Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » TMay refuses 3 times to say she’d vote for Brexit

2

Comments

  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,705

    That would be anything but optimal. As you yourself have pointed out, it would relegate us to the second division outside the Eurozone. We need to join the Euro and face up to the reality that our firm national interest is in being at the core of the EU. There is no alternative.
    By stating there is no alternative you are empirically wrong.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,990
    Sean_F said:

    Run that by me again.
    I think he means demos (plural) not demos (singular).
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,435

    I think it is what Mrs Thatcher said about why she wasn't keen on referendums, they become an opportunity to kick an unpopular government.

    I mean how many people ignored the merits of AV just to give Clegg a kicking.
    But, there aren't any merits to AV.
  • You are in for a shock my friend when it finally dawns on you that there is indeed a very good alternative and we have already taken it.
    I really hope you are right, Richard, though I have yet to see any reason for thinking you are.

    Where we definitely agree is that train has certainly left the station, and we are on it.
  • Sean_F said:

    That is exactly why lots of people voted for Corbyn.

    Not because of an ideological commitment to socialism, but because so much of the corporate sector has behaved appallingly.
    And with no fear of retribution or willingness to take responsibility.

    The way the likes of Blair and Osborne have received huge amounts from High Finance immediately on leaving government doesn't go down well either.

    We were not 'all in this together'.
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 3,100

    That would be anything but optimal. As you yourself have pointed out, it would relegate us to the second division outside the Eurozone. We need to join the Euro and face up to the reality that our firm national interest is in being at the core of the EU. There is no alternative.
    Give it a rest. Do you just copy and paste the same euro line every night?
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,705
    Sean_F said:

    But, there aren't any merits to AV.
    Scores 5 in scrabble. That is an advantage, if it is permissible.
  • I'm sure you'd agree that with dozens of UKIP MPs the Brexit process would be much further down the line.
    No idea. Wouldn't it depend on how good those MPs turned out to be?
  • That's my plan for when I become the country's first directly elected Dictator.

    My first term would be for 12 to 15 years, and elections every 10 years thereafter.
    Who would be your Master of Horse ?
  • DadgeDadge Posts: 2,052

    No we wouldn't. That would make it worse and be even less Democratic. Giving more power to the parties is simply reinforcing everything that is wrong with our Parliamentary system. MPs are supposed to represent their constituents first and last. They do not because the party has too much control over them.

    That is why referendums are necessary so the people actually get a voice against the elite.

    By the way, I assume you will tell Switzerland their system of democracy is a disaster. Be sure to point out why they are so much worse off than we are since apparently you think that to be the case.
    I meant in the UK. The UK is not Switzerland. Direct democracy works quite well there because it's a small country similar in scale to a US state. And of course you need a government that's comfortable with implementing laws that it disagees with. We're having a little experiment with this in the UK at the moment and we can all see how successful that's turning out. Direct democracy isn't going to happen here, except perhaps in an advisory form.
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited October 2017
    Dadge said:

    If Brexit has done anything, it's shown us that government by referendum is a recipe for disaster.

    If we had proportional representation we'd mostly remove the problem of people being represented by the wrong MPs.
    Yes.

    IMO, under 3+ member STV, UKIP(/BNP?) would have emerged as an electoral force soon after 2008 and pushed Lab & Con to take their supporters' grievances seriously.

    Who knows how the GE/coalitions would have played out, but I think it's pretty unlikely we'd have ended up with a ridiculous all-or nothing IN/OUT referendum, framed as a proxy anti-austerity/anti-status quo vote.

    The current mess could have been avoided if Farage & co had been in parliament for a few years, putting the soft/hard leave case forward & having it challenged (& IMO discredited) from different angles by lab/con/ld/BNP(?)

    If leavers had won the country over to their cause, it would have at least been a responsible, negotiated brexit that had been a long time coming.

    Not this mess.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,823
    edited October 2017
    It doesn't really matter whether Theresa would vote for Brexit in another referendum because;

    A. The People have spoken and she's implementing their decision.

    B. There's not going to be another referendum.

    Of course ideally we'd have a "Believer" implementing the policy but Boris and Gove screwed that up so we are where we are...
  • brendan16brendan16 Posts: 2,315


    I support democracy.

    You support populism.

    They are being charged with acts against the constitution...

    Populism is doing what the majority of the voters want?

    Democracy is doing what you want?

    Interesting view I must say.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,559
    edited October 2017
    A couple of questions on the details of how the 48 letters are reached:

    1. Can letters be withdrawn by the MP and, once sent but not withdrawn, is there a time limit on how long do they remain valid?
    2. The level is set at 15% of total MPs, but can the letters only be sent by backbenchers, which would suggests a somewhat higher threshold of those eligible to write?

    If letters are withdrawable or time limited, I can imagine there have already been waves of letters as the favoured candidates of various factions looked set to move, only to be withdrawn when they did not. I'm thinking it is something akin to a peloton, and two factions moving at the same time is what could do for Theresa.

    Is that right?
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,705
    Dadge said:

    I meant in the UK. The UK is not Switzerland. Direct democracy works quite well there because it's a small country similar in scale to a US state. And of course you need a government that's comfortable with implementing laws that it disagees with. We're having a little experiment with this in the UK at the moment and we can all see how successful that's turning out. Direct democracy isn't going to happen here, except perhaps in an advisory form.
    The coalition managed implementing laws parts of the coalition disagreed with well.
  • freetochoosefreetochoose Posts: 1,107

    No idea. Wouldn't it depend on how good those MPs turned out to be?
    They'd get loads of air time at PMQs and in the commons in general, they'd hammer May relentlessly.

    See what I mean about democracy on your terms?
  • Who would be your Master of Horse ?
    Mr Meeks or Mr Price, both of these parish would be contenders.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    philiph said:

    Which rather perversely may well be the legacy the UK leaves the EU for a selection recalcitrant states, as it will be the only way to prevent further departures.
    I was with some Swedes earlier this week and they were bemoaning the loss of an ally/someone to take the flak

    I'll be in Beijing next week so we shall see what they have to say.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,823
    edited October 2017



    She risks here looking like she still would vote Remain and she is reluctantly implementing what she secretly thinks is the wrong decision.

    Er, that is her position and has been all along lol...
  • MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584
    brendan16 said:

    Populism is doing what the majority of the voters want?

    Democracy is doing what you want?

    Interesting view I must say.

    You might have missed something there.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,237
    philiph said:

    Scores 5 in scrabble. That is an advantage, if it is permissible.
    It's not; there are no two letter words with V permissible in Scrabble.
  • Pro_Rata said:

    A couple of questions on the details of how the 48 letters are reached:

    1. Can letters be withdrawn by the MP and, once sent but not withdrawn, is there a time limit on how long do they remain valid?
    2. The level is set at 15% of total MPs, but can the letters only be sent by backbenchers, which would suggests a somewhat higher threshold of those eligible to store?

    If letters are withdrawable or time limited, I can imagine there have already been waves of letters as the favoured candidates of various factions looked set to move, only to be withdrawn when they did not. I'm thinking it is something akin to a peloton, and two factions moving at the same time is what could do for Theresa.

    Is that right?

    1) They can be withdrawn at any time up to the point unless a vote of confidence has been triggered. There is no time limit

    2) They can be sent at anyone, and will remain anonymous, only the Chair of 22 knows, and 2003 it was said shadow ministers below cabinet rank sent letters.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    I'm sure you'd agree that with dozens of UKIP MPs the Brexit process would be much further down the line.
    On the other hand there would be more LD and Green MPs too, depending on the PR system.

    I rather think a Holyrood style Additional Member system would be good.

    Merge all current constituencies, 2 into one, and create X number of list seats. Perhaps 275 so as to have 600 MPs.
  • DadgeDadge Posts: 2,052

    I think Theresa May has made a mistake there.

    All she needed to say was, "If a referendum was held, now - and it is a hypothetical question, Iain, because we're not going to have one as I'm focused on getting on and delivering the mandate the British people gave the Government last year - of course I would vote to support the Government's current policy of getting on and making a success of Brexit."

    But, she didn't.

    She risks here looking like she still would vote Remain and she is reluctantly implementing what she secretly thinks is the wrong decision.

    She would. She is. Although with plenty of bravado since she wanted the job (PM) and she felt this was the only way she could get it. She's rather less intelligent than Cameron if she felt she could get away with it.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,435
    Pong said:

    Yes.

    IMO, under 3+ member STV, UKIP(/BNP?) would have emerged as an electoral force soon after 2008 and pushed Lab & Con to take their supporters' grievances seriously.

    Who knows how the GE/coalitions would have played out, but I think it's pretty unlikely we'd have ended up with a ridiculous all-or nothing IN/OUT referendum, framed as a proxy anti-austerity/anti-status quo vote.

    The current mess could have been avoided if Farage & co had been in parliament for a few years, putting the soft/hard leave case forward & having it challenged (& IMO discredited) from different angles by lab/con/ld/BNP(?)

    If leavers had won the country over to their cause, it would have at least been a responsible, negotiated brexit that had been a long time coming.

    Not this mess.
    I could be reaching, but my guess is that if elections were regularly returning 100 MP's to the Right of the Conservatives, people who are hostile to Brexit would rapidly become hostile to STV.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,237
    edited October 2017

    1) They can be withdrawn at any time up to the point unless a vote of confidence has been triggered. There is no time limit

    2) They can be sent at anyone, and will remain anonymous, only the Chair of 22 knows, and 2003 it was said shadow ministers below cabinet rank sent letters.
    I presume individual letters come off the list if the MP dies, resigns or loses his/her seat? (Though one assumes not many were submitted before the GE.)
  • Where Mrs May struggles is thinking on her feet.

    My response to the question would have been

    'The people have spoken, the bastards'
  • glwglw Posts: 10,339
    Sean_F said:

    I could be reaching, but my guess is that if elections were regularly returning 100 MP's to the Right of the Conservatives, people who are hostile to Brexit would rapidly become hostile to STV.

    No doubt. Very few people will advocate a form of PR that lets "extremists" in. What the usually want is more of their side and their friends, and less of the others.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    edited October 2017
    Sean_F said:

    I could be reaching, but my guess is that if elections were regularly returning 100 MP's to the Right of the Conservatives, people who are hostile to Brexit would rapidly become hostile to STV.
    There would be compensatory benefits in more LD and Green MPs, so swings and roundabouts.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,705

    It's not; there are no two letter words with V permissible in Scrabble.
    In that case AV is useless.
  • I think it is what Mrs Thatcher said about why she wasn't keen on referendums, they become an opportunity to kick an unpopular government.

    I mean how many people ignored the merits of AV just to give Clegg a kicking.
    Adult Videos??
  • MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584

    Where Mrs May struggles is thinking on her feet.

    My response to the question would have been

    'The people have spoken, the bastards'


    Nah. Should have been: 'Democracy is democracy'.
  • I presume individual letters come off the list if the MP dies, resigns or loses his/her seat? (Though one assumes not many were submitted before the GE.)
    Yup, you have to be a current MP in receipt of the Tory whip.

    So Anne Marie Morris can't participate as things stand.
  • Where Mrs May struggles is thinking on her feet.

    My response to the question would have been

    'The people have spoken, the bastards'

    A public school elitist speaks!
  • Theresa has landed herself in a bit of a hole again. The optics also look terrible - that she's overseeing a political project, Brexit, that she can't even bring herself to admit she'd vote to continue with. This doesn't help the Brexit brand at all, at a time that it needs all the propping up it can get.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,823
    Here's Theresa May(BE) in all her glory with Iain Dale (occasionally of this parish many years ago)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfP2J-jtCkM

    #enjoy
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,237

    Yup, you have to be a current MP in receipt of the Tory whip.

    So Anne Marie Morris can't participate as things stand.
    So she could just direct the government whips to remove the Tory whip from any dissenters. Simples!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,299

    Where Mrs May struggles is thinking on her feet.

    My response to the question would have been

    'The people have spoken, the bastards'

    I always liked that line, but for some reason a lot of people seemed to take offence whenever it was used.

  • Ally_BAlly_B Posts: 185

    Where Mrs May struggles is thinking on her feet.
    My response to the question would have been
    'The people have spoken, the bastards'

    A better response would have been "We are attempting to implement what was said by the No camp in the referendum but we can't find anything that they said was true." (Cue, howls of outrage by the nut jobs and fruit loons both in her party and beyond). "We'll get the best deal we can and then put it to Parliament to decide whether this is acceptable or not".
  • DadgeDadge Posts: 2,052

    I'm sure you'd agree that with dozens of UKIP MPs the Brexit process would be much further down the line.
    Not at all. If Leave was marginalised in a large Ukip group, and the Tory party less beholden to its Leave wing, it's less likely there would've been a referendum (since it would've been seen as peripheral to getting things done in government).

    And even if the referendum had gone ahead and Leave had still won, I can't believe that the government would've wanted to involve Ukip in the Brexit process. If it did, the process would be in even geater disrepute than it is.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Yesterday I watched Louis Theroux's latest programme which was on the opiates epidemic in the United States, and tonight the first item on the BBC 10 O'clock News was about a similar problem in County Durham.
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    She needs to recall her previous -and rather good answer given in the election campaign -that she voted Remain but that the People had spoken and she would make Leave a success. She has the advantage that she said very little during the referendum campaign that can be held against her now. But she isnt very good at interviews and handling tricky interviewers -|(nor is Boris Johnson) and this is another reason why she will need to step down.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,237
    Ally_B said:

    A better response would have been "We are attempting to implement what was said by the No camp in the referendum but we can't find anything that they said was true." (Cue, howls of outrage by the nut jobs and fruit loons both in her party and beyond). "We'll get the best deal we can and then put it to Parliament to decide whether this is acceptable or not".
    Alternatively she could have been honest and answered "Would I f*ck"!
  • freetochoosefreetochoose Posts: 1,107
    A question for pb punters: how would you price up a second referendum?
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 5,032

    The wrong decision according to who?
    According to a majority of MPs in the HoC
  • DadgeDadge Posts: 2,052
    glw said:

    No doubt. Very few people will advocate a form of PR that lets "extremists" in. What the usually want is more of their side and their friends, and less of the others.
    I hear this, but I don't see it. Many countries have extremists in parliament and they cope fine. They just don't include them in government. (Ukip aren't really extremists anyway.)
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,237
    stevef said:

    She needs to recall her previous -and rather good answer given in the election campaign -that she voted Remain but that the People had spoken and she would make Leave a success. She has the advantage that she said very little during the referendum campaign that can be held against her now. But she isnt very good at interviews and handling tricky interviewers -|(nor is Boris Johnson) and this is another reason why she will need to step down.

    Her great advantage is that she appears to have the hide of a rhinoceros. I cannot see her going before the next GE.
  • freetochoosefreetochoose Posts: 1,107
    OllyT said:

    According to a majority of MPs in the HoC
    How can you be sure how they all voted?
  • freetochoosefreetochoose Posts: 1,107

    Her great advantage is that she appears to have the hide of a rhinoceros. I cannot see her going before the next GE.
    A few weeks ago I'd have agreed but she can't cope much longer
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,153

    Well in this case, yes, but only because Parliament agreed to be bound by it. They could just as easily have said 'have a referendum and we'll consider the outcome'. That too would have been democratic, and also a damn sight more sensible.

    What perplexes me is the number of people who think that a referendum is somehow synonymous with democracy, or even some extremely pure form of it. It's nothing of the sort, and even in its more appropriate uses it is still government by populism, which is of course highly flawed, as Brexit itself well illustrates.
    Peter, we've had an election post the referendum. The people could have voted for the Liberal Democrats, who advocated staying in the EU. If the Liberal Democrats had swept to power under a "remain in the EU flag", then I would regard their mandate as superseding the referendum.

    But that didn't happen. The people voted overwhelmingly for parties that wished to implement the EU referendum vote.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    AndyJS said:

    Yesterday I watched Louis Theroux's latest programme which was on the opiates epidemic in the United States, and tonight the first item on the BBC 10 O'clock News was about a similar problem in County Durham.

    The USA opioid epidemic is truly horriffic. It is largely a small town Red state phenomenon, while previous epidemics were urban blue inner cities. It started with over prescription and abuse of prescription of opiods by my profession, before people switched to cheaper heroin.

    More people now die of opiate overdoses in America than motor vehicle collisions or due to guns. It is way out of control.

    Will we follow the same route? possibly so.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,126
    Dadge said:

    She would. She is. Although with plenty of bravado since she wanted the job (PM) and she felt this was the only way she could get it. She's rather less intelligent than Cameron if she felt she could get away with it.
    You'd have thought she'd have either changed her mind upon reflection and experience, like Niall Ferguson, or Jeremy Hunt, or sufficient belief in her Government's policy for the UK's post-Brexit future to vote for it given she'd be in charge.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,175

    A question for pb punters: how would you price up a second referendum?

    I think 'leave' would win, narrowly. Again.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,559
    edited October 2017

    So she could just direct the government whips to remove the Tory whip from any dissenters. Simples!
    Do the letters survive dissolution and a GE if the senders are re-elected! That sounds fun - you end up going from under 15% to over 15% without anyone sending a letter. Or if you are close and an MP resigns or dies or has the whip withdrawn and they hadnt sent a letter. (At 313 MPs the quota reduces from 48 to 47 by my reckoning).

    Am I getting too theoretical? What am I saying, you run 30 AV threads a year on this site.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,642
    edited October 2017

    So she could just direct the government whips to remove the Tory whip from any dissenters. Simples!
    You have to be a loyal Conservative to sign a letter against May.
    If you want to sign a letter against May then you clearly are not a loyal Conservative.

    Guess which book I am currently reading...
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,640
    rcs1000 said:

    Peter, we've had an election post the referendum. The people could have voted for the Liberal Democrats, who advocated staying in the EU. If the Liberal Democrats had swept to power under a "remain in the EU flag", then I would regard their mandate as superseding the referendum.

    But that didn't happen. The people voted overwhelmingly for parties that wished to implement the EU referendum vote.
    Wretched cant. Theresa May called an election specifically because she said that forces at Westminster, including Labour, were undermining Brexit. Watch her statement again and tell me the election result was an endorsement of leaving the EU.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39630009
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,126
    Sean_F said:

    I could be reaching, but my guess is that if elections were regularly returning 100 MP's to the Right of the Conservatives, people who are hostile to Brexit would rapidly become hostile to STV.
    Like giving the plebs the vote, giving graduates extra ones, extending it to 16 year olds, whilst stripping it away from old people, many people's interpretations of democracy can be remarkably flexible when the votes aren't going the right way.
  • OllyT said:

    According to a majority of MPs in the HoC
    Who employs the MPs?
  • freetochoosefreetochoose Posts: 1,107
    Pulpstar said:

    I think 'leave' would win, narrowly. Again.
    I think they'd win easily tbh but its not happening.

    Leave 2/5
    Remain 7/4

    would be my tissue

    There are very few punters on this site unfortunately
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 5,032

    How can you be sure how they all voted?
    It's pretty clear that a majority of MPs are anti-Brexit even though they will implement the referendum decision

    I honestly can't think of a single thing that has happened since the referendum that would have convinced any Remain voter to change their opinion. If anything I think their views will have hardened I know mine have,
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,705

    The USA opioid epidemic is truly horriffic. It is largely a small town Red state phenomenon, while previous epidemics were urban blue inner cities. It started with over prescription and abuse of prescription of opiods by my profession, before people switched to cheaper heroin.

    More people now die of opiate overdoses in America than motor vehicle collisions or due to guns. It is way out of control.

    Will we follow the same route? possibly so.
    best to change our policies and go for legalisation of drugs then.

    We have a failed policy causing social problems, societial problems, enforcement problems, medical problems, and financial problems.
  • Rafael Behr is proving to be one of the smartest analysts of the politics of Brexit. He has an uncanny understanding of the Leaver psychology.

    There is a contradiction here that the likes of John Redwood and Bernard Jenkin do not acknowledge, perhaps even to themselves. To make “no deal” sound acceptable, they must belittle the scale of upheaval, yet the only reason for accepting it would be to accelerate drastic change. They do not acknowledge the cliff but they dream of launching from its edge, soaring over the Atlantic once the EU shackles are broken.

    The psychology of this is rooted in pre-Brexit Conservative folklore. It starts in veneration of Margaret Thatcher’s pugnacious dismantling of state-run industry in the 1980s. I don’t intend here to relitigate the case for and against those reforms. The point, for the Brexiters, is not whether Thatcher’s vision was the best one (this is beyond question in Tory theology), but that it could be done only by economic violence. The status quo needed smashing.


    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/10/brexit-cliff-edge-eu-hardline-thatcherism-uk-economy
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,237

    You have to be a loyal Conservative to sign a letter against May.
    If you want to sign a letter against May then you clearly are not a loyal Conservative.

    Guess which book I am currently reading...
    Catch-22?
  • Wretched cant. Theresa May called an election specifically because she said that forces at Westminster, including Labour, were undermining Brexit. Watch her statement again and tell me the election result was an endorsement of leaving the EU.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39630009
    Labour campaigned to leave the EU.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,642

    Who employs the MPs?
    Lobbyists?
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,642

    Catch-22?
    Got it in one!
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,237

    Who employs the MPs?
    Betty Windsor?
  • Lobbyists?
    The people who vote
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,237
    Scott_P said:
    Weyhey, Chappers is back! Where's he been this past 2 months?
  • Dadge said:

    Not at all. If Leave was marginalised in a large Ukip group, and the Tory party less beholden to its Leave wing, it's less likely there would've been a referendum (since it would've been seen as peripheral to getting things done in government).

    And even if the referendum had gone ahead and Leave had still won, I can't believe that the government would've wanted to involve Ukip in the Brexit process. If it did, the process would be in even geater disrepute than it is.
    Except it would be that large UKIP group that would most likely be the deciding factor on whether or not the Tories were in power. Moreover do not think that all the Tories would be Remainers. There would still be large numbers who objected to some aspects of UKIP policy but were in favour of leaving the EU.

    The maths simply does not work for an openly pro-EU Conservative party.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,642

    Betty Windsor?
    Is she the one from the Carry On films?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,640
    Pulpstar said:

    I think 'leave' would win, narrowly. Again.
    Sunlit uplands? Global Britain? £350m a week for the NHS?

    A second Leave campaign would be a complete embarrassment.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,658
    I see the PB Brexiters have had their lager shandies (bold for a Tuesday night) and are spouting all kinds of Bollocks standing there in their Union Jack socks and saggy Y-fronts.

    For no appreciable sovereignty gain (we always were...) they have fucked the country. Just as well we have one or two cabinet ministers who are refusing to join in the madness.
  • PAWPAW Posts: 1,074
    philiph - probably be more effective to bring in massive penalties for doctors, judging from the American experience.
  • freetochoosefreetochoose Posts: 1,107
    OllyT said:

    It's pretty clear that a majority of MPs are anti-Brexit even though they will implement the referendum decision

    I honestly can't think of a single thing that has happened since the referendum that would have convinced any Remain voter to change their opinion. If anything I think their views will have hardened I know mine have,
    So you don't know, thanks.

    I recall the conversations you and I had pre referendum, I'll take your guesses with a pinch of salt after you said no Labour people in the north would vote to Leave.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,126
    Given the Euro has been established for well over 15 years I think it's safe to say that the UK has survived well enough without it.

    Outside the Euro, we're not in the inner core of EU decision making. But, had we joined, I don't see how we would have moved the EU in any different direction from that of ever closer union, given we'd have explicitly signed up for it.

    The best I can say (positively) is we might have been able to push more quickly for the development of the single market in services, had a bit more influence on European financial services regulation, and probably had a much bigger boom in the years leading up to 2008.

    But, we'd then have suffered an almighty crash.

    We'd have lost the ability to do QE, adjust our interest rates, and use our currency as an automatic stabiliser, not to mention all the further political and economic integration to come in the interests of the Euro's long-term stability, and I suspect British politics would currently be extremely febrile and dominated by debate on whether to bring back Sterling.
  • TOPPING said:

    I see the PB Brexiters have had their lager shandies (bold for a Tuesday night) and are spouting all kinds of Bollocks standing there in their Union Jack socks and saggy Y-fronts.

    For no appreciable sovereignty gain (we always were...) they have fucked the country. Just as well we have one or two cabinet ministers who are refusing to join in the madness.

    Oh dear, Topping has been at the Port again.

    Go to bed before you make a fool of yourself again.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,237

    Is she the one from the Carry On films?
    Distant relation maybe
  • Weyhey, Chappers is back! Where's he been this past 2 months?
    Hiding in a cupboard desperately hoping everyone will have forgotten his last embarrassing foray into the Brexit debate I would think.
  • Weyhey, Chappers is back! Where's he been this past 2 months?
    Where are The Democrats? :lol:
  • TOPPING said:

    I see the PB Brexiters have had their lager shandies (bold for a Tuesday night) and are spouting all kinds of Bollocks standing there in their Union Jack socks and saggy Y-fronts.

    For no appreciable sovereignty gain (we always were...) they have fucked the country. Just as well we have one or two cabinet ministers who are refusing to join in the madness.

    I'm ironing my Union Jack underpants right now :lol:
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,705

    Weyhey, Chappers is back! Where's he been this past 2 months?
    Looking for his phone?
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,642

    Hiding in a cupboard desperately hoping everyone will have forgotten his last embarrassing foray into the Brexit debate I would think.
    There was some talk of a new political party, and fair play, it has happened. Or am I mixing him up with Anne Marie Waters?
  • Betty Windsor?
    The people wot vote for the MPs.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    philiph said:

    best to change our policies and go for legalisation of drugs then.

    We have a failed policy causing social problems, societial problems, enforcement problems, medical problems, and financial problems.
    Certainly both deaths from formerly legal highs and the number of homeless zombies on spice show that making them illegal is a mixed result at best. Decriminalisation perhaps rather than legalisation.

    Perhaps the real answer is to have a society that dealt with the underlying causes of addiction, such as poverty, family breakdown, mental health, rootlessness, lack of opportunity, lack of aspiration and related issues.

    I have seen enough of lives destroyed by addiction for a lifetime, not just the addicts, but also their families and friends.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,642

    I'm ironing my Union Jack underpants right now :lol:
    I hope you took them off first.
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 3,100

    Weyhey, Chappers is back! Where's he been this past 2 months?
    Supposedly being manhandled by the Greek authorities at the behest of the British government
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,237

    Got it in one!
    Great book! Although I keep promising myself that one day I am going to get a copy, cut it up, and read all the chapters in chronological order.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,658

    Oh dear, Topping has been at the Port again.

    Go to bed before you make a fool of yourself again.
    QED
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,237

    I hope you took them off first.
    Brilliant! :lol:
  • MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584
    TOPPING said:

    I see the PB Brexiters have had their lager shandies (bold for a Tuesday night) and are spouting all kinds of Bollocks standing there in their Union Jack socks and saggy Y-fronts.

    For no appreciable sovereignty gain (we always were...) they have fucked the country. Just as well we have one or two cabinet ministers who are refusing to join in the madness.


    As I pointed out before the referendum: If it is economically impossible/impractical to Leave (as the Remainers keep pointing out), then we have already lost our sovereignty.

  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 5,032

    So you don't know, thanks.

    I recall the conversations you and I had pre referendum, I'll take your guesses with a pinch of salt after you said no Labour people in the north would vote to Leave.
    Are you saying that a majority of the current HoC voted to leave the EU?


  • Wretched cant. Theresa May called an election specifically because she said that forces at Westminster, including Labour, were undermining Brexit. Watch her statement again and tell me the election result was an endorsement of leaving the EU.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39630009

    People voted against May because she is useless and because she and her party have managed to upset both the young (with tuition fees and no housing prospects) and the old (with the removal of the triple lock and the late life care proposals).

    But the people also voted overwhelmingly for 2 parties that were in favour not only of Brexit but of what most would term a hard Brexit.

    The precious few votes that were in favour of reversing the decision went to the Lib Dems who did not exactly shine at all, and in Scotland to the SNP who saw their support drop dramatically.
  • TOPPING said:

    QED
    Um no. I am on shift so definitely no alcohol for me. Take another slurp old boy.
This discussion has been closed.