John Wright Posted December 12, 2018 Share Posted December 12, 2018 Irony, irony. Anyone else love the irony of JRM and other ERG members wanting a vote on the conservative leadership, when they only voted on it in 2016. Seems if you’re a conservative and you landed yourself with a leader who is a crock of shit, it’s democratic to vote and change your mind ( or not - as the case May be ) but if you’re a voter and voted in the referendum for something which now looks like a crock of shit then having a second vote is antidemocratic. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted December 12, 2018 Share Posted December 12, 2018 I know the Article 50 period is two years, I suggested a year between the first and second referendums to allow time within the Article 50 to allow time for renegotiation. I take your broader point on board, but I'm sure that there will be crafty lawyers in Whitehall more capable than me of drafting a question that uses the words Withdrawal Agreement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted December 12, 2018 Share Posted December 12, 2018 5 minutes ago, Declan said: I know the Article 50 period is two years, I suggested a year between the first and second referendums to allow time within the Article 50 to allow time for renegotiation. I take your broader point on board, but I'm sure that there will be crafty lawyers in Whitehall more capable than me of drafting a question that uses the words Withdrawal Agreement. The fundamental flaw is that once you are out, you are out, and you leave before the new deal option is known. So it can only ever be in or out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted December 12, 2018 Share Posted December 12, 2018 34 minutes ago, Declan said: The real problem here is that David Cameron sought to break a vastly complex process into a very simple question. He thought he would win the referendum and this would put the Leavers on the back foot for a decade. But actually, because the question was so simple, his opponents only needed to deliver a simple message. They didn't need to answer the questions about whether we were in or out of the customs union or whether there would be a hard border in Northern Ireland, because they could say "well that can all be decided during the leave process." Really Cameron should have asked a question like - "The British people instruct the government to negotiate the UK's exit from the EU, and to hold a second referendum within 1 year to ratify the negotiated settlement. YES / NO" Article 50 could be triggered at this stage. The second referendum would be "The British people instruct the Government to leave the EU on the terms agreed with the EU. YES/NO" Then have a second question on what to do if No wins (basically Leave anyway, Negotiate further and have a further referendum in 6 months, Remain - that would probably need to by STV). Cameron, like all his ilk, thought he was smarter than the great unwashed and definitely thought he was smarter than he is. Events proved him wrong. The problem with the above approach, Declan, is that you hand over all of the negotiating cards to the EU. We kind of did that anyway but we shouldn't have done. The whole thing was managed as a disaster by people who didn't believe in the opportunities. The deal that has come back is workable but it could have been far better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted December 12, 2018 Share Posted December 12, 2018 They had a vote in 2016. That should be the end of it. But oh no, now they want to do it all over again so they can change their minds. It’s an affront to democracy. Bloody tories and their leadership battles. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted December 12, 2018 Share Posted December 12, 2018 Just now, woolley said: The problem with the above approach, Declan, is that you hand over all of the negotiating cards to the EU. I agree, but it seems less of a problem than the one we have now. It's suggested work around for the problems caused by the decision to have a referendum. I wouldn't have had one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted December 12, 2018 Share Posted December 12, 2018 18 minutes ago, John Wright said: The fundamental flaw is that once you are out, you are out, and you leave before the new deal option is known. So it can only ever be in or out. Why don't you ever read people's posts properly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted December 12, 2018 Share Posted December 12, 2018 2 minutes ago, Declan said: Why don't you ever read people's posts properly? I read it and understood it. I’m pointing out that what you suggest could never work because under Art 50 you have to leave before you negotiate the future deal. So what you suggest as preferable can never happen. The current deal is just an exit deal and transition. But no one knows what it’s a transition to, because negotiations have not yet begun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted December 12, 2018 Share Posted December 12, 2018 And I've already acknowledged that and indicated it would be the Withdrawal Agreement that would be brought back for a Second Referendum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted December 12, 2018 Share Posted December 12, 2018 1 hour ago, Declan said: And I've already acknowledged that and indicated it would be the Withdrawal Agreement that would be brought back for a Second Referendum. But the withdrawal agreement doesn’t tell you what’s coming, so you still aren’t getting a choice on the deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted December 12, 2018 Share Posted December 12, 2018 But as you point out it's not possible to do the deal until after a country left. So voting on the Withdrawal Agreement is the next best thing - or are all these Tories getting their knickers in a twist about nothing. And there's nothing stopping the Withdrawal agreement containing a road map or agreed principles for the future negotiations. Certainly a lot more detail could be presented at the second referendum than were available in the binary option of Leave or Stay with the details to be discussed later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted December 12, 2018 Share Posted December 12, 2018 4 hours ago, woolley said: As Richard would say, strawman argument. Nobody but you mentioned evil goblins and world domination. I and others have come up with plenty of facts over the years, but you simply refuse to see the merits of the other side and resort to insults. I rest my case too. Perhaps Woody would like to take the stage? He seemed to be able to keep you all in line admirably. Woody2 is the worst kind of brexit voter. He wants shot of the "eu scum" as he puts it without any heed for the quinciequonces. Over the years I've come to realise he actually typifies the brexit voter. As to "Evil Goblins running the EU" thats simply the impression I've been given by the brexiteers on here. And if the EU is undemocratic why is it folks still want to sign up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman1980 Posted December 12, 2018 Share Posted December 12, 2018 2 hours ago, John Wright said: Irony, irony. Anyone else love the irony of JRM and other ERG members wanting a vote on the conservative leadership, when they only voted on it in 2016. Seems if you’re a conservative and you landed yourself with a leader who is a crock of shit, it’s democratic to vote and change your mind ( or not - as the case May be ) but if you’re a voter and voted in the referendum for something which now looks like a crock of shit then having a second vote is antidemocratic. Is this the death throes of the Conservative Party? Does it even exist anymore? How can this party include MP's whose ideologies are now so far apart from each other? More importantly, all the plotting and scheming just highlights how obsessed certain members are with self-advancement over doing the actual job of governing the country. Even if the vote of no confidence fails tonight then they have laid the perfect groundwork for the Labour party to lodge their own vote of no confidence in the Government and try and force an election. God only knows what the outcome of a general election would be or how it would impact upon Brexit. The only positive that I can see from the vote of no confidence is that under Tory Party rules they cannot push another vote of no confidence for 12 months. If May loses the vote of no confidence then the new leader of the Tory Party would have about 6-days to sort out Brexit. Not only that but the new PM would be elected by Tory Party members alone, which is hardly democratic given the small percentage of the population that this would make up. Of course, whilst the Tory Party is busy trying to tear itself apart then there is still nothing stopping the Labour Party moving for the vote of no confidence. Basically the Tory Party have mucked up big time! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobbie Bobster Posted December 12, 2018 Share Posted December 12, 2018 4 hours ago, woolley said: Woody ... seemed to be able to keep you all in line admirably. Didn't realise this was the Jokes topic. (hello - wide open goal here) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted December 12, 2018 Share Posted December 12, 2018 22 minutes ago, Bobbie Bobster said: Didn't realise this was the Jokes topic. (hello - wide open goal here) You have to have a sense of humour, Bobbie. PK thinks Woody and I are one and the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.