Labour want to ignore the will of the people...

p1212

mwpt wrote: »

For brexit, yes. But the rest is unknown

Even if our "fantastic, clever" MP's waste 20 years making zillion plans, the rest will still be unknown...

Also the unknown should've been addressed BEFORE the vote. For some reasons at that time it was not important for the remainers what we were voting about as they were so sure about winning.

Now they've lost, suddenly this vote seems to be invalid as we did not even know the details. Well, it is your problem, brexit side was happy with everything they knew -> if the result is out we trigger article 50.

If remainers were not happy with this, they should've talked BEFORE. Owen Smith was quiet together with everyone else. Now it's too late to explain yourselves...

You should've talked before and be quiet now, not the other way around.

Now it's the time to trigger article 50.

kinger101

Both outcomes were unknowns. What would the EU look like in 10 or 20 years if we voted to remain? Even with Cameron negotiating no closer integration, it wouldn't have been the same beast it is today.

As for remain, how could we possibly plan for it given it's not really possible to make serious negotiations with the EU until we formally ask to leave. The future is always uncertain.

mwpt

p1212 wrote: »

Even if our "fantastic, clever" MP's waste 20 years making zillion plans, the rest will still be unknown...

Also the unknown should've been addressed BEFORE the vote. For some reasons at that time it was not important for the remainers what we were voting about as they were so sure about winning.

Now they've lost, suddenly this vote seems to be invalid as we did not even know the details. Well, it is your problem, brexit side was happy with everything they knew -> if the result is out we trigger article 50.

If remainers were not happy with this, they should've talked BEFORE. Owen Smith was quiet together with everyone else. Now it's too late to explain yourselves...

You should've talked before and be quiet now, not the other way around.

Now it's the time to trigger article 50.

That post is almost 100% pure garbage. Quite impressive.

kinger101

mayonnaise wrote: »

How has this become clear?

Because we now have a PM that has campaigned throughout her career to better control immigration. She now has the mechanism with which to do it, and a popular mandate.

http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/briefings/uk-public-opinion-toward-immigration-overall-attitudes-and-level-concern

The reality of whether these immigrants are actually required won't matter. It was the primary reason people voted brexit and to not act on this will be seen as a failure.

Unfortunately, this will restrict opportunities of UK residents to work in the EU. Typically, an employer won't sponsor visa unless they cannot find someone already eligible for work.

p1212

mwpt wrote: »

That post is almost 100% pure garbage. Quite impressive.

Is that all you can add to the brexit/bremain debate?

I am sure we should trust you and your remainer friends leading the country and decide what we should do, it seems you are really up to the debate...

Conrad

Flanders Prime Minister talks sense;



"there is a growing consensus in EU capitals that it would be fatal mistake to try to “punish” Britain"'

“More and more people now agree that there has to be a ‘soft Brexit,”


"“I can’t imagine a situation where we have more barriers on trade in both directions. You are our fourth biggest export market. It is in our mutual interest to find a solution, and the majority of the EU now agrees that anything other than a soft Brexit would have a huge cost,” he said.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/08/23/belgium-offers-olive-branch-on-brexit-calls-for-north-sea-union/


Hamish's terror will soon abate as reality hits home

mwpt

p1212 wrote: »

Is that all you can add to the brexit/bremain debate?

I am sure we should trust you and your remainer friends leading the country and decide what we should do, it seems you are really up to the debate...

You expect debate? Then post something that isn't almost 100% pure garbage.

mrginge

mwpt wrote: »

Do we? As far as I can tell, 48% of people voted for no immigration restrictions and of the 52% who voted for brexit, I'm pretty sure more than 2% don't want immigration restrictions.

So, as far as democracy and majority rule goes, we should probably pursue a brexit model which entails entry in the single market and includes freedom of movement.

I wonder what the result of a referendum question that asked -

Should the British government be able to control immigration?
Yes
No

Would be.

I'll wager that it would be a conclusive yes vote.
Which wouldn't quite stack up with your '48% are happy wth immigration' bobbins.

Of course you can disagree with my assessment, you usually do. But I bet most people would agree with me.

Shakethedisease

Conrad wrote: »

Flanders Prime Minister talks sense;



"there is a growing consensus in EU capitals that it would be fatal mistake to try to “punish” Britain"'

“More and more people now agree that there has to be a ‘soft Brexit,”


"“I can’t imagine a situation where we have more barriers on trade in both directions. You are our fourth biggest export market. It is in our mutual interest to find a solution, and the majority of the EU now agrees that anything other than a soft Brexit would have a huge cost,” he said.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/08/23/belgium-offers-olive-branch-on-brexit-calls-for-north-sea-union/


Hamish's terror will soon abate as reality hits home

I don't buy it. I don't think EU leaders are coming at this from the 'punishing' Britain aspect, more the 'we need to discourage any further members from thinking leaving the EU would be a good idea'.

he economic complexities of Brexit pale in comparison to the psychological ones, it sometimes seems – and in the response to remarks made by the German vice-chancellor, Sigmar Gabriel, yesterday on the consequences of Britain’s decision, we have another case in point. Gabriel, a compelling political figure recently notable for giving the finger to a bunch of neo-Nazis, was reflecting on Europe’s likely response to British manoeuvres, and said something that you might imagine would be self-evident to most people: “If we organise Brexit in the wrong way, then we’ll be in deep trouble, so now we need to make sure that we don’t allow Britain to keep the nice things, so to speak, related to Europe while taking no responsibility.”
Which is just obvious, isn’t it? Depressing, but obvious.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/29/voted-out-eu-brexit-hurt-german-vice-chancellor-britain


And lets not forget that Davies and Fox are all out to secure a hard Brexit, not a soft one. For them it's stopping FOM or bust. Or more likely stopping FOM AND bust.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I don't buy it. I don't think EU leaders are coming at this from the 'punishing' Britain aspect, more the 'we need to discourage any further members from thinking leaving the EU would be a good idea'.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/29/voted-out-eu-brexit-hurt-german-vice-chancellor-britain


And lets not forget that Davies and Fox are all out to secure a hard Brexit, not a soft one. For them it's stopping FOM or bust. Or more likely stopping FOM AND bust.

all countries in the world, without except operate, on the principle of no freedom of movement
few are bust.