Democracy under threat.

Talk about anything you want in here.

Moderators: botrash, mikkyx, charlie, uncovered

Post Reply
User avatar
QuakerPete
Posts: 1165
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:51 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by QuakerPete » Wed Apr 03, 2019 11:18 pm

EDJOHNS wrote:Sorry, but by the very meaning of the word democracy you can not have a change in the peoples wishes until you have delivered them.
Really? Not in any dictionary I’ve seen. When the people are offered various embellishments of the “great deal” and “they need us more than we need them”, or the various Leave politicians talking about Norway, Canada++, Switzerland, Ukraine, etc, etc., or people like Daniel Hannan quoted as saying “No-one is talking about leaving the Single Market”, plus the myriad of other versions - now we are told ‘No Deal was the plan all along’?
It’s not very democratic really is it? When radically changing the offer 3 years after it was voted on, they are entitled to have a new say on the new terms and conditions.
It’s a bizarre democratic theory that you ignore the warning signs to the country and to its future to proceed with something that hadn’t been voted for in the first place. Yet go on to state that it's a "FACT" no-one knows what no deal exit will mean medium to long term - you have to ask, if jumping off a cliff blindfold, why do it then?
EDJOHNS wrote: I know remainers will say that would cost a fortune, but the simple FACT is that despite all the doom and gloom merchants prophecies no-one actually knows what a no deal exit will mean medium to long term. We know it would cause problems short term, but we have countries out there eager to deal with us that are unable to because of EU laws. Once we are not bound by those laws and can go our own way it is actually NOT that hard for 2 companies,(replace with countries), to sit down and thrash out a sell/buy deal.
The official bodies and organisations who warn against the devastating impact of No Deal include:
  • Department for Exiting the EU (DExEU) - government's own Brexit department
    Bank of England
    International Monetary Fund (IMF)
    Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
    Her Majesty’s Revenues and Customs (HMRC)
    Confederation of British Industry (CBI)
    Trades Unions
    Construction’s five largest trade bodies
    University leaders
    Retail Industry bodies
    Farming Industry
    Motor Industry
    Association of British Insurers
    Airbus UK
    Financial Institutions (£1 Trillion already moved to EU)
. . . to list just a few
We have around 759 trade deals of various types across the world which includes around 40 Free Trade Agreements - all via the EU. More FTAs to be signed soon by EU. These all stop dead with No Deal - completely gone! Everyone of the 759! How many years / decades to retrieve those levels, all the while operating under “division 4” WTO? Any guarantees they’ll be better than what we have? How is an FTA to be improved upon?
Good luck with the Commonwealth “making up the slack” - there are 3 other countries of any GDP size and the rest are minuscule in comparison - UK is around a quarter of GDP of the whole Commonwealth. Whereas the UK in the EU is 15% of total GDP in a mature, industrialised grouping - able to supply around half the UK’s needs right on our doorstep. Anyone from Darlington shop in Manchester for their weekly groceries? There’s good reasons why not.
EDJOHNS wrote: Ps, I agree some may vote to stay now, but I have also heard more than 1 who voted to remain say that they would vote to leave now on the principle that was the result.
I wish people were so very principled about democracy that they call out fraudulent and illegal actions (and add to it concern about the on-going criminal investigations into Leave which haven't yet concluded). All of which have been admitted by the government's own legal counsel. As yet, not one Leaver has had any qualms.
Only one way to be sure about whether opinions have changed! Leave might well win again. Democracy can’t be undermined with more democracy.

Darlo_Pete
Posts: 12009
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by Darlo_Pete » Thu Apr 04, 2019 7:21 am

Fortunately we live in a democracy, where democratic votes are taken and we have to abide by the result of these democratic votes. If we start to ignore such votes, then we are heading towards being a countries like China, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam and Venezuela. People in those countries would love to have a democratic vote, we are fortunate that we had such a vote and that vote should be honoured, although that seems more and more unlikely.

EDJOHNS
Posts: 339
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2019 3:56 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by EDJOHNS » Thu Apr 04, 2019 7:47 am

QuakerPete wrote:
Wed Apr 03, 2019 11:18 pm
EDJOHNS wrote:Sorry, but by the very meaning of the word democracy you can not have a change in the peoples wishes until you have delivered them.
Really? Not in any dictionary I’ve seen. When the people are offered various embellishments of the “great deal” and “they need us more than we need them”, or the various Leave politicians talking about Norway, Canada++, Switzerland, Ukraine, etc, etc., or people like Daniel Hannan quoted as saying “No-one is talking about leaving the Single Market”, plus the myriad of other versions - now we are told ‘No Deal was the plan all along’?
It’s not very democratic really is it? When radically changing the offer 3 years after it was voted on, they are entitled to have a new say on the new terms and conditions.
It’s a bizarre democratic theory that you ignore the warning signs to the country and to its future to proceed with something that hadn’t been voted for in the first place. Yet go on to state that it's a "FACT" no-one knows what no deal exit will mean medium to long term - you have to ask, if jumping off a cliff blindfold, why do it then?
EDJOHNS wrote: I know remainers will say that would cost a fortune, but the simple FACT is that despite all the doom and gloom merchants prophecies no-one actually knows what a no deal exit will mean medium to long term. We know it would cause problems short term, but we have countries out there eager to deal with us that are unable to because of EU laws. Once we are not bound by those laws and can go our own way it is actually NOT that hard for 2 companies,(replace with countries), to sit down and thrash out a sell/buy deal.
The official bodies and organisations who warn against the devastating impact of No Deal include:
  • Department for Exiting the EU (DExEU) - government's own Brexit department
    Bank of England
    International Monetary Fund (IMF)
    Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
    Her Majesty’s Revenues and Customs (HMRC)
    Confederation of British Industry (CBI)
    Trades Unions
    Construction’s five largest trade bodies
    University leaders
    Retail Industry bodies
    Farming Industry
    Motor Industry
    Association of British Insurers
    Airbus UK
    Financial Institutions (£1 Trillion already moved to EU)
. . . to list just a few
We have around 759 trade deals of various types across the world which includes around 40 Free Trade Agreements - all via the EU. More FTAs to be signed soon by EU. These all stop dead with No Deal - completely gone! Everyone of the 759! How many years / decades to retrieve those levels, all the while operating under “division 4” WTO? Any guarantees they’ll be better than what we have? How is an FTA to be improved upon?
Good luck with the Commonwealth “making up the slack” - there are 3 other countries of any GDP size and the rest are minuscule in comparison - UK is around a quarter of GDP of the whole Commonwealth. Whereas the UK in the EU is 15% of total GDP in a mature, industrialised grouping - able to supply around half the UK’s needs right on our doorstep. Anyone from Darlington shop in Manchester for their weekly groceries? There’s good reasons why not.
EDJOHNS wrote: Ps, I agree some may vote to stay now, but I have also heard more than 1 who voted to remain say that they would vote to leave now on the principle that was the result.
I wish people were so very principled about democracy that they call out fraudulent and illegal actions (and add to it concern about the on-going criminal investigations into Leave which haven't yet concluded). All of which have been admitted by the government's own legal counsel. As yet, not one Leaver has had any qualms.
Only one way to be sure about whether opinions have changed! Leave might well win again. Democracy can’t be undermined with more democracy.

Or then again, just maybe, the fact that the entire team meant to be working on Brexit for us ALL voted remain could lead to the idea their entrenchment has led to refusal to deal in a way that could have ended in agreement for us to leave with a deal?
One does wonder at the stupidity of taking even a second vote on a "deal" so soundly thrashed the first time voted on and even more so when a further expanse of time was wasted in the determination to bring it back yet a third time.

I would so love to be more explicit in my determination we should be out, sadly, should I do so I would be in trouble not worth the taking, so this will be my last comment on the matter.

User avatar
QuakerPete
Posts: 1165
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:51 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by QuakerPete » Thu Apr 04, 2019 3:13 pm

Darlo_Pete wrote:
Thu Apr 04, 2019 7:21 am
Fortunately we live in a democracy, where democratic votes are taken and we have to abide by the result of these democratic votes. If we start to ignore such votes, then we are heading towards being a countries like China, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam and Venezuela. People in those countries would love to have a democratic vote, we are fortunate that we had such a vote and that vote should be honoured, although that seems more and more unlikely.
Is there any threshold of law-breaking in the referendum which would make you (meaning all Leavers) stop and think that the fraud and illegalities in the Leave campaign are just wrong and something should be done about it?
Or even the (up to ten) continuing criminal investigations into Leave, far from concluded, which would make you (meaning all Leavers) sit up and say well maybe we need to see the result of these first before Brexit is even considered to proceed?
Because if not, that's the real threat to democracy, not some pious adherence to a "democratic" referendum which has been so badly abused in many ways. We're already heading in the direction of countries whose elections are regularly held using corruption to buy the outcome. In effect, a vote can be bought / manipulated illegally and that's OK?
For anyone who is interested, have a read of the Electoral Commission's statement about Vote Leave in the middle of last year and how they actively refused to co-operate with the lawful duty of the Electoral Commission to investigate Vote Leave's finances and conduct. Vote Leave have recently dropped their appeal against the Electoral Commission as they've confessed they can't prove their case as they destroyed all their data shortly after the result (!?!)
https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/ ... ctoral-law

User avatar
QuakerPete
Posts: 1165
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:51 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by QuakerPete » Thu Apr 04, 2019 3:46 pm

EDJOHNS wrote:
Thu Apr 04, 2019 7:47 am
QuakerPete wrote:
Wed Apr 03, 2019 11:18 pm
EDJOHNS wrote:Sorry, but by the very meaning of the word democracy you can not have a change in the peoples wishes until you have delivered them.
Really? Not in any dictionary I’ve seen. When the people are offered various embellishments of the “great deal” and “they need us more than we need them”, or the various Leave politicians talking about Norway, Canada++, Switzerland, Ukraine, etc, etc., or people like Daniel Hannan quoted as saying “No-one is talking about leaving the Single Market”, plus the myriad of other versions - now we are told ‘No Deal was the plan all along’?
It’s not very democratic really is it? When radically changing the offer 3 years after it was voted on, they are entitled to have a new say on the new terms and conditions.
It’s a bizarre democratic theory that you ignore the warning signs to the country and to its future to proceed with something that hadn’t been voted for in the first place. Yet go on to state that it's a "FACT" no-one knows what no deal exit will mean medium to long term - you have to ask, if jumping off a cliff blindfold, why do it then?
EDJOHNS wrote: I know remainers will say that would cost a fortune, but the simple FACT is that despite all the doom and gloom merchants prophecies no-one actually knows what a no deal exit will mean medium to long term. We know it would cause problems short term, but we have countries out there eager to deal with us that are unable to because of EU laws. Once we are not bound by those laws and can go our own way it is actually NOT that hard for 2 companies,(replace with countries), to sit down and thrash out a sell/buy deal.
The official bodies and organisations who warn against the devastating impact of No Deal include:
  • Department for Exiting the EU (DExEU) - government's own Brexit department
    Bank of England
    International Monetary Fund (IMF)
    Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
    Her Majesty’s Revenues and Customs (HMRC)
    Confederation of British Industry (CBI)
    Trades Unions
    Construction’s five largest trade bodies
    University leaders
    Retail Industry bodies
    Farming Industry
    Motor Industry
    Association of British Insurers
    Airbus UK
    Financial Institutions (£1 Trillion already moved to EU)
. . . to list just a few
We have around 759 trade deals of various types across the world which includes around 40 Free Trade Agreements - all via the EU. More FTAs to be signed soon by EU. These all stop dead with No Deal - completely gone! Everyone of the 759! How many years / decades to retrieve those levels, all the while operating under “division 4” WTO? Any guarantees they’ll be better than what we have? How is an FTA to be improved upon?
Good luck with the Commonwealth “making up the slack” - there are 3 other countries of any GDP size and the rest are minuscule in comparison - UK is around a quarter of GDP of the whole Commonwealth. Whereas the UK in the EU is 15% of total GDP in a mature, industrialised grouping - able to supply around half the UK’s needs right on our doorstep. Anyone from Darlington shop in Manchester for their weekly groceries? There’s good reasons why not.
EDJOHNS wrote: Ps, I agree some may vote to stay now, but I have also heard more than 1 who voted to remain say that they would vote to leave now on the principle that was the result.
I wish people were so very principled about democracy that they call out fraudulent and illegal actions (and add to it concern about the on-going criminal investigations into Leave which haven't yet concluded). All of which have been admitted by the government's own legal counsel. As yet, not one Leaver has had any qualms.
Only one way to be sure about whether opinions have changed! Leave might well win again. Democracy can’t be undermined with more democracy.

Or then again, just maybe, the fact that the entire team meant to be working on Brexit for us ALL voted remain could lead to the idea their entrenchment has led to refusal to deal in a way that could have ended in agreement for us to leave with a deal?
One does wonder at the stupidity of taking even a second vote on a "deal" so soundly thrashed the first time voted on and even more so when a further expanse of time was wasted in the determination to bring it back yet a third time.

I would so love to be more explicit in my determination we should be out, sadly, should I do so I would be in trouble not worth the taking, so this will be my last comment on the matter.


ALL voted Remain? What, like these cabinet ministers such as Boris Johnson, Liam Fox, Michael Gove, David Davies, Dominic Raab? It was the one clever thing May did at the beginning after the referendum - basically, own your own s***! And of the current cabinet whereby in the recent meeting this week a small majority voted for no deal. Hardly full of remainers! They have to own their own s*** because they produced so many soundbites to achieve a result rather than have a comprehensive plan on what to do next, they still have no plan - the objective was to win and then explain later, hence No Deal. It's no surprise that a lot of people said 'No Thanks'
  • You agree to buy a house, agree a price and get a survey arranged.
    Survey states there are major structural problems and that it wasn't the dream moving you thought
    Do you decide to withdraw from the deal and stay where you are or take the plunge and proceed anyway, not knowing the cost to yourself?
The "meaningful" votes fiasco have now resulted in Parliament "taking back control", because this Sunlit Uplands deal doesn't exist. The EU couldn't give us unicorns (as those on the Remain side kept saying at the time) because it would have meant voluntarily dismantling the core principles of the EU in order to advantage the UK by us having our cake, eating it but without the responsibilities as members. Why Leavers now believe switching from a Sunlit Uplands deal to No Deal is perfectly democratic is beyond me - it certainly wasn't on the agenda at the time and certainly not before the referendum.

We're in agreement about May's deal, it suits nobody but the EU - and I have no problem with them negotiating hard for the benefit of their remaining 27 members because that's what all countries do in the outside world. We'll have that to face if we do leave with No Deal.

Darlo_Pete
Posts: 12009
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by Darlo_Pete » Thu Apr 04, 2019 7:51 pm

QuakerPete wrote:
Thu Apr 04, 2019 3:13 pm
Darlo_Pete wrote:
Thu Apr 04, 2019 7:21 am
Fortunately we live in a democracy, where democratic votes are taken and we have to abide by the result of these democratic votes. If we start to ignore such votes, then we are heading towards being a countries like China, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam and Venezuela. People in those countries would love to have a democratic vote, we are fortunate that we had such a vote and that vote should be honoured, although that seems more and more unlikely.
Is there any threshold of law-breaking in the referendum which would make you (meaning all Leavers) stop and think that the fraud and illegalities in the Leave campaign are just wrong and something should be done about it?
Or even the (up to ten) continuing criminal investigations into Leave, far from concluded, which would make you (meaning all Leavers) sit up and say well maybe we need to see the result of these first before Brexit is even considered to proceed?
Because if not, that's the real threat to democracy, not some pious adherence to a "democratic" referendum which has been so badly abused in many ways. We're already heading in the direction of countries whose elections are regularly held using corruption to buy the outcome. In effect, a vote can be bought / manipulated illegally and that's OK?
For anyone who is interested, have a read of the Electoral Commission's statement about Vote Leave in the middle of last year and how they actively refused to co-operate with the lawful duty of the Electoral Commission to investigate Vote Leave's finances and conduct. Vote Leave have recently dropped their appeal against the Electoral Commission as they've confessed they can't prove their case as they destroyed all their data shortly after the result (!?!)
https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/ ... ctoral-law
As stated before I voted to remain, but I believe in democracy and if a second vote for forced on the public I would now vote to leave and there are plenty of people that hold the same view as me.

User avatar
QuakerPete
Posts: 1165
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:51 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by QuakerPete » Thu Apr 04, 2019 10:25 pm

Darlo_Pete wrote:
QuakerPete wrote:
Thu Apr 04, 2019 3:13 pm
Darlo_Pete wrote:
Thu Apr 04, 2019 7:21 am
Fortunately we live in a democracy, where democratic votes are taken and we have to abide by the result of these democratic votes. If we start to ignore such votes, then we are heading towards being a countries like China, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam and Venezuela. People in those countries would love to have a democratic vote, we are fortunate that we had such a vote and that vote should be honoured, although that seems more and more unlikely.
Is there any threshold of law-breaking in the referendum which would make you (meaning all Leavers) stop and think that the fraud and illegalities in the Leave campaign are just wrong and something should be done about it?
Or even the (up to ten) continuing criminal investigations into Leave, far from concluded, which would make you (meaning all Leavers) sit up and say well maybe we need to see the result of these first before Brexit is even considered to proceed?
Because if not, that's the real threat to democracy, not some pious adherence to a "democratic" referendum which has been so badly abused in many ways. We're already heading in the direction of countries whose elections are regularly held using corruption to buy the outcome. In effect, a vote can be bought / manipulated illegally and that's OK?
For anyone who is interested, have a read of the Electoral Commission's statement about Vote Leave in the middle of last year and how they actively refused to co-operate with the lawful duty of the Electoral Commission to investigate Vote Leave's finances and conduct. Vote Leave have recently dropped their appeal against the Electoral Commission as they've confessed they can't prove their case as they destroyed all their data shortly after the result (!?!)
https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/ ... ctoral-law
As stated before I voted to remain, but I believe in democracy and if a second vote for forced on the public I would now vote to leave and there are plenty of people that hold the same view as me.
You didn’t refer to or answer the questions posed - or perhaps you did in your own way. Your version is “democracy” with its fraud and illegalities must be honoured and respected. Bought and sold


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
DarloOnTheUp
Posts: 6338
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 12:35 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by DarloOnTheUp » Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:18 pm

Remain voters before the referendum: "Leaving the EU will bring about the apocalypse! Why would anyone want that?"

*Leave wins*

Remain voters after the referendum: "Upholding the result of the referendum will bring about the apocalypse! Why would anyone want that?"

:roll:

But to answer your reply to my post QuakerPete, here’s a few examples of what I was talking about, as requested (I’ve also tried to include your key points that you’ve mentioned multiple times):
QuakerPete wrote:1) Please supply evidence of my scaremongering
QuakerPete wrote:No Deal wipes out *every* type of deal - 759 of them - we would have to start from scratch - disastrous!
To be honest, I could have picked multiple lines from each of your posts for this one.

But reading the above quote, you make it sound as though the world is about to end.

Well guess what: Switzerland are not in the EU and are the 7th richest nation in the world by GDP (source: https://eu.usatoday.com/story/money/201 ... /38429481/).

Norway are not in the EU and are 9th on that list.

Japan have just negotiated a trade deal with the EU. And that’s it. It’s a trade deal and nothing more. Err, why can’t we be given a similar deal, then we can make a start on the other 759?

Either way, your above quote is nothing more than scaremongering. Isn’t that what the rest of the non-EU world does, make trade deals with each other? Not exactly disastrous for them is it?

And to quote John F. Kennedy:
We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win.
QuakerPete wrote:2) Please supply evidence of my stating opinion and prediction as fact
QuakerPete wrote:My previous post gave figures of how we are (and will be) worse off due to Brexit, dependent upon the type of deal if we leave, but particularly under No Deal.
The figures in question relate to the financial benefits of being in the EU. However, you do not supply figures of the financial benefits of not being in the EU, therefore using these stats to declare we will be worse off if we leave, but “particularly under No Deal”, is nothing more than opinion and prediction (and more scaremongering).

And we get it, you have a big list of important sounding people who definitely don’t have an agenda and whose OPINION it is that leaving the EU, deal or no deal, will [insert scaremongering hyperbole here].

That list could contain everyone on the planet apart from me and it still wouldn’t make it anymore true. If the whole world believes in something incorrect, it doesn’t matter how many people believe it, or the status of those who do, it’s still incorrect.

This also leads to the problem that anyone could present an opposing opinion/prediction and it would be EQUALLY VALID since all we’re dealing with here is prediction and opinion. So, for example, it’s possible that our freedom from the EU allows us to strike up new trade deals around the world which, despite short term issues, in the long run, benefits our country greatly and leads to a more prosperous nation (Switzerland are one example of this, as mentioned above. The success of Switzerland isn't an opinion/prediction either: it's FACT). The prior opinion/prediction is equally valid to any you put forward. And of course the aim of your argument is to stop us even trying, forever enshrining your cherry-picked opinions as fact.

Again, I could have picked multiple lines from any of your posts for this one.
QuakerPete wrote:3) Please supply evidence of my twisting narratives
QuakerPete wrote:And while you’re lecturing me on democracy, just check out Sir James Eadie QC, legal counsel for Theresa May, admitting in court about Leave’s illegal activities and on-going criminal investigations - if the 2016 vote had been binding (it wasn’t) then it would have been voided
The way you’re portraying this is that the Leave campaign were evil manipulators who only won because they broke the law (I reject the implication that Leave voters were too stupid to make an informed decision of their own, but hey), and that Remain were good little angels surrounded by puppies and kittens who never so much as hurt a fly. All of which in order to achieve your agenda of a having a second crack at the vote (I see through your dishonesty and manipulation).

The truth, as with everything else you’ve said, is of course entirely different.

If you want to go down the law route, well then the law has already decided on their crime and punishment. The punishment WASN’T to redo the referendum, it was a large fine. You can’t have it both ways. You can’t on the one hand go hard on the “adherence to the law” angle, then on the other hand decide that the punishment set by the law isn’t good enough: you aren’t judge, jury, and executioner. If you have a problem with the law, take it up with your MP. Punishments of crimes are not decided based on your whim, however.

Furthermore, and I noticed Darlogramps brought this up previously, but the Remain side did not exactly come out of this smelling of roses. For instance, the government spent £9million on a pro-EU leaflet, and Lord Sainsbury donated over £4million to various pro-EU political groups, as well as £210,000 for a pro-EU advert to Virgin Media. Both sides in the referendum exploited loopholes to maximise how much they could spend.

So legally AND morally, you don’t have a leg to stand on. Check and mate.
QuakerPete wrote:4) And *definitely* please advise on falsehoods (lies, you mean?) I’ve said
QuakerPete wrote:The EU is more than a match for the UK in terms of democracy
Complete and utter falsehood, and I’ll try to explain why as briefly as possible.

You keep banging on about democracy this, democracy that. Well the EU is not only undemocratic, it is ANTI-DEMOCRATIC. Examples:

The Nice Treaty, the Maastricht treaty, the Lisbon Treaty, the Euro Bailout, were all voted AGAINST by different EU countries. The EU’s response? They were either made to vote again or their vote was ignored altogether (sound similar to what’s happening with May’s Deal, or the referendum result?).

The EU commission is both their governmental and legislative body: there is no separation. It’s like the US without Congress, or the UK without Parliament. Why are you not attacking this for being “undemocratic”, especially since we cannot vote them in or out if they do something we disagree with?

And before you mention the MEPs, they are entirely ceremonial. They cannot propose or repeal laws, it’s all done by unelected commissioners, who cannot be voted out by the people. If UK politicians mess up, we vote them out. The EU commissioners? No chance.

Moreover, every time the UK has voted against EU proposals, we have lost the vote. This has happened over 70 times since the 80s. So much for our privileged seat at the table.

To finish off an overly long post, I think you’re focusing too much on the economic factors. If the EU was nothing more than a European trading bloc, then that’s an entirely different argument. But there’s more to it than that, isn’t there?

The EU is a monstrous globalist superstate, which on the one hand demonises and attempts to eradicate nation states and nationalism, but on the other hand has all the hallmarks and characteristics of one giant nation, just without all that pesky democracy. If the EU applied to join the EU, they would be rejected on the grounds of not being democratic enough. Their rules and regulations are forced on all and anyone wanting to leave is harshly punished.

If the only way to legally and democratically oppose any of this is by leaving the EU, then that is what we must do.

Unfortunately, I have a feeling that we’ll never truly leave, which, of course, is exactly what the EU wants. And what the EU wants, the EU gets, by hook or by crook.

User avatar
OHDFC
Posts: 343
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 1:22 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by OHDFC » Sat Apr 06, 2019 11:06 am

I've seen Switzerland mentioned in several forums as an example of a successful European nation not in the EU.
But Switzerland has an agreement with the EU. They are a member of the EFTA (European Free Trade Area) - as are Norway - which has an agreement with the EU. They are in the Single Market and Schengen (free movement of people) but not in the Customs Union - I regular see queues of lorries at the border (but only entering Switzerland, not leaving.)
So perhaps Switzerland (and Norway) are not good examples to use in support of no deal.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk


User avatar
QuakerPete
Posts: 1165
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:51 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by QuakerPete » Mon Apr 08, 2019 3:48 pm

DarloOnTheUp wrote:
Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:18 pm
Remain voters before the referendum: "Leaving the EU will bring about the apocalypse! Why would anyone want that?"

*Leave wins*

Remain voters after the referendum: "Upholding the result of the referendum will bring about the apocalypse! Why would anyone want that?"

:roll:

But to answer your reply to my post QuakerPete, here’s a few examples of what I was talking about, as requested (I’ve also tried to include your key points that you’ve mentioned multiple times):
QuakerPete wrote:1) Please supply evidence of my scaremongering
QuakerPete wrote:No Deal wipes out *every* type of deal - 759 of them - we would have to start from scratch - disastrous!
To be honest, I could have picked multiple lines from each of your posts for this one.

But reading the above quote, you make it sound as though the world is about to end.

Well guess what: Switzerland are not in the EU and are the 7th richest nation in the world by GDP (source:
(link removed)

Norway are not in the EU and are 9th on that list.

Japan have just negotiated a trade deal with the EU. And that’s it. It’s a trade deal and nothing more. Err, why can’t we be given a similar deal, then we can make a start on the other 759?

Either way, your above quote is nothing more than scaremongering. Isn’t that what the rest of the non-EU world does, make trade deals with each other? Not exactly disastrous for them is it?

And to quote John F. Kennedy:
We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win.

So many serious discrepancies in your argument here:
• Those 2 countries (and no other country in the rest of the world – apart from some Leavers in the UK) have no intention of stopping all their relationships with the whole world and starting all over again from scratch using WTO.
• Those 2 countries along with the rest of the world have spent many decades building up political, financial and trading relationships with each other rather than tearing them down!
• Figures you’re quoting are not GDP, but GNI per capita. Switzerland is 36th for GDP and Norway is 53rd
• The UK isn’t in the top 25 of that list for GNI per capita – perhaps internal issues even with UK GDP at 5th in the world?
• Norway is a member of EEA and EFTA, giving it almost 100% access to the EU’s single market in return for large contributions without any say on the rules
• Switzerland is a member of EFTA, giving it almost 100% access to the EU’s single market and it’s also a member of Schengen (we have an opt out).
• How long does it take to replicate all those 759 deals prior to No Deal just to return us to parity?
• Japan, along with a number of other countries, have already indicated that they won’t roll over the deals that we have with the EU – they know they can get a better version out of us if we leave
• The EU is already conducting Free Trade Agreement talks with Australia and New Zealand, having concluded that with Japan (combined as one-third of world GDP) and also hoping to conclude another soon with Mercusor (Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay) which is even bigger than Japan
• You introduced the phrases “apocalypse” and “the world is about to end” – I said it would be disastrous, which is just reporting that said by all those organisations I listed previously – you could argue with them directly, if you wish
• Losing 759 deals and starting again from scratch is not scaremongering, it’s just a plain fact – whether you believe the consequences stated by all those organisations of moving from the most comprehensive deal in the world with the EU plus all the other Free Trade Agreements and various other deals, that’s up to you.



QuakerPete wrote:2) Please supply evidence of my stating opinion and prediction as fact
QuakerPete wrote:My previous post gave figures of how we are (and will be) worse off due to Brexit, dependent upon the type of deal if we leave, but particularly under No Deal.
The figures in question relate to the financial benefits of being in the EU. However, you do not supply figures of the financial benefits of not being in the EU, therefore using these stats to declare we will be worse off if we leave, but “particularly under No Deal”, is nothing more than opinion and prediction (and more scaremongering).

And we get it, you have a big list of important sounding people who definitely don’t have an agenda and whose OPINION it is that leaving the EU, deal or no deal, will [insert scaremongering hyperbole here].

That list could contain everyone on the planet apart from me and it still wouldn’t make it anymore true. If the whole world believes in something incorrect, it doesn’t matter how many people believe it, or the status of those who do, it’s still incorrect.

This also leads to the problem that anyone could present an opposing opinion/prediction and it would be EQUALLY VALID since all we’re dealing with here is prediction and opinion. So, for example, it’s possible that our freedom from the EU allows us to strike up new trade deals around the world which, despite short term issues, in the long run, benefits our country greatly and leads to a more prosperous nation (Switzerland are one example of this, as mentioned above. The success of Switzerland isn't an opinion/prediction either: it's FACT). The prior opinion/prediction is equally valid to any you put forward. And of course the aim of your argument is to stop us even trying, forever enshrining your cherry-picked opinions as fact.

Again, I could have picked multiple lines from any of your posts for this one.

Without wanting to go down the “Leavers don’t believe in experts” route, I’m really scratching my head to think why you think these organisations’ “opinions” aren’t valid, especially in their own specialised fields. That they somehow arrive at these “opinions” without knowing the effects of No Deal (in other words, already-established WTO tariffs and non-tariff barriers which are applicable across the world) on their core business? That somehow they don’t carry out their own assessments, investigations and number-crunching into the effects on their businesses should No Deal happen and find out they really don’t like what they see?
As an example, Ford UK have already stated that No Deal will cost it £1 billion per year – a sum they cannot afford. What options will they consider? Apart from the effect on Ford, what about their supply chains? Repeat that across all the sectors mentioned in that list.
You’re asking me to provide you with financial benefits of Leaving – there are no TANGIBLE benefits to leaving as far as I can see. I’m happy for you to provide me with a list of tangible benefits and I’ll see how many I can agree with. Can’t say fairer than that!
Of course organisations mentioned have “an agenda”, they want their businesses to survive and prosper. I can’t even begin to understand what you’re suggesting there.
And, of course, anyone who leaves the EU on No Deal is able to make their own deals afterwards – no-one is arguing against that. Where the “fact” becomes debateable is when you claim new deals (whenever they would eventually be made – decades?) would benefit the UK “in the long run” – how do you know that? Define and evidence “long run”, define and evidence “better”, define and evidence “short term issues”. How is it possible to improve upon Free Trade Agreements already in place? Upon leaving the EU, where around 44% of our imports and exports occur, how is UK able to have a better trading relationship than it has now with the EU? Or, as Pascal Lamy (former director-general of the WTO) said: No Deal and leaving the EU is like moving from division 1 to division 4 of trade deals.




QuakerPete wrote:3) Please supply evidence of my twisting narratives
QuakerPete wrote:And while you’re lecturing me on democracy, just check out Sir James Eadie QC, legal counsel for Theresa May, admitting in court about Leave’s illegal activities and on-going criminal investigations - if the 2016 vote had been binding (it wasn’t) then it would have been voided
The way you’re portraying this is that the Leave campaign were evil manipulators who only won because they broke the law (I reject the implication that Leave voters were too stupid to make an informed decision of their own, but hey), and that Remain were good little angels surrounded by puppies and kittens who never so much as hurt a fly. All of which in order to achieve your agenda of a having a second crack at the vote (I see through your dishonesty and manipulation).

The truth, as with everything else you’ve said, is of course entirely different.

If you want to go down the law route, well then the law has already decided on their crime and punishment. The punishment WASN’T to redo the referendum, it was a large fine. You can’t have it both ways. You can’t on the one hand go hard on the “adherence to the law” angle, then on the other hand decide that the punishment set by the law isn’t good enough: you aren’t judge, jury, and executioner. If you have a problem with the law, take it up with your MP. Punishments of crimes are not decided based on your whim, however.

Furthermore, and I noticed Darlogramps brought this up previously, but the Remain side did not exactly come out of this smelling of roses. For instance, the government spent £9million on a pro-EU leaflet, and Lord Sainsbury donated over £4million to various pro-EU political groups, as well as £210,000 for a pro-EU advert to Virgin Media. Both sides in the referendum exploited loopholes to maximise how much they could spend.

So legally AND morally, you don’t have a leg to stand on. Check and mate.

You’re conflating the Leave campaign with people who voted to leave.
It’s not about how much each side spent (though I would wish to have much stricter rules on election spending) otherwise the Tories would win every election, but how it is carried out – see election spending and common purpose rules on the Electoral Commission’s website.
I never said Leave won because they broke the law, I said they acted illegally by breaking the law which is all that is required to have a legally binding election voided. There is no requirement of proof on how much it affected the referendum and which would be impossible to prove under any circumstances anyway.
The point is, under a free, fair and transparent democracy, the result of any election / referendum would not be allowed to stand / proceed without those investigations being concluded first.
Theresa May was aware of the illegalities and decided to proceed anyway – in my judgment, that is wrong!
The law has NOT yet decided on all the crime and punishment, due to the outstanding investigations still to be completed. Those crimes that could be dealt with by the Electoral Commission have been! That same Electoral Commission have now passed all its information on Leave and its officials (which does not fall within its remit) to various bodies such as the National Crime Agency (our FBI), Metropolitan Police and other agencies such as Financial Conduct Authority.
Not saying it will happen, but just imagine for one minute if it’s found that Arron Banks’ £8 million donation was found to be from an impermissible source or that some of the leading Leave officials are prosecuted, found guilty and even jailed – the present political upheaval would be turned into a constitutional crisis if Brexit has already occurred.
It’s not up to you (or me) to interpret your own version of Electoral Law. Has the law been broken by Leave? Yes! Are there further laws broken? Perhaps – but the Electoral Commission believes so!
Perhaps it’s more about your own morality and whether you’re happy for a vote to proceed without the full evidence?

And as I said to Darlogramps, if you have evidence that Remain carried out illegal acts please report them to the Electoral Commission with your evidence. But it’s a deflection of the real issues as the Electoral Commission have already concluded no case against Remain. In the end cheating is cheating, fraud is fraud and illegalities are illegalities, whichever side was responsible. But in the meantime, even if Remain was also responsible for wrong-doing, does that make it “even stevens” or “worse”?




QuakerPete wrote:4) And *definitely* please advise on falsehoods (lies, you mean?) I’ve said
QuakerPete wrote:The EU is more than a match for the UK in terms of democracy
Complete and utter falsehood, and I’ll try to explain why as briefly as possible.

You keep banging on about democracy this, democracy that. Well the EU is not only undemocratic, it is ANTI-DEMOCRATIC. Examples:

The Nice Treaty, the Maastricht treaty, the Lisbon Treaty, the Euro Bailout, were all voted AGAINST by different EU countries. The EU’s response? They were either made to vote again or their vote was ignored altogether (sound similar to what’s happening with May’s Deal, or the referendum result?).

The EU commission is both their governmental and legislative body: there is no separation. It’s like the US without Congress, or the UK without Parliament. Why are you not attacking this for being “undemocratic”, especially since we cannot vote them in or out if they do something we disagree with?

And before you mention the MEPs, they are entirely ceremonial. They cannot propose or repeal laws, it’s all done by unelected commissioners, who cannot be voted out by the people. If UK politicians mess up, we vote them out. The EU commissioners? No chance.

Moreover, every time the UK has voted against EU proposals, we have lost the vote. This has happened over 70 times since the 80s. So much for our privileged seat at the table.

To finish off an overly long post, I think you’re focusing too much on the economic factors. If the EU was nothing more than a European trading bloc, then that’s an entirely different argument. But there’s more to it than that, isn’t there?

The EU is a monstrous globalist superstate, which on the one hand demonises and attempts to eradicate nation states and nationalism, but on the other hand has all the hallmarks and characteristics of one giant nation, just without all that pesky democracy. If the EU applied to join the EU, they would be rejected on the grounds of not being democratic enough. Their rules and regulations are forced on all and anyone wanting to leave is harshly punished.

If the only way to legally and democratically oppose any of this is by leaving the EU, then that is what we must do.

Unfortunately, I have a feeling that we’ll never truly leave, which, of course, is exactly what the EU wants. And what the EU wants, the EU gets, by hook or by crook.
You’re comparing a democratic system of one nation (all other 27 nations are different, too), to shared sovereignty in certain areas for 28 nations in the EU. You shouldn’t expect a mirror image set of circumstances for both – it is impossible.
The European Parliament is not ceremonial, it has powers to amend and block many areas of EU law-making:
http://europarl.europa.eu/about-parliam ... ive-powers
(hardly ceremonial!)
The European Parliament also shares the power for the whole EU budget and has final say on it
http://europarl.europa.eu/about-parliam ... ary-powers
(hardly ceremonial!)
The European Council is made up of the leaders of all 28 nations – it is where joint EU policy is made, quite a natural position considering each of those countries’ leaders would also make their own internal policy to fit in with their EU positions.
The EU Commissioners (equivalent to our government ministers) are one from each country - nominated by the leaders of each country. How would you like to vote for the Commissioners? Would the bigger countries, population-wise, get more votes? Would we vote just for our own commissioner or those from other countries as well? Here’s a better explanation of the Commission:
https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-facts-be ... reaucrats/
There are many areas in UK politics where you don’t vote for people – Head of State (monarch) who has a role in government, the Prime Minister (we’ll soon have a second one in a few years elected by the Conservative Party without recourse to the country), any of the Cabinet Ministers / Private Secretaries / Advisors, House of Lords or any of the 400,000 Civil Servants (some of whom wield significant and career-long power in many areas – such as Permanent Secretaries or even Olly Robins who was UK main negotiator with EU, I can’t remember getting the chance to vote for him).
And you overstate MPs’ powers – they can propose Private Members Bills but only at the discretion of the serving Government and when have they ever been able to propose Primary Legislation such as Budgetary or Taxation? The power in UK Parliament is directly with the PM followed by the Cabinet.
Please provide evidence that the EU “made” countries vote again.
If you’re going to mention the number of times UK has lost a vote in the EU (2% of the time up to 2016), perhaps you should practice what you preach about giving both sides of the story (your answer in part 2) and mention it has successfully voted 95% of the time and abstained 3% - I’d say we were pretty successful in getting what we wanted within the EU. And have you seen the list the UK voted against? Included are 17 votes against different consumer protection and food safety laws, some were trade fairness and workers rights laws, tax avoidance and anti-corruption laws, etc – those “bastards” in the EU eh!
The political argument on Remaining or Leaving I can understand – it just happens I don’t agree on Leaving as I feel our power and influence and economy are much better served inside the EU where we are a major influence and contributor to its direction and laws.

EDJOHNS
Posts: 339
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2019 3:56 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by EDJOHNS » Wed Apr 10, 2019 9:09 am


User avatar
QuakerPete
Posts: 1165
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:51 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by QuakerPete » Wed Apr 10, 2019 12:03 pm

EDJOHNS wrote:Read in particular Germany.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/11 ... Ea7bGatctE
EDJOHNS in “No-Deal-will-only-hit-UK-in-short-term-but-will-be-disastrous-for-EU-and-particularly-five-countries - written-by-Daily-Express-the-leading-proponent-of-Brexit” shocker!!!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

EDJOHNS
Posts: 339
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2019 3:56 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by EDJOHNS » Wed Apr 10, 2019 1:35 pm

QuakerPete wrote:
Wed Apr 10, 2019 12:03 pm
EDJOHNS wrote:Read in particular Germany.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/11 ... Ea7bGatctE
EDJOHNS in “No-Deal-will-only-hit-UK-in-short-term-but-will-be-disastrous-for-EU-and-particularly-five-countries - written-by-Daily-Express-the-leading-proponent-of-Brexit” shocker!!!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Since when does Peter Altmaier work for the Express?

AS far as I am aware neither does Eric Schweitzer.

Please let me know if this has changed.

Yet again, it is ok for remainders to give "expert" opinion from A-Z but when someone does it with the view to leave you deride it.

I would suggest that Eric Schweitzer, as head of the Association of German Chambers of Commerce and Industry, warning that "the chaos is absolute” in a no deal. He said companies are "shaking their heads" at the decision and that "Britain and Europe are stumbling toward an unregulated withdrawal from the EU”.

Let me know why someone like that would say it is bad for both sides unless true.
As I said previously, Germany in particular can not afford to lose us as a trad partner for long as they lose 27% of their car industry exports and have NO alternatives whatsoever.

That alone without any other trade being taken into account is enough to bring them back to the table after we leave.

onewayup
Posts: 1680
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 6:02 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by onewayup » Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:45 pm

We should have come out the day's after the vote no question. Then started the shenanigans of what free trade deals and more measured thinking from the EU to what they could/want to save from the fiasco of EU meddling ripping off the UK for as much as they can get to uphold the failure of the European parliament/ government.just agree to come out deal or no deal.

Darlo_Pete
Posts: 12009
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by Darlo_Pete » Wed Apr 10, 2019 8:17 pm

QuakerPete swimming against the tide on here. :D

User avatar
QuakerPete
Posts: 1165
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:51 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by QuakerPete » Wed Apr 10, 2019 10:31 pm

EDJOHNS wrote:
QuakerPete wrote:
Wed Apr 10, 2019 12:03 pm
EDJOHNS wrote:Read in particular Germany.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/11 ... Ea7bGatctE
EDJOHNS in “No-Deal-will-only-hit-UK-in-short-term-but-will-be-disastrous-for-EU-and-particularly-five-countries - written-by-Daily-Express-the-leading-proponent-of-Brexit” shocker!!!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Since when does Peter Altmaier work for the Express?

AS far as I am aware neither does Eric Schweitzer.

Please let me know if this has changed.

Yet again, it is ok for remainders to give "expert" opinion from A-Z but when someone does it with the view to leave you deride it.

I would suggest that Eric Schweitzer, as head of the Association of German Chambers of Commerce and Industry, warning that "the chaos is absolute” in a no deal. He said companies are "shaking their heads" at the decision and that "Britain and Europe are stumbling toward an unregulated withdrawal from the EU”.

Let me know why someone like that would say it is bad for both sides unless true.
As I said previously, Germany in particular can not afford to lose us as a trad partner for long as they lose 27% of their car industry exports and have NO alternatives whatsoever.

That alone without any other trade being taken into account is enough to bring them back to the table after we leave.
At least you’ve finally acknowledged No Deal is bad for both sides, but not quite got away from the “They Need Us More Than We Need Them” mantra. No Deal isn’t about NOT trading with Germany and the rest of the EU members, it’s about the tariffs and non-tariff regulations which will be automatically applied under WTO.

We can amend our own import tariffs (for the whole world only) to try to mitigate for some issues; but we have no say over others’ import tariffs, therefore 10% on cars, 70% on beef and 45% on lamb products.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... h_2019.pdf
(While you’re at have a look at the loss of GDP “under a smooth transition to WTO” - 10.5% less for North East (the financial crisis in 2009 was -2%)

100% of our cars exported (which is 81.5% of total production in the UK) will attract the 10% tariff wherever they are sold in the world. The beef and lamb tariffs on their own will see off our exports in those products and with it the associated industries.

It goes back to the issue of 44% of UK exports go to the EU and around 8-18% imported to UK from EU (depending on calculations used). All those non-tariff regulations kick in straight away on our imports from the EU (and other countries who transport goods to us via Rotterdam). Depends whether you think nearly half of our imports is less important in the grand scheme of things against less than 20% of the EU’s exports
https://fullfact.org/europe/uk-eu-trade/

Of course there’ll be chaos, but the EU members will still be trading with each other AND the rest of the world under a number of Free Trade Agreements and various other deals. Meanwhile, we’ll be the only country in the world trading solely on “fourth division” WTO
Plus, Barnier has already stated there’ll be no talks over a deal until UK accepts the £39 billion payment, Northern Irish backstop and citizens’ rights


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
QuakerPete
Posts: 1165
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:51 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by QuakerPete » Wed Apr 10, 2019 10:32 pm

onewayup wrote:We should have come out the day's after the vote no question. Then started the shenanigans of what free trade deals and more measured thinking from the EU to what they could/want to save from the fiasco of EU meddling ripping off the UK for as much as they can get to uphold the failure of the European parliament/ government.just agree to come out deal or no deal.
Not really thought that one through!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
QuakerPete
Posts: 1165
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:51 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by QuakerPete » Wed Apr 10, 2019 10:33 pm

Darlo_Pete wrote:QuakerPete swimming against the tide on here. :D
Still haven’t answered about the referendum illegalities Pete!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
DarloOnTheUp
Posts: 6338
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 12:35 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by DarloOnTheUp » Thu Apr 11, 2019 12:08 am

QuakerPete wrote:
Wed Apr 10, 2019 10:33 pm
Darlo_Pete wrote:QuakerPete swimming against the tide on here. :D
Still haven’t answered about the referendum illegalities Pete!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
He'd be wasting his time. I explained clearly and concisely how pretty much everything you've been saying is utter nonsense (including the illegalities), yet it all went over your head.

Never mind, I tried.

joejaques
Posts: 2669
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 10:36 am
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Milford Haven

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by joejaques » Thu Apr 11, 2019 6:44 am

After lat night I am really looking forward to seeing European faces when Nigel turns up to the opening of the new European Parliament session. :roll:
Image

Darlo_Pete
Posts: 12009
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by Darlo_Pete » Thu Apr 11, 2019 6:55 am

It's ridiculous that we have to take part in European elections, pure farce.

Darlogramps
Posts: 4725
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 10:47 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by Darlogramps » Thu Apr 11, 2019 8:12 am

DarloOnTheUp wrote:
QuakerPete wrote:
Wed Apr 10, 2019 10:33 pm
Darlo_Pete wrote:QuakerPete swimming against the tide on here. :D
Still haven’t answered about the referendum illegalities Pete!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
He'd be wasting his time. I explained clearly and concisely how pretty much everything you've been saying is utter nonsense (including the illegalities), yet it all went over your head.

Never mind, I tried.
Always the same with QuakerPete. He's never wrong apparently, and anything which suggests an alternative opinion is either corrupt or stupid according to him. And if it answers his points, he'll ignore it because it's too inconvenient.

For instance, in this thread he'll refuse to even look at sources of info which are right wing and pro-Brexit. But he's more than happy to quote the far-left, anti-Semitic, fake-news peddling hate site that is The Canary.

There's been no attempt from him to even acknowledge the many legitimate arguments in favour of Brexit. The absolutism on both sides is what's been so damaging. Whether to leave the EU is not a binary issue, it's a sliding scale. There are benefits to remaining, of course there are. But there are also benefits to leaving.

The question is really around which sets of benefits and consequences we want to live with. For me, on balance, if the EU were simply a trading bloc, I'd have no issue. But it is unbelievably undemocratic (see the Greek bailouts, re-running of referendums etc), lacks any form of basic accountability (the only body with any direct accountability to the people it serves is the EU Parliament, the weakest of the EU's institutions) and insists on interfering by applying one-size fits all policies to 28 vastly different countries (from the economy, immigration, farming, agriculture, etc).

But not once have hardline remainers attempted to see it that way. Instead they've told people they were too stupid to know what they were voting for, that they were duped, or that they have corrupt intentions.

When someone has that mentality, it's pointless trying to engage. They simply do not want to know.


If ever you're bored or miserable:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlZohZoadGY

User avatar
theoriginalfatcat
Posts: 3959
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by theoriginalfatcat » Thu Apr 11, 2019 8:56 am

The above post is a good one, and made me think - the playing field is no longer level, a bit like Spennymoor's infamous Brewery Field, or whatever it's called :)

Since the referendum, a good deal of the 'leaving' arguments, and reasons to leave have slowed right down. Probably because that particular point had been sorted out - or so we'd thought.

So now all the noise comes from the remain side, it's relentless and I feel that many people who voted to leave (me for one) may be starting to forget the reasons why they voted to leave in the first place, and are getting lethargic about the whole thing.

This will only continue - I think it's called attrition.
Mr Singh said this " I'm not expecting to get back any of the money I've already put in, I'm prepared to write it off for the future of the club. I'm not hanging in to make any kind of financial gain in the short or long term - if someone was prepared to come in and take the club off my hands, I'd be more than willing to discuss it"

Tamworth matchday programme 26 Nov 2011

H1987
Posts: 1211
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by H1987 » Thu Apr 11, 2019 9:40 am

I see there are the usual leaver tantrums going on at great length here.

Voting on something a few years down the line doesn't undermine democracy. All of this gesturing and overcompensating is that just about every shoddy promise (i.e. lie) the leave campaign sold to con the electorate has fallen apart, and they know fine well if it goes back to the public, they will lose.

So they're all on the offensive. Pathetic, bairns behaviour. I certainly don't think the EU is perfect, but give me Brussels over the likes of Rees-Mogg, Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage and the rest, without any proper checks and balances running this country. I may not live in Darlington anymore, but I certainly still vote for what will protect it, and make it better, for my family who still live there, and for the town as a whole. It's still my home, and always will be. With those people running the show, to quote John Major, it'd be about as safe as a pet hamster with a hungry python. I can't countenance the idea of how anyone who cares about the town would vote for this.

Darlington gets more from the European Union than it ever will from a hard right, wacko Tory government. If we are given the chance to vote again, i would crawl over glass to vote remain. Then again, i've no desire to live out some weird, world war two fantasy (seems to all be a certain age group - none of whom fought in the war who obsess over this), and i'd sooner protect the freedoms and rights of the young people of Darlington too.

That said, rather than another referendum, i'd sooner we entered an arrangement like the EFTA. Which does all of those things, but leaves the political union. I think it's a compromise, that doesn't require another nasty, hateful vote, and it compensates for some of the (to my mind, more reasonable) criticisms that gramps points out. I've no desire to listen, or debate with hard right tosh, but i've sympathy for concerns such as those, even if i don't necessarily agree leaving is the way to resolve them.

EDJOHNS
Posts: 339
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2019 3:56 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by EDJOHNS » Thu Apr 11, 2019 9:43 am

Darlogramps wrote:
Thu Apr 11, 2019 8:12 am
DarloOnTheUp wrote:
QuakerPete wrote:
Wed Apr 10, 2019 10:33 pm
Darlo_Pete wrote:QuakerPete swimming against the tide on here. :D
Still haven’t answered about the referendum illegalities Pete!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
He'd be wasting his time. I explained clearly and concisely how pretty much everything you've been saying is utter nonsense (including the illegalities), yet it all went over your head.

Never mind, I tried.
Always the same with QuakerPete. He's never wrong apparently, and anything which suggests an alternative opinion is either corrupt or stupid according to him. And if it answers his points, he'll ignore it because it's too inconvenient.

For instance, in this thread he'll refuse to even look at sources of info which are right wing and pro-Brexit. But he's more than happy to quote the far-left, anti-Semitic, fake-news peddling hate site that is The Canary.

There's been no attempt from him to even acknowledge the many legitimate arguments in favour of Brexit. The absolutism on both sides is what's been so damaging. Whether to leave the EU is not a binary issue, it's a sliding scale. There are benefits to remaining, of course there are. But there are also benefits to leaving.

The question is really around which sets of benefits and consequences we want to live with. For me, on balance, if the EU were simply a trading bloc, I'd have no issue. But it is unbelievably undemocratic (see the Greek bailouts, re-running of referendums etc), lacks any form of basic accountability (the only body with any direct accountability to the people it serves is the EU Parliament, the weakest of the EU's institutions) and insists on interfering by applying one-size fits all policies to 28 vastly different countries (from the economy, immigration, farming, agriculture, etc).

But not once have hardline remainers attempted to see it that way. Instead they've told people they were too stupid to know what they were voting for, that they were duped, or that they have corrupt intentions.

When someone has that mentality, it's pointless trying to engage. They simply do not want to know.
You annoy me with your repeated dog with a bone arguments on uncovered, but this is the best post/comment I have seen from you as yet.
I am a "Get the hell out asap with no deal" sort of person, but had we lost the referendum I would have gone with that because I believe in democracy. Sadly is shows clearly that some only believe in it when it suites them.

User avatar
theoriginalfatcat
Posts: 3959
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by theoriginalfatcat » Thu Apr 11, 2019 11:50 am

H1987 wrote:
Thu Apr 11, 2019 9:40 am
That said, rather than another referendum, i'd sooner we entered an arrangement like the EFTA. Which does all of those things, but leaves the political union. I think it's a compromise, that doesn't require another nasty, hateful vote, and it compensates for some of the (to my mind, more reasonable) criticisms that gramps points out. I've no desire to listen, or debate with hard right tosh, but i've sympathy for concerns such as those, even if i don't necessarily agree leaving is the way to resolve them.

It's been pointed out to me that if we leave the EU political project, but remain in an EU trading block - then we kind of get what was voted for back in the 70's when the first vote took place. Perhaps this is the answer?

I voted to leave, but I like to think I'm not blinkered - and it seems that our present bunch of politicians are not up to the task of sorting this out.

Change of subject, QuakerPete - what is that pic off of your profile? Paul Rodgers...
Mr Singh said this " I'm not expecting to get back any of the money I've already put in, I'm prepared to write it off for the future of the club. I'm not hanging in to make any kind of financial gain in the short or long term - if someone was prepared to come in and take the club off my hands, I'd be more than willing to discuss it"

Tamworth matchday programme 26 Nov 2011

H1987
Posts: 1211
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by H1987 » Thu Apr 11, 2019 12:06 pm

theoriginalfatcat wrote:
Thu Apr 11, 2019 11:50 am
H1987 wrote:
Thu Apr 11, 2019 9:40 am
That said, rather than another referendum, i'd sooner we entered an arrangement like the EFTA. Which does all of those things, but leaves the political union. I think it's a compromise, that doesn't require another nasty, hateful vote, and it compensates for some of the (to my mind, more reasonable) criticisms that gramps points out. I've no desire to listen, or debate with hard right tosh, but i've sympathy for concerns such as those, even if i don't necessarily agree leaving is the way to resolve them.

It's been pointed out to me that if we leave the EU political project, but remain in an EU trading block - then we kind of get what was voted for back in the 70's when the first vote took place. Perhaps this is the answer?

I voted to leave, but I like to think I'm not blinkered - and it seems that our present bunch of politicians are not up to the task of sorting this out.

Change of subject, QuakerPete - what is that pic off of your profile? Paul Rodgers...
I voted remain, and I agree with that. I personally still feel we're better off inside the EU, but i'd be prepared to compromise to this, and I think it's preferable to voting on the final deal. I think there's a majority in parliament, and probably in the country for it. The problem is the shoutiest people on both sides have completely dominated the debate, and it's made it so mean spirited and nasty. It's an indictment of Theresa May's leadership that she has insisted on pandering to the shoutiest lunatics of the leave vote (who are nothing like a majority) and basically stuck two fingers up at everyone else.

We go into the EFTA, it protects our rights and freedoms, makes sure young people can still have access to things like Erasmus, guarantees workers rights, access to the European market, standards on a bunch of things (chlorinated American chicken, and the rest of the rubbish they pump their food with can get in the bin), protects British citizens in Europe, and Europeans in the UK (who i think have been treated appallingly). It just makes sense.

It's all become to nasty, spiteful and common sense has been swept away. I'd be concerned if we vote on the final deal, it divides the country even more. The common market 2.0 proposal that so narrowly lost in parliament would bring most of the country together again (to a point). It's absolutely pointless trying to appease the headbangers like Farage. That's the problem with extremists - they tend to be unreasonable.

EDJOHNS
Posts: 339
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2019 3:56 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by EDJOHNS » Thu Apr 11, 2019 3:46 pm

theoriginalfatcat wrote:
Thu Apr 11, 2019 11:50 am
H1987 wrote:
Thu Apr 11, 2019 9:40 am
That said, rather than another referendum, i'd sooner we entered an arrangement like the EFTA. Which does all of those things, but leaves the political union. I think it's a compromise, that doesn't require another nasty, hateful vote, and it compensates for some of the (to my mind, more reasonable) criticisms that gramps points out. I've no desire to listen, or debate with hard right tosh, but i've sympathy for concerns such as those, even if i don't necessarily agree leaving is the way to resolve them.

It's been pointed out to me that if we leave the EU political project, but remain in an EU trading block - then we kind of get what was voted for back in the 70's when the first vote took place. Perhaps this is the answer?

I voted to leave, but I like to think I'm not blinkered - and it seems that our present bunch of politicians are not up to the task of sorting this out.

Change of subject, QuakerPete - what is that pic off of your profile? Paul Rodgers...
You see, people from both sides actually can come to a decision if they discuss rather than play the political game.
I voted against joining back in was it 1972-3, but lived with the CM as that was the vote. (I also spoke out against % wage rises which came in at about the same time), but I also would accept a deal to leave the political but stay in the trading sectors. It is not going to happen as things are far to entrenched.
The stupidity of "delaying" until the end of the year and taking part in elections bemuses me. The longer the uncertainty goes on the worse it gets. Anyone who can't get that really does not deserve to be involved. The 1 good thing is that it will get Nigel back into the ring with a place to fight from the "inside".
Pre the take over by the English Nazi party UKIP had actually done a good job in helping get us to the point of leaving. Sadly those who voted UKIP to force the leaving thought that once the referendum took place it was a done deal and they went back to their "natural" parties. Big, big mistake.

User avatar
QuakerPete
Posts: 1165
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:51 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by QuakerPete » Thu Apr 11, 2019 9:26 pm

theoriginalfatcat wrote:
H1987 wrote:
Thu Apr 11, 2019 9:40 am
That said, rather than another referendum, i'd sooner we entered an arrangement like the EFTA. Which does all of those things, but leaves the political union. I think it's a compromise, that doesn't require another nasty, hateful vote, and it compensates for some of the (to my mind, more reasonable) criticisms that gramps points out. I've no desire to listen, or debate with hard right tosh, but i've sympathy for concerns such as those, even if i don't necessarily agree leaving is the way to resolve them.

It's been pointed out to me that if we leave the EU political project, but remain in an EU trading block - then we kind of get what was voted for back in the 70's when the first vote took place. Perhaps this is the answer?

I voted to leave, but I like to think I'm not blinkered - and it seems that our present bunch of politicians are not up to the task of sorting this out.

Change of subject, QuakerPete - what is that pic off of your profile? Paul Rodgers...
It is indeed Paul Rodgers, album cover for Heartbreaker. Fantastic Blues/Rock singer


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
QuakerPete
Posts: 1165
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:51 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Democracy under threat.

Post by QuakerPete » Fri Apr 12, 2019 2:45 pm

DarloOnTheUp wrote:
Thu Apr 11, 2019 12:08 am
QuakerPete wrote:
Wed Apr 10, 2019 10:33 pm
Darlo_Pete wrote:QuakerPete swimming against the tide on here. :D
Still haven’t answered about the referendum illegalities Pete!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
He'd be wasting his time. I explained clearly and concisely how pretty much everything you've been saying is utter nonsense (including the illegalities), yet it all went over your head.

Never mind, I tried.
And I made rebuttals to all your points - but, hey, I tried!

Post Reply