I get all that but the moment that it was declared out means out, we’re having a hard brexit (something wholly applauded by the out camp) how was brexit ever going to be different to what’s happening? Other than being better organised.
Surely if out means out then this is out. The details wouldn’t be any different just the execution.
When you say that you were expecting something that “would protect my best interests” I assumed that meant that you weren’t expecting a hard brexit.
So what is your meaning of a hard Brexit?
I took 'out means out' to mean that there would be no second referendum, not that it was hard brexit or hard brexit. The again, who knows, it could mean neither and just be another silly soundbite from that idiot Theresa May.
I voted to leave. I probably still would vote to leave given another opportunity.
The mistake I made was expecting this joke of a Conservative government to be able to manage the process of leaving in a way that would protect my best interests.
Do you believe that what you voted for is what is being delivered? I’m not talking about the execution I’m talking about the terms.
I didn't vote for the terms though, I voted for Britain to leave the EU. That is being delivered.
Speaking at a security conference in Berlin Michel Barnier accused the UK abandoning the defence of Europe at a time when it should be standing “shoulder to shoulder” with its neighbours in the EU.
The UK government said as recently as September that it wants to remain inside Europol and retain other EU security benefits such as the European Arrest Warrant and shared criminal databases.
Then he says......
But outlining the consequences of Brexit on defence and security, Mr Barnier said Britain would no longer be a member, adding that the UK would be leaving the European Defence Agency and that UK defence ministers and ambassadors would be excluded from international meetings with EU colleagues.
These changes were all a “logical consequence of the sovereign choice made by the British” in the referendum last year, he said.
He says we are abandoning it at a bad time, we say we want to stay in then he says we must leave.
Does anyone spot a contradiction there?
True and you could argue we need a compromise to settle the country down from division. Some things I’m not happy about but yes we are leaving and that’s the main thing to me.
I didn't vote for the terms though, I voted for Britain to leave the EU. That is being delivered.
I didn't vote for the terms though, I voted for Britain to leave the EU. That is being delivered.
You don't live here as I've said before. You don't see the mess that the NHS is in, the waits for school places, rising crime, traffic congestion, the negative impact on wages etc. You just put your hands over your ears and pretend that somehow its all lies and propaganda. On that basis if incoming numbers are shrunk hugely and services start coping better then yes things could be better.Funny that. But, the main thing for me is that we can somehow be better off than before. That would be a good reason for leaving. Not just leaving for leaving‘s sake. That sounds pretty stupid to me.
I voted to leave......I still believe in the principles that lead me to that decision, but I'd probably abstain given another opportunity.
The mistake I made was expecting a general election to be called as soon as Cameron & Osborne jumped ship followed by real cross-party cooperation on formulating a transitional plan......
You don't live here as I've said before. You don't see the mess that the NHS is in, the waits for school places, rising crime, traffic congestion, the negative impact on wages etc. You just put your hands over your ears and pretend that somehow its all lies and propaganda. On that basis if incoming numbers are shrunk hugely and services start coping better then yes things could be better.
You know that old financial argument doesn't stack up. Yes we lose a few tax dollars but the overall impact on services and infrastructure outweigh those gains. We may lose a few decent people too and that is a shame but we'll survive with more investment in training our own. We managed before mass migration and we shall manage again.If less people come here, less will go into these services.
Just not one that represents your interests apparently. Why did you vote out again? I can’t ever imagine personally deliberately voting for something that doesn’t represent my interests but that’s what you seem to be admitting to.
You know that old financial argument doesn't stack up. Yes we lose a few tax dollars but the overall impact on services and infrastructure outweigh those gains. We may lose a few decent people too and that is a shame but we'll survive with more investment in training our own. We managed before mass migration and we shall manage again.
You know that old financial argument doesn't stack up. Yes we lose a few tax dollars but the overall impact on services and infrastructure outweigh those gains. We may lose a few decent people too and that is a shame but we'll survive with more investment in training our own. We managed before mass migration and we shall manage again.
You have to factor in how many EU nationals work in the NHS.
You don't live here as I've said before. You don't see the mess that the NHS is in, the waits for school places, rising crime, traffic congestion, the negative impact on wages etc. You just put your hands over your ears and pretend that somehow its all lies and propaganda. On that basis if incoming numbers are shrunk hugely and services start coping better then yes things could be better.
I am telling you what I voted for. I voted out, at that point there wasn't any talk of a hard brexit. I assumed that we would join the EFTA or similar.
I voted out as I do not believe in the ever closer union envisaged by the European powers that be. I don't believe that our laws should originate from EU commissioners. I want to be absolutely able to hold the British government to account for the legislation they pass.
I know it is often conveniently ignored, but it's EU procurement law that has brought rampant privatisation into public services including the NHS. It is EU law which allows, for example, SISU to take the council to Judicial Review twice under what I know you believe to be spurious grounds. It's the EU Common Agricultural Policy that pays large grants to rich landowners regardless of whether they produce anything on that land.
I am telling you what I voted for. I voted out, at that point there wasn't any talk of a hard brexit. I assumed that we would join the EFTA or similar.
I voted out as I do not believe in the ever closer union envisaged by the European powers that be. I don't believe that our laws should originate from EU commissioners. I want to be absolutely able to hold the British government to account for the legislation they pass.
I know it is often conveniently ignored, but it's EU procurement law that has brought rampant privatisation into public services including the NHS. It is EU law which allows, for example, SISU to take the council to Judicial Review twice under what I know you believe to be spurious grounds. It's the EU Common Agricultural Policy that pays large grants to rich landowners regardless of whether they produce anything on that land.
I agree this is a serious issue.I know it is often conveniently ignored, but it's EU procurement law that has brought rampant privatisation into public services including the NHS.
I've not witnessed that many myself, they're mostly from Commonwealth countries.
So basically you didn’t know what you voted for.
The question wasn't "Do you wish for Britain to leave the EU on the following terms?". So essentially, I did know what I was voting for. The terms are the next stage which is left to our elected representatives in parliament to decide.
The question wasn't "Do you wish for Britain to leave the EU on the following terms?". So essentially, I did know what I was voting for. The terms are the next stage which is left to our elected representatives in parliament to decide.
You gambled on what it would mean then and your gamble hasn’t paid off. Sounds a bit of a silly thing to do if you ask me.
Are you for a second referendum on the terms? How come you trust parliament to do a deal on the terms, but it has to be a referendum on whether we leave or not? Shouldn’t we have left membership to parliament in the first place?
Well, not really. Whether the 'gamble' has paid off remains to be seen.
You’ve already said it doesn’t represent you. Clearly you already think it hasn’t paid off.
The mistake I made was expecting this joke of a Conservative government to be able to manage the process of leaving in a way that would protect my best interests.
You gambled on what it would mean then and your gamble hasn’t paid off. Sounds a bit of a silly thing to do if you ask me.
I've not witnessed that many myself, they're mostly from Commonwealth countries.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?