Jezza is a communist but his name is not Kim Philby just Jezza. His party offers no common sense on Brexit at all. A customs treaty would entail us being accepting of the ECJ and paying yearly into EU coffers. The referendum should be finite. No ECJ superior laws, no ability to govern us. Our laws, our borders, our money, our waters. No free movement. Our decision end of.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
General Election 2017
- Thread starter Giraffe
- Start date
Jezza is a communist but his name is not Kim Philby just Jezza. His party offers no common sense on Brexit at all. A customs treaty would entail us being accepting of the ECJ and paying yearly into EU coffers. The referendum should be finite. No ECJ superior laws, no ability to govern us. Our laws, our borders, our money, our waters. No free movement. Our decision end of.
The Tory Government will allow those EU citizens the rights you mention. Kerr Starmer today was trying to make capital out of something we all know will happen anyway. The government are simply not stating it 100% at present, as the negotiations with the EU haven't started.
It is an interesting election. Will the traditional Labour votr crumble in part to follow other parties for various reasons?
As has been stated many many many times, the EU citizens will get the rights to remain, as will others, the hand will not be shown until the negotiations start.....obvious and sensible really.
We are singing from the same hymn sheet. I agreed with all your comments on this.
Newsnight on BBC2 just now. Had detailed analysis that 46% of Labour's 2015 voters in the crucial north and midlands, who voted for brexit in 2016, will not vote for Labour this time. Not necessarily for one single other party, but spread, which in the many key marginals would have a big impact. In addition to that, a significant proportion of those 2015 Labour voters who voted Remain, will vote for other parties this time presumably LibDem. The squeeze on Labour's already hard pressed vote will be problematic!
I'd replace that with 'insurmountable' for Labour.
Last edited:
It was deliberately understated, to avoid further depressing the last few comrades on here.
Oh I wouldn't worry about that empathy too much. I'd leave them desperate.
JC Footy Genius
Bringer of TRUTH
- Jun 9, 2015
- 10,568
Hope you don't get caught in the stampede of people heading in the opposite direction.
studio150
Well-known member
studio150
Well-known member
It is not project fear. Although Mrs May has indicated that she wants this issue resolved quickly in the negotiating process she has not gone as far as Labour and others have stated that they would saveguard the EU citizens rights now and then seek for the EU to do likewise for EU citizens in the EU.
The current stance of the Home Office just looks like they don't want to provide UK citizenship as it removes these EU citizens from the negotiating table.
I am beginning to wonder if this election will be as one sided as I originally thought, time will tell.
mikeyjh
Well-known member
For the record, I'm not educated, unless you count 4 GCSEs
. Not stupid though, arrogant or just wrong you could argue, but not stupid!
mikeyjh
Well-known member
My gf's mother is a French national who's lived in the UK for 40+ years. She asked me what to do. I said she should do nothing, it'll be ok, it's just a negotiating tactic. She continued fretting, so I pointed her to a Partner specialising in immigration law that I use for my work immigration stuff. His advice, paraphrased, was "it'll probably be ok, but under this Government you currently have no guarantee. If you wait for confirmation that you need to do nothing and then find that you do need to do something after all, you'll be at the back of a very long queue. While I think that everything will be fine, my advice is that you apply now, as insurance. You can always withdraw the application later if your status is confirmed." In the cold light of day, I found it impossible to argue with that advice. I've filled in the forms for her and she's sending them off...
Good luck, though I do not think it will be needed.
Key difference is that without a clear majority, the "status quo" wins by default. So yes, I would hold the same view (ie, if we were out and the referendum had been about joining, I'd argue the same: that a 52/48 split on a 72% turnout is not a clear enough mandate). The referendum was held to seek a mandate for change, and my opinion is that despite Leave "winning" that mandate is no where near as clear as the Tories have been claiming. Especially when the campaigns (both sides, unfortunately) were marred by potentially illegal campaigning techniques and spending.
Have looked into it, and you're right for a vast majority of parliamentary votes. I was misled by some reporting on the recent vote on approving the early GE (where sufficient abstentions apparently could have defeated the motion). So my bad on that one.
I still firmly believe that the democratic mandate in favour of Brexit is not clear enough, however. That may simply be my Aussie background, where referendums that seek to make such a large change are a) mandatory vote*, b) require a national majority, and c) require a majority of states to have a majority. But I don't think that's all of why I feel this way. I simply don't believe that something that will have such a profound effect on this nation should be pushed through so aggressively on the basis of such a tight referendum result. Especially when looking at the demographics of the vote: the younger the voter, the stronger the vote in favour of Remain - and these younger voters are the ones who are going to have to live the longest with the outcome.
(* It is only mandatory to turn up and get your name marked as having attended. What you do from there is up to you: you can quite legally put a blank slip in the box, or write something foul mouthed on it. The most recent referendum held in Australia had a 95% voter turnout, and just under 1% of the votes cast were "informal" or blank ... effectively an abstention).
You do realize that they are in the position of strength here?
Are we really going to play hardball about 'sending back' the nurses, Polish plumbers and Eastern European fruit-pickers we need (and the pretty Spanish girls from all the Brighton shops) in return for the millions of our pensioners currently hoovering up resources in France and Spain?
On your first point - that wasn't aimed at you, more at the rampant pro-Brexit politicians who keep claiming they have a clear mandate for hard Brexit using some rather loaded language.
On your second - yes, that's the way they are set up currently. I personally (opinion, here) find it unacceptable that when there are such clear differences of opinion between the separate 'states' that make up the UK, that two of the states are going to be dragged into a hard Brexit that they clearly do not want because the most populous 'state' voted in favour by a narrow majority. While we live in a union (the UK), it is a union of separate cultures that (for Brexit and a range of other issues) have clear differences of opinion.
Your argument re: individual cities is spurious here, I'm afraid. Those cities do not enjoy the same status as Scotland / Wales / Northern Ireland. Those cities are fully integrated parts of England, and I'm quite happy for them to have to accede to the wishes of the majority England vote. There is a major difference between individual cities and the individual member states of the UK. Unless, of course, you think that London enjoys the same legal right to request an independence referendum that Scotland does?
JC Footy Genius
Bringer of TRUTH
- Jun 9, 2015
- 10,568
I know polls are sometimes wrong but the consistent 20+ lead the Tories hold suggests a landslide win. They also indicate a significant revival in Scotland beating Labour into a poor third and remarkably that Wales could go Tory.
Wonder what excuses Corbyn and his cheerleaders will use if these polls turn out to be accurate .. all the media's fault?
