onevalefan.co.uk Present Past Specials About Forum
Jump to content
onevalefan.co.uk forum

Advert


Advert


Brexit again...


Davebrad

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, mr.hobblesworth said:

The DUP just want a hard border, IMO, and will do whatever it takes to increase the likelihood of that happening. They're vile specimens and their antics during the abortion and gay marriage stuff last week was utterly shameful.

I can quite understand their position on both abortion and gay marriage, and to be honest they're not too far from mine, the only difference being that in the interests of human society I could tolerate both. The big issue here is their rather larger neighbour which they never want to help (or 'appease' in their own strange logic). The major UK political parties have never tried to organise in Northern Ireland because politics is tribal there, and as soon as tribalism is done away with there as well as here the better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Advert

1 hour ago, 1 said:

I hadn’t considered the vote being split. So maybe...

remain

vs

a withdrawal agreement

(a deal in its totally ratified, cast iron state - which can be signed into law the day after the referendum)

So the benefits of remaining v the cost of a withdrawal agreement......?

Doesn't sound balanced to me.

The only balanced question would be.... remain v whatever trade deal etc with the EU  + any other deals we have negotiated with others along the way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fosse69 said:

On the day after the referendum, the WA could be signed allowing the Trade negotiations to proceed during the transition period up to December 2020, or even 2022 if no-deal can be avoided. It maybe the case that May`s deal will be chosen for the referendum in preference to the current one.

Hang on....... so if the referendum was won again by leave the WA would suddenly become totally acceptable to all the nay sayers, no more saying it's the worst deal possible, bad for jobs, bad for the economy, a national crisis.... everything would be fine and dandy..... the remainers like SNP,  lib dems, Labour, some ex Tories would all be fine after nearly 4 years of argument and delay to just be happily converted to leaving, along with all the remain voters who couldn't swallow the first loss..... your optimism is verging on something else now mate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, geosname said:

Hang on....... so if the referendum was won again by leave the WA would suddenly become totally acceptable to all the nay sayers, no more saying it's the worst deal possible, bad for jobs, bad for the economy, a national crisis.... everything would be fine and dandy..... the remainers like SNP,  lib dems, Labour, some ex Tories would all be fine after nearly 4 years of argument and delay to just be happily converted to leaving, along with all the remain voters who couldn't swallow the first loss..... your optimism is verging on something else now mate.

It's not so much that as gaining a democratic mandate in the teeth of all the lies that have been told about both leaving and remaining by the Leave side. The Remainers' principal argument is that as so many lies were told prior to the vote you need another referendum now the full effects of leaving have become known; if the verdict is once again to leave you can't say they weren't told and the result would need to be accepted IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Heatwave said:

It's not so much that as gaining a democratic mandate in the teeth of all the lies that have been told about both leaving and remaining by the Leave side. The Remainers' principal argument is that as so many lies were told prior to the vote you need another referendum now the full effects of leaving have become known; if the verdict is once again to leave you can't say they weren't told and the result would need to be accepted IMO.

The problem with that scenario is no one knows what's going to happen if we leave, the only thing people know about is the WA not what the situation would be when we left..... The WA is not a deal, its the precursor to a deal we have to agree to before we can even talk about a deal.

Do you  honestly think that all the people who don't want to leave would just pack up and go home? 

Do you trust politicians that much?

Don't you think there is a possibility of a slew of legal claims hitting the courts to throw a spanner in the works?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Heatwave said:

It's not so much that as gaining a democratic mandate in the teeth of all the lies that have been told about both leaving and remaining by the Leave side. The Remainers' principal argument is that as so many lies were told prior to the vote you need another referendum now the full effects of leaving have become known; if the verdict is once again to leave you can't say they weren't told and the result would need to be accepted IMO.

There could be no argument against 2 leave results, but it would not stop a campaign to re-join the EU in say 10 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Brexit deadline is a week away,not enough time to discuss the deal according to some and yet the shadow leader of the commons is demanding more time to be allowed to pay tribute to Speaker Bercow do they have no idea what signs that sends out ? 

The sooner there is an election and this bunch of incompetents on all sides of the political divide are dispatched to history the sooner the better. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The business of the house is controlled by the PM, Johnson abandoned further discussion on WA after not allowing sufficient time for it to discussed. All the time wasted by suspending parliament was due to Johnson also. Did we need a Queen`s speech when time was short?

11 minutes ago, Mario said:

The Brexit deadline is a week away,not enough time to discuss the deal according to some and yet the shadow leader of the commons is demanding more time to be allowed to pay tribute to Speaker Bercow do they have no idea what signs that sends out ? 

The sooner there is an election and this bunch of incompetents on all sides of the political divide are dispatched to history the sooner the better. 

Whether an election will get the vote may depend on Macron limiting the extension

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Jacko51 said:

Slightly off topic but an interesting piece by Daniel Finkelstein in yesterday's Times about the DUP.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-dups-answer-is-always-the-same-no-7vp6dh3rq

The DUP's answer is always the same: NO

Daniel Finkelstein

Sadly the make-up of the Commons has given far too much leverage to a party with a history of stamping out progress

We have all been trying to find something in Brexit that can unite us, heal us, bring us all together. We haven’t done too well so far. But I’m excited to say that I think I’ve found a contender: we can all agree that we have had enough of the Democratic Unionist Party. Not Unionism or the Union. The DUP.

Now, I use the word “all” loosely. Nigel Dodds, the party’s leader at Westminster, likes the DUP. And his wife likes the DUP (probably). The rest of us, however? Not so much.

The reputation of the DUP is that it’s a tough deal-making party. Yet to be a deal-making party you sometimes have to deal. Instead, the DUP is a party that likes to say no. It can be persuaded to say yes only when someone asks whether it would like to spend some public money.

So the DUP said no to the European Union. Britain’s decision to leave the EU, of course, has big consequences for the Republic of Ireland. Some voters in mainland Britain and even some politicians might be forgiven for overlooking this since Ireland is not a priority for them. They might not have thought through the impact Brexit would have on our neighbour. The DUP leadership does not have that excuse. For them Ireland is a priority. So they must have known that there were consequences. Leaving the EU means that for the first time we will be in a different customs area from Ireland.

This leaves three options: create a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland; agree a compromise in which the whole UK remains in the customs area until we find technical solutions to avoid a hard border (broadly Theresa May’s deal); or agree a compromise in which different arrangements for Northern Ireland align it more with the EU and place checks between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK (broadly Boris Johnson’s deal).

Those — if you say no to EU membership — are the only options. And the DUP has rejected all of them. It has said no to a hard border, no to the May deal and is now saying no to the Johnson deal. It has abstained on no-deal, presumably worried that if it said no to no-deal then the double negative might mean that it had accidentally said yes to something.

During the debates on the government’s withdrawal bill it may be persuaded to say yes to a second referendum and yes to the customs union, even though its actual view is no to both. This is simply because it has seized on the idea that saying yes to these things might be the best way of saying no altogether. If someone actually asked DUP leaders if they really, properly wanted a second referendum they would say no, and if there ever is one, they would vote no in it.

When speaking of the Johnson deal, the DUP MP Ian Paisley this week used the term “no surrender” that was associated with his father, the Rev Ian Paisley, the booming cleric who founded the DUP in 1971 upon the rock of no.

Paisley Sr came to prominence by saying no to the modest Unionist reforms advanced by the Northern Irish prime minister Terence O’Neill. Responding to limited attempts to ameliorate bigotry and discrimination against Catholics, Paisley marched in protest, calling O’Neill “the traitor and the Lundy”, a special Northern Irish term for a particularly bad betrayer.

O’Neill was driven out in 1969. The BBC’s Spotlight on the history of the Troubles, which has just been shown (and which, by the way, everyone should watch) reveals that the authorities believed Paisley was entangled with organisations carrying out the violent attacks that helped tip O’Neill out of office.

So the DUP was created and began its progress, not as the Unionist ally of Conservatives but as the resolute opponent of conservative and official Unionism.

In 1973 came the Sunningdale agreement — an attempt to create an executive for Northern Ireland with power shared between the two communities, nationalist and Unionist. The DUP, of course, said no. Paisley took the lead and a strike was organised and enforced with a generous helping of loyalist intimidation that ended power sharing.

The DUP also said no to the Anglo-Irish agreement in 1985. And for those talking about what does and doesn’t break the Good Friday agreement it is worth noting that the DUP said no to that too. It also said no to abortion, no to gay rights, even no to rock music. “Rock music is satanic,” Paisley said, “and those who have studied it have proved that conclusively”. In 1998 the DUP said no to Elton John playing in Stormont. “We don’t like poofs,” said Paisley Jr.

A full decade after the Good Friday agreement, Paisley Sr, charmed by Tony Blair, finally entered the power-sharing devolved government. Blair’s negotiator Jonathan Powell describes the whole negotiation as torturous, delayed for years by Paisley wanting photos of the IRA decommissioning its weapons so that it might be humiliated. Even then, Paisley’s biographer David Gordon says that his DUP followers found the one political yes of the reverend’s career pretty hard to take and it contributed to his retirement a year later.

Although the DUP now says no to any arrangement that treats Northern Ireland differently to the rest of the UK it hasn’t always been purist about that. When it was in power in Stormont it also said no to the way Great Britain handled its renewable heating incentive scheme. What would be the point of devolved government, it decided, if it was just going to do the same as London?

As a result it created a vast scheme of its own in which people were paid more money to heat their business premises than it cost them. It would have paid you to put radiators on the outside wall. Companies began promoting the scheme under the slogan “Ash for Cash”. Hundreds of millions of pounds were lost.

No one much cared about the scheme when they thought the British Treasury was paying but as it became obvious that this wasn’t the case, the whole thing became a massive scandal. Arlene Foster, by then DUP leader and first minister, had earlier been the energy minister who introduced the catastrophic scheme without grasping the details. She overlooked warnings and her adviser had been installing his own boiler and claiming the money. But she said no to taking responsibility and no to resigning. As a result the Northern Ireland executive collapsed.

These are the people to whom the mathematics of the Commons has given such great leverage. But do any of us have to like it? No.

[email protected]

 

 
 
 

 

The DUP were outraged and disgusted when it was suggested that a leave vote would create a major issue with Irish border. A Vile party. 

6 hours ago, geosname said:

The above questions split the leave vote and almost guarantee a remain majority...... is that not a definition of rigged as opposed to democratic?

Not necessarily. It doesn’t have to be a first past the post vote. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Nofinikea said:

Yes 52% were wrong.  Just because it's the majority (if 17m of 43m is a majority) doesnt mean it's right.  It's not democratic to push on with something that is clearly wrong it's stupid.

What this referendum has done is show that proportional representation doesnt work and would return an unworkable situation time and again.

It's not a case of right or wrong, it's a case of democracy or no democracy.

12 hours ago, Nofinikea said:

Leave, lose the best deal we will ever have and then vote to rejoin on a worse deal just to pander to a few idiots who dont understand its democratic to ask again if the situation has changed?

Eyes shut and hope for the best eh?  Plonker.

I don't believe it is the best deal we will ever have. I believe being outside of the EU will be better. As do the majority of people in this country.

12 hours ago, Nofinikea said:

Yep, a right wing Tory led Parliment.

They have already slipped up and said we can be more competitive, what does that mean?  Min wage abolished?  Extended working hours?  Unfortunately the average shop floor worker who voted to leave the EU didnt understand that the EU actually protects there interests far better than ANY British government has.  .

They were uninformed and wrong.

 

Project fear. You seriously think the tories will survive if they start doing any of that? I don't believe that you honestly think that.

On 23/10/2019 at 19:04, Nofinikea said:

And you think the turnout was because of something David Cameron said? 

The thing with that turnout is, everybody who wanted out turned outA fair number of folk who wanted to remain didnt turn out because they ddnt think leave could win.  A 2nd referendum wouldnt see then make the same mistake which is the real reason none of you brexiteers want another vote.  You cant believe you won the first one and know you have no chance of repeating that result.  

Any evidence at all for that?

I honestly think brexit would win by a larger margin than before. Like on my mother and fathers life I truly believe that. The reason I don't want another vote is because it is completely and utterly anti-democratic.

There is no justifiable reason whatsoever to have a second vote with remain an option. Remain has been categorically ruled out. It is literally the only scenario that has been ruled out completely and comprehensively. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 23/10/2019 at 19:04, Nofinikea said:

And you think the turnout was because of something David Cameron said? 

The thing with that turnout is, everybody who wanted out turned out.  A fair number of folk who wanted to remain didnt turn out because they ddnt think leave could win.  A 2nd referendum wouldnt see then make the same mistake which is the real reason none of you brexiteers want another vote.  You cant believe you won the first one and know you have no chance of repeating that result.  

The protest vote against Cameron would no longer be there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Reporting Posts and other information

    Rules - This forum is moderated but the admin team don't read everything. Don't assume we'll spot rule breaking and alert us by reporting content. Logged in users can hover over the post and click the orange button. Guests can contact us here. If you don't get on with another user you can "ignore" them. Click this link, type in their username and click save. Please check with the admin team if you wish to sell/auction any items. We're happy to support good causes but check first.

    Use - This forum may not be suitable for all as it may contain words or phrases not considered appropriate for some. You are personally responsible and potentially liable for the contents of your posting and could face legal action should it contain content of a defamatory or other illegal nature. Every message posted leaves a traceable IP number. Please do not reveal any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example: phone number, address or email address). This forum is not in any way affiliated with Port Vale FC. OVF reserve the right to edit, delete, move or close any thread for any reason. If you spot an offensive post please report it to the admin team (instructions are above).

    Adverts - This site occasionally a) has adverts and sponsored features about gambling b) accepts sponsored posts from third parties. If you require help and advice on gambling read these links: Information on protecting young people | Addiction help from gambleaware.co.uk
  • Friends of OVF


Advert



×
×
  • Create New...