Brexit Penny Dropping?

[P.K.]

14 hours ago, quilp said:

Yes, JW, I'd agree with most of your post and appreciate the power and influence the media game played by all sides in the argument had on the voters. And unfortunately, still playing out 6 years later.

Apple is right, the nation was duped by promises never to be realised, sold a pup without pedigree. But that does not make those who voted to leave, xenophobic, racist simpletons, as repeatedly claimed, ad nauseum on here by certain posters. That insidious portrayal of brexiteers has been my objection all along.

@quilp

As you put it the "power and influence" of the media wasn't played by all sides. That's simply not true. It was very much weighted towards the Leave campaign as you well know.

I've noticed that brexiteers try and close down any "debate" by asking "Do you you think leave voters are stupid?" or similar. 

I would certainly like you to explain these inescapable facts:

Hate crimes soared after EU referendum, Home Office figures confirm

Report finds there were more than 5,000 hate crimes in July – up 41% on previous year

A daily breakdown of the hate crime offences reported to the police showed the number of incidents doubled in the days after the referendum. The level peaked at 207 incidents on 1 July, twice as many as before the vote, when the level was already unusually high.

In July, there were 5,468 hate crimes – 41% higher than July 2015. A Home Office report on the data noted that the “sharp increase” in hate crime was not replicated in equivalent offences at the time.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/13/hate-crimes-eu-referendum-home-office-figures-confirm

You and your ilk owe people like me a massive apology for the shambles you've made of the UK including being instrumental in the biggest drop in living standards since records began...

[John Wright]

18 minutes ago, P.K. said:

@quilp

As you put it the "power and influence" of the media wasn't played by all sides. That's simply not true. It was very much weighted towards the Leave campaign as you well know.

I've noticed that brexiteers try and close down any "debate" by asking "Do you you think leave voters are stupid?" or similar. 

I would certainly like you to explain these inescapable facts:

Hate crimes soared after EU referendum, Home Office figures confirm

Report finds there were more than 5,000 hate crimes in July – up 41% on previous year

A daily breakdown of the hate crime offences reported to the police showed the number of incidents doubled in the days after the referendum. The level peaked at 207 incidents on 1 July, twice as many as before the vote, when the level was already unusually high.

In July, there were 5,468 hate crimes – 41% higher than July 2015. A Home Office report on the data noted that the “sharp increase” in hate crime was not replicated in equivalent offences at the time.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/13/hate-crimes-eu-referendum-home-office-figures-confirm

You and your ilk owe people like me a massive apology for the shambles you've made of the UK including being instrumental in the biggest drop in living standards since records began...

@quilp

P.K. Give it a rest. No ordinary voter owes you an apology. Quilp & I weren’t even allowed a vote.

The media moguls who twisted the portrayal of the EU for 40 years, the politicians and lobbyists who wanted Brexit, for whatever spurious politically self interested reason. They owe apologies.

But then so do middle of the roaders, like Cameron, who to appease group 1 offered up a referendum on the sacrificial altar of personal and party political survival over national interest. They owe apologies.

As do the pro Europeans, who for decades, to avoid the ire of the first group failed to appropriately highlight the advantages and benefits of membership over the falsehoods put out by the anti EU group. They owe apologies.

Then, the likes of you, with your constant obsessive harping on in irrational/strident tones, you owe an apology.

You know that one years figures in isolation are meaningless. Just stop parroting and quoting, in bold, and linking to guardian articles that no one will read,  Try accepting that we are out, we got a duff deal, and that it needs to change. Post some original thought and analysis instead of fighting a 6 year old battle.

And if I see you rabbiting  your tired old cliches when describing Johnson or anyone else you owe me an apology. Learn not to use the childish language of the playground. It does your case no good.

At last there are some signs of recognition, even amongst the likes of Davies, Eustice ( but not RM, Dorries, Francois or Farage ) that we need to move back towards a single market access scheme. And the public are moving that way. Let’s fight for that, but accept it will take years to get there.

Learn from where we went wrong, as remainers, as campaigners, as negotiators. Build on that.

 

[P.K.]

4 minutes ago, John Wright said:

 

P.K. Give it a rest. No ordinary voter owes you an apology. Quilp & I weren’t even allowed a vote.

The media moguls who twisted the portrayal of the EU for 40 years, the politicians and lobbyists who wanted Brexit, for whatever spurious politically self interested reason. They owe apologies.

But then so do middle of the roaders, like Cameron, who to appease group 1 offered up a referendum on the sacrificial altar of personal and party political survival over national interest. They owe apologies.

As do the pro Europeans, who for decades, to avoid the ire of the first group failed to appropriately highlight the advantages and benefits of membership over the falsehoods put out by the anti EU group. They owe apologies.

Then, the likes of you, with your constant obsessive harping on in irrational/strident tones, you owe an apology.

You know that one years figures in isolation are meaningless. Just stop parroting and quoting, in bold, and linking to guardian articles that no one will read,  Try accepting that we are out, we got a duff deal, and that it needs to change. Post some original thought and analysis instead of fighting a 6 year old battle.

And if I see you rabbiting  your tired old cliches when describing Johnson or anyone else you owe me an apology. Learn not to use the childish language of the playground. It does your case no good.

At last there are some signs of recognition, even amongst the likes of Davies, Eustice ( but not RM, Dorries, Francois or Farage ) that we need to move back towards a single market access scheme. And the public are moving that way. Let’s fight for that, but accept it will take years to get there.

Learn from where we went wrong, as remainers, as campaigners, as negotiators. Build on that.

I did post "and your ilk" because I am very aware that quilp and yourself did not have a vote.

The figures for one year are not meaningless for that year at all. It demonstrated very clearly that the brexit vote acted as a trigger to embolden racists to raise their game. Because that's exactly what they did as the figures show.

Johnson is out of the game. However it was clear that some tory MP's wanted him back because they thought he was the only one who might prevent them being re-deployed into the jobs market. Fortunately for the UK Johnson being narcissistic chose the easy money of the speaker circuit. It was very notable that Matt Hancock was pilloried for taking time out from being an MP yet there was no mention of Johnson's multiple holidays....

I don't like the label "irrational" at all. Because I am very aware that we are out and probably will not be going back in my lifetime. What a shit legacy to leave our kids though. We should all be apologising to them...

[John Wright]

1 hour ago, P.K. said:

I did post "and your ilk" because I am very aware that quilp and yourself did not have a vote.

The figures for one year are not meaningless for that year at all. It demonstrated very clearly that the brexit vote acted as a trigger to embolden racists to raise their game. Because that's exactly what they did as the figures show.

Johnson is out of the game. However it was clear that some tory MP's wanted him back because they thought he was the only one who might prevent them being re-deployed into the jobs market. Fortunately for the UK Johnson being narcissistic chose the easy money of the speaker circuit. It was very notable that Matt Hancock was pilloried for taking time out from being an MP yet there was no mention of Johnson's multiple holidays....

I don't like the label "irrational" at all. Because I am very aware that we are out and probably will not be going back in my lifetime. What a shit legacy to leave our kids though. We should all be apologising to them...

Just because there was a rise in racially motivated hate crime in the month after an event doesn’t prove any nexus or causality, as well you know.

There you go again about Johnson. It’s unnecessary.

Johnson, Hancock, Raab, Braverman, Patel, etc can holiday all they want. I’m not watching celebrity, and the further they are from the levers of power - the better.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

1 hour ago, P.K. said:

I don't like the label "irrational" at all. Because I am very aware that we are out and probably will not be going back in my lifetime. What a shit legacy to leave our kids though. We should all be apologising to them...

Then don’t be irrational.

Although had I been given the opportunity I would have voted leave, I have heard some reasoned arguments from the other camp as to why the UK should remain in the EU. I don’t agree with them but respect their views and the way they articulate them.

You on the other hand just rant and post articles from the Guardian.

[manxman1980]

8 hours ago, P.K. said:

That court has nothing to do with the EU.

It is ironic though....

Yes, I am well aware that the ECHR has nothing to do with the EU.  Not sure if woolley realises this when he refers to "European Courts".

The case, however, is full of delightful irony.

[woolley]

On 11/21/2022 at 9:47 PM, P.K. said:

Woolley is still pushing the much hackneyed "sovereignty" non-argument.

Which is why we had a veto n'est ce pas...?

I didn’t intend to come back on this subject (ever again), but since I’ve been mentioned subsequently a couple of times in despatches, I feel compelled. I’ll be brief.

 

It’s fair to say that JW and I don’t agree on much, but he is right about PK reheating the same hackneyed arguments that he and I debated ad nauseam for (in retrospect) far too many years. I don’t intend to try to debunk all of these yet again because I know he just keeps coming back like a boxing kangaroo throwing all the same punches.

I’ll just take issue with one point: Which is why we had a veto n'est ce pas...?

The veto was not a tool to cure all present and future ills. If you believe that it was, then it would appear that you have not heard of, or do not understand, QMV – Qualified Majority Voting? As a “thick as mince” Brexiteer, I do understand it. Please avail yourself of some information:

https://ukandeu.ac.uk/the-facts/what-is-qualified-majority-voting/

 

And in traditional EU fashion, there is mission creep and aspiration to enhance QMV to further erode and confiscate (or ‘pool' if you remain delusional) the national sovereignty of member states:

 

https://www.swp-berlin.org/en/publication/more-eu-decisions-by-qualified-majority-voting-but-how

 

And, of course, the clincher is that if the veto worked in the catch all manner that PK would have us believe, then the EU would never have reached its current stage of integration at all.

So perhaps we might at least hear no more about the veto?

 

20 hours ago, manxman1980 said:

Yes, I am well aware that the ECHR has nothing to do with the EU.  Not sure if woolley realises this when he refers to "European Courts".

The case, however, is full of delightful irony.

Of course woolley realises this. It's elementary stuff. Since the context was the EU, my reference to 'European Courts" was to EU Courts. In my view, the UK should finish the job and withdraw from the unnecessary ECHR. I would take the same line as the USA and not recognise the jurisdiction of any supranational court above our own. We are perfectly capable of passing and enforcing our own civilised laws without parental guidance from a continent we had to save from itself twice in the 20th century.

[manxman1980]

4 hours ago, woolley said:

Of course woolley realises this. It's elementary stuff. Since the context was the EU, my reference to 'European Courts" was to EU Courts. In my view, the UK should finish the job and withdraw from the unnecessary ECHR. I would take the same line as the USA and not recognise the jurisdiction of any supranational court above our own. We are perfectly capable of passing and enforcing our own civilised laws without parental guidance from a continent we had to save from itself twice in the 20th century.

That's fine if you do but it was hardly clear in your post.  I would hardly describe it as elementary when so many people do not realise that the ECHR is not part of the EU.

As for "us" being able to pass and enforce our own civilised law could I point you towards the legislation which is the UK Government is trying to pass.  They are busy trying to strip out many employment and civil rights.  They would love to get rid of the ECHR then they can start removing even more rights.

[The Voice of Reason]

1 hour ago, manxman1980 said:

That's fine if you do but it was hardly clear in your post.  I would hardly describe it as elementary when so many people do not realise that the ECHR is not part of the EU.

As for "us" being able to pass and enforce our own civilised law could I point you towards the legislation which is the UK Government is trying to pass.  They are busy trying to strip out many employment and civil rights.  They would love to get rid of the ECHR then they can start removing even more rights.

But why are “we” signed up to the ECHR  As far as I know Australia or the USA  aren’t part of it. Is it just a case of geographical proximity?

Why should  the UK populace, via its government, rely on a third party to determine  employment and civil rights?

Do you not think the UK is not democratic enough to sort those things out itself? Or do you regard it as some sort of rogue state?

As a mature democracy you don’t outsource fundamental rights and obligations.

Edited November 24, 2022 by The Voice of Reason
Last paragraph

[woolley]

1 hour ago, manxman1980 said:

That's fine if you do but it was hardly clear in your post.  I would hardly describe it as elementary when so many people do not realise that the ECHR is not part of the EU.

As for "us" being able to pass and enforce our own civilised law could I point you towards the legislation which is the UK Government is trying to pass.  They are busy trying to strip out many employment and civil rights.  They would love to get rid of the ECHR then they can start removing even more rights.

You are correct to say that "so many people do not realise that the ECHR is not part of the EU". A great many people, and not all of them "thick as mince" Brexiteers, do not realise a great many things. The level of argument among the masses is shockingly mundane on both sides. Perhaps it's time for folk to shout a little less stridently and educate themselves about the issues.

You might point me towards UK legislation that you believe is wanting and you could even be right, but this is an entirely different matter. If such is the case then these failings need to be rectified domestically to keep control within. The imperative is to put your own house in order.

You appear to be making the counter argument that it is better to outsource the legislative process to foreign bodies because they make law which is more to your taste. Perhaps you perceive that EU legislation is more socialist or liberal or whatever for the time being, and you like that. This slippery constitutional slope is the fulcrum of the entire debate, and it eclipses every other aspect of it. Countries and peoples around the world fought against imperialism because they wanted the freedom of self-determination to pass their own laws and govern themselves. You and other EU enthusiasts are advocating the opposite direction of travel, and don't forget, the complexion of any power base can change over time. Ceding powers over your destiny is a very big deal indeed and not one to be stumbled into without a shot being fired.

Now that really is it for me here on Brexit and allied matters. Have fun campers.

 

[John Wright]

Post Brexit UK Japan Trade Deal - a failure.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/nov/26/brexit-britain-japan-trade-deal-exports-slump?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

[The Voice of Reason]

1 hour ago, John Wright said:

Post Brexit UK Japan Trade Deal - a failure.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/nov/26/brexit-britain-japan-trade-deal-exports-slump?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Just what we need. Another Guardian anti Brexit article.

[John Wright]

Just now, The Voice of Reason said:

Just what we need. Another Guardian anti Brexit article.

Or an accurate report that the much vaunted/heralded UK - Japan trade deal, now in force for 2 years, isn’t working.

This sovereignty thing  is a great driver on the road to the bottom and economic ruin.

[manxman1980]

On 11/24/2022 at 11:57 PM, woolley said:

You are correct to say that "so many people do not realise that the ECHR is not part of the EU". A great many people, and not all of them "thick as mince" Brexiteers, do not realise a great many things. The level of argument among the masses is shockingly mundane on both sides. Perhaps it's time for folk to shout a little less stridently and educate themselves about the issues.

You might point me towards UK legislation that you believe is wanting and you could even be right, but this is an entirely different matter. If such is the case then these failings need to be rectified domestically to keep control within. The imperative is to put your own house in order.

You appear to be making the counter argument that it is better to outsource the legislative process to foreign bodies because they make law which is more to your taste. Perhaps you perceive that EU legislation is more socialist or liberal or whatever for the time being, and you like that. This slippery constitutional slope is the fulcrum of the entire debate, and it eclipses every other aspect of it. Countries and peoples around the world fought against imperialism because they wanted the freedom of self-determination to pass their own laws and govern themselves. You and other EU enthusiasts are advocating the opposite direction of travel, and don't forget, the complexion of any power base can change over time. Ceding powers over your destiny is a very big deal indeed and not one to be stumbled into without a shot being fired.

Now that really is it for me here on Brexit and allied matters. Have fun campers.

 

Some examples of rights being removed would include

 

1. the new piece of legislation imposing restrictions on protests where they are deemed a nuisance.  That is wide open to abuse.

2. The "planned" removal of EU legislation including The Working Time Regulations and environmental legislation. 

3. Currently under discussion is the removal of even more Trade Union powers placing workers at a huge disadvantage. 

On 11/24/2022 at 11:04 PM, The Voice of Reason said:

But why are “we” signed up to the ECHR  As far as I know Australia or the USA  aren’t part of it. Is it just a case of geographical proximity?

Why should  the UK populace, via its government, rely on a third party to determine  employment and civil rights?

Do you not think the UK is not democratic enough to sort those things out itself? Or do you regard it as some sort of rogue state?

As a mature democracy you don’t outsource fundamental rights and obligations.

As I understand it the UK were a founding member of the ECHR set up to protect Human Rights in Europe (not the EU).

The UK Government sometimes needs to be checked by an external power.  Even a pro brexit anti ECHR activist had realised that as I linked earlier.

UK democracy is a busted flush so I don't trust it to sort itself out.  

[The Voice of Reason]

10 minutes ago, manxman1980 said:

 

UK democracy is a busted flush so I don't trust it to sort itself out.  

Is it really?