We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Will Brexit happen?
Comments
-
Well you were saying we expect them to stick rigidly to their views and that’s not the case.
However they cannot claim the legitimacy of the referendum for different views.
No I wasn’t.
I said it was hypocrisy to claim that opinions have changed in one direction so we need another referendum and then also slag off people who may have changed their opinion in a different direction.0 -
The general election also brings into question the legitimacy of the referendum result. If the will of the people was to leave then they have a funny way of showing it by making sure the party who wanted to leave were unable to.
Not sure which party that wanted to leave you're referring to. Most Brexit voters weren't desperate enough to secure Brexit to vote for Corbyn. Only a minority wanted to exit the EU so we could go back in time and join the USSR.
As for the Tories, the general population didn't get a say in them appointing a Remainer as leader. The only way to get rid of her was to vote for Labour instead in 2017, but see above.0 -
SpiderLegs wrote: »No I wasn’t.
I said it was hypocrisy to claim that opinions have changed in one direction so we need another referendum and then also slag off people who may have changed their opinion in a different direction.
I don’t agree that’s what bobs post said (but I’ll agree to disagree as I have things to do).
People are not being slagged off for changing their minds.
They are being slagged off for claiming the vote has legitimacy for something they’ve their mind to. It only has legitimacy for what was specifically voted on at the time.0 -
It only has legitimacy for what was specifically voted on at the time.
I think it's hard to argue legitimacy for the referendum, the first court case is underway & I am sure there will be others.Malthusian wrote: »Not sure which party that wanted to leave you're referring to.
Conservatives. It's the main home of the eurosceptics.Malthusian wrote: »Most Brexit voters weren't desperate enough to secure Brexit to vote for Corbyn.
Voting for Labour was a tactical vote against leaving the EU, their manifesto made it clear they were pushing for either Brexit in name only or no Brexit. Their lack of following through with that is why the Lib Dems, Greens and Change UK collectively did so well at the EU elections.Malthusian wrote: »As for the Tories, the general population didn't get a say in them appointing a Remainer as leader. The only way to get rid of her was to vote for Labour instead in 2017, but see above.
While Theresa May says she voted to remain, I don't have her down as a remainer. She quickly sided with the ERG because she wanted to hold the conservative party together.
Her reason to call the GE was so she could gain more support in parliament for the type of brexit that the ERG wanted & she knew there wasn't support even in her own party for that. If she was a remainer like you think then it wouldn't have made sense to push for an election when she did as it was clear remain voters wouldn't for them & she thought if the will of the people is to leave then at least they'd get a land slide victory from them.
That didn't happen, so either the leave voters didn't turn up to vote or maybe it's not the will of the people. Although turnout in the referendum was high, still not everyone voted & EU election turn out was even lower. So it's hard to really know what the people want from the referendum/GE/EU results combined.
The idea of giving everyone (including those who were too young to vote in the referendum) a chance to say "is this really what you want" and that it's really important that you turn up and don't just think "we'll never be stupid enough to have a majority leave vote so there is no point in me voting to remain" would seem to be a good idea to me. I don't actually have any idea what the result would be. Although we'd need to toughen up the rules, because referendums shouldn't be abused in the way the last one was.
I think you have a strange misunderstanding of politics.0 -
SpiderLegs wrote: »It’s a bit odd to complain that leave didn’t have a clear plan three years ago and also complain that today’s plan is not the same as the clear plan from three years ago that didn’t exist.
Also a bit odd for people to bang on about how apparently opinions have changed in three years so we need another referendum, but seem to expect the leave side to stick rigidly to their original views.
I said neither of these things. Leave has never had a clear plan and now some of them say it was WTO all along which many fellow leavers do not support.
Opinions have by and large not changed in three years. Leave (as a community) did not agree what they meant then and they still do not. But individual leavers may have known exactly what they were advocating even if they chose not to explain.Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.0 -
I think it's hard to argue legitimacy for the referendum, the first court case is underway & I am sure there will be others.
Can you explain which case you mean?
I'm aware of the Tilbrook case but that's about the extenstion not the referendum.
I personally don't think it's legitimate e.g. boris in court, but accept it's hard to argue that now 3 years later.0 -
SpiderLegs wrote: »No I wasn’t.
I said it was hypocrisy to claim that opinions have changed in one direction so we need another referendum and then also slag off people who may have changed their opinion in a different direction.
But who was saying this apart from you.
.
The only case for a referendum is to break the deadlock without a General Election. Most of Parliament will not want a General Election but will refuse to vote for a no deal Brexit. What is the alternative to break the deadlockFew people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.0 -
Voting for Labour was a tactical vote against leaving the EU, their manifesto made it clear they were pushing for either Brexit in name only or no Brexit.
Only in Brexit la la land is "being clear that you want Brexit and clear you don't want Brexit" "clear".
Brexit in name only is still Brexit as the "in name only" can be changed by the UK Parliament in the future, which is unacceptable to Remain.
The Labour leadership for which the party overwhelmingly voted, twice, is very clear that Labour wants to leave the EU's capitalist club, and no amount of counter-revolutionary whinging from MPs will alter that.
So the party led by a Leaver is a Remain party and the party led by a Remainer is the Leave party.While Theresa May says she voted to remain, I don't have her down as a remainer. She quickly sided with the ERG because she wanted to hold the conservative party together.
Back in the real world, both the Tories and Labour are committed to Brexit for different ideological reasons, and parties committed to Remaining were thumped in the European elections roughly 60/40 and obliterated in the 2017 elections almost 90/10.The only case for a referendum is to break the deadlock without a General Election. Most of Parliament will not want a General Election but will refuse to vote for a no deal Brexit. What is the alternative to break the deadlock
There are two ways to break the deadlock.
The first is that the EU expel us after we fall over a deadline.
The second is that we cancel Brexit.
The first is in my opinion far more likely, as the annoyance of trying to conduct EU business while the UK claws at the cat flap is not worth our subs.0 -
Voting for Labour was a tactical vote against leaving the EU, their manifesto made it clear they were pushing for either Brexit in name only or no Brexit.
Are you Corbyn's spin Doctor? The waffle goes on.........
Labour have no position for the simple reason it'll split the party in half.
The party is still a mish mash of old and Nu Labour.0 -
Sorry slight diversion on the actual Brexit happening or not. But it affects all of us Europeans living here (French national, been here 25 years). I have applied for Settled Status via that phone app (that is somehow only available on Android but anyways). Because I had a child 6 years ago, my application requires additional information ie proof of residency for the past 6 years !! Even though I was registered as self employed (so you would have thought the info would have gone from HMRC to them), they need proof.
All I can think of is mortgage and bank statements (which were given as options. Being registered at a doctor's surgery isn't enough). Down to the actual question. Can I blur the financial information? Don't fancy giving them the detail of all my financial outgoings, mortgage payments, spending etc for the past 6 years?! !0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards