Brexit Penny Dropping?

[The Voice of Reason]

1 minute ago, manxman1980 said:

Once again... if the Lib Dems had won enough of a majority at the election, with that pledge as part of their manifesto,  then they would have obtained a mandate from the UK voters to do just that.  A non-binding referendum held before they came to power would be irrelevant. 

 

But Jo Swinson and the Lid Dems didn't win the election and therefore couldn't take the UK back into the EU.

The miners strikes actually happened and of course they will resonate from those who witnessed them.

Do you see how the two things are different? 

Yes of course but not in the context that there is somehow a cut of point of time where things can no longer be discussed.

Of course Swinson didn’t win the election and was never likely to despite whatever they were promising. 
 

Talk of a “ non binding referendum “ is just Remoaner speak. Sure it was framed as, and was billed as “advisory “  but to just cast the result aside would result in uproar and would be an affront to democracy 

[The Voice of Reason]

2 minutes ago, manxman1980 said:

@The Voice of Reason and @woolley if we are dragging up pointless manifestos from the last this is a link to the Conservative one in 1997.

http://www.conservativemanifesto.com/1997/1997-conservative-manifesto.shtml

Interesting reference to Britain being the sick man of Europe. 

The vision for 2020 is interesting as well.  Tariff free global trade! 

Also remarkable of how much of that manifesto could apply to the Conservative party of today.  Its almost as if they haven't achieved anything after 14 years in Government! 

Why are you drawing my attention to a Conservative manifesto of 27 years ago?
 

When I had the choice before coming to the IoM I never voted Conservative and even if I had the choice now nothing would persuade me to do so.

[manxman1980]

3 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Talk of a “ non binding referendum “ is just Remoaner speak. Sure it was framed as, and was billed as “advisory “  but to just cast the result aside would result in uproar and would be an affront to democracy 

BUT not if the Country elected a party to Government that said it would call the whole thing off!! 

That would have been the people saying,  "Yea, that referendum?   We kinda cocked that up.  Can we just stay in the EU".

[manxman1980]

1 minute ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Why are you drawing my attention to a Conservative manifesto of 27 years ago?
 

Because it, like the Lib Dem one, never had the chance to come into effect as the Conservative Party lost the election. 

 

[The Voice of Reason]

29 minutes ago, manxman1980 said:

Because it, like the Lib Dem one, never had the chance to come into effect as the Conservative Party lost the election. 

 

But every party that doesn’t win an election  ( and those that do ) produces a manifesto. Not sure what you’re getting at.

[manxman1980]

2 hours ago, The Voice of Reason said:

But every party that doesn’t win an election  ( and those that do ) produces a manifesto. Not sure what you’re getting at.

The point I am making is that dragging up an article from several years ago about their manifesto or leaders position then is irrelevant to this discussion.  The same goes for the 1997 Tory manifesto. 

You also argued that Swinson would have been acting undemocratically if the Lib Dems had been able to form a Government.  My position is that had they won an election on that manifesto then they would have a mandate to reverse brexit.

[P.K.]

10 hours ago, The Voice of Reason said:

I “dragged it up” because Barney said he had “ left” the Liberal Democrats. , He didn’t say when. It could have been a year ago, it could have been ten years ago.

It was a policy of the Lib Dems that they would disregard and ride roughshod over the democratically expressed will of the people. Maybe Barney was a Lib Dem person at the time they embraced that policy. We don’t know

Many things are relevant years later. For example the treatment of the miners in the 1984 strike by Thatcher et al  still resonates and it still has an impact today on ex mining communities.
Journalists are still writing articles about that time. Being from a mining community it will certainly live with me.

@The Voice of Reason

Dear me. So you trawled all that way back to try and discredit me somehow? Sheer stupidity fuelled by desperation on your part.

I agree that some things are relevant years later. Your totally stupid and completely unnecessary brexit has cost the UK at least 5% of GDP. This loss will be compounded year on year. Idiots like you have lowered our standard of living...

I cut my membership card up and sent it back in 2010 when Nick Turncoat Cleggy formed a coalition government with Cameron. Lots of people like me just couldn't believe it. Liberal values are not so much closer to Labour but rather are worlds apart from the tories. Ditching our principles for a few crumbs from Cameron's table was a step too far. As for tuition fees...

[The Voice of Reason]

10 hours ago, manxman1980 said:

BUT not if the Country elected a party to Government that said it would call the whole thing off!! 

That would have been the people saying,  "Yea, that referendum?   We kinda cocked that up.  Can we just stay in the EU".

But as it was the Lib Dems performed miserably in that election.

That would have been the people saying  “No thanks, we’re happy we made the right decision in voting Leave”

[manxman1980]

9 minutes ago, P.K. said:

I cut my membership card up and sent it back in 2010 when Nick Turncoat Cleggy formed a coalition government with Cameron. Lots of people like me just couldn't believe it. Liberal values are not so much closer to Labour but rather are worlds apart from the tories. Ditching our principles for a few crumbs from Cameron's table was a step too far. As for tuition fees...

I can see why they did it.  The Lib Dems were hoping that they Alternative Vote referendum would go their way and end FPTP giving them much more of a chance to be at the table.  

They probably kept in check some of the worst Tory austerity, however, as you point out they rightly compromised too many of their core values.

They certainly paid the price at the following general election and much of what we see today had its roots in that coalition Government. 

[manxman1980]

1 minute ago, The Voice of Reason said:

But as it was the Lib Dems performed miserably in that election.

That would have been the people saying  “No thanks, we’re happy we made the right decision in voting Leave”

Yes!!  You finally get the point!  

I made the point ages ago that that general election was won by the Conservative Party based on "Get Brexit Done".  Labour at that time were still divided on the issue and had Corbyn as leader.  The Lib Dems were probably the largest party to stand on a "remain" ticket but realistically they had not recovered from the coalition government with the Conservatives.  

Those who wanted to "remain/rejoin" did not have any party to reliably back.  Those on the leave side clearly did.  

[P.K.]

8 minutes ago, manxman1980 said:

They probably kept in check some of the worst Tory austerity, however, as you point out they rightly compromised too many of their core values.

They certainly paid the price at the following general election and much of what we see today had its roots in that coalition Government. 

My personal view is that Clegg et al had very little leverage to change anything really.

Worse than that it seemed to me they weren't entirely sure about the priorities of those who voted for them! Little wonder they got creamed in 2015. They deserved it...

[The Voice of Reason]

6 minutes ago, manxman1980 said:

Yes!!  You finally get the point!  

I made the point ages ago that that general election was won by the Conservative Party based on "Get Brexit Done".  Labour at that time were still divided on the issue and had Corbyn as leader.  The Lib Dems were probably the largest party to stand on a "remain" ticket but realistically they had not recovered from the coalition government with the Conservatives.  

Those who wanted to "remain/rejoin" did not have any party to reliably back.  Those on the leave side clearly did.  

Yes I got your point. But there is more to UK politics than Brexit you know. And the election wasn’t just a proxy for a second referendum. 

But surely you concede that it’s bad form and a bit off to have as one of your election pledges a promise to ignore the wishes of the majority as expressed in a recently held referendum. I don’t think that sat too well with the electorate, including many  of  those  who voted Remain

Voters would have chosen which party they wanted to vote for on any number of issues

[manxman1980]

14 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Yes I got your point. But there is more to UK politics than Brexit you know. And the election wasn’t just a proxy for a second referendum. 

But surely you concede that it’s bad form and a bit off to have as one of your election pledges a promise to ignore the wishes of the majority as expressed in a recently held referendum. I don’t think that sat too well with the electorate, including many  of  those  who voted Remain

Voters would have chosen which party they wanted to vote for on any number of issues

Brexit was absolutely central to the 2019 election.  The Conservative Party was struggling to make any progress in the House of Commons due to a very small majority after the 2017 election.  In order to break the stalemate Johnson illegally prorogued parliament and had Jacob Rees-Mogg lie to the Queen.  

The Conservative manifesto at that election contained a guarantee from Johnson that, "We will get Brexit done in January" and also another sentence saying "If Jeremy Corbyn's Labour and Nicola Sturgeon's SNP team up and take control on December 13th, we will have two referendums on Brexit and Scotland in 2020."

Both of these quotes are in the opening section of the manifesto and the Conservative Party built their campaign around it.  They also formed an electoral pact with Reform UK (or whatever Farage's lot were known by at that point).  

That stance took away many pro-brexit labour supporters, who "lent" their vote to the Conservatives to "get Brexit Done" and resulted in the collapse of the red wall.

I do not concede that it is a "bit off" to have an election pledge to ignore the majority wishes of the recent referendum because it provides choice and that is what democracy should be about.  The SNP and Green Party also had remaining in the EU on their manifestos so you are being very selective in your criticism.

[Garteth T]

I was not going to post but the UK has left the EU and I think that it is generally accepted by both sides of the argument that it is not likely to rejoin any time soon. That is inline with the referendum question which I believe was "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?"

There was not a single reference to leaving or remaining in any related aspects such as the single market so it is perfectly possible for the UK to be a member of the single market, customs unions etc and still comply with majority view in favour of leaving the EU. It would also be possible not to be a member of both. No wonder everything since is such a mess and open to argument when the basic fundamentals of what came after Brexit were never put to the UK public    

 

[The Voice of Reason]

6 hours ago, Garteth T said:

I was not going to post but the UK has left the EU and I think that it is generally accepted by both sides of the argument that it is not likely to rejoin any time soon. That is inline with the referendum question which I believe was "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?"

There was not a single reference to leaving or remaining in any related aspects such as the single market so it is perfectly possible for the UK to be a member of the single market, customs unions etc and still comply with majority view in favour of leaving the EU. It would also be possible not to be a member of both. No wonder everything since is such a mess and open to argument when the basic fundamentals of what came after Brexit were never put to the UK public    

 

Yes well you could have had referendum questions that asked should the UK leave the EU subject to X, Y and Z or subject to amendments to A , B and C?
You would have had thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, millions of permutations for the UK public to vote on.

Far better ( well not far better ) the only option  being to put to the UK public a simple in/ out question and being as the result was out, take forward our relationship with the EU from there.