Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Brexit Referendum Brexit Referendum

01-24-2017 , 04:02 AM
This ruling this morning.

I may be wrong, but it seems to me a bad result if the government win, cos it gives the other side the opportunity to appeal - to the ECJ.

That would put the cat among the pigeons.
01-24-2017 , 05:42 AM
Gov lost.

Won on the devolution argument
01-24-2017 , 05:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by chezlaw
Gov lost.

Won on the devolution argument
Best result IMO.
01-24-2017 , 06:02 AM
I like it. The best hope is to make sure that there's a vote before a deal can be done and then later create a way for that vote to include the option to cancel the whole thing.
01-24-2017 , 06:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by chezlaw
I like it. The best hope is to make sure that there's a vote before a deal can be done and then later create a way for that vote to include the option to cancel the whole thing.
Lol
01-24-2017 , 06:46 AM
the similarities between the scotland-uk relationship and the uk-eu one are hilarious*. sturgeon should go all out calling the uk undemocratic, attacking the house of lords, monarchy and the first-past-the-post silliness (though i guess they like the queen and wouldnt have any seats if not for fptp).

*main difference seems to be that scotland doesnt get to decide anything important itself while in the uk, but the uk mainly can in the eu.

Last edited by daca; 01-24-2017 at 06:47 AM. Reason: .
01-24-2017 , 06:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by daca
the similarities between the scotland-uk relationship and the uk-eu one are hilarious*. sturgeon should go all out calling the uk undemocratic, attacking the house of lords, monarchy and the first-past-the-post silliness (though i guess they like the queen and wouldnt have any seats if not for fptp).

*main difference seems to be that scotland doesnt get to decide anything important itself while in the uk, but the uk mainly can in the eu.
Most governments elected through proportional representation have local lists not just national lists, considering Scotland a region would still result in the SNP having a bunch of seats.
01-24-2017 , 08:28 AM
Some. But even some of those require parties to clear the national threshold - often 5% - before they can get seats on the regional lists, to ensure that the people in the parliament are serious about governing the country as a whole, not just lobbying for the narrow interests of a small part of it.

The 5% rule would cut the UK parliament down to a more manageable 3 parties instead of the current situation where we have more than 10.
01-24-2017 , 08:52 AM
yeah imposing a 5% threshold effectively excluding the party running the Scottish government isn't happening and suggesting it would is ludicrous, that's not including representation from the NO parties and wales

oh and four parties not three
01-24-2017 , 10:11 AM
Ah yes, of course UKIP cleared 5% last time as well.

I know it isn't happening. No kind of electoral reform is happening after even minimal reform was roundly rejected last time it was offered.

As for NI politicians, the idea that a national threshold would cut out a bunch of nutters with 0.5% each whose supporters all happen to live next door to each other is a reason in favour not against.

I don't support that system though. I'd much rather go with STV as used in the Republic of Ireland because its a much better system (even if we continue suffering the nutters and regionalists).
01-24-2017 , 10:28 AM
The fact that the UK has 4 regional assemblies of various jurisdictions suggests to me that any PR would reflect that. But you're right we aren't getting any closer to PR anytime soon.

Personally I think it should have been part of the Labour governments program under Brown.
01-24-2017 , 11:04 AM
UK lead negotiator apparently told May it would be 2020 at absolutely earliest (and be probably a decade later) to negotiate a deal with EU (not even other countries) that would work.

May apparently said not quick enough.

Dude says, in essence, lol. I am outta here. Have fun with your fantasy.
01-24-2017 , 11:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by grizy
UK lead negotiator apparently told May it would be 2020 at absolutely earliest (and be probably a decade later) to negotiate a deal with EU (not even other countries) that would work.

May apparently said not quick enough.

Dude says, in essence, lol. I am outta here. Have fun with your fantasy.
That was the guy that kept telling Cameron to ask for less and less, and had a career completely bound to the EU, right?
01-24-2017 , 12:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by grizy
UK lead negotiator apparently told May it would be 2020 at absolutely earliest (and be probably a decade later) to negotiate a deal with EU (not even other countries) that would work.

May apparently said not quick enough.

Dude says, in essence, lol. I am outta here. Have fun with your fantasy.
2020 is not actually that much further than the 2 years' notice away.

Even if it was a long time., it's a confirming reason to not be a part of that organisation.
01-24-2017 , 03:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexdb
2020 is not actually that much further than the 2 years' notice away.

Even if it was a long time., it's a confirming reason to not be a part of that organisation.
Except trade deals take a long time with anyone.
01-24-2017 , 03:49 PM
New poll today showing public coming together behind hardball Brexit strategy.

https://www.icmunlimited.com/polls/

Although framing UK-EU negotiations questions is a difficult task, we asked the public how they would most like the outcome to be evaluated.
A majority (53%) opt for leaving the EU no matter what happens in the negotiating process, with
a quarter (26%) wanting a second referendum on the terms of the deal.
One in ten (12%) prefers for a final decision to be made in Parliament.

In the event that negotiations fail to yield an acceptable outcome within the permitted time frame,
just shy of a majority (49%) believe that we should simply leave without a deal –
a third (33%) would want to see a postponement or suspension of our exit (with 62% of Remainers understandably preferring this way forward).

However, if the terms of the deal are not considered to be in the UK’s interest, the public solidly endorse the proposition of us
leaving without a trade deal (63%) rather than
accepting a bad one (8%).

The public also support Theresa May’s threat to change the UK’s business model in the event of the EU only offering a bad deal.
Six in ten (59%) agree that she was right to threaten the EU with
only 18% saying she was wrong.
01-24-2017 , 03:59 PM
So we're going the US route of burn it all down, to hell with the consequences. Great stuff.
01-24-2017 , 04:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LektorAJ
New poll today showing public coming together behind hardball Brexit strategy.
It's their funeral.
01-24-2017 , 04:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LektorAJ
New poll today showing public coming together behind hardball Brexit strategy.
The public think what the Mail and the Express and the Sun tell them.
01-24-2017 , 05:04 PM
The public are extremely stupid, and they still haven't realised that the National Health Service, the welfare system, the old-age pension and free education are all going to go, along with European employment-protection, environmental-protection, trading-standards, health-and-safety and most importantly human-rights law, and getting rid of immigrants was just the racist carrot that was dangled to make the idiots vote for it.
01-24-2017 , 06:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LektorAJ
However, if the terms of the deal are not considered to be in the UK’s interest, the public solidly endorse the proposition of us
leaving without a trade deal (63%) rather than
accepting a bad one (8%).
Leaving with no deal IS the bad trade deal. What could possibly be worse than no rights to trade in services and vast tariffs and non tariff barriers on goods?
01-24-2017 , 06:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by davmcg
Leaving with no deal IS the bad trade deal. What could possibly be worse than no rights to trade in services and vast tariffs and non tariff barriers on goods?
OMG some people really have no clue about negotiating.

Good to see a decent majority understand it, at least.
01-24-2017 , 06:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 57 On Red
The public are extremely stupid, and they still haven't realised that the National Health Service, the welfare system, the old-age pension and free education are all going to go, along with European employment-protection, environmental-protection, trading-standards, health-and-safety and most importantly human-rights law, and getting rid of immigrants was just the racist carrot that was dangled to make the idiots vote for it.
LOL.

Wow, just wow.

Shouldn't respond to this nonsense but do you know anything about human rights law or even when UK joined the EU? I'll give you a clue, we had some before the EU and we'll have some after the EU.
01-24-2017 , 06:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diebitter
OMG some people really have no clue about negotiating.

Good to see a decent majority understand it, at least.
rofl - Terry's negotiating position is that she will send the children up chimneys, cancel all tax for foreign investors and "my brother Donnie is bigger than you".

As a result the EU are probably going to refuse to talk trade until most of the EU exit issues are agreed. When this becomes clear the pressure on the government will be overwhelming.
01-24-2017 , 06:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by davmcg
Leaving with no deal IS the bad trade deal. What could possibly be worse than no rights to trade in services and vast tariffs and non tariff barriers on goods?
i dont get it either. no deal seems like the worst case scenario. but maybe it's something depressing like them being afraid a deal ends up including free movement.

      
m