The Positive Brexit Thread

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

13 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

That's a nice segué, but even so, if people who voted to leave the EU and now regret it are just going to look for someone else to blame instead of looking at their own approach to how they made their decision on voting then expect more of the same going forward. 

 

😂

In the case of Brexit I'm sure there are a very large number of people who now regret voting Leave but very few of them honest enough to actually admit that they made a mistake (whatever the reason behind it) - that is just human nature and to be expected.

But personally I'm very happy to hear leavers every day of the week blaming the liars, chancers, and crooks who won the vote under false pretences and in some cases illegally.

But of course it isn't just the result of the vote about which they (and the rest of us actually) are complaining - it is the way Brexit was implemented that is the major bone of contention and which bears no resemblance whatsoever to what was promised by the Leave campaign - that we are going to hear a lot more about going forward.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

4 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

😂

In the case of Brexit I'm sure there are a very large number of people who now regret voting Leave but very few of them honest enough to actually admit that they made a mistake (whatever the reason behind it) - that is just human nature and to be expected.

But personally I'm very happy to hear leavers every day of the week blaming the liars, chancers, and crooks who won the vote under false pretences and in some cases illegally.

But of course it isn't just the result of the vote about which they (and the rest of us actually) are complaining - it is the way Brexit was implemented that is the major bone of contention and which bears no resemblance whatsoever to what was promised by the Leave campaign - that we are going to hear a lot more about going forward.

I don't understand what comfort you get from that. All of those people won't learn anything and will simply be taken in by the next lie. 

Edited August 21, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

3 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

I don't understand what comfort you get from that. All of those people won't learn anything and will simply be taken in by the next lie. 

😀 Well I wasn't intending to suggest that it was a major consolation, but it is quite refreshing to hear people like @Well b back be very open about why they voted the way they did and how they feel about it now - and I think you are quite wrong to say 'All of those people won't learn anything and will simply be taken in by the next lie' because I think its pretty clear that he won't for one.

What's more, I suspect there are many others who voted Leave (for whatever reason) and who have been very directly and negatively impacted by Brexit who will no longer trust (or would vote for) the politicians which have betrayed them - I would suggest that was a very significant factor in Johnson's demise as PM, not just Brexit per se of course but the realisation by a huge majority of the voters (and Tory MPs) that they have been repeatedly lied to not just about Brexit, but across a whole host of other serious issues as well.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

10 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

😀 Well I wasn't intending to suggest that it was a major consolation, but it is quite refreshing to hear people like @Well b back be very open about why they voted the way they did and how they feel about it now - and I think you are quite wrong to say 'All of those people won't learn anything and will simply be taken in by the next lie' because I think its pretty clear that he won't for one.

What's more, I suspect there are many others who voted Leave (for whatever reason) and who have been very directly and negatively impacted by Brexit who will no longer trust (or would vote for) the politicians which have betrayed them - I would suggest that was a very significant factor in Johnson's demise as PM, not just Brexit per se of course but the realisation by a huge majority of the voters (and Tory MPs) that they have been repeatedly lied to not just about Brexit, but across a whole host of other serious issues as well.

Johnson's demise as PM had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Brexit. Mostly it was to do with the Conservative party looking to dispatch someone they felt was too off song with some of the Brexit opportunities perceived by the right of the Conservative party, namely a regulatory bonfire and a smaller state. 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

Johnson was a one off pinch hitter for the Tories. Many people said it at the time and were proved right.

[Yellow Fever 3,772]

29 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

😀 Well I wasn't intending to suggest that it was a major consolation, but it is quite refreshing to hear people like @Well b back be very open about why they voted the way they did and how they feel about it now - and I think you are quite wrong to say 'All of those people won't learn anything and will simply be taken in by the next lie' because I think its pretty clear that he won't for one.

What's more, I suspect there are many others who voted Leave (for whatever reason) and who have been very directly and negatively impacted by Brexit who will no longer trust (or would vote for) the politicians which have betrayed them - I would suggest that was a very significant factor in Johnson's demise as PM, not just Brexit per se of course but the realisation by a huge majority of the voters (and Tory MPs) that they have been repeatedly lied to not just about Brexit, but across a whole host of other serious issues as well.

I think this proverb is most apt - 

Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me ...

[Herman 9,756]

From last year. Seems very relevant. And very depressing.

 

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

20 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Johnson's demise as PM had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Brexit. Mostly it was to do with the Conservative party looking to dispatch someone they felt was too off song with some of the Brexit opportunities perceived by the right of the Conservative party, namely a regulatory bonfire and a smaller state. 

😂😂????????

"Johnson's demise as PM had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Brexit"

"it was to do with the Conservative party looking to dispatch someone they felt was too off song with some of the Brexit opportunities"

Pretty strange statement on many levels, I think pretty much everyone else in the country (and especially in the Government) thought it was because his Cabinet colleagues got sick of Johnson telling blatent and clearly demonstrable lies and then expecting them to go out and defend the indefensible making themselves look both stupid and as untrustworty as Johnson himself and all the while tanking the Tory Party's electoral chances in the next GE.

The regulatory bonfire was Rees-Smug's job and the fact that he was utterly useless in it was...........well Rees-Smug's fault rather than Johnson's

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

3 hours ago, Creative Midfielder said:

😂😂????????

"Johnson's demise as PM had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Brexit"

"it was to do with the Conservative party looking to dispatch someone they felt was too off song with some of the Brexit opportunities"

Pretty strange statement on many levels, I think pretty much everyone else in the country (and especially in the Government) thought it was because his Cabinet colleagues got sick of Johnson telling blatent and clearly demonstrable lies and then expecting them to go out and defend the indefensible making themselves look both stupid and as untrustworty as Johnson himself and all the while tanking the Tory Party's electoral chances in the next GE.

The regulatory bonfire was Rees-Smug's job and the fact that he was utterly useless in it was...........well Rees-Smug's fault rather than Johnson's

The leaks and briefing against Johnson that turned the tide against him almost definitely came largely from within the Conservative party. So really not strange at all if you bother to think about it. 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

1 hour ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

The leaks and briefing against Johnson that turned the tide against him almost definitely came largely from within the Conservative party. So really not strange at all if you bother to think about it. 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

😀 I'm very happy to give you a good laugh, in fact I take it as a compliment as I don't imagine that having a sense of humour is something that you're normally associated with.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

1 minute ago, Creative Midfielder said:

😀 I'm very happy to give you a good laugh, in fact I take it as a compliment as I don't imagine that having a sense of humour is something that you're normally associated with.

Don't worry: Many people like yourself have had successful lives without having much of an imagination. 😚

[Herman 9,756]

I see that the Today programme is still balancing an expert's opinion with a right wing journalist's. 

[Daz Sparks 1,152]

Brexit positive, Spain is now a part of Britain..

[Wings of a Sparrow 1,414]

I see Liz Truss may invoke article 16, days after becoming PM 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/aug/26/liz-truss-may-trigger-article-16-days-after-becoming-pm-amid-brexit-row

 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

3 hours ago, Wings of a Sparrow said:

I see Liz Truss may invoke article 16, days after becoming PM 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/aug/26/liz-truss-may-trigger-article-16-days-after-becoming-pm-amid-brexit-row

 

Jesus H, its awkward enough now without pishing off the whole of Europe just to appease the 160K membership and racist bigots. Another backlog looming.

Hi, I'm Liz Truss, UK PM and I'm not for turning. Apart from being a LibDem remainer.

Edited August 27, 2022 by keelansgrandad

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

14 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

Jesus H, its awkward enough now without pishing off the whole of Europe just to appease the 160K membership and racist bigots. Another backlog looming.

It won't **** off most EU states. France will be the most outraged, the Republic of Ireland will be genuinely and legitimately concerned but most states won't be that interested. 

Now Boris is gone, it's legitimate to revisit and to use the provisions in the treaty to protect the stability of Northern Ireland, given that it was his agreement and everyone else agrees it was awful. 

The only legitimate interest the EU has in Northern Ireland is the integrity of the Customs Union, but the only directly involved parties in practical terms are the UK government, Stormont, and the Republic of Ireland; the EU should delegate its negotiation of arrangements to the Republic of Ireland, who can be trusted by both sides to negotiate in good faith for a workable arrangement that respects the needs of the EU, with the outcome to be ratified by the EU. 

Edited August 27, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[Yellow Fever 3,772]

32 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

It won't **** off most EU states. France will be the most outraged, the Republic of Ireland will be genuinely and legitimately concerned but most states won't be that interested. 

Now Boris is gone, it's legitimate to revisit and to use the provisions in the treaty to protect the stability of Northern Ireland, given that it was his agreement and everyone else agrees it was awful. 

The only legitimate interest the EU has in Northern Ireland is the integrity of the Customs Union, but the only directly involved parties in practical terms are the UK government, Stormont, and the Republic of Ireland; the EU should delegate its negotiation of arrangements to the Republic of Ireland, who can be trusted by both sides to negotiate in good faith for a workable arrangement that respects the needs of the EU, with the outcome to be ratified by the EU. 

Its the SM not the CU plus it's an international treaty that stands irrespective of who signed it unless you want to be a pariah state.

[Well b back 3,203]

On 21/08/2022 at 16:10, littleyellowbirdie said:

Johnson's demise as PM had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Brexit. Mostly it was to do with the Conservative party looking to dispatch someone they felt was too off song with some of the Brexit opportunities perceived by the right of the Conservative party, namely a regulatory bonfire and a smaller state. 

Think you will find it has, it was just another group of lies from a lying lawbreaking c***. If you don’t think lying matters go to the electorate, 1. For a general election 2. For a fresh Brexit vote or at least a vote to allow proper trade with the EU.

Unfortunately people like me saw people backing Johnson with his lies and lawbreaking, including my local MP. You may think that makes me a new Labour voter, but it does not, I will vote for whoever has the biggest chance of ousting my local mp ( who I voted for ). 
 

[A Load of Squit 5,161]

50 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

It won't **** off most EU states. France will be the most outraged, the Republic of Ireland will be genuinely and legitimately concerned but most states won't be that interested. 

Now Boris is gone, it's legitimate to revisit and to use the provisions in the treaty to protect the stability of Northern Ireland, given that it was his agreement and everyone else agrees it was awful. 

The only legitimate interest the EU has in Northern Ireland is the integrity of the Customs Union, but the only directly involved parties in practical terms are the UK government, Stormont, and the Republic of Ireland; the EU should delegate its negotiation of arrangements to the Republic of Ireland, who can be trusted by both sides to negotiate in good faith for a workable arrangement that respects the needs of the EU, with the outcome to be ratified by the EU. 

More Brexiteer tosh.

The EU can send whoever they want to the negotiating table, the British are in no position to decide who can be 'trusted'.

The EU are very unlikely to want to negotiate further with the Tories, a change of government might see them interested but I think you'll find that they see the current bunch of Tory lightweights as a collective of liars who cannot be trusted.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

1 hour ago, A Load of Squit said:

More Brexiteer tosh.

The EU can send whoever they want to the negotiating table, the British are in no position to decide who can be 'trusted'.

The EU are very unlikely to want to negotiate further with the Tories, a change of government might see them interested but I think you'll find that they see the current bunch of Tory lightweights as a collective of liars who cannot be trusted.

More remainiac/rejoiner tosh.

Edited August 27, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

2 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

Its the SM not the CU plus it's an international treaty that stands irrespective of who signed it unless you want to be a pariah state.

It's an international treaty which includes article 16, which allows for unilateral action on NI, as a provision agreed by both sides, one which the EU commission felt technically entitled to reach for over a petty squabble over vaccines until it belatedly woke up to how politically petty it looked.

All of this nonsense over 'pariah states' over small scale disputes over customs arrangements; it's utterly absurd hyperbole.

Edited August 27, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

4 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

It won't **** off most EU states. France will be the most outraged, the Republic of Ireland will be genuinely and legitimately concerned but most states won't be that interested. 

Now Boris is gone, it's legitimate to revisit and to use the provisions in the treaty to protect the stability of Northern Ireland, given that it was his agreement and everyone else agrees it was awful. 

The only legitimate interest the EU has in Northern Ireland is the integrity of the Customs Union, but the only directly involved parties in practical terms are the UK government, Stormont, and the Republic of Ireland; the EU should delegate its negotiation of arrangements to the Republic of Ireland, who can be trusted by both sides to negotiate in good faith for a workable arrangement that respects the needs of the EU, with the outcome to be ratified by the EU. 

Why revisit? 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

1 hour ago, keelansgrandad said:

Why revisit? 

That's a question for the EU, not me. But from the UK's perspective, the legal case supporting using article 16 is good, so if the EU refuses to budge, use article 16. 

https://ukandeu.ac.uk/article-16-eu-protocol/

Edited August 27, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[Herman 9,756]

4 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

More remainiac/rejoiner tosh.

Sadly it's a fact. There is little to no trust in our current government from the EU's viewpoint. If a more grown up and less ideological government comes in then they may want to try and get things working properly.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

3 minutes ago, Herman said:

Sadly it's a fact. There is little to no trust in our current government from the EU's viewpoint. If a more grown up and less ideological government comes in then they may want to try and get things working properly.

it's not a fact, as articulated by Professor Damian Chalmers, professor of international law at LSE, in the article I posted that @Creative Midfielder is amused by for some reason. Maybe you should try reading it and doing a bit of thinking instead of regurgitating the same recycled rubbish over and over again to convince each other otherwise. The legal case for using article 16 holds up. 

Edited August 27, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

37 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

That's a question for the EU, not me. But from the UK's perspective, the legal case supporting using article 16 is good, so if the EU refuses to budge, use article 16. 

https://ukandeu.ac.uk/article-16-eu-protocol/

Did you read the counter arguments beneath the article?

[A Load of Squit 5,161]

Remember when Paul Moy kept telling that top economist Patrick Minford had made the case for Brexit?

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

4 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

Remember when Paul Moy kept telling that top economist Patrick Minford had made the case for Brexit?

Had enough of experts, have you? 

[Herman 9,756]

30 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

it's not a fact, as articulated by Professor Damian Chalmers, professor of international law at LSE, in the article I posted that @Creative Midfielder is amused by for some reason. Maybe you should try reading it and doing a bit of thinking instead of regurgitating the same recycled rubbish over and over again to convince each other otherwise. The legal case for using article 16 holds up. 

I did read it, yes it was interesting, as were the replies as @keelansgrandad has mentioned. It is one person's opinion rather than a fact based article so I won't just base a whole complex situation on that one piece.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

15 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Had enough of experts, have you? 

No such thing in this debate. Its all opinion. There is no model. There is no history.