EU will delay Brexit until February if Johnson fails to ratify deal this week - The Sunday Times

[Chomper Higgot]

2 hours ago, Thomas J said:

It is no wonder that USA has copied British Common Law.  Neither government is functional.  The people voted for Brexit but the elected officials are fighting the will of the people tooth and nail.  Three and one half years later and still no progress.  In USA most people favor legal immigration, secure the border, stop welfare benefits for those here illegally but the lawmakers steadfastly balk at any progress for decades.  DYSFUNCTIONAL 

Just because you aren’t getting what you want doesn’t mean the Government is dysfunctional.

 

Far from it.

 

[el torro]

47 minutes ago, JAG said:

If I may chip in: elect a fresh Parliament?

 

It will give a clear picture of the electorates view on Brexit, both to the Parliament which it produces and to the EU with whom the UK have to negotiate.

 

It will produce a government which has a clear mandate to either leave, remain, or to continue discussing the options (heaven help us).

 

The process can be carried out within less than two months. We will have an answer, and can proceed accordingly.

 

As you know, I would wish for a government which would take us out of the EU. However, if it produced a government with a mandate to keep us in, so be it. As you have pointed out, we are a parliamentary democracy. This matter has now moved on so far from the arguments on which the last election was fought, that it should be put before the electorate again. Yes, MPs are representatives and not directed delegates, but this matter is so fundamental, and the divisions in our society are being so deepened by it, that I think it really should require a General Election to be fought over it, and a government produced with a proper mandate.

The promise of another referendum/GE just gives the EU the excuse they need to give yet another extension.

[SheungWan]

If I may chip in: elect a fresh Parliament?
 
It will give a clear picture of the electorates view on Brexit, both to the Parliament which it produces and to the EU with whom the UK have to negotiate.
 
It will produce a government which has a clear mandate to either leave, remain, or to continue discussing the options (heaven help us).
 
The process can be carried out within less than two months. We will have an answer, and can proceed accordingly.
 
As you know, I would wish for a government which would take us out of the EU. However, if it produced a government with a mandate to keep us in, so be it. As you have pointed out, we are a parliamentary democracy. This matter has now moved on so far from the arguments on which the last election was fought, that it should be put before the electorate again. Yes, MPs are representatives and not directed delegates, but this matter is so fundamental, and the divisions in our society are being so deepened by it, that I think it really should require a General Election to be fought over it, and a government produced with a proper mandate.

If it can be said that a new Parliament will give a clearer view of the electorate's views, then the same can be said of a new referendum. Dozy Hard Brexiteers stuffed on that one.

Sent from my SM-N935F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Chomper Higgot]

50 minutes ago, JAG said:

If I may chip in: elect a fresh Parliament?

 

It will give a clear picture of the electorates view on Brexit, both to the Parliament which it produces and to the EU with whom the UK have to negotiate.

 

It will produce a government which has a clear mandate to either leave, remain, or to continue discussing the options (heaven help us).

 

The process can be carried out within less than two months. We will have an answer, and can proceed accordingly.

 

As you know, I would wish for a government which would take us out of the EU. However, if it produced a government with a mandate to keep us in, so be it. As you have pointed out, we are a parliamentary democracy. This matter has now moved on so far from the arguments on which the last election was fought, that it should be put before the electorate again. Yes, MPs are representatives and not directed delegates, but this matter is so fundamental, and the divisions in our society are being so deepened by it, that I think it really should require a General Election to be fought over it, and a government produced with a proper mandate.

A fresh Parliament is due in 2022.

 

It can wait.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, el torro said:

The promise of another referendum/GE just gives the EU the excuse they need to give yet another extension.

The UK asking for an extension is all the excuse they need.

[oldhippy]

52 minutes ago, JAG said:

If I may chip in: elect a fresh Parliament?

 

It will give a clear picture of the electorates view on Brexit, both to the Parliament which it produces and to the EU with whom the UK have to negotiate.

 

It will produce a government which has a clear mandate to either leave, remain, or to continue discussing the options (heaven help us).

 

The process can be carried out within less than two months. We will have an answer, and can proceed accordingly.

 

As you know, I would wish for a government which would take us out of the EU. However, if it produced a government with a mandate to keep us in, so be it. As you have pointed out, we are a parliamentary democracy. This matter has now moved on so far from the arguments on which the last election was fought, that it should be put before the electorate again. Yes, MPs are representatives and not directed delegates, but this matter is so fundamental, and the divisions in our society are being so deepened by it, that I think it really should require a General Election to be fought over it, and a government produced with a proper mandate.

I note that you no longer mention a "beached whale" when talking about members of parliament. Good!

[el torro]

42 minutes ago, DannyCarlton said:

1975, and we wre alredy in the EEC and aware of it's positives and negatives so were able to make an informed choice. I voted leave in '75 BTW!

Not at all.

 

I was only 15 at the time and had no interest in politics, but immediately saw that there was something very wrong with CAP. - and was suprised that nobody else recognised the problem.

[MRToMRT]

7 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

Clear Brexit "off the table". Another ham-fisted attempt to justify no-deal.

If you think I care whether the UK leaves or stays, has a deal or no deal or wipes its ars or not then you have mistaken me for someone who cares. Don't try and pigeonhole people based on your own political prejudices.

[oldhippy]

21 minutes ago, el torro said:

Perhaps politicians should enact the referendum result?  Let's be honest - honest politicians are few and far between!

So you are in favour of direct democracy, or only when it suits you?

[fishtank]

4 hours ago, baansgr said:

What's the point, if the result was the same as 2016, Gina Miller and her ilk will still not be happy and continue their childish games ruining the economy

Saving the country from ruin I think you meant to say.

[el torro]

8 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The UK asking for an extension is all the excuse they need.

Except the PM is doing his very best to make it clear that he doesn't want yet another extension.

 

You, on the other hand, have made it very clear that you are desperate for another extension...

[SheungWan]

Probably all that can be done now, it's definitely the best and possibly the only real shot of achieving a house comprised of enough people of conviction to get the job done - with a majority, if the Brexit party, DUP and Tories joined forces and ran on a joint ticket, so to speak.
 
This whole disaster is why I would echo P.Hitchen's words some months ago - instead of having a referendum on the issue, having a general election based around electing parties with an specific manifesto based around the EU question would have been the best bet - if the Brexit party had existed in 2016 headed by its current lot then the UK would have had someone in power who was willing and able to do as the public dictated, and it seems very possible they would have won such an election too. Instead we had the eurosceptic proponents of Brexit within the Tory party unable or too spineless to enact it and the weakened position of the Tory gov. unable to command the house. Party politics and saving one's career being a major factor in this failure of government too. Effectively the country was left with no one wanting to do the dirty deed - we got Theresa May and we're still living with her Remainer's Brexit treaty to this day. It seems crazy to me, that after the most important vote in a lifetime we were left with those who had campaigned hardest and were best placed to deliver Brexit - totally unable to as they were not in government or if they were, were unable to lead, while those who were in government and best placed to enact it - totally inept and unwilling or unable to do so.
 
A *fair and unadulterated* general election now is perhaps a 2nd bite of the cherry that no one expected to be bitten in the first place. All we can do is hope that we get one, because I think we all know what the outcome would be.

You mean, like, running another referendum, you know the result of that one as well?

Sent from my SM-N935F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Chomper Higgot]

8 minutes ago, el torro said:

Except the PM is doing his very best to make it clear that he doesn't want yet another extension.

 

You, on the other hand, have made it very clear that you are desperate for another extension...

What I want is irrelevant but only slightly less so than what Johnson did not want.

 

He was forced to obey the law. 

 

Like the rest of us.

 

For the record, what I would like is the withdrawal of Article 50.

 

 

[oldhippy]

Excuse me for asking a stupid question.

 

What is wrong with organising simultaniously a binding referendum and an election?

The referendum will tell you remain or leave, and at what terms.

The election will tell you which social-economic-political path to take after remain/brexit is settled.

[tebee]

1 hour ago, CanterbrigianBangkoker said:

No, it wasn't. Leave or Remain was. There is ambiguity to both of course. As in 1973 the same binary choice was made, however fast-forward 46 years and the EU 'status quo' as Remainers love to deem it, is about as far removed from what it was in 1973 as anyone back then could have imagined. No Deal Brexit, Soft Brexit, Hard Brexit, Remainers Brexit - these monikers were all devised many weeks and months AFTER THE FACT. The choice was binary - for better or worse - and the choice taken was to LEAVE. 

What exactly is ambiguous about remaining ?

[el torro]

9 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

What I want is irrelevant but only slightly less so than what Johnson did not want.

 

He was forced to obey the law. 

 

Like the rest of us.

 

For the record, what I would like is the withdrawal of Article 50.

 

 

"For the record, what I would like is the withdrawal of Article 50"

 

We all know that is the desire of nearly everyone within the EU - as they want/need UK money.

[wreckingcountry]

[quote post="14688312" timestamp="1571647281" name="oldhippy"
And again I ask you: do you really believe Boris, Jacob and the Tories have the best interest of the working people in mind?
what facile statement ! I do know the crazy Marxist leading Labour Party doesn’t have the interests of the UK in his thoughts ! Some of us were in the party in the 1980s and know his abhorrent views. As well as being a liar on Brexit ! Let the public decide in a GE who has “working people interests at heart”. Another “class “ warrior spouting!


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[wreckingcountry]

If I may chip in: elect a fresh Parliament?
 
It will give a clear picture of the electorates view on Brexit, both to the Parliament which it produces and to the EU with whom the UK have to negotiate.
 
It will produce a government which has a clear mandate to either leave, remain, or to continue discussing the options (heaven help us).
 
The process can be carried out within less than two months. We will have an answer, and can proceed accordingly.
 
As you know, I would wish for a government which would take us out of the EU. However, if it produced a government with a mandate to keep us in, so be it. As you have pointed out, we are a parliamentary democracy. This matter has now moved on so far from the arguments on which the last election was fought, that it should be put before the electorate again. Yes, MPs are representatives and not directed delegates, but this matter is so fundamental, and the divisions in our society are being so deepened by it, that I think it really should require a General Election to be fought over it, and a government produced with a proper mandate.

It’s divisive because those who lost never accepted the result ! Can only imagine the response from remainers if the leave campaign had reacted the way they had if lost ! Cowardly lying bunch of Europhiles ! And believe me if this were ever reversed there would be anarchy and subversive acts of which I will be a part


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[oldhippy]

1 minute ago, wreckingcountry said:

[quote post="14688312" timestamp="1571647281" name="oldhippy"
And again I ask you: do you really believe Boris, Jacob and the Tories have the best interest of the working people in mind?
what facile statement ! I do know the crazy Marxist leading Labour Party doesn’t have the interests of the UK in his thoughts ! Some of us were in the party in the 1980s and know his abhorrent views. As well as being a liar on Brexit ! Let the public decide in a GE who has “working people interests at heart”. Another “class “ warrior spouting!


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

I don't know enough about the labour party to have an opinion about them.

Now please answer my question: do you really believe Boris, Jacob and the Tories have the best interest of the working people in mind?

I will take YOUR word for it.

[billd766]

2 hours ago, sandyf said:

At the end of the day Bill it does not matter what we think of the politicians. Until there is a change in the constitution the UK is a parliamentary democracy rather than a people's republic.

It would appear that those that do not like the result parliament of the last vote want to hold another vote, before the last one is finished.

Party politics has made Brexit nothing but a string of inconsistencies.

I am bored with the whole FUBAR of Brexit as I thing so many people are and wish it was over one way or the other.

 

My MP voted against the Benn act, resolution or what ever, which was probably a vote for Boris.

 

I am looking forward to the next election with great interest though.

[tebee]

4 minutes ago, billd766 said:

I am bored with the whole FUBAR of Brexit as I thing so many people are and wish it was over one way or the other.

 

My MP voted against the Benn act, resolution or what ever, which was probably a vote for Boris.

 

I am looking forward to the next election with great interest though.

of course you realize with the deal it won't be over ? It will years and years of negotiating the stuff that's in the political declaration. You will be lucky if we are back to a stable state again in 10 years. 

No deal will be even worse, wouldn't expect that  to be sorted out for a generation or more, especially NI.

 

The people that told you Brexit would be quick and easy - they lied 

[Jip99]

5 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

My MP voted against the Benn act, resolution or what ever, which was probably a vote for Boris.

 

 

 

 

Mine too..... and she has been consistent in supporting the government in Brexit votes. That is what she was mandated to do by her constituency.

 

Sandy is right when he says we have a parliamentary democracy - but it is the people who put the MPs where they are.

 

The next election will indeed be interesting and I wouldn’t like to be an MP who voted against the majority of his constituents..... they have long memories. 

 

As for the people who voted for a Labour politician on the strength of their manifesto (to deliver Brexit), I wonder what they think.

[Jip99]

2 minutes ago, tebee said:

of course you realize with the deal it won't be over ? It will years and years of negotiating the stuff that's in the political declaration. You will be lucky if we are back to a stable state again in 10 years. 

No deal will be even worse, wouldn't expect that  to be sorted out for a generation or more, especially NI.

 

The people that told you Brexit would be quick and easy - they lied 

 

 

Nobody told me it it would be quick and easy - the EU are not capable of that.

 

A deal, at least, sets a foundation.

[oldhippy]

16 minutes ago, wreckingcountry said:

It’s divisive because those who lost never accepted the result ! Can only imagine the response from remainers if the leave campaign had reacted the way they had if lost ! Cowardly lying bunch of Europhiles ! And believe me if this were ever reversed there would be anarchy and subversive acts of which I will be a part


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

I like the "anarchy" part in your post - but I sincerily doubt that your anarchy and my anarchy are the same anarchies. Bit of a hooligan perhaps?

[billd766]

4 minutes ago, Jip99 said:

 

 

Mine too..... and she has been consistent in supporting the government in Brexit votes. That is what she was mandated to do by her constituency.

 

Sandy is right when he says we have a parliamentary democracy - but it is the people who put the MPs where they are.

 

The next election will indeed be interesting and I wouldn’t like to be an MP who voted against the majority of his constituents..... they have long memories. 

 

As for the people who voted for a Labour politician on the strength of their manifesto (to deliver Brexit), I wonder what they think.

My constituency voted to leave but the MP is a Remainer.

[Denim]

3 hours ago, oldhippy said:

The first referendum was not binding to start with.

And if you like direct democracy, why not have brexit referendums every day?

Not practical you say?

Ah, true, but fortunately there is an alternative: it is called "parliamentary democracy".

Maybe you want to look up the meaning of that expression.

 

Who said the first referendum was binding ? Certainly not me.

I thought it was a bad idea to have the first as any fool could see it would open a can of worms.

 

Sorry but the rest of your post is just your own imagination waffling on.  

 

In a general election the people have the chance to vote for the party they believe will best deliver their aspirations. The parliament thus elected should not resort to referendums. If the people are not happy with the elected representatives they can vote them out of office at the next election.

[melvinmelvin]

6 minutes ago, Denim said:

 

Who said the first referendum was binding ? Certainly not me.

I thought it was a bad idea to have the first as any fool could see it would open a can of worms.

 

Sorry but the rest of your post is just your own imagination waffling on.  

 

In a general election the people have the chance to vote for the party they believe will best deliver their aspirations. The parliament thus elected should not resort to referendums. If the people are not happy with the elected representatives they can vote them out of office at the next election.

 

I do not agree with that

 

In general I think referundums/da would be a good idea on the foggy islands,

you have an archaic electoral system which almost guarantees that the composition 

of the national assembly will not reflect the will of the voters

 

a referendum should get the wishes of the plebs to surface

 

a GE also clarifies the wishes of the plebs, but the resulting parliament does not match the wishes,

very BIG SHAME on foggy islands

 

[Orton Rd]

12 minutes ago, Denim said:

 

Who said the first referendum was binding ? Certainly not me.

 

No but David Cameron did and he organized it, lost then did a runner.

[oldhippy]

12 minutes ago, Denim said:

 

Who said the first referendum was binding ? Certainly not me.

I thought it was a bad idea to have the first as any fool could see it would open a can of worms.

 

Sorry but the rest of your post is just your own imagination waffling on.  

 

In a general election the people have the chance to vote for the party they believe will best deliver their aspirations. The parliament thus elected should not resort to referendums. If the people are not happy with the elected representatives they can vote them out of office at the next election.

Did you not say:

Unless the electorate surprise everybody again and get it wrong for the second time in which case it is not binding just an expression of the voters opinion.

 

I understand that as "remainers will never accept an unfavorable result of a second referendum and will again claim the referendum was not binding".

 

Sorry if you meant something else.

 

 

[melvinmelvin]

5 minutes ago, Orton Rd said:

No but David Cameron did and he organized it, lost then did a runner.

no,

Cameron did not say it was binding, he said that the gov. would implement whatever the plebs decided,

there is a difference there

 

did a runner?

lots of pommies think so - hard for me to understand

in my view the pommies should be very gratefull that Cameron <deleted> off very swiftly, well done

 

no point in having him around after that loss, clout gone