EU referendum...THE RESULT...and aftermath...

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Les Miserable wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Or should they just button it, suck it up and accept the consequences

Isn't that what you are advocating elsewhere regarding the AFT leadership debate?

Not at all.

I'm advocating engagement with the democratic process by encouraging those who feel strongly that the AFT needs to be improved to stand for election so that, if they are successful, they can implement the changes they feel so strongly about.

What's the problem with that?

There isn't a problem with that but the vast majority don't have the time/inclination/wherewithal or desire to stand for election, preferring to pay their subs every year, support the general raison d'etre of the Trust but question with varying degrees of vociferousness what they perceive to be it's shortcomings.

tigertony wrote:

I heard a clip on the news that millions in UK are concerned about their jobs during/after brexit. Are these the same millions who voted to leave? Surely if the French have ripped up an agreement that doesn't mean we have to rip it up as well?

The whole point of an agreement is that two parties must agree to something. If they don't it isn't an agreement and not worth tuppence.

Bit sloppy there Saint Francis.

Since when has 16,141,241 been slightly fewer than 17m? And while I'm at it, when has 17,410,742 been slightly more.

Yet you have no problem accepting the result when only 24.8% of the Teachers Union bother to vote. To simplify it for you, three out of four don't vote and certainly didn't vote to strike.

I thought maths was your speciality.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

The High Court has ruled that Article 50 cannot be activated by Government without it being approved first by Parliament.

The chances of A50 happening recede slightly further into the distance.

It will still have to happen but the court ruling is very good news as it means parliament can at least agree on the terms of our exit, rather than Theresa May acting as a dictator when she doesn't even have a democratic mandate from the country to do so. As it currently seems there is no plan other than to just up and leave and worry about the details later.


It will be interesting to see the same people who told remainers to shut up and accept the result, fail to shut up and accept the result of the high court. The same people who complained bitter throughout the referendum that UK Parliament should be Sovereign complain that UK Parliament is Sovereign.

I feel we need to know the terms we are leaving under before accepting it,  Lets have a vote on the terms,  not just give the government a blank cheque.

Hugh Watt wrote:

It will still have to happen but the court ruling is very good news as it means parliament can at least agree on the terms of our exit, rather than Theresa May acting as a dictator when she doesn't even have a democratic mandate from the country to do so. As it currently seems there is no plan other than to just up and leave and worry about the details later.

We are not a Presidential country. Never have been.

We voted in a Government, not a president. So yes they do have a mandate.

Be careful what you wish for.

The Conservatives would wipe the floor with Labour in an election.

Exactly. Which is why she can't activate article 50 without parliamentary assent.

A complete mess.

Pay more, get less, the British way. Ripoff Brexit.

17.4 million people must not be sidelined by the wishes of the rich and titled moneymakers....they need to be shipped off to the EU as part of a brexit deal....no more gravy train off our backs.

Because of course none of the press barons like Murdoch or viscount Rothermere or the Barclay brothers are rich moneymakers riding a wave of impotent anger :

What Has happened is that the notion that a single politician and an unelected one at that can dictate the precise terms without parliamentary scrutiny has been shot down by 3 of the most senior lawmakers in this country as being unlawful.

That's based on the UK rule of law which brexiters thought was sacrosanct right up to when it stopped suiting them. One of the main roles of Parliament is to protect the people, in this instance from themselves.

Article 50 will get voted through because a high percentage of labour MPs sit in constituencies which overwhelming voted leave.

So why should this be a problem? Because it means that the government will have to come clean about their plans when's it's quite clear they haven't got any.

The best we can hope for is a relatively soft Brexit which allows for access to the single market in exchange for certain concessions on free movement. None of which will be as good as the deal Cameron got from the EU earlier this year but that's where we are.

Rollo Tomasi wrote:

Bit sloppy there Saint Francis.

Since when has 16,141,241 been slightly fewer than 17m? And while I'm at it, when has 17,410,742 been slightly more.

Yet you have no problem accepting the result when only 24.8% of the Teachers Union bother to vote. To simplify it for you, three out of four don't vote and certainly didn't vote to strike.

I thought maths was your speciality.

The Union vote makes the point exactly. If the government sees fit to pass such legislation, and it has has, then why should it only apply to Union votes?

Just adding this little beaut to the sovereignty paradox.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

One for the wankbank there Franny, foreshore.

Glad to be of service.

So, what is happening with Brexit?

What is the plan?

When will it happen?

Hard, soft or somewhere in the middle?

I need to start planning for the future.....

My new passport arrived this week (the whole process took only 10 days!!!!), it says "European Union" on it! The new design is great!!

Look "Brexit means Brexit", right? (Just like aardvark means aardvark presumably).

Every cloud has a silver lining...

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

In a leaked memo prepared by Deloitte, it states the Government has no plan to deal with Brexit, The process such as it is, is paralysed by cabinet infighting and Theresa May is showing a tendency to ignore it anyway.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Nigel Farage is furious at the Governments refusal to use him as a go between with Trump. How dare they refuse an interim leader of a political party with 1 MP

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Hugh Watt wrote:

In a leaked memo prepared by Deloitte, it states the Government has no plan to deal with Brexit, The process such as it is, is paralysed by cabinet infighting and Theresa May is showing a tendency to ignore it anyway.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Nigel Farage is furious at the Governments refusal to use him as a go between with Trump. How dare they refuse an interim leader of a political party with 1 MP  

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

You forgot to mention that Farage has stood for Parliament 7 times and never been elected.

Also, every government has someone whose job it is to 'act as a go between' with other countries' leaders. Foreign Secretary, I believe he's called.

Homeslice wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

In a leaked memo prepared by Deloitte, it states the Government has no plan to deal with Brexit, The process such as it is, is paralysed by cabinet infighting and Theresa May is showing a tendency to ignore it anyway.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Nigel Farage is furious at the Governments refusal to use him as a go between with Trump. How dare they refuse an interim leader of a political party with 1 MP  

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

You forgot to mention that Farage has stood for Parliament 7 times and never been elected.

Also, every government has someone whose job it is to 'act as a go between' with other countries' leaders. Foreign Secretary, I believe he's called.

That's true. Problem is that's Boris.

Has there ever been a time when political 'leaders' have been so mind-numbingly useless?

So Deloitte has published its own report on Brexit. It hasn't been sanctioned by the Government and is based on hearsay. No civil servants were involved.

Of course the fact that Deloitte has major offices in seven of the EU countries, including The Hague, is coincidental.

Impartial, my arse.

Grasping at straws.

It wasn't a report, it was an internal memo.

Deloitte also gets a lot of UK Government contracts, they are hardly going to intentionally piss off their customers are they? If they can't keep sensitive information under wrap it doesn't make them look good at all.

Deloiite are huge, they have got offices all over the world, of course they'll have some in Europe. Why wouldn't they?

The fact is, regardless of the identity of the messenger, the message is one that is being repeated across various media. There is no plan, isnt that a worry?

FWIW I don't include jetting off to India for 'trade talks' and getting told 'no preferential treatment without commitment to freedom of movement'.

So there's no plan?

They'll make one.

No problem.