Santa_Rosa Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 When the bloke who drew up the original constitutional treaty says the new treaty is 99% the same, would you not consider the two documents to have the same impacts? Good enough for me. The government promised it, they should deliver. Regardless of what my Guardian, or anyone else's Mail says. God I hope the Lib Dems get their act together before the next election - I can't vote for these clowns any more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 Brown is the Steve McClaren of PM's in that no one wants him and as such he is running scared for his job .... once he gets enough notice that public opinion is against him he will change his mind and hold the referendum , but try and spin it so that it was always his intention to hold one and that he agrees with the great British people etc ect spin spin etc in the words of James Goldsmith ... OUT OUT OUT OUT OUT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 When the bloke who drew up the original constitutional treaty says the new treaty is 99% the same, would you not consider the two documents to have the same impacts? Good enough for me. The government promised it, they should deliver. Regardless of what my Guardian, or anyone else's Mail says. God I hope the Lib Dems get their act together before the next election - I can't vote for these clowns any more. I'd agree with all of that. Yes the government are honour bound to deliver on their referendum pledge, if it's in their manifesto how can they not? Very few professional commentators in this country dispute the analysis that the new Treaty is essentially the old Constitution re-named. No worries but if the government are confident of their position why not open up the debate, make the argument in favour, then go for the referendum? I don't accept people would be unduely swayed by the media, of course news barons have an agenda but it's pretty patronising to suggest people can't be trusted to make big decisions about the nations future. If you go down that route you may as well abolish elections completely. It's this tendancy to treat the public like so many numpties - and politicians and the media are equally guilty - that is driving people nuts! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 Brown is the Steve McClaren of PM's in that no one wants him and as such he is running scared for his job .... once he gets enough notice that public opinion is against him he will change his mind and hold the referendum , but try and spin it so that it was always his intention to hold one and that he agrees with the great British people etc ect spin spin etc in the words of James Goldsmith ... OUT OUT OUT OUT OUTYawnnnnnnnnnnn And Cameron is the Harry Redknapp maybe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 .......... I'd agree with all of that. Yes the government are honour bound to deliver on their referendum pledge, if it's in their manifesto how can they not? ...!Wrong on so many counts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 I see your debating skills haven't got any better Drat :-) So If Brown is so popular why doesn't he hold an election ..one answer ..fear , he knows he is going to lose ...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 Wrong on so many counts those counts being ..... one thing to dismiss another posters post.... is it not more constructive to post some reasoned arguement to back up your counter claims ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinity-Tom Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 No, I think this is a decision which should be voted for by the Houses of Parliament and part of the reason why we have general elections. I think a decision should be postponed however until after the next general election. Too many people will vote without any real knowledge of what they are voting for and why they are voting for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 I see your debating skills haven't got any better Drat :-) So If Brown is so popular why doesn't he hold an election ..one answer ..fear , he knows he is going to lose ......Yawnnnnnnn God Tony - 1. Why does he have to hold an election or again is this Pop Idol politics that your friend the marketing man is average at? 2. The manifesto pledge was on something that is no longer in existence Tedious - and as I said political advantages trying to be gained rather than "honour bound" politics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 No, I think this is a decision which should be voted for by the Houses of Parliament and part of the reason why we have general elections. I think a decision should be postponed however until after the next general election. Too many people will vote without any real knowledge of what they are voting for and why they are voting for it.Thank you Tom I thought the world had gone "press the red button" crazy today - for that I wont eat a chicken today :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R.I.C.O. Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 I doubt it, not that I really care much. I just don't think this links in with Gordon "Age of Change"..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 Wrong on so many counts those counts being ..... one thing to dismiss another posters post.... is it not more constructive to post some reasoned arguement to back up your counter claims ?Because Mr I love a gimmick - if you cared to read the thread and you will see that a manifesto pledge on something that is no longer in existence? I just wonder how many of the manifesto pledges any of the parties would uphold? Would the Tory party really reduce tax on petrol? Hmmm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Santa_Rosa Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 No, I think this is a decision which should be voted for by the Houses of Parliament and part of the reason why we have general elections. I think a decision should be postponed however until after the next general election. Too many people will vote without any real knowledge of what they are voting for and why they are voting for it. That's as maybe Tom, and a whole other argument I reckon - the key one for me here is, shouldn't governments deliver on their promise to have a referendum, not what the outcome might be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 .......... That's as maybe Tom, and a whole other argument I reckon - the key one for me here is, shouldn't governments deliver on their promise to have a referendum, not what the outcome might be.Head hitting wall time - please show where this was promised? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Santa_Rosa Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 if you cared to read the thread and you will see that a manifesto pledge on something that is no longer in existence? but to all intents and purposes, and according to numerous political commentators that I've heard (include foreign ones with no agenda) it's the same thing isn't it? Brown has wriggled out of this on a technicality because he is scared of the outcome IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 if you cared to read the thread and you will see that a manifesto pledge on something that is no longer in existence? but to all intents and purposes, and according to numerous political commentators that I've heard (include foreign ones with no agenda) it's the same thing isn't it? Brown has wriggled out of this on a technicality because he is scared of the outcome IMO. Yawnnnn - god this is so boring Even the BBC tried to say it was the same and then when you read their article admitted it was not. Pathetic political manoeuvre's being played by the marketing boys of the green (oops blue) party. I suppose anything that may show foreigners in a bad light will do these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Santa_Rosa Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 Head hitting wall time - please show where this was promised? Those thousands of google hits not good enough for you then? Why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 Head hitting wall time - please show where this was promised? Those thousands of google hits not good enough for you then? Why not?Ha - its obvious today is read half a post day isn't it - is all this for children in need or something? Have you read the manifesto - Gringo even kindly posted it earlier in the thread - or doesn't that fit in with the Daily Mail, Torygraph, Mail on Sunday and Conservative party media issues that make up the bulk of those first Google posts? At least look at what was said rather tan listening to half a story p.s. where do I send the sponsor money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinity-Tom Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 shouldn't governments deliver on their promise to have a referendum, not what the outcome might be. If they did promise it, then they shouldn't have done but to be honest, two wrongs don't make a right. It may be wrong to go back on a promise (if indeed there was one) but it would be a greater wrong to have a referendum on this basis alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 Because Mr I love a gimmick post not posters ... or are you saying that your blind love for everything labour is based on well formed opinion and yet i'm not allowed to have well formed opinions of my own ? Blair's promise was to hold a vote on an EU constitution .. this new draft AMENDS , rather than replaces, existing EU treaties . The removal of the preamble and references to the EU flag and anthem, as well as the relegation of the charter of fundamental rights to an annexe, are cosmetic changes... they haven't stopped other European heads of government saying that the treaty is a constitution in all but name.. a Scotsman in an England shirt is still a Scotsman at the end of the day Brown knows he would loose a referendem ..he is hoping that outside events will save him as the French and the Dutch did Blair, Brown, it seems, will have to clutch at straws—and pray that he grasps the right one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts