

OK. I'll bite. Explain this?

I'm anything but a protester. If anything I'm a quiet thinker who writes out things when I've decided that I'm right

---------- Post added 10-07-2016 at 02:59 ----------

I'll come back to your post I1 tomo, I'm not ignoring your response to me, but the 3am cut is coming up!

That's a cop-out.

How is it a cop out?

The fact that both parties seem to be in a twist at the moment, and with DC deeserting, it's all a bit up in the air.

Seems reasonable to me, not a cop out.

The number of potential short term outcomes is massive! (though slightly fewer now May looks like winning the Tory business)

Other things that could alter things massively...

1. (main one) is there going to be a GE?

2. What is happening with Labour?

3. If there is a GE, who is going to oppose the government?

- If it's Corbyn, then it'd be a pointless GE

- If it's a Labour brexiter with seemingly good plans, and good at winning people over, against May who is a remainer, then that could also change everything.

4. many more but too late to add. I'm sure you know anyway, you're just trying to cut me off with the cop-out line.

If it is a cop-out, then it's because I have no idea or even could predict what is going to happen in the next couple of months. I'd prefer to see a good opposition and a GE, perhaps in October time (if Labour or new party gets their act together)

Think of it this way, 4 million UKIP voters are there for the taking now the party is finished. Still, I've got my head in the sand as I was told in the last post.

I will say that I'm quite surprised with the whole thing, that when the ballot paper had only 2 options, that neither the government, nor the opposition had a plan b. Or even a Plan A! It shows the current 'political elite' to be very poor IMO.

However, despite the fact that both parties are showing themselves to be wasters, I still do not approve or condone the treatment by the press of them, hounding them outside their houses. I think this will mean that good potential MPs and politicians amongst the younger generation will be put off - and like I've said before (on occasion ) - I think we'll end up with Trump or that blonde woman here... type people as politicians. Ones who don't give a toss about anything other than their twitter follower stats.

What specifically will get better for the average family? Brexiters must have some idea.

 

Wages?

 

Job security?

 

Opportunities for youngsters?

 

Utility prices?

 

Food prices?

 

House prices?

 

Tax burden?

 

 

What..................

see above. especially points 1 and 3

Ian Hislop was on Question Time and I found his comments very interesting.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36742691

I watched the whole episode and I thought he was very good in it. A lot of good points were made in it by all in fact, even George, but this one line makes the headlines No remainers were waiting for this then?

 

I know, its the government that pulls the trigger by invoking A50.!

 

You can as its not open to public involvement thats what the government is for.

This is the crux of the legal challenge. Can government invoke article 50 without an act of parliament. The government is arguing that technically yes it can but in practice would not. The legal challenge is attempting to cover the case where the government decides not to go to parliament.

And yes absolutely the public can be involved, not directly of course but through their elected representatives. You, me or anybody can suggest to our MPs which way we would like them to vote if this is put to parliament.

This is the crux of the legal challenge. Can government invoke article 50 without an act of parliament. The government is arguing that technically yes it can but in practice would not. The legal challenge is attempting to cover the case where the government decides not to go to parliament.

 

Could you point me to where the government is saying this please?

No, that's absolutely not the case.

 

TV Vox pops have gone through at least three tiers of editorial/journalistic choices, before their specifically selected opinions are broadcast.

That still doesn't affect the way these people voted in the referendum,and in the West Bromwich Panorama programme,they were all out voters citing immigration as the main reason.

Choosing to' remain' meant having to accept anyone and everyone who wished to come here from the EU. How would that help to deal with any future problems associated with immigration?

We have equal number coming here from the EU and from outside the EU; we do not have as much an issue with other countries because we are an island.

I support reducing immigration, where ever possible.

When people hear about us becoming more racist and in recession the numbers of immigrants will fall. There may be no need for the politicians to reduce numbers.

This is the crux of the legal challenge. Can government invoke article 50 without an act of parliament. The government is arguing that technically yes it can but in practice would not. The legal challenge is attempting to cover the case where the government decides not to go to parliament.

 

And yes absolutely the public can be involved, not directly of course but through their elected representatives. You, me or anybody can suggest to our MPs which way we would like them to vote if this is put to parliament.

As the majority of MPs are in parties which support membership of the EU, and entered parliament on that basis at the last election, then it would seem appropriate if those MPs chose to vote to remain, as they already have a mandate.

The UK voted to leave the EU, which means the UK are going to leave the EU.

We are in unchartered waters. I think we will exit, but it is by no means certain. And the route to geting there is certainly not fixed.