Brexit View

[rendelharris]

keano, perhaps you should remember your own side's Mr.Farage, who said in the runup to the referendum: "In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way." Would your faith in democracy have been so shaken had the vote been the other way on the same margin and Brexiters had continued their campaign? As very competently pointed out above, democracy isn't a penalty shootout, winner takes all: it's an ongoing process and those who fail to institute change, or who oppose change, have every right to continue to campaign for their point of view, particularly when - as is the case in this instance - the evidence changes almost daily.

Good posts Joe and DL, by the way.

[keano77]

DL.

Thanks for explaining the 60% point, although irrelevant to the rules on which the referendum was carried out.

Immigration. Nobody knows what the future system will be. Remember, while in the EU we can't decide such matters for ourselves (see Sovereignty below)

Lies. You seem to be very selective about pre-vote lies. Personally I never believed the NHS bus nonsense. The only people who appear to have done so are remainers who never seem to stop bleating on about it. Allow me to jog your memory of 'warnings' (let's be generous) from Osborne and Cameron in league with the EU and a US President being press-ganged into support. Strangely the sun came up the morning after the vote, even if the dawn chorus was drowned out by Anna Soubry wailing and bawling all day.

Sovereignty. I'll give you a clue - the ECJ.

Democracy. Don't be fooled by Gina Miller and her like. Dark forces are at work there

Rendelharris

Personally I expected the Remain camp to win. I thought with all the 'warnings' of Armageddon people would err on the side of caution. Fortunately the British people are braver than I hoped. If Remain had won I would have accepted the vote as I believe in democracy. I would have shrugged my shoulders and thought to myself 'don't come crying to me if it all goes pear-shaped'

[JoeLeg]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> Democracy. Don't be fooled by Gina Miller and her

> like. Dark forces are at work there

Oh come on now - let's leave (haha, just my little pun there) conspiracy nonsense to one side. The vote is done, the result is accepted by both main political parties, and the supreme court made it plain that it was not going to be drawn on the core issue of Brexit; the 'realpolitik' is that this is happening, and anyone who thinks they can somehow stop it is a deluded fool. I would aver that anyone who believes it can be stopped - by anyone - is just as deluded.

Dark forces? Well, maybe they'll spend the next 40 years trying to change it back. Churchill ahd it right on democracy.

>

> Rendelharris

>

> Personally I expected the Remain camp to win. I

> thought with all the 'warnings' of Armageddon

> people would err on the side of caution.

> Fortunately the British people are braver than I

> hoped. If Remain had won I would have accepted the

> vote as I believe in democracy. I would have

> shrugged my shoulders and thought to myself 'don't

> come crying to me if it all goes pear-shaped'

Much like the attitude of most Remain voters, with the added complication that if it does all go pear-shaped we get to go along for the ride, as do my children and everyone else's.

[rendelharris]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Democracy. Don't be fooled by Gina Miller and her

> like. Dark forces are at work there

Obviously one person's "exercising the democratic right to challenge the government" is another's "reds under the bed." "Dark forces," forsooth! While I respect your right to your point of view you do tend to stray into somewhat hyperbolic territory.

> Personally I expected the Remain camp to win. I

> thought with all the 'warnings' of Armageddon

> people would err on the side of caution.

> Fortunately the British people are braver than I

> hoped. If Remain had won I would have accepted the

> vote as I believe in democracy. I would have

> shrugged my shoulders and thought to myself 'don't

> come crying to me if it all goes pear-shaped'

So when a referendum goes one particular way, that's game over for eternity? Everyone should give up on their beliefs and toe the line? So all those who've fought for over forty years against the emphatic 1975 vote (67-33, with only the Shetlands and the Outer Hebrides voting leave) to remain in the European Community - have they shaken your faith in democracy to the core with their inability to accept the result of a referendum?

By the way, from one of your earlier posts: "A country that can't make its own laws and can be told what to do by another body isn't a sovereign state." Would one be correct in assuming you'd be in favour of the abolition of the United Nations and the International Court of Justice at the Hague, then?

[Loz]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "European Union officials are looking forward to a

> massive eight-hour end of year party, which will

> boast 700 bottles of wine and a dinner with 26

> different dishes at a cost of up to ?48,600.

>

> ... The bill will be paid from the council budget,

> which is money from EU member states including

> Britain..."

I notice you snipped the bit that says it is for "about 1,200 to 1,400 civil servants". Sneaky.

If you think UK government departments don't do much the same thing, you've never worked with a UK government department. Apart from everything else, the House of Commons has a permanently subsidised bar and restaurants costing millions per year (and damn nice they are, too!).

[red devil]

Every firm I've worked for has had a shindig for the staff of some sort, I suspect most firms do e.g. the office Christmas party. It's a basic staff morale boosting strategy...

[keano77]

Rendel

I advised caution on the true motives of Gina Miller and her supporters because DulwichLondoner asked whether her court case was about taking back sovereignty. If Gina was really concerned about the supremacy of parliamentary democracy she would have voted leave.

I'm not bothered about the UN or ICJ. They both deal with Sovereign states who defer to them and consent to their arbitration. There's nothing wrong with a sovereign state cooperating with others in treaties and laws that benefit all parties

We pooled our sovereignty with other EU members and agreed to treaties and rules of membership. However the EU has morphed from an entity based around economic cooperation for mutual benefit into a polical supra-national entity which will need further integration and a degree of federalism to survive future challenges.

It's not what people signed up for in 1975.

[rendelharris]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It's not what people signed up for in 1975.

I think a fair few people are starting to wonder if what they're going to get now is quite what they signed up for last year, no? It is a fair point that the EC/EU has certainly evolved since the 1975 referendum, but you are tacitly agreeing, are you not, that people are entitled to keep campaigning even if a referendum doesn't go in their favour? The anti-EC/EU lobby have been campaigning solidly for the last forty years since the '75 vote, they didn't shrug their shoulders and accept the democratic will of the people - again, did that "undermine your faith in democracy"?

The UN and ICJ impose the collective will of other states on "sovereign states," up to and including taking military action against them and bringing their leaders to trial when their laws transgress the internationally accepted boundaries of law and human rights. Neither body limits its activities to "Sovereign states who defer to them and consent to their arbitration." If, as you appear to, you believe that the sovereignty of the individual state must be paramount then surely you must oppose such interference?

[DulwichLondoner]

@keano77

No, your argument that Gina Miller would have voted leave had she cared about parliamentary sovereignty is ridiculous; unless you believe that 48% of voters wanted to subvert the democratic order, you should accept that one can be in favor of the EU without wanting to subvert parliament.

In fact, I asked you very specific questions about the terrible impositions of the EU, yet you have miserably failed to answer. You just mentioned the ECJ. What about it? You didn't elaborate. Please do. What's so terrible about it? What has it done that is so unfortunate? And don't come back with the usual guff about the number of cases the UK loses - that number is utterly irrelevant because the European Commission only defends cases it thinks it can win. Of course you know that the ECJ also decided in favour of the UK in a number of cases, like on euro-clearing, or against the French when they wanted to limit the imports of dairy products from the UK after I-don't-remember-what disease (not the mad cow).

This is something which really makes me foam at my mouth. Everyone banging about sovereignty and the EU's terrible impositions, yet when I ask what those terrible impositions are, very, very few are capable of articulating an answer. It beggars belief.

You have similarly failed to answer about the "European scum bags", as you called them.

Can I have the honour of an answer on these points, or shall I conclude that it's pointless to debate with you because you throw accusations around as though they were rice grains at a wedding, but then are not interested in backing them up with facts?

Incidentally, this is an excellent example of why I am against referendums. Very rarely is a simple yes or a simple no the right answer; it is almost always some variation of "it depends", yet referendums don't give you that choice. Also, direct democracy doesn't work because not everyone has the maturity, intelligence and competence to make informed decisions on complex matters - that's one of the reasons why we, as voters, delegate. I fully appreciate it is a slippery slope, very dangerous territory, that taking this argument to the extreme is what dictatorships do to justify their very existence - yet this doesn't make this any less true. It's not a coincidence, for example, that many countries with a written constitution explicitly prohibit referendums on matters of international diplomacy (things like international treaties etc) or taxes. Can you imagine a referendum on taxes? Do you want a 3% tax rate? Yeeees! Do you want to build 5000 new schools and 3000 new hospitals? Yeees! And how are we going to pay for all of this?? :)

PS @rendelharris, you and I agreeing on something? It's now 2 pints I owe you :)

[keano77]

People are entitled to campaign as much as they like, no matter how misguided. It's healthy for a democracy

I see the flat earthers now have a discussion group on Facebook.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3984980/flat-earthers-rapper-b-o-b-tila-tequila-world-sphere-nasa/

Your UN ICJ point raises big questions of sovereignty, international cooperation etc and would merit a separate discussion. It would only put the few people still reading this thread to sleep to pursue it now.

[keano77]

DulwichLondoner

My advice to you to be wary of Gina Miller's campaign to ensure Parliament had a say is because there are ulterior motives behind it. Don't be fooled. It's an attempt to get Parliament to water down Brexit. Don't forget she's an investment manager, worried about how Brexit will hit her in the pocket perhaps?

Re the ECJ. It has the power to overrule the British Parliament. Therefore, the British Parliament is not supreme while we are in the EU (plus it forced straight bananas and tasteless French Golden 'Delicious' on us).

Scum bags. You are well aware that some bad people from Europe have turned up here. You're correct we should have stopped then entering but some have slipped through. Only last week a Couple of baddies were stopped on the French side of the Channel Tunnel trying to smuggle 79 hand guns into Britain. One was a Czech lad living in the UK, the other a Pole. There are plenty of other examples if you'd care to search google you can refresh your memory.

(And before you say it, yes there are plenty of other non-EU nationals who are gangsters, drug dealers, people smugglers etc)

[Loz]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Re the ECJ. It has the power to overrule the British Parliament. Therefore, the British

> Parliament is not supreme while we are in the EU (plus it forced straight bananas and tasteless

> French Golden 'Delicious' on us).

Oh dear.

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.

You really still believe that is true?

The apple one is a new one on me, though. I bought some Jazz apples last week - could you explain how I managed to avoid the nasty EU forcing me to buy GDs?

[rendelharris]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> People are entitled to campaign as much as they

> like, no matter how misguided. It's healthy for a

> democracy

This doesn't exactly chime with your earlier statement that "My faith in democracy has also been shaken to the core by the bitter backlash of some remainers who don't seem able to accept the result of a referendum they participated in."

> I see the flat earthers now have a discussion

> group on Facebook.

So you regard 48% of the electorate as idiots, basically, and the cause of remaining in the EU as akin to believing the earth is flat? Which is amusing as you're the one warning us of "dark forces" at work and recycling tired old half-truths and downright lies (even our Nige gave up on the straight bananas one).

[rendelharris]

DulwichLondoner Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> PS @rendelharris, you and I agreeing on something?

> It's now 2 pints I owe you :)

Skies were cloudy last night but I assume there must have been one of these...

http://i.imgur.com/mYVwru0.png

[Alan Medic]

UK and EU regulations

https://www.economist.com/news/britain/21699483-brexiteers-carp-european-union-red-tape-how-much-it-would-they-tear-up-yes-we-have

[keano77]

Loz, Rendel, Alan Medic

Loz, given the hour of your post you cannot have been expected to appreciate the irony of my mention of bananas given that DulwichLondoner raised the subject in an earlier reply to me above. Anyway, you might be delighted to learn that

Commission regulation 2257/94 decreed that bananas in general should be ?free from malformation or abnormal curvature?. Those sold as ?extra class? must be perfect, ?class 1? can have ?slight defects of shape? and ?class 2? can have full-scale ?defects of shape?.

In short, bananas should be preferably straightish, shouldn't be too curvy but can be bendy.

I've no idea what Jazz apples are. Do they play a tune? No doubt they fall under the grading of Apples in accordance with

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011, laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007.

I wonder how many months of meetings, free lunches washed down with bottles of vintage wines from Juncker's wine cellars these intellectual feats took. No doubt the costs will be buried in the fine detail and added to our Brexit Divorce Deal settlement.

Rendel,

I see from your post you were up with the larks. You have an amusing tendency to try and put words into my mouth but the early hour might explain that.

FYI, If you use the current definition of a Blue Moon as the second of two full moons in a single calendar month (rather than the older definition of the third of four full moons in a single season) The next one is due on January 31, 2018 (despite Brexit as the BBC is fond of saying). Can't promise it will have a blue tinge as that depends on particular atmospheric conditions.

So sorry Rendel, I think you dreamt of that moon last night. Unfortunately I can't find any EU Directives or Regulations on Blue Moons, or Larks for that matter, but no doubt they are works (working party) in progress.

Alan Medic

Thanks for posting that link but it's a bit of a non article if you know what I mean. The heading is 'Yes, we have no straight bananas' but curiously only mentions bananas in passing. See my info to Loz above which may be more helpful.

Anyway lads, sorry I can't stop to play, duty calls to help build a better Britain for all

[uncleglen]

This was 2011

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8439117/EU-migrants-commit-500-crimes-a-week-in-UK.html

and the Latvian who murdered Alice gross had already killed his own wife and served time and then came in and out of the UK 7 times and was not prevented. There are powers to stop criminals who've served 2 years in jail from not entering but they slip through the net.

[rendelharris]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Rendel,

>

> I see from your post you were up with the larks.

> You have an amusing tendency to try and put words

> into my mouth but the early hour might explain

> that.

>

> FYI, If you use the current definition of a Blue

> Moon as the second of two full moons in a single

> calendar month (rather than the older definition

> of the third of four full moons in a single

> season) The next one is due on January 31, 2018

> (despite Brexit as the BBC is fond of saying).

> Can't promise it will have a blue tinge as that

> depends on particular atmospheric conditions.

>

> So sorry Rendel, I think you dreamt of that moon

> last night. Unfortunately I can't find any EU

> Directives or Regulations on Blue Moons, or Larks

> for that matter, but no doubt they are works

> (working party) in progress.

I haven't put words in your mouth keano, I've quoted exactly, word for word, what you've said at one point, then quoted, again word for word, what you said at another point which entirely contradicts your first statement. Exact quotation and putting words in someone's mouth, two rather different things.

I think you've misunderstood the blue moon, not addressed to you, just a joke between self and Dulwichlondoner about the rarity of our being in agreement.

[keano77]

Rendel said

So you regard 48% of the electorate as idiots, basically

I have never said that or implied it. You have chosen to interpret my words that way

[rendelharris]

uncleglen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> This was 2011

> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-ord

> er/8439117/EU-migrants-commit-500-crimes-a-week-in

> -UK.html

>

> and the Latvian who murdered Alice gross had

> already killed his own wife and served time and

> then came in and out of the UK 7 times and was not

> prevented. There are powers to stop criminals

> who've served 2 years in jail from not entering

> but they slip through the net.

The statistics in that article spurred me to dig a little deeper in more recent figures, uncle. Here's something for you to try out on your pianola: there are around 3.2M EU citizens resident in the UK, and last year 37,000 were convicted of a crime, making roughly 1 in 87 of them. Taking the remaining population of 62M, they produced 1.2M criminal convictions, giving them a crimes per head ratio of around 1 to 52. So it would appear that EU citizens in the UK are in fact about 30% more law abiding than the natives.

[titch juicy]

Keano

You've been asked over and over and over and over again about ECJ/EU impositions on us, and the ONLY things you've come back with are apples and bananas.

God save us all from the evil EU.

[rendelharris]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Rendel said

>

> So you regard 48% of the electorate as idiots,

> basically

>

> I have never said that or implied it. You have

> chosen to interpret my words that way

Come off it squire, you said: "People are entitled to campaign as much as they like, no matter how misguided. It's healthy for a democracy. I see the flat earthers now have a discussion group on Facebook."

Not seriously going to claim you weren't drawing a comparison? Especially when earlier in this thread you said: "Years ago Loz, people feared sailing towards the horizon meant you'd fall off the earth. In fact, if it was wasn't for fearless Brexit-like types prepared to take a risk the Antipodes would never have been discovered and they're be no Dame Edna.

Remainers are a bit like early cartographers - Here be Dragons"

(By the way just for interest, none of the early explorers, cartographers or anyone else thought the world was flat, it's been generally accepted that it's round since about 300BC)

[keano77]

titch juicy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Keano

>

> You've been asked over and over and over and over

> again about ECJ/EU impositions on us, and the ONLY

> things you've come back with are apples and

> bananas.

>

> God save us all from the evil EU.

Titch, from the article posted by Alan above as a simple example

Membership of the EU, especially its single market, brings with it many rules. Some are ill-judged, uncosted and not subject to cost-benefit analysis. The working-time directive was a needless intrusion into an issue better decided at national level. And regulation imposes costs. Open Europe, a London-based think-tank, using official figures, says the annual cost to the economy of the EU?s 100 most expensive rules is ?33 billion ($49 billion) a year.

Really, I can't keep holding everyone's hands through this, you really need to put some effort in yourself - try reputable sources on Google

[rendelharris]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> titch juicy Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> Titch, from the article posted by Alan above as a

> simple example

>

> Membership of the EU, especially its single

> market, brings with it many rules. Some are

> ill-judged, uncosted and not subject to

> cost-benefit analysis. The working-time directive

> was a needless intrusion into an issue better

> decided at national level. And regulation imposes

> costs. Open Europe, a London-based think-tank,

> using official figures, says the annual cost to

> the economy of the EU?s 100 most expensive rules

> is ?33 billion ($49 billion) a year.

You've accidentally left off the next sentence, which reads "Yet regulation also brings benefits, put in this case by the government at ?59 billion." It does then say (see this is what you have to do to quote accurately rather than selectively) "surely an exaggeration" but those are the UK government figures.

[titch juicy]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> keano77 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > titch juicy Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

>

> > Titch, from the article posted by Alan above as

> a

> > simple example

> >

> > Membership of the EU, especially its single

> > market, brings with it many rules. Some are

> > ill-judged, uncosted and not subject to

> > cost-benefit analysis. The working-time

> directive

> > was a needless intrusion into an issue better

> > decided at national level. And regulation

> imposes

> > costs. Open Europe, a London-based think-tank,

> > using official figures, says the annual cost to

> > the economy of the EU?s 100 most expensive

> rules

> > is ?33 billion ($49 billion) a year.

>

> You've accidentally left off the next sentence,

> which reads "Yet regulation also brings benefits,

> put in this case by the government at ?59

> billion." It does then say (see this is what you

> have to do to quote accurately rather than

> selectively) "surely an exaggeration" but those

> are the UK government figures.

So hold on Rendell, what you're pointing out here is that the regulation Keano has higlighted as an imposition on us by the EU, actually benefits us to the tune of about ?26 billion a year?

You shouldn't need to hold Keano's hand through this. I'm sure if he'd read past the headline he'd have known that.