tonyh29 Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 23 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said: For a woman who campaigned for Remain, she does sound like she'd like to leave. So that's both main party leaders then 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkyvilla Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 19 minutes ago, Chindie said: Theresa May campaigned for whatever would position her to take power if Cameron fell on his sword. Hence carefully chosen absenteeism in the referendum campaign and uncommitted 'Remain' stance. I've less than no sympathy for her. She wanted this position, she can carry the shit that comes with it. I daresay if you could dig around in her deepest thoughts, you'd find someone who did think Remain was the right choice, but that was dwarfed by outright ambition and thirst for power. Surely being a leaver would have made more sense if the idea was to take over from Cameron if he lost? Boris for example got criticised for campaigning to leave because he wanted to be the next PM, it seems odd that Tories aren't allowed to campaign for leave or remain without being accused of cynical careerism. It could just be that she didn't feel particularly strongly about it or chose collective responsibility. I voted to remain but don't think it's the end of the world if we leave, it's more the lack of a plan that people voted for that pissed me off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted January 17, 2017 VT Supporter Share Posted January 17, 2017 15 minutes ago, sharkyvilla said: Surely being a leaver would have made more sense if the idea was to take over from Cameron if he lost? Boris for example got criticised for campaigning to leave because he wanted to be the next PM, it seems odd that Tories aren't allowed to campaign for leave or remain without being accused of cynical careerism. It could just be that she didn't feel particularly strongly about it or chose collective responsibility. I voted to remain but don't think it's the end of the world if we leave, it's more the lack of a plan that people voted for that pissed me off. If she'd nailed her colours to the Leave mast she risked being ostracised if Remain won. She carefully made sure she didn't commit too hard to the Remain cause, and kept her head down so not to be tainted either way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkyvilla Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 5 minutes ago, Chindie said: If she'd nailed her colours to the Leave mast she risked being ostracised if Remain won. She carefully made sure she didn't commit too hard to the Remain cause, and kept her head down so not to be tainted either way. If Remain won then Cameron would have stayed on as PM at least a few years before most likely handing over to Osborne anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted January 17, 2017 VT Supporter Share Posted January 17, 2017 1 minute ago, sharkyvilla said: If Remain won then Cameron would have stayed on as PM at least a few years before most likely handing over to Osborne anyway. Yes. My point was in that scenario she might have threatened her cabinet future under Cameron or his successor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 1 hour ago, OutByEaster? said: I have some sympathy for her in a way (and by some I mean very little) There are literally billions of people more deserving of your sympathy. Don't waste it on this vacuous, self-serving careerist. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 1 hour ago, sharkyvilla said: Surely being a leaver would have made more sense if the idea was to take over from Cameron if he lost? Boris for example got criticised for campaigning to leave because he wanted to be the next PM, it seems odd that Tories aren't allowed to campaign for leave or remain without being accused of cynical careerism. It could just be that she didn't feel particularly strongly about it or chose collective responsibility. I voted to remain but don't think it's the end of the world if we leave, it's more the lack of a plan that people voted for that pissed me off. With respect, if you seriously believe that she didn't really care about it in early June and was then incensed about it by the autumn, and that her career had nothing to do with that change, then I've got several, high-quality bridges to sell you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 5 hours ago, PieFacE said: So the Brexit deal will go to parliament to vote on, and if they vote "no" to it? There are two different Parliament votes here. One is regarding the triggering of article 50 (that one is being fought over in the courts). That vote could theoretically stop Brexit happening. The vote May is talking about is a vote on the terms of deal after a50 is triggered. If Parliament does not agree on the deal the UK will exit the EU with no deal in place and revert to WTO regulations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted January 17, 2017 VT Supporter Share Posted January 17, 2017 21 minutes ago, LondonLax said: There are two different Parliament votes here. One is regarding the triggering of article 50 (that one is being fought over in the courts). That vote could theoretically stop Brexit happening. The vote May is talking about is a vote on the terms of deal after a50 is triggered. If Parliament does not agree on the deal the UK will exit the EU with no deal in place and revert to WTO regulations. Which you can think of as a bunch of people standing on a high ledge and tied together, with one of them saying 'I've worked out a way to get down, but if you don't agree it's the best idea I'm jumping and you're all coming with me whether you like it or not'. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 43 minutes ago, LondonLax said: There are two different Parliament votes here. One is regarding the triggering of article 50 (that one is being fought over in the courts). That vote could theoretically stop Brexit happening. The vote May is talking about is a vote on the terms of deal after a50 is triggered. If Parliament does not agree on the deal the UK will exit the EU with no deal in place and revert to WTO regulations. I thought May had specifically refused to rule out just overriding a vote against triggering article 50 at some point in today's festivities? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 14 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: I thought May had specifically refused to rule out just overriding a vote against triggering article 50 at some point in today's festivities? We are largely in uncharted territory here, hence May's pointed reference to our unwritten constitution and her opponents' references to Henry VIII. If they wish to, parliamentarians can use many devices to frustrate her plans. The Brexiters know this very well, hence the pre-emptive line about frustrating the will of fhe people. It looks like getting interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PompeyVillan Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 I'm troubled, because I don't don't Theresa May has a mandate to pull us out of the single market. I voted on the a simple in or out, not the terms of exit. Theresa May has no idea what the country really want. Nobody does, so perhaps she should consult parliament and get get picture on what the people are telling their MPs. Or call a general election, that she'll probably win and then press ahead legitimately with a mandate from the public. Basically, sod her. I accept Brexit but I don't accept her Brexit. She's talking bollocks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted January 17, 2017 VT Supporter Share Posted January 17, 2017 She wants the Brexit that puts party troubles to bed. So she wants the cake and eat it version. She wants the trade but she knows she can't have the immigration or the whinging Tory benches don't go away, and conveniently the immigration card plays really **** hard in some not traditionally Tory places (putting aside anyone thinking leaving the EU is going to make the 'dirty Moslens and *insert racial epithet here* go home' is a fool at best). She doesn't much care otherwise. There's an argument to say this is a first step to a Tory plan of making social costs go away. I don't quite believe that. But it's an interesting thought. Not a thought I tink May cares about. That'd require conviction. She's rather more interested in newspaper ink and power. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Dan Hannan, Tory MEP 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post peterms Posted January 17, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted January 17, 2017 There are many good arguments for leaving the EU. There are none at all for subjugating ourselves to the mad, chaotic morass that is the US, sucking up trade deals of their making. And yet that is what lies in store for us, with our economic future "negotiated" by fools, charlatans and serfs like Fox, Davis and Johnson. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 7 hours ago, LondonLax said: There are two different Parliament votes here. One is regarding the triggering of article 50 (that one is being fought over in the courts). That vote could theoretically stop Brexit happening. The vote May is talking about is a vote on the terms of deal after a50 is triggered. If Parliament does not agree on the deal the UK will exit the EU with no deal in place and revert to WTO regulations. Parliament voted in early December by a massive majority to trigger Article 50 by the end of March, so that ship has sailed. The Supreme Court is now ruling on whether the devolved administrations should also have a right to approve the triggering of A50. That could get messy, particularly with the situation at Stormont having new elections which could potentially delay triggering by two months - NI assembly can't approve it if it's not sitting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaglint Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 (edited) Out of interest @Awol pleased at the direction we seem to be taking? (Just to signpost this is genuine interest and not a leading question). I guess what I'm interested in is whether you see immigration as the real scourge here and worth taking this hard line and likely pain for? I know there were plenty of other reasons you wanted to leave one or two that I see the sense in even if I don't agree. But bearing in mind we'll still require plenty of immigration afterwards anyway and I doubt the look and feel of the country will be tremendously effected by "putting up our borders" I am wondering whether those in favour of leaving are pleased at the decisions Mrs May is taking in terms of not trying to negotiate any kind of Norway style agreement and according to Hammond favouring the US style low tax low regulation economy. Edited January 18, 2017 by villaglint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hippo Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 Id never thought Id say this, but I agree with Jeremy Corbyn re May's statement yesterday. She has given up on staying in the single market, because the EU wouldn't agree to that unless we accept free movement. However what she has said yesterday is she wants a new trade deal with europe - but still doesn't want accept free movement Unless I'm missing something isn't she going to hit same brick wall negotiating such an agreement ? - it seems what she wants is access to single market - but it won't be called the single market ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts