World Trade Organisation Rules

CLAPTON

mwpt wrote: »

Is it shocking behaviour? Political systems evolve over time and we seem to have reached representative democracy. It works at the moment but doesn't always result in the best outcomes for everyone. If you went for super duper democracy where the population gets to vote on every issue, you'd have your ultimate democracy and I imagine it would be a disaster. So why is this particular issue any different? It is perfectly possible, and in my view very probable, that the people have voted for an outcome here that will make most worse off.

I don't really understand what point you are making. The referendum result was clear.
For politicians to say, that the people were wrong and so they won't accept the result is shocking.
You may genuinely think the result will make people worse off, just as some people considered Thatcher made people worse off or some people think Corbyn would make people worse off but that is no reason not the accept a fair result.

Whether we should more or less referendum is an interesting point but not the salient point here.

Rinoa

wotsthat wrote: »

In case you didn't know I'm not very happy about the result of the referendum but I've been perfectly clear that the result should be respected and implemented. We were asked one question - should we leave the EU? The result was clear and we must now leave the EU.

However, if you think I won't do what, albeit, little I can to shape the future into what I think is best for my family and friends you're mistaken. If I think that future is better with May as the next PM rather than Gove then don't be surprised if I investigate what options I have to influence that result.

Telegraph ran an article "May is a great self-promoter but terrible home secretary".

After pressure from May campaign (Tory hierarchy ?) it was pulled.

But Guido prints it here in full:

http://order-order.com/2016/07/02/read-full-article-pulled-telegraph-pressure-may-campaign/

mwpt

Rinoa wrote: »

I'd prefer Gove. Think he makes a lot of sense.

You support him because he opposes free movement of people. It doesn't really matter what else he says, what his other economic policies are, you support him for that reason.

buglawton

mwpt wrote: »

You support him because he opposes free movement of people. It doesn't really matter what else he says, what his other economic policies are, you support him for that reason.

Seems no one else in the running will support controlled immigration.

mwpt

CLAPTON wrote: »

I don't really understand what point you are making. The referendum result was clear.

That we would leave the EU. It said nothing about what deal we would sign up to after that fact. We could sign up to free trade, free movement, contributions while not being part of the EU and democracy would be upheld. The referendum vote was stupid. It lumped reasonable leave voters in with bigots and that is the only reason they won. I consider it fair dues that the same referendum question now leaves a lot of room for compromise after the fact.

For politicians to say, that the people were wrong and so they won't accept the result is shocking.

Only if you accept that democracy trumps all else including self harm. To be frank, I personally would be shocked if they ignored the vote in this case but I'm not shocked that politicians ignore the will of the people in many many cases.

mwpt

buglawton wrote: »

Seems no one else in the running will support controlled immigration.

Sure, but we all know the real reason for Rinona's (and presumably your) support. It is embarrassing to pretend otherwise. Your cards are already on the table that you oppose free movement so why pretend to support the guy for any other reason?

Kohoutek

Rinoa wrote: »

I'd prefer Gove. Think he makes a lot of sense. Current odds now 20/1 though due to his perceived treachery of Boris.

Leadsom making lots of people sit up and take notice - and she's a Leaver. Looks like a run off between her and May.

What in particular that Gove is saying makes a lot sense (serious question)?

Rinoa

mwpt wrote: »

You support him because he opposes free movement of people. It doesn't really matter what else he says, what his other economic policies are, you support him for that reason.

All those aspiring to be tory leader have stated free movement will be restricted in future.

I'm happy with controlled immigration that is beneficial to us.

Rinoa

Kohoutek wrote: »

What in particular that Gove is saying makes a lot sense (serious question)?

He thinks big business is now too big. Doesn't agree with ftse 100 company heads being paid £5m per year- want to empower shareholders to prevent this. He doesn't believe city traders are worth their bonuses, thinks they just got lucky,not sure what he intends to do about that exactly but impression I got is that the City won't be getting preferential treatment in future.

Overall I reckon he will go for WTO terms rather than compromise with EU. Compromise will mean we have to adhere to more Brussels regulations so I reckon it's better to have a clean break.

Rinoa

mwpt wrote: »

You support him because he opposes free movement of people. It doesn't really matter what else he says, what his other economic policies are, you support him for that reason.

Just so we know your position, how many people should the UK admit before controlling immigration.

500,000 per year, 1,000,000 per year, what about 5,000,000 per year.

Would you be happy with 5,000,000 per year. No waffle please, just yes or no.