Let's Get Political!

[Ardiles]

It's not legitimate (in my opinion) to assume that the 48% who voted to remain are a totally consistent bloc who voted to remain in every individual EU institution whilst at the same time carving up the leave vote into individual elements.
 
Reg is right for once ( ) the decision was made to leave and it's up to the government of the day to work out the best way of achieving that. 

In my view the referendum was a mistake,  Boris Johnson is a cunt and a lot of people who voted to leave were racists or morons or both.  So what?  The result was tight but clear.  Once you start saying "ah yes but they didn't realise this or that or the other and if they had ...." then no referendum or general election result has any meaning and everyone has carte blanche to sabotage any result they don't like.

I was ashamed and embarrassed that we voted to leave, but if another referendum was imposed on us by a bunch of elitists who mouth the word "democracy" but don't actually believe in it, then I would vote to leave on principle and I would hope that other 'remainers' would do the same.

I hear you, but keep coming back to this....the Customs Union and Single Market were not on the ballot paper.  The government has a mandate to take us out of the EU, but no mandate at all for anything else.  This is a complete mess - and how Cameron has not been called to account for his gross ineptitude is staggering.

It is patently obvious that there was no consensus across the voting population on what the vote was about.  Some assumed that a vote to Leave meant leaving everything, while others will have assumed otherwise.  While there are arguments against, I accept, one argument in favour of a further referendum on the actual deal that is delivered is that - this time - at least everyone will know what they were voting for.

[horlock07]

I hear you, but keep coming back to this....the Customs Union and Single Market were not on the ballot paper.  The government has a mandate to take us out of the EU, but no mandate at all for anything else.  This is a complete mess - and how Cameron has not been called to account for his gross ineptitude is staggering.

I am not making excuses for Cameron as ultimately he was the architect for all this, what is shambolic is that the legals behind both the referendum and subsequent actions have been so shoddily done. My line of work is often law based and even with my peripheral understanding its obvious why holes can and are be picked in it all - Day one of law school interpret the law for what it actually says, not what you want it to say.

There was no consensus , for instance I know for a fact that a lot of my extended family voted leave as they seemed to be under the impression that it would mean fewer brown faces in their home towns in West Yorkshire, they seem entirely ignorant to the fact that the only immigrants it would directly affect were their polish friends and often partners, so do we take their vote and interpret it as a mandate to reduce immigration from the Indian sub-continent? 

[RedRag]

Agree with Ardiles.

If you cannot say that 100% of the 51.9% would have discounted the CU and or SM, tweaked or otherwise, as ever being an acceptable part of leaving the EU, you have to rely on the "normal" democratic processes. 

Here I agree with Paul that this leaves a bit of a mess with Parliament and Parties as well as the Public, all deeply divided and with the DUP punching absurdly above its weight. 

I don't believe the CU/SM etc question is best decided upon by a referendum. Any true debate on the merits or otherwise has been closed down anyway.  What shape might a trade deal with the USA and India take and would the Government propose any red lines there on the NHS or immigration for example?

Having Parliament determine this question is more democratic than leaving it to be resolved by a divided Conservative Government but can the Government (or for that matter the EU) negotiate Brexit properly?  It seems no one really has a mandate and that timid Theresa is just playing for time "hoping something will turn up".

We are going round in circles on Brexit, not truly mapping out a vision, still having "not to reveal our hand" other than "red lines".  We are prevented from even seeing the sectorial impact assessments.  Other policy areas are neglected.  Truly, wtf is going on?

[RedRag]

While there are arguments against, I accept, one argument in favour of a further referendum on the actual deal that is delivered is that - this time - at least everyone will know what they were voting for.

It's all too technical for a meaningful vote.  imo.   I just fear that it would all boil down to "immigration" again.  I'd rather not scratch that itch again.  Once was quite enough.

[pauld]

It's not legitimate (in my opinion) to assume that the 48% who voted to remain are a totally consistent bloc who voted to remain in every individual EU institution whilst at the same time carving up the leave vote into individual elements.
 
Reg is right for once ( ) the decision was made to leave and it's up to the government of the day to work out the best way of achieving that. 

In my view the referendum was a mistake,  Boris Johnson is a cunt and a lot of people who voted to leave were racists or morons or both.  So what?  The result was tight but clear.  Once you start saying "ah yes but they didn't realise this or that or the other and if they had ...." then no referendum or general election result has any meaning and everyone has carte blanche to sabotage any result they don't like.

I was ashamed and embarrassed that we voted to leave, but if another referendum was imposed on us by a bunch of elitists who mouth the word "democracy" but don't actually believe in it, then I would vote to leave on principle and I would hope that other 'remainers' would do the same.

Pretty much agree with all of this. It's this politicians trying to wriggle out of a result they don't like that annoys me. The referendum was a bloody car crash but they signed up for it, albeit only because they smugly thought the hoi polloi would vote the "right" way like they were told to, and now they can damn well implement it.

[RedRag]

No Doctors please, we're British!

After the shameful treatment of our "Windrush" fellow Brits, our distinguished Home Office has just refused a whole batch of 100 visa applications by Indian Doctors with NHS job offers - on quota grounds.  That's about 200 refusals this year.

Yay!  And that helps leave us free to continue blaming immigrants for waiting lists meanwhile.

Nevertheless, by 2025 we should be having a sudden glut of Brit doctors thanks to the extra 1500 training places to start later this year.  Lets hope that 1500 doctors, all newly qualified, is just what the NHS will need then

[BambooToTheFuture]

Amber Rudd has apparently resigned.

[Pax Romana]

Whilst this smacks of executing one of the concentration camp guards rather than the camp commandant I hope it stays that way.

The last thing we need right now is a new PM.  Brexit will still be an insoluble mess and getting someone slightly less hapless than May is not going to help.

[tans]

Sajid javid takes over as home secretary

[horlock07]

Interesting that Rudd has been forced to resign after it emerged that a Memo she sent to Theresa May illustrated the fact that she lied to parliament. I assume we will now at the very least see May stand up in parliament to apologise for not correcting her colleague who she explicitly knew was lying to parliament last week?

[Bogus Dave]

Maybot was not programmed to feel remorse

[Batch]

So the will of the people is to send those dirty stinking illegal immigrants home, but be outraged about the lie about having planned targets to do it?

[Reg Smeeton]

So the will of the people is to send those dirty stinking illegal immigrants home, but be outraged about the lie about having planned targets to do it?

I don't think it's the problem with deporting illegal immigrants, or having targets but rather including in those people from the Windrush generation, who although perhaps technically illegal due to bureaucracy, wouldn't be considered illegal by any common sense measure. And then lying about it.

[Batch]

I don't think it's the problem with deporting illegal immigrants, or having targets but rather including in those people from the Windrush generation, who although perhaps technically illegal due to bureaucracy, wouldn't be considered illegal by any common sense measure. And then lying about it.

I thought the lie was about the setting of % targets of illegal immigrant deportation, not Windrush. Windrush was a "mistake". Only even the lie wasn't a lie, merely "misleading"...

Ah well, apologies if I have it wrong.

edit: BBC reads like that too
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-43945768/amber-rudd-why-has-the-home-secretary-resigned
-------
So it still seems to me she has fallen on her sword over not telling the truth on targets. Not the actual targets themself, not Windrush.

Controversial, shouldn't illegal immigrants be deported ASAP?
Not asylum seekers.
Not legal immigrants.  The illegal ones.

Of course its never that simple I suppose
http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/11883712.Facebook_campaign_as_Swindon_coffee_bride_faces_deportation/

[horlock07]

So the will of the people is to send those dirty stinking illegal immigrants home, but be outraged about the lie about having planned targets to do it?

Similar to the aspiration to bomb Syria for humanitarian reasons, but then vote against taking in orphaned children from the same conflict.... Oh and supplying bombs and weapons to Saudi Arabia to bomb Yemen killing civilians and kids....

The Vicars daughter has a very skewed moral compass.....