'Disaster looms,' says head of UK's anti-Brexit party

[Baerboxer]

4 hours ago, steve187 said:

when will the remain camp, get over it and move on, now get the best deal possible or no deal and no divorce money, the MP's are like a bunch of  children. Stop worrying about the 1 million in Europe, and  the 3 million in the UK, they will have to make the best of it.

 

For how many years were the Leavers going on and on about having a referendum? They finally had one and won by a small margin.

 

Now suddenly, it must be a one and only, never to be repeated, can never be changed, vote according to them!

 

Democracy means that people can, and do, change their mind when voting. Get over it.

[Baerboxer]

1 minute ago, Laughing Gravy said:

I totally agree.

 

Just for those who need reminding again. Vince cable and some TV posters here.

 

 

David Cameron, even when still PM wasn't in a position to make that decision. The British people will. Just like the witch behind him found out to her cost when she also tried to circumvent the British parliamentary and democratic procedure, people don't like it.

[puck2]

46 minutes ago, rixalex said:

There was propaganda from both sides before the last referendum, and if there is a second one (or a third, or a fourth...), it will be no different. There will still be lies and mistruths propagated aplenty from both sides. There will never be this magical propaganda-free referendum with only the pure facts spoken, that you seem to believe in. It will always be up to the public to sift through all the nonsense and come to their own decision. It's what you did i presume? Why do you think that people who voted out weren't capable of doing that too? It's a touch arrogant don't you think? Have you ever considered for a moment that maybe it was you who was duped into voting the wrong way?

 

I agree with you that there would be propaganda actions from both sides. But the situation nowadays is very different.

 

I guess  in June last year, the majority of the voters have not been informed enough about the negative consequences of Brexit (what happens now) re. the positive effects of the EU.

 

It's shown day by day that the Brexiteers didn't have any concrete and reliable ideas for the Brexit procedure, except cherry picking. Imagine all EU members would think like this. Then the Brexiteer-friends in this forum nearly would would die, if Germany - as the money contributor #1 - would ask for most of the cherries. This union is built for many senseful reasons, not only for money. A long list I cannot write here.

 

BTW, in the following TV thread you can read about one of the positive reasons for a remaining, if you are open for the real facts. And the positive list is very long, believe or not.

 

https://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/1002886-british-expats-face-cliff-edge-in-pensions-and-insurance-after-brexit/

 

[Laughing Gravy]

7 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

David Cameron, even when still PM wasn't in a position to make that decision. The British people will. Just like the witch behind him found out to her cost when she also tried to circumvent the British parliamentary and democratic procedure, people don't like it.

You should learn to get over it.

 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/brexit-opinion-poll-reveals-majority-8283139

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-second-referendum-poll-vote-leave-voters-regret-four-out-of-ten-remain-europe-a7127731.html

 

These are from remain papers.  David Cameron was in a position to make that decision, as he was the only one who could have given a referendum in the first place. He had pledged one in 2009 and back tracked. He thought he would win and now the Europhiles are making a last, desperate effort to try and keep the UK in the corrupt EU. The people had a chance at the last election to vote for the Lib dems, as they were the only main party wanting a second referendum. In case you forgot they didn't

 

If we changed our mind the way you are saying we would have an GE every 6 months. IMHO the subject of going back into the EU shouldn't be broached for at least 10 years.

 

[Bannoi]

I feel a lot of people would  like the chance to either change their mind or confirm their original choice.

 

A binding not advisory referendum on accepting or rejecting the final deal once and for all should be made by the people not any political party or ministers or even parliament.

 

Everybody leave or remain would then have to accept it.

 

If the will of the people is what this is really all about then let democracy have the final say.

[Laughing Gravy]

9 minutes ago, Bannoi said:

I feel a lot of people would  like the chance to either change their mind or confirm their original choice.

 

A binding not advisory referendum on accepting or rejecting the final deal once and for all should be made by the people not any political party or ministers or even parliament.

 

Everybody leave or remain would then have to accept it.

 

If the will of the people is what this is really all about then let democracy have the final say.

What you say was said the first time. It could end up a forth and fifth. The UK are leaving. People should deal with it. If they are unhappy they can vote for a party who will take them back in the EU. Good luck with that one. 

 

The article is full of project fear. All my friends in the UK are fine with us leaving the EU and only feel worried after watching the BBC or reading the Guardian and Independent Newspapers. They have stopped reading and watching.

 

The whole process would be a mockery of democracy. People are still laughing at Eire and Holland and what happened to them. We are leaving, article 50 has been triggered, so once again accept it.

 

[Laughing Gravy]

9 minutes ago, Bannoi said:

I feel a lot of people would  like the chance to either change their mind or confirm their original choice.

 

Just look at the cost and would the government spend 9 million pound on leaflets saying we should leave the EU?

[puck2]

29 minutes ago, the guest said:

Democracy must be upheld, the people voted, and decision must be carried !

What a strange logic. Voting a second time, is this undemocratic ?????

Is it undemocratic when the Scots will have a second voting about leaving the UK?

 

EU and Brexit is a very serious subject concerning the future. It's not like betting if Arsenal or Chelsea will win.  In many states you would need a qualified majority for such an important issue. Qualified means not 50% of the votes cast, but at least 50% - or more - of the eligible voters. That's democracy, too.

[dick dasterdly]

3 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

You should learn to get over it.

 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/brexit-opinion-poll-reveals-majority-8283139

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-second-referendum-poll-vote-leave-voters-regret-four-out-of-ten-remain-europe-a7127731.html

 

These are from remain papers.  David Cameron was in a position to make that decision, as he was the only one who could have given a referendum in the first place. He had pledged one in 2009 and back tracked. He thought he would win and now the Europhiles are making a last, desperate effort to try and keep the UK in the corrupt EU. The people had a chance at the last election to vote for the Lib dems, as they were the only main party wanting a second referendum. In case you forgot they didn't

 

If we changed our mind the way you are saying we would have an GE every 6 months. IMHO the subject of going back into the EU shouldn't be broached for at least 10 years.

 

Re. the Independent article, I particularly laughed at the following snippet :-

 

"The survey of 2,000 people by ORB found that 40 per cent agree that there should be a referendum on the exit deal the Government negotiates, and should seek to remain in the EU if the public rejects the terms."

 

So 60% thought otherwise?  Must admit that I stopped reading after this.

 

I've no problem with another binding referendum - as long as all the options are made very clear long before the referendum, and one of the options is along the lines of 'deal not good enough - leave immediately under WTO terms'.  This would concentrate both UK and EU politicians' minds wonderfully on coming up with the best deal possible!

[Laughing Gravy]

2 minutes ago, puck2 said:

  In many states you would need a qualified majority for such an important issue. Qualified means not 50% of the votes cast, but at least 50% - or more - of the eligible voters. That's democracy, too.

Different system entirely and the US is not democratically represented the same as the UK. It was a referendum  not an election, so all equal from county to countries.

 

4 minutes ago, puck2 said:

What a strange logic. Voting a second time, is this undemocratic ?????

Yes it is as it was referendum which was clearly set out as one only. Not accepting the vote is undemocratic. If you and Vince Cable want to stop the EU referendum result, then get yourself in power.  That is democratic although his party tried that a few months ago and he is left whining to any liberal, lefty that will listen.

[sawadee1947]

Good man, good ideas. Congrats. I hope proEU brains will win over outdated proBrexit finally. It's still not too late for a good future.

[puck2]

41 minutes ago, rixalex said:

There was propaganda from both sides before the last referendum, and if there is a second one (or a third, or a fourth...), it will be no different. There will still be lies and mistruths propagated aplenty from both sides. There will never be this magical propaganda-free referendum with only the pure facts spoken, that you seem to believe in. It will always be up to the public to sift through all the nonsense and come to their own decision. It's what you did i presume? Why do you think that people who voted out weren't capable of doing that too? It's a touch arrogant don't you think? Have you ever considered for a moment that maybe it was you who was duped into voting the wrong way?

 

 

I agree with you that there would be propaganda actions from both sides. But the situation nowadays is very different.

 

I guess , in June last year the majority of the voters have not been informed enough about the negative consequences of Brexit (what happens now) re. the positive effects of the EU.

 

It's shown day by day that the Brexiteers didn't have any concrete and reliable ideas for the Brexit procedure, except cherry picking. Imagine all EU members would think like this. Then the Brexiteer-friends in this forum nearly would would die if Germany - as the money contributor #1 - would aks for most of the cherries. This union is built for many senseful reasons, not only for money. A long list I cannot write here.

 

BTW, in the following TV thread you can read about one of the positive reasons for a remaining, if you are open for the real facts. And the positive list is very long, believe or not.

 

https://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/1002886-british-expats-face-cliff-edge-in-pensions-and-insurance-after-brexit/

 

[puck2]

7 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Re. the Independent article, I particularly laughed at the following snippet :-

 

"The survey of 2,000 people by ORB found that 40 per cent agree that there should be a referendum on the exit deal the Government negotiates, and should seek to remain in the EU if the public rejects the terms."

 

So 60% thought otherwise?  Must admit that I stopped reading after this.

 

I've no problem with another binding referendum - as long as all the options are made very clear long before the referendum, and one of the options is along the lines of 'deal not good enough - leave immediately under WTO terms'.  This would concentrate both UK and EU politicians' minds wonderfully on coming up with the best deal possible!

Tell me the wanted result of o a poll and you get what you want. An old wisdom.

 

I didn't read this article of the I.  What, if only 35% had said "don't want a new one" and 25 had said" I don't know at now???

[sawadee1947]

3 minutes ago, puck2 said:

 

I agree with you that there would be propaganda actions from both sides

look here. If you want to be informed 8in Thailand) about politics at home you got the choice (except www) between many TV channels e.g. Al Jazeera, RT, DW, AUS, chinese and Japanese. After watching news you can make up your mind and find the right view for yourself. The truth is always between all these facts showed there. if British people would not listen to BBC only information would be much clearer. In this case the coming disaster.

[Bannoi]

17 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

What you say was said the first time. It could end up a forth and fifth. The UK are leaving. People should deal with it. If they are unhappy they can vote for a party who will take them back in the EU. Good luck with that one. 

 

The article is full of project fear. All my friends in the UK are fine with us leaving the EU and only feel worried after watching the BBC or reading the Guardian and Independent Newspapers. They have stopped reading and watching.

 

The whole process would be a mockery of democracy. People are still laughing at Eire and Holland and what happened to them. We are leaving, article 50 has been triggered, so once again accept it.

 

What i am saying is their should be a final binding not an advisory referendum as the vote to see whether people wanted to leave was.

 

The only people running scared of a final referendum are the leave supporters that begs the question as to why? the answer to that is blatantly obvious.

 

I agree the referendum vote was to leave albeit by a small margin that is what was decided. 

 

What is undemocratic is not allowing another referendum in case the vote goes against you.

 

Leave or remain there are going to be an awful lot of people unhappy with the decision.

 

 

[nauseus]

50 minutes ago, puck2 said:

I agree with you that there would be propaganda actions from both sides. But the situation nowadays is very different.

 

I guess  in June last year, the majority of the voters have not been informed enough about the negative consequences of Brexit (what happens now) re. the positive effects of the EU.

 

It's shown day by day that the Brexiteers didn't have any concrete and reliable ideas for the Brexit procedure, except cherry picking. Imagine all EU members would think like this. Then the Brexiteer-friends in this forum nearly would would die, if Germany - as the money contributor #1 - would ask for most of the cherries. This union is built for many senseful reasons, not only for money. A long list I cannot write here.

 

BTW, in the following TV thread you can read about one of the positive reasons for a remaining, if you are open for the real facts. And the positive list is very long, believe or not.

 

https://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/1002886-british-expats-face-cliff-edge-in-pensions-and-insurance-after-brexit/

 

Same old same old, take it away to the tip!

[Laughing Gravy]

4 minutes ago, Bannoi said:

What i am saying is their should be a final binding not an advisory referendum as the vote to see whether people wanted to leave was.

Ok but it was binding to everyone who voted which ever way you voted. It would seem its not binding when the result is less favourable to some people.

 

5 minutes ago, Bannoi said:

The only people running scared of a final referendum are the leave supporters that begs the question as to why? the answer to that is blatantly obvious.

Is that so and how do you know this quantifiable fact?

 

5 minutes ago, Bannoi said:

What is undemocratic is not allowing another referendum in case the vote goes against you.

I have never said that at all. I have said that people had a choice to vote for a party that was representing another referendum. Not many did. If you went by your way we would have a referendum every year.

 

7 minutes ago, Bannoi said:

Leave or remain there are going to be an awful lot of people unhappy with the decision.

That is politics and the way of life. You can't please everyone. You have to go with the Majority and if you are unhappy, vote for those who will bring you harmony, if ever.

 

If there was another referendum now, I believe there would be chaos. If people find they want to rejoin the EU in say 10 years time, once we left then that would be justified. Although I would still be voting leave but would accept the decision like I am from the last one.

[David in the north]

High time Cable & others shut up & got behind the UK.
The vote was for out - end of.
Enough of talking the country down now.

[nauseus]

50 minutes ago, Bannoi said:

I feel a lot of people would  like the chance to either change their mind or confirm their original choice.

 

A binding not advisory referendum on accepting or rejecting the final deal once and for all should be made by the people not any political party or ministers or even parliament.

 

Everybody leave or remain would then have to accept it.

 

If the will of the people is what this is really all about then let democracy have the final say.

Done already!

[hawker9000]

" 'Disaster looms,' says head of UK's anti-Brexit party"

<yawn>   Yes, of course it does and the sky really IS falling.   yadda yadda yadda     So how did the Chargers do yesterday?

 

  

 

[Laughing Gravy]

56 minutes ago, puck2 said:

I agree with you that there would be propaganda actions from both sides. But the situation nowadays is very different.

 

I guess  in June last year, the majority of the voters have not been informed enough about the negative consequences of Brexit (what happens now) re. the positive effects of the EU.

It has actually highlighted what the EU is all bout and brought them to account. The UK people had been tricked for years and now we are leaving been threatened, bullied and punished. Yes the people know what the EU is like and are thanking we are leaving the federalization of Europe.

 

Staying in the EU would mean an EU army (opps that was  lie for years until now)

Having to join the euro (people of the UK would never agree)

Have a one president unelected, presiding over sovereign laws.

One bank etc etc

 

Yes the situation is very different. people have been awakened. finally.

 

[rixalex]

30 minutes ago, puck2 said:

 

I agree with you that there would be propaganda actions from both sides. But the situation nowadays is very different.

 

It's no different at all. Nobody really knows what life outside the EU will be like, until the day it happens. Everything is speculation.

 

[nauseus]

40 minutes ago, sawadee1947 said:

Good man, good ideas. Congrats. I hope proEU brains will win over outdated proBrexit finally. It's still not too late for a good future.

The EU future looks dire - that's why the UK voted out. 

[nauseus]

34 minutes ago, Bannoi said:

What i am saying is their should be a final binding not an advisory referendum as the vote to see whether people wanted to leave was.

 

The only people running scared of a final referendum are the leave supporters that begs the question as to why? the answer to that is blatantly obvious.

 

I agree the referendum vote was to leave albeit by a small margin that is what was decided. 

 

What is undemocratic is not allowing another referendum in case the vote goes against you.

 

Leave or remain there are going to be an awful lot of people unhappy with the decision.

 

 

Never a word about this pre referendum, when it was generally accepted (by the majority) that it was binding. 

[Justgrazing]

2 hours ago, puck2 said:

Another point of view.

Why are the Brexeteers so afraid of a second voting ? It's not a voting about a soccer club. It's too important for UK's future.

 

If they win again, it's confirmed by the majority of the voters. All okay.

 

But if they lose - what they are afraid of - it is confirmed that they have been deceived by some blockheads,  as Johnson for example. It would be a correction by the MAJORITY, who now  know more about the real problems and  about the former propaganda for Brexit. The last election already showed this tendency.

 

If they lose then that must make it 1 - 1.. If that is so will there be a decider played at Wembley like the play-off finals and if its still a draw will they then go to penalties .?

[pigeonjake]

When Britain come out and they will,

europe will fold as dont you really think others will follow, ?

 

Britain has put far to much into europe with very little out apart from being told we must take more and more migrants who are they to tell us to open our borders and let the masses come in?

 

we voted out and in my book that meens out, not some second vote so them at uni can be promised more, lol, (you dont have to pay your fees back) lol

 

out the sooner the better and no money changing hands they have had enough from this once great country,

[aright]

3 hours ago, baansgr said:

Maybe there should be a 2nd referendum, no lies or double voting from the leftist uni cronies....shut this sore loosers up once and for all, or maybe they will just say it should best of 5,

There was a second referendum not so long ago; it was called the General Election. Only one party said they wanted to stay in. The Lib Dems who promised another referendum if they got into power. Only 7% of the voters voted for them. 87% voted for the parties committed to leaving

[robertson468]

Cable and his cohorts (MPs) make me very cross!  The people voted and said out........your job Mr Cable is to implement the will of the people and frankly neither you or anyone else can accurately forecast the outcome of Brexit for the UK, so kindly shut up and get on with your job.  You also need to come to terms with there will be no freebie (incredibly well paid) EU Jobs in the offing for UK MPs when they loose their seat at the next election (as you did before) that you can capitalize on.

[Jip99]

17 minutes ago, aright said:

There was a second referendum not so long ago; it was called the General Election. Only one party said they wanted to stay in. The Lib Dems who promised another referendum if they got into power. Only 7% of the voters voted for them. 87% voted for the parties committed to leaving

 

 

 

That sounds conclusive to me........

 

 

 

...... but, Oh no, Cable and other whining remoaners don't get the result they wanted so they will bleat some more and obstruct the process wherever possible

 

treasonable!

[aright]

It sometimes helps to remind ourselves why we voted out.

This from a letter in the DT

 

Why we should leave the EU (or what do we get in return for our EU membership fee?). In return for the £12,000 million here are a few of the things we could have done without the EU, and a few to look forward to if we don’t leave:

1. Would we have been able to destroy our UK fishing industry if we had not been in the EU? Answer - yes, but we wouldn't.
2. Would we have been able to forge free trade agreements with any country we liked on our terms, including the EU block, if we had not been in the EU - answer yes, of course.
3. Would we have massive immigration and have no legal ability to deny benefits to those immigrants, even though they have not contributed, if we had not been in the EU? Answer - no.
4. Would we have paid our farmers to leave fields fallow, give massive subsidies to large unproductive land owners such as the royal family, whilst importing massive amounts of food, if we had not been in the EU? Answer – of course not.
5. Would UK nationals have been able to settle in other EU countries if we were not in the EU? Answer - yes, but not if you came with nothing and expected to be provided with a living for nothing, which is the situation elsewhere in the world, not just in the EU.

6. Are we destroying our right of self-determination? Answer – yes we are. The Europarl contribution? The toothless body can't change a thing Brussels decides to do. "The European Parliament may approve or reject a legislative proposal, or propose amendments to it. The Council is not legally obliged to take account of Parliament's opinion but in line with the case-law of the Court of Justice, it must not take a decision without having received it". 

7. Laws: I want my laws made by the body I have a say in electing, not a group of unelected people in Brussels pandering to the requirements of Germany and France and voting down UK objections every time under the majority voting system. There are now more than 40,000 legal acts in the EU. There are also 15,000 Court verdicts and 62,000 international standards, all of which must be respected and obeyed by all citizens and companies in the EU.
8. Will we be able to set our own foreign policy in future? Answer - not if the EU gets its way. Military: if the EU has the army as it wants, and national armies cease to exist as the EU wants, and foreign policy is set by Brussels that may or may not reflect the needs and aspirations of UK as the EU wants, who would control this army? Who would it fight for? What happens if the UK disagrees but is voted down? What happens to the UK nuclear deterrent?

9. Is the EU an institution that treats all members fairly and equitably? Answer – no it isn’t. The Greeks remember when they couldn't access any of their money a few months ago, and this was entirely due to the ECB flexing its muscles to coerce the Greek government into doing as it was told!

10. Can we set our own financial policy in the future? Not within the EU. We will be required to join the Euro this decade by EU law. The EU wants a common financial policy and common tax rates, set by the ECB.

11. Do all MS obey the EU laws, or are punished for not doing so? Answer – no. The migrant crisis: We watch as the French fail to apply EU laws as the laws don't suite them at the moment. The French allow migrants to set up camp to daily try to force their way into a sovereign territory that has rejected their 'application to enter' instead of processing them as require by EU law. Other MS simply wave them through, contrary to EU law. Other MS refuse to share the burden and erect razor wire border fences. Germany has run an illegal trade surplus for many years, other countries run up illegal deficits, all ignored of course.

12. Do we need the EU to alleviating a skills shortage in the UK? Answer – no. Our current immigration laws allow people with skills to enter and work in the UK. The EU just allows a million low skilled workers to come to the UK to take low paid jobs.

13. Is inward investment into the UK reliant on EU membership? Answer – no. Inward investment into the UK continues to grow after the Brexit vote.

SO, WHY ARE WE A MEMBER STATE? ANYONE