Brexit - The Final

Spooky. Neither do l.
At least BL rarely mixes numbers and text in his messages. Reckon he actually read and understood JMH. I know, I know... he could probably tell the difference between a watch and a compass too. Maybe he didn't even lick the end of his china graphs and could actually fold a map the right way as well. But be still wore the wrong colour puttees though. Oh well.

M'eh.
 

Brotherton Lad

LE
Kit Reviewer
I find in retirement there isn't too much spare time - working on an Op Banner book just about takes up most of it - been 12 years now!
I agree. An active retirement is very busy. There's simply so much to do.
 
The referendum was advisory, as has been declared on many occasions, in which case there shouldn't be a problem in canning the whole thing, instead of the fannying around with delays and obfuscations.

I'm sure people would understand.
 

Brotherton Lad

LE
Kit Reviewer
I find in retirement there isn't too much spare time - working on an Op Banner book just about takes up most of it - been 12 years now! ETA there again, it could have been 'Brexit in my time" - that would never have been finished even if it was ;)
Brexit in any one's time is merely wishful thinking.
 
Which is why I keep on about fceking Europe off and forming a Five Eyes alliance.
Well it seems the remain side does have a bit more Anti American sentiment, which is unnerving. But many of us are watching to see which faction the UK ends up joining.

Relations with Western Europe are in the tank, but I don’t honestly think my generation is going to place to much emphasis on repairing them. We question everything including 70 year old alliances where the majority of members don’t honour their commitments.

Staying in the U.K. is going to result in a lot of stick heading your way. I think the EU is going to end up leaning China, until the Chinese get all they want and cast them aside.
 
The referendum was advisory, as has been declared on many occasions, in which case there shouldn't be a problem in canning the whole thing, instead of the fannying around with delays and obfuscations.

I'm sure people would understand.
Until Government voted for A50 to be implemented and then had the EU withdrawal 2018 act made an act of Parliament. From that point on it was no longer advisory. But keep stating the mantra please so we can see those who choose to ignore what is plainly in front of them.
 
That deserves an answer, as does your earlier post, which I missed due to another meeting. In fairness, you're making a better argument for remain in a few days, than the other remain posters put together over the past two years.
I find that ... surprising.

Firstly, I noted your comment on the "once-in-lifetime referendum" - slight dissembling there, my real point was that I looked at where the EU was going in the long-term, rather than the here and now. I do not think that we should remain in an organisation that aims to extract ever greater contributions whilst systematically denying Britain a commensurate political voice. 25 years of Europhile British leadership was unable to change this; the EU has consistently set its face against giving us a greater political voice.
I'd have to do some research to look at this in sufficient detail to warrant an answer. One of the first few things I'd look at though would be how the other nations viewed our level of influence, how they viewed their positions, and then look for some objective measures with which to objectively assess the truth of these viewpoints.

This being the case, why do I think this will cause long term damage to UK economically. First and foremost, France and Germany have a long term goal of using EU legislation to manoeuvre Britain into the euro as the precursor to transferring our financial sector to Paris and Frankfurt. Secondly, as probably the greatest hub destination in the world with a huge service sector, the EU views the UK as the ideal repository for its surplus labour, regardless of the impact on those Britons already here. Thirdly, the EU wishes to perpetuate restrictive practises, especially in the agricultural and trade sectors, that negate the greater potential efficiency of these same sectors in UK. Without real power or indeed any political voice, we cannot fight this from within, as many here have suggested. Leaving the EU with a deal is the best alternative way of protecting the UK in the long term, as I see it.
OK. I've got no problem with you choosing Leave on the basis of your assessments. I might differ, but I'll put that aside for the moment.

Of course there is a huge risk; if we cannot make our way in the world, we may be forced to return on the EU's terms, which will be basically asset stripping. There is also the possibility that if we now agree to revoke article 50, the EU will accept that Britain needs more political power and that perhaps the pace of federalism is too great. Conversely, they may take our "surrender" as a green light to push for even faster federalism.
Agreed.

Long post for me, so I'll end by asking you (without prejudice) the question that Remain has dodged since the beginning and still refuses to address. If we revoked article 50, how should a remain government proceed with the EU?
Difficult. I'd like to devote myself full-time to the old politics, but after a hard day fiddling with computers I just like a nice cup of tea in the evening.

But, seriously, I have no more idea than anybody else and most of what I think would be helpful has probably been tried before but shot down in flames quicker than a B-17 over Schweinfurt or a Fairey Battle over the Albert Canal.

Give me a minute to think about it.

OK. One thing that I, as your future PM, most definitely would do is set up measures to *plan* a future Brexit. I would make this known to the Nation and to the EU (As I suggested Cameron should have done. Sorry to harp on about this, but it really, really, really should have been objectively wargamed, without the rosy glow of hopes shining over everything, or the doom and gloom of the stygian darkness infesting the psyche. I know there was work done on this (as mandated by the Referendum Act), but, IMO, it was insufficient to the task).

The department's brief would be to come up with a feasible, objectively evaluated exit plan with SWOT analysis. I'd select its staff by picking out people who could work effectively with those holding disparate views. I'd expect facts to be checked and have passed a peer review. Where opposing views could not be reconciled, full arguments would be given as to their strengths and weaknesses for consideration by HMG, HoC and HoL. At the very least, I'd expect preliminary talks to have been held with external parties (eg, foreign nations) to avoid going into deals blind or blinded by wishful thinking. As much information as possible would be available on an appropriate .gov.uk site for everybody to read and comment on - I'd probably hold a referendum to see if we should let ARRSE members scribble on it, though.

Addressing your point re 'surrender', I would take the opposite view and take a rather more robust approach.
We would not have 'surrendered', we would have prevailed upon the people, despite their grave misgivings, to have faith that remaining with the EU was the right thing to do. For the present. (I'd make every EU politician and civil servant read through ARRSE to show what an uphill struggle it was, and I certainly wouldn't entertain any snarky comments about surrendering from any of the EU countries - they've either all got form for it or sat on the sidelines whilst the big boys played rough!)

I would drum home the message that the EU is also better with the UK in it and reiterate our value to the Union.

I would be quite clear, however, about the fragility of public opinion and outline the various factors that led to the 2016 Referendum, and state that such opinion could easily swing the other way if the underlying issues were not addressed - and pointedly remind them that I had Dept X (see above) working to ensure that the mistakes made this time during Brexit would not be repeated and that we would have a sounder basis to proceed with if we invoked Article 50 again. I'd wield this threat not so strongly as to appear Damoclean but in more of an occasional 'running my finger over the blade and leering suggestively' kind of way, just to make my point and keep them on edge.

I would also note, in support of the above, that the American Presidential Election and our EU Exit Referendum showed that governments must learn to listen to *everybody* and not dismiss their heart- and mind-felt opinions no matter how right-field they may seem. Dismissal and suppression of a people's concerns lead to the kind of disaffection that was seen in the above two elections. The last thing the EU wants is to find the whole edifice crumbling around their ears because they only preached to, and listened to, the choir.

And then I'd do my diplomatic best to rebuild bridges and work for the betterment of the UK and the EU.

I'd probably also seriously look at UK government quite closely to address some of the longer-term issues that have caused internal division. I was raised in the north of England, most of my family hails from Wales, and I lived in Surrey since just before I left the mob until about 5 years ago when I moved to Scotland - my children are much more Scottish in outlook than English now. I have some understanding of the frustrations that are felt about the centralization of power and money within the South East, even if some of it is because people sometimes don't realize what they do get. At the moment, I'd be willing to consider at least Regional Assemblies for England, and even additionally separating UK government from English government.

It all sounds so easy when I say it like that. :-D

------------------------------------------------------------------------

... Sadly, historically, my diplomatic best is probably going to see me put a few people against the wall (don't worry, just politicians and the odd uncivil servant, they'll none of them be missed) and likely to see the first use of nuclear weapons since Hiroshima and Nagasaki (I'm a physicist by education - you don't think I'd pass up on a research opportunity like that, do you? Anyway, my wife has been nagging me to do something about the Earth's axis of rotation, so that we get a bit more Sun up here in Scotland. It's either that or redecorate the shower room, and I've run out of paint).
 
I find in retirement there isn't too much spare time - working on an Op Banner book just about takes up most of it - been 12 years now! ETA there again, it could have been 'Brexit in my time" - that would never have been finished even if it was ;)
I feel your pain. 5 years now for me and no credible result on the screenplay (Not of Banner). Still, I could always ask some of our more prolix members here for help; @Excognito looks good for numbers of words,although whether they'd translate to dialogue I have doubts.
 
It was undermined when Vote Leave and LeaveEU broke the law but you don't seem too upset about those particular episodes. How is Toad Hall? You never did answer.
did they? found guilty in a court of law?
 
Difficult. I'd like to devote myself full-time to the old politics, but after a hard day fiddling with computers I just like a nice cup of tea in the evening............................................................
Well i guess that was the easy part...the rest took a bit longer/more effort simply tapping the keys.

It’s easier to just say it was put to a vote and a result was democratically obtained. End of.
 
I feel your pain. 5 years now for me and no credible result on the screenplay (Not of Banner). Still, I could always ask some of our more prolix members here for help; @Excognito looks good for numbers of words,although whether they'd translate to dialogue I have doubts.
I was 'consulted' very recently on a screenplay for a Banneresque drama and found the exercise extremely enjoyable. The writer/director has a fair bio in the business, but had little insights into things NI - particularly accents. The other opportunity for input concerned the predictable 'how do the military actually communicate'.....initial response 'its complicated' and 'it isn't'. It was, I think, mutually beneficial though it wasn't really my thing - more of a factual and end note type of thing for me (deafness is an issue - reading isn't).
 
Clarity of vision, my MP and me.....

After more than three years since we the people of the UK voted by a majority to leave the EU we have another majority. An elitist majority here in the UK who have CONSISTENTLY taken it upon themselves to declare that their vote is more important than my vote.

There are less than 700 of these elitists voters who have overrode the vote of millions and millions of ( ordinary voters ).
That's because that's the way our parliamentary system works. We had a chance to make our votes count more in the 2011 electoral reform referendum but chose overwhelmingly to leave it as FPTP. That means you might not agree with the way your MP voted, but you might well not have actually voted for them anyway.

We elect MPs to represent us but to also use their own judgement in deciding upon whether to support any given motion before the House.

Where this declaration of elitism came from I don't know
I'm sure there are quite a few good books describing the evolution of our current parliamentary system.

Ask yourself a simple question......has my elected MP carried out MY instructions? Has my MP represented the will of the majority in his or her constituency. Has my MP stood on their parties manifesto?
I have many instructions, not all of them are compatible with the manifesto presented by my chosen candidate; I've usually gone with the best compromise I can think of. My elected MP may well not have carried out any of my instructions because I didn't vote for them.

Ask yourself are you confidant that going forward based on the last 3 years you are happy with your MP,s ability to represent you and your democratic instructions.....
On the matter of Brexit, yes I am happy. 66% of the voters in my constituency voted Remain in the Referendum and our MP voted in line with our wishes. :thumright:

Hindsight is a perfect science......cast the perfect vote !
Hindsight is a much-overrated facility; most of us don't have all the necessary facts to gain a proper perspective of matters and many of us won't live long enough for the facts to become available.

Even if hindsight were perfect, which it isn't, the ability to predict the future is somewhat limited. Perfect hindsight might inform the shape of the next generation cavalry sabre, but says very little about the use of machine guns or tanks. Looking ahead to our more immediate concerns, I'm afraid I regard anybody who claims they have perfect 2020 vision as quite delusional.

Perfection is in the eye of the beholder. I doubt my perfect vote would meet your criteria for perfection.
 

Latest Threads

Top