REFERENDUM RESULTS AND DISCUSSION THREAD

[thehistorymakers]

Why is there this massive urgency to trigger article 50? Do you not think it's better to have a clearer idea of what post-Brexit looks like, rather than just hitting the button and then seeing what happens?

We have had 7 months. The negotiations don't start till we enact article 50. If you accept that we voted to leave, you will accept we need to start negotiating our withdrawal of the EU.

 

[thehistorymakers]

So to summarise -

sovereign parliament = $#@!ing ace when it votes to approve a referendum
sovereign parliament = enemy of the people when it wants to debate the outcome of the referendum

And you say this isn't just you wanting people to do exactly what you say.

Sovereign parliament knows the result of the referendum, we voted to leave ( 7 months ago).

 

[thehistorymakers]

I have no idea why you lot think there is any point in trying to have a reasoned debate - I had better odds making progress in a discussion with my ex-wife when Arsenal were at home.

Reasoned as the people who agree with you, but disagree with the majority of the electorate.

 

[Trips]

We have had 7 months. The negotiations don't start till we enact article 50. If you accept that we voted to leave, you will accept we need to start negotiating our withdrawal of the EU.

I've said this previously, on the last page I believe - I accept the result of the referendum, and I accept that we will be leaving the EU. Hopefully I have cleared this up.

My question is, is it not a good thing that parliament can debate some of the conditions around leaving the EU? What we will and will not be happy with? Or should we just let Theresa May hit the button and whatever happens, happens?

 

[So Long Architect]

Only seven months? I feel like I've aged about seven years just reading today's thread.

 

[thehistorymakers]

Only seven months? I feel like I've aged about seven years just reading today's thread.

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha.

 

[Jabbawolf]

Reasoned as the people who agree with you, but disagree with the majority of the electorate.

I was pretty ambivalent leading up to the vote, but leaned towards Remain. Yes, the electorate has voted, and we should leave, but this is not a minor decision about whether we have curry or a Chinese tonight - this is a real biggie - we should proceed, but with caution, and we should take as long as it needs to do it in the most appropriate way, and with robust, forensic scrutiny.

 

[leedswolf]

I am not concerned about entering trade discussions at anytime and yes I did vote against EU interference, I believe you voted for EU interference against the interests of our sovereign parliament?

I thought that you hadn't or couldn't have voted because of your Spanish residency?????

 

[thehistorymakers]

I've said this previously, on the last page I believe - I accept the result of the referendum, and I accept that we will be leaving the EU. Hopefully I have cleared this up.

My question is, is it not a good thing that parliament can debate some of the conditions around leaving the EU? What we will and will not be happy with? Or should we just let Theresa May hit the button and whatever happens, happens?

If it's a stay in the single market, but you can't get back sovereignty, controlling your own country's laws and borders, would you like the MP'S then to vote against leaving the EU? Because as you know, that is what is on the table. We voted to leave by majority, we won't be leaving if we don't control our own sovereignty and borders. Is that what you want,? Because the EU won't let us have both things.It is stay in the single market, but not to leave the EU.

 

[Johnny75]

If it's a stay in the single market, but you can't get back sovereignty, controlling your own countries laws and borders, would you like the MP'S then to vote against leaving the EU? Because as you know, that is what on the table. We voted to leave by majority, we won't be leaving if we don't control our own sovereignty and borders. Is that what you want,? Because the EU won't let us have both thing. It is stay in the single market, but not to leave the EU.

That's not what was asked. So can you answer what is wrong with parliament discussing Article 50?

 

[leedswolf]

I wasn't delighted but I accepted it, like you have accepted we have voted to leave the EU and we are leaving it?
Are you happy we will regain sovereign democracy and will longer be controlled by people we don't vote for?

I can't remember electing any members to the Lords or indeed the civil servants or think tanks that influence government policies.

 

[thehistorymakers]

That's not what was asked. So can you answer what is wrong with parliament discussing Article 50?

They will be discussing it.

 

[Trips]

If it's a stay in the single market, but you can't get back sovereignty, controlling your own country's laws and borders, would you like the MP'S then to vote against leaving the EU? Because as you know, that is what is on the table. We voted to leave by majority, we won't be leaving if we don't control our own sovereignty and borders. Is that what you want,? Because the EU won't let us have both things.It is stay in the single market, but not to leave the EU.

MP's will not vote against triggering Article 50. The bill will pass and it will be triggered.

You haven't answered my question though. What is the big rush to trigger it? As you have said, we have had 7 months. Yet in those 7 months we are still no clearer on what post-Brexit Britain looks like. Surely you can see that taking our time and making sure we have the best conditions and deals in place before triggering is better for Britain?

 

[thehistorymakers]

I can't remember electing any members to the Lords or indeed the civil servants or think tanks that influence government policies.

Talking about the Lords, isn't it ironic that the Liberals are asking their unelected Lords to vote against the majority decision to leave the EU?

 

[visage]

I think you vote for a sovereign parliament, EU commisioners didn't need our votes to dictate our policies.

EU commissioners are appointed by sovereign parliaments.

 

[leedswolf]

I don't know thm. Is it?

 

[thehistorymakers]

MP's will not vote against triggering Article 50. The bill will pass and it will be triggered.

You haven't answered my question though. What is the big rush to trigger it? As you have said, we have had 7 months. Yet in those 7 months we are still no clearer on what post-Brexit Britain looks like. Surely you can see that taking our time and making sure we have the best conditions and deals in place before triggering is better for Britain?

You won't know what it will look like till we start negotiating. Article 50 is the beginning of the negotiations.

 

[So Long Architect]

You talk utter bollocks THM but I can only admire your stamina. Mrs THM is one lucky lady.

 

[Trips]

You won't know what it will look like till we start negotiating. Article 50 is the beginning of the negotiations.

With the EU. We will be having discussions with other countries now.

Also, hypothetically, it could be that Theresa May wants us to have a similar deal as Norway or Switzerland post-brexit. Leave voters surely don't want this, so isn't it a good thing that Article 50 is debated before we just let May hit the button and strike whatever deal her and her ministers fancy?

 

[Wilf Wolf]

I've said this previously, on the last page I believe - I accept the result of the referendum, and I accept that we will be leaving the EU. Hopefully I have cleared this up.

My question is, is it not a good thing that parliament can debate some of the conditions around leaving the EU? What we will and will not be happy with? Or should we just let Theresa May hit the button and whatever happens, happens?

Agreed. I would like to hear a debate about the consequences of certain actions. If we stop Freedom of Movement how will low paid jobs be filled in the South East? Will EU workers be allowed to come if there is a job vacancy that has not been filled for a set period of time? Will people have to take their own sheets when staying at a hotel in London as there is no-one to clean them? Is stopping Freedom of Movement going to make any significant difference to the number of EU nationals working here?

As for laving the Single market are we going to cosy up to the USA and accept all their conditions of a trade agreement that will be far less favourable than the deal we have currently with the EU? Lower environmental standards, and arbitration in NY rather than Brussels?