Jump to content
Total Rugby League Fans Forum
John Drake

The Brexit Thread (incl Brexit Party)

Brexit: What should happen now?  

164 members have voted

  1. 1. Brexit: What should happen now?

    • Accept Theresa May's Brexit deal and just get it over and done with
      18
    • Reject Theresa May's Brexit deal and leave with 'No Deal' regardless of the consequences
      48
    • Reject Theresa May's Brexit deal and force a General Election
      12
    • Reject Theresa May's Brexit deal and have a second referendum with 'Remain' as an option
      56
    • Reject Theresa May's Brexit deal and have a second referendum without 'Remain' as an option
      7
    • Something completely different which I'll explain in detail below
      0
    • I have absolutely no idea and have now lost the will to live, just make this stop, for pity's sake
      23


Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, SSoutherner said:

Quite funny but factually wrong - it is more like 6/10 said they wanted to leave burgerking but 2 want McD, 1 a KFC, 1 a Pret, 1 the greasy spoon down the road and 1 is on hunger strike - which is why the other 4 are stood around in the BK listening to the 6 argue where to go and wondering why they dont just order a whopper while they wait

And 2 years down the track, the 2 who want to go to McDonalds have decided that the best way to leave is accuse the other 4 of being traitors, insist that it was implicit in deciding to leave that they were going to McDonalds, and hoping that if they make enough noise, the manager of Burger King will work out what they should do.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I liked the clip. 

As a Remainer, it gives insight. 

The important thing to note is that the responsibility is not seen as being with people, but with the manager of Burger King. There is no thought of where to go next. Debating this is seen as a distraction. 

That the six have not left is not their fault, but oddly the fault of the four. 

It is a different mentality. It is why being asked what they suggest is considered offensive. 

  • Thanks 1

"You clearly have never met Bob8 then, he's like a veritable Bryan Ferry of RL." - Johnoco 19 Jul 2014

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Wholly Trinity said:

Ah, it could take longer than expected. There was an RBS in jakarta, but it closed in August 2015. I'm advised to direct queries to NatWest in Warsaw????

https://www.rbs.com/rbs/about/worldwide-locations/rbs-international-branch-network/indonesia.html

 

That's what happens when they stop sponsoring the 6Nations. Lose international recognition, close the Jakarta branch. It all makes sense when you look at the wider picture.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given that some Remainers here are so opposed to Brexit and are happy to list all the reasons why delivering it is so difficult and why it is such a bad thing for the country, do those Remainers take the view that what our MP's did in 2015/2016 is the biggest act of negligence and self-harm inflicted on this country in the past, say, 50 years?

I'm looking at the situation and thinking that even if we now remained, there has been so much damage done to this country already. Financially it has cost us a lot, reputation and trust wise we are shattered, our people are divided and we have spent thousands of wasted hours arguing and focusing on Brexit. All of that would have been a complete waste of time and for nothing. Not to mention the effect on trust in the political system that will be caused by going back on what was promised. Nobody forced the remain supporting David Cameron and his government to produce a leaflet telling everyone that the referendum was a big decision, that it would effect people for the next few decades, etc. It was his and their choice to do that. Just as it was his/the government/parliament's choice to hold a referendum offering people an option to "Leave the EU", without it being clear what that meant.

From the outside and right now, the above all seems like an absolute disaster. Am I worrying too much? Could we just remain and things would soon get back to normal? In five years time, would it be seen as just a minor mistake and nothing too bad? Or has it genuinely done some more long term damage, both financially and to our politics? Obviously we've lost some jobs in places were companies have transferred their offices etc. Would that eventually return if we remained, or have we lost that no matter what we now do.

Also, in the interests of fairness to Cameron and the MP's, what could they have done differently? Clearly the issue of EU membership was a concern to some people in the country, hence the rise of UKIP. So was this maybe an issue that they couldn't have avoided completely? Should they maybe just have taken more time and tried to be more clear about what leaving would mean, and more importantly, give people a clearer choice of what sort of leave they would be voting for. Rather than just "Leave the EU", should something more specific have been offered? I suppose that's difficult because nobody would have known what deal we would get from the EU. Then again, certain things we would and should have known (such as the issue with Rep of Ireland/Northern Ireland border), so leavers needed really to have some idea of what they wanted in that respect.

I guess right now I just feel a bit angry. I think I'm probably like a lot of people - not a rabid remainer or a rabid leaver - just kind of in the middle and not wanting to see the country in this mess. Voted remain, but happy initially to say ok, Leave won, let's deliver upon that - after all, the government offered it in a referendum and said that they would honour the result. I kind of naively assumed that they ought really have known what they were doing and what they were offering. Now I'm sitting here three years later and wondering how and when things will be sorted out. I feel like we just somehow need to leave, because I cannot contemplate how utterly stupid and pointless these past three years will have been, were we to now remain. I've ended up waffling on a lot longer than I intended to. I guess I'm just fed up with this nonsense. Then again, like I suggested above, maybe I'm just worrying too much about something that isn't really going to be that bad, however it turns out (leave or remain).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, 17 stone giant said:

Given that some Remainers here are so opposed to Brexit and are happy to list all the reasons why delivering it is so difficult and why it is such a bad thing for the country, do those Remainers take the view that what our MP's did in 2015/2016 is the biggest act of negligence and self-harm inflicted on this country in the past, say, 50 years?

I'm looking at the situation and thinking that even if we now remained, there has been so much damage done to this country already. Financially it has cost us a lot, reputation and trust wise we are shattered, our people are divided and we have spent thousands of wasted hours arguing and focusing on Brexit. All of that would have been a complete waste of time and for nothing. Not to mention the effect on trust in the political system that will be caused by going back on what was promised. Nobody forced the remain supporting David Cameron and his government to produce a leaflet telling everyone that the referendum was a big decision, that it would effect people for the next few decades, etc. It was his and their choice to do that. Just as it was his/the government/parliament's choice to hold a referendum offering people an option to "Leave the EU", without it being clear what that meant.

From the outside and right now, the above all seems like an absolute disaster. Am I worrying too much? Could we just remain and things would soon get back to normal? In five years time, would it be seen as just a minor mistake and nothing too bad? Or has it genuinely done some more long term damage, both financially and to our politics? Obviously we've lost some jobs in places were companies have transferred their offices etc. Would that eventually return if we remained, or have we lost that no matter what we now do.

Also, in the interests of fairness to Cameron and the MP's, what could they have done differently? Clearly the issue of EU membership was a concern to some people in the country, hence the rise of UKIP. So was this maybe an issue that they couldn't have avoided completely? Should they maybe just have taken more time and tried to be more clear about what leaving would mean, and more importantly, give people a clearer choice of what sort of leave they would be voting for. Rather than just "Leave the EU", should something more specific have been offered? I suppose that's difficult because nobody would have known what deal we would get from the EU. Then again, certain things we would and should have known (such as the issue with Rep of Ireland/Northern Ireland border), so leavers needed really to have some idea of what they wanted in that respect.

I guess right now I just feel a bit angry. I think I'm probably like a lot of people - not a rabid remainer or a rabid leaver - just kind of in the middle and not wanting to see the country in this mess. Voted remain, but happy initially to say ok, Leave won, let's deliver upon that - after all, the government offered it in a referendum and said that they would honour the result. I kind of naively assumed that they ought really have known what they were doing and what they were offering. Now I'm sitting here three years later and wondering how and when things will be sorted out. I feel like we just somehow need to leave, because I cannot contemplate how utterly stupid and pointless these past three years will have been, were we to now remain. I've ended up waffling on a lot longer than I intended to. I guess I'm just fed up with this nonsense. Then again, like I suggested above, maybe I'm just worrying too much about something that isn't really going to be that bad, however it turns out (leave or remain).

I was rude to you previously and I regret that. Sorry. I put up with a lot of rudeness on here, but  that is no excuse. 

Part of what irritates is it was predictable. A few years ago, we could see the mess coming, but it was denied. Nothing except the extent of irresponsibility should surprise. 

Cameron was arrogant to almost lose Scotland and rather than being humbled, think he is infallible. Now anyone who wants to condemn a politician actively trying to sort it out should be able to come up with a reasonable outline of a constructive suggestion and why.  Very few do. 

  • Thanks 1

"You clearly have never met Bob8 then, he's like a veritable Bryan Ferry of RL." - Johnoco 19 Jul 2014

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw an item about Cameron wanting to become an MP again.  It was headlined "iceberg returns to Titanic" 😆


“Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.”

Clement Attlee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes the referendum was the single most self destructive bit of political gambling in the last 50 years

 

In answer to what should they have done well lots before that point so we never reached that point which was an abdication of responsibility - but if we take it from the point of having promised a ref would take place then the timeline should have been

1: Make it clear that it was not IN /OUT it was Carry on as before/Change and that if change won there would need to be a consultation on what change entailed

2: assuming the same result then gone to the EU and said "ok we have a population of an EU country hear who want change - we are going to carry ut a consultation but it looks like the primary worries are X, Y & Z so we are initially going to carry out these actions to allay those (I am thinking actually exercising the powers we already had to send non economically active migrants back etc etc)

3; Created an ALL party consultation group who would also include people from business, NHS, security services, academia to ascertain where we were at, what was wanted and what needed to change (taking into account any suggestions of change from the EU side) - at the end of that drawn up a position paper 

4; Gone back to EU with that result

5: Listened to comments of EU and reported to the people of the UK

6; if the grumbles were loud enough held a legally binding referendum on Remain, Leave with the deal most likely to be achieved following the discussions, Walk away (with an evidence lead description of the the consequences) - with a proviso that if the Deal option was chosen and the planned deal proved unable to implement what would happen

7 Either stay or enact A50

Edited by SSoutherner
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The longer this drags on, the rest of the world, who already think the UK is making a huge mistake, are losing patience with all the dithering.  These are the countries the UK’s future success is dependent on, I might add.  Countries who will be only too pleased to exploit the UK’s weakness and incompetence for their own benefit.

What the UK needs most at the moment is creative, courageous, committed and above all, transparent leadership.  Unfortunately, precious little of that is available in the current crop of politicians, least of all the leaders of the Leave campaign who are being anything but leaders.

That it’s so completely split the population, made the UK a laughing stock internationally and rendered effective governance almost impossible, yes you could say it’s been the calamitous piece of single party chicanery since, well, possibly ever.

Still, I’m sure a few will do quite well out of the mess, no doubt they’ve already hedged their bets on that.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bob8 said:

I was rude to you previously and I regret that. Sorry. I put up with a lot of rudeness on here, but  that is no excuse.

No worries, Bob. I think we've got bigger things to worry about than that - like how the heck does our country get out of this current mess! Plus you offered to buy me a Guinness, so we're all good.

2 hours ago, Bob8 said:

Part of what irritates is it was predictable. A few years ago, we could see the mess coming, but it was denied. Nothing except the extent of irresponsibility should surprise. 

Cameron was arrogant to almost lose Scotland and rather than being humbled, think he is infallible. Now anyone who wants to condemn a politician actively trying to sort it out should be able to come up with a reasonable outline of a constructive suggestion and why.  Very few do. 

It does appear to have been quite an incredible gamble to have taken - by that I mean they gambled that the referendum would produce a Remain vote, and seem woefully unprepared for it not going as they had predicted//assumed/hoped.

I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens in the next year or so. Maybe the new PM will be able to deliver a Brexit that turns out to be ok. Alternatively, the whole thing will be cancelled, and then we can take a good look at why it went wrong and maybe start to ask questions of those responsible.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SSoutherner said:

1: Make it clear that it was not IN /OUT it was Carry on as before/Change and that if change won there would need to be a consultation on what change entailed

My issue with that is wouldn't people always vote for the 'change' option? After all, you're not committing to definite change, rather just saying that you want change to be considered and possible changes discussed.

You've got nothing to lose by voting for it, because if after discussion nothing comes of it anyway, you've not lost anything.

With the above in mind, I tend to think that a referendum along the lines of what you described, would be a pointless exercise. It would be far too vague and always produce a vote for possible 'change'. A lot of effort and money spent just to learn the obvious - that most people would like to change at least one thing about the EU.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, 17 stone giant said:

My issue with that is wouldn't people always vote for the 'change' option? After all, you're not committing to definite change, rather just saying that you want change to be considered and possible changes discussed.

You've got nothing to lose by voting for it, because if after discussion nothing comes of it anyway, you've not lost anything.

With the above in mind, I tend to think that a referendum along the lines of what you described, would be a pointless exercise. It would be far too vague and always produce a vote for possible 'change'. A lot of effort and money spent just to learn the obvious - that most people would like to change at least one thing about the EU.

It would be defining Change as a process with an undefined end point as opposed to what we did which was define it as something that looked precise but was anything but Starting from a point of telling people that change would be an undefined thing that might turn out to be not worth it would have been honest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, 17 stone giant said:

 

Given that some Remainers here are so opposed to Brexit and are happy to list all the reasons why delivering it is so difficult and why it is such a bad thing for the country, do those Remainers take the view that what our MP's did in 2015/2016 is the biggest act of negligence and self-harm inflicted on this country in the past, say, 50 years?

 

Yes.  

You could go back more than fifty years though.  

Suez?  Staying on the gold standard?  The Corn Laws?


English, Irish, Brit, Yorkshire, European.  Citizen of the People's Republic of Yorkshire, the Republic of Ireland, the United Kingdom and the European Union.  Critical of all it.  Proud of all it.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, SSoutherner said:

It would be defining Change as a process with an undefined end point

Sure, but the point I'm making is why in your referendum would anyone vote for anything other than the 'change' option?

You're basically asking people whether there is anything at all about the EU that they would like the UK/EU to discuss changing.

For example, if someone wants to change the fact that the EU keep switching between Brussels and Strasbourg, that person would need to vote for the 'change' option in your referendum. That's the only way that they can have the issue discussed. If they voted 'carry on as before', their concerns wouldn't even be discussed, let alone addressed.

I'm making the assumption that most people would have at least one thing they didn't like about the EU - eg. the Parliament switching locations, or the issue over accounts not being signed off - so my thinking is that a referendum like the one you propose, would always produce a one sided vote for the 'change' option.

I would certainly vote for the change option in your referendum. I'd have nothing to lose by doing so. All I'd be doing is saying "yes, there are some things that I'd probably like to be changed about the EU, so I'd like you to discuss them". If nothing came of it in the end, I'd get your 'carry on as before' option anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 17 stone giant said:

It does appear to have been quite an incredible gamble to have taken - by that I mean they gambled that the referendum would produce a Remain vote, and seem woefully unprepared for it not going as they had predicted//assumed/hoped.

Yes, it was a hugely reckless gamble by a man who was promoted way out of his depth purely because of his background.  

And they *were* unprepared for a Leave vote.  One of the reasons that they were unprepared for a Leave vote is that David Cameron personally intervened to stop the civil service preparing for a Leave vote.    So when it happened, they didn’t really know what to do.  Any planning they did manage to do had to be done in secret and kept away from the government.

When the history of this shambles is written, it will not be flattering to David Cameron.  A flippant, incurious, superficially charming and deeply arrogant man, he simply wasn’t fit to hold the office.    

 

 

  • Like 3

English, Irish, Brit, Yorkshire, European.  Citizen of the People's Republic of Yorkshire, the Republic of Ireland, the United Kingdom and the European Union.  Critical of all it.  Proud of all it.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, 17 stone giant said:

Sure, but the point I'm making is why in your referendum would anyone vote for anything other than the 'change' option?

You're basically asking people whether there is anything at all about the EU that they would like the UK/EU to discuss changing.

For example, if someone wants to change the fact that the EU keep switching between Brussels and Strasbourg, that person would need to vote for the 'change' option in your referendum. That's the only way that they can have the issue discussed. If they voted 'carry on as before', their concerns wouldn't even be discussed, let alone addressed.

I'm making the assumption that most people would have at least one thing they didn't like about the EU - eg. the Parliament switching locations, or the issue over accounts not being signed off - so my thinking is that a referendum like the one you propose, would always produce a one sided vote for the 'change' option.

I would certainly vote for the change option in your referendum. I'd have nothing to lose by doing so. All I'd be doing is saying "yes, there are some things that I'd probably like to be changed about the EU, so I'd like you to discuss them". If nothing came of it in the end, I'd get your 'carry on as before' option anyway.

There are a lot of things wrong with the EU.  But if you look at the disasters, confusion and down right dangers,  since we voted to leave, it's easy to realize that there are a lot more things that are right.  The advantages of remaining far outweigh those of leaving. I think a lot of people realise this today.  And I also think that is why those behind leave side are so desperate to avoid another vote.  The vested interests who funded the leave campaigns stand to lose big time if we don't Brexit.


“Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.”

Clement Attlee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Trojan said:

There are a lot of things wrong with the EU.  But if you look at the disasters, confusion and down right dangers,  since we voted to leave, it's easy to realize that there are a lot more things that are right.  The advantages of remaining far outweigh those of leaving. I think a lot of people realise this today.  And I also think that is why those behind leave side are so desperate to avoid another vote.  The vested interests who funded the leave campaigns stand to lose big time if we don't Brexit.

What are the 'disasters and downright dangers' you speak of exactly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Steve May said:

Yes, it was a hugely reckless gamble by a man who was promoted way out of his depth purely because of his background.  

And they *were* unprepared for a Leave vote.  One of the reasons that they were unprepared for a Leave vote is that David Cameron personally intervened to stop the civil service preparing for a Leave vote.    So when it happened, they didn’t really know what to do.  Any planning they did manage to do had to be done in secret and kept away from the government.

When the history of this shambles is written, it will not be flattering to David Cameron.  A flippant, incurious, superficially charming and deeply arrogant man, he simply wasn’t fit to hold the office.    

 

 

But then to anyone with half a brain that was obvious from the start in 2005.  They wanted a "Blair mkII"   and they thought that's what they'd got with greasy Dave.  Unfortunately he was nowhere near as effective a politician as Blair (say what you like about his policies)  He looked good until the hit the fan.  That's usually the case with Tory leaders because they have the press on their side. 

I remember my parents thinking Eden was the new Churchill - presumably because that's what the Daily Express said.  Heath was the best thing since sliced bread, and they both led the country to disaster. 


“Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.”

Clement Attlee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Saintslass said:

What are the 'disasters and downright dangers' you speak of exactly?

The mass departure of the Japanese car industry, and the problems in the British car industry,  the closure of the Scunthorpe steel plant, the problems in Ireland rearing their heads again. That's just to name but three. 

Edited by Trojan

“Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.”

Clement Attlee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Trojan said:

The mass departure of the Japanese car industry, and the problems in the British car industry,  the closure of the Scunthorpe steel plant, the problems in Ireland rearing their heads again, to name but three. 

The mass departure of the Japanese car industry?  There hasn't been one.  What has occurred is that the Japanese have fixed up a deal with the EU so they have no more need to use the UK as the 'gateway to the EU'.  I think one Japanese company is withdrawing from the UK?  It's also withdrawing from the whole of Europe and manufacturing at home instead because it can now do its business cheaply direct with the EU.  I am fairly sure that any withdrawal (or changing of mind about future plans) would have happened anyway given the deal with the EU.

The problems with the British car industry began with the government's reckless and stupid announcement that all diesel cars would be banned by 2040.  The diesel car industry tanked within months of that announcement.  In addition, we still sell more cars than a decade ago I believe?  We'd been on an upward trajectory for a few years.  How far up do you think we would go before we hit the ceiling and sales began to dip again?

Scunthorpe was on the verge of closure in April 2016 when it was sold for a quid to some seedy blokes who generally leach money from their businesses and bankrupt them.  It had been in trouble for a few years prior to 2016.

The problems in Ireland have never stopped.  If you think that they have then you haven't been reading/listening to/watching the news.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Saintslass said:

The mass departure of the Japanese car industry?  There hasn't been one.  What has occurred is that the Japanese have fixed up a deal with the EU so they have no more need to use the UK as the 'gateway to the EU'.  I think one Japanese company is withdrawing from the UK?  It's also withdrawing from the whole of Europe and manufacturing at home instead because it can now do its business cheaply direct with the EU.  I am fairly sure that any withdrawal (or changing of mind about future plans) would have happened anyway given the deal with the EU.

The problems with the British car industry began with the government's reckless and stupid announcement that all diesel cars would be banned by 2040.  The diesel car industry tanked within months of that announcement.  In addition, we still sell more cars than a decade ago I believe?  We'd been on an upward trajectory for a few years.  How far up do you think we would go before we hit the ceiling and sales began to dip again? 

Scunthorpe was on the verge of closure in April 2016 when it was sold for a quid to some seedy blokes who generally leach money from their businesses and bankrupt them.  It had been in trouble for a few years prior to 2016. 

The problems in Ireland have never stopped.  If you think that they have then you haven't been reading/listening to/watching the news. 

When will leavers ever take ownership of what they have done to our country?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, M j M said:

When will leavers ever take ownership of what they have done to our country?

So that's all you could say in response to my post?  lol!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Saintslass said:

So that's all you could say in response to my post?  lol! 

Some posts are so devoid of facts or bear so little relationship to reality it's best not to even try and unpick them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, M j M said:

Some posts are so devoid of facts or bear so little relationship to reality it's best not to even try and unpick them.

Translation: I find it impossible to counter your position because what you wrote is correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Saintslass said:

Translation: I find it impossible to counter your position because what you wrote is correct.

You are on fire tonight😂😂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...