Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Silent Puffin? wrote: This just turned up on my Facebook feed and is apparently from the Guardian comments section. Maybe Dave is a genuis after all.....
Spoiler:
If Boris Johnson looked downbeat yesterday, that is because he realises that he has lost.
Perhaps many Brexiters do not realise it yet, but they have actually lost, and it is all down to one man: David Cameron.
With one fell swoop yesterday at 9:15 am, Cameron effectively annulled the referendum result, and simultaneously destroyed the political careers of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and leading Brexiters who cost him so much anguish, not to mention his premiership.
How?
Throughout the campaign, Cameron had repeatedly said that a vote for leave would lead to triggering Article 50 straight away. Whether implicitly or explicitly, the image was clear: he would be giving that notice under Article 50 the morning after a vote to leave. Whether that was scaremongering or not is a bit moot now but, in the midst of the sentimental nautical references of his speech yesterday, he quietly abandoned that position and handed the responsibility over to his successor.
And as the day wore on, the enormity of that step started to sink in: the markets, Sterling, Scotland, the Irish border, the Gibraltar border, the frontier at Calais, the need to continue compliance with all EU regulations for a free market, re-issuing passports, Brits abroad, EU citizens in Britain, the mountain of legistlation to be torn up and rewritten ... the list grew and grew.
The referendum result is not binding. It is advisory. Parliament is not bound to commit itself in that same direction.
The Conservative party election that Cameron triggered will now have one question looming over it: will you, if elected as party leader, trigger the notice under Article 50?
Who will want to have the responsibility of all those ramifications and consequences on his/her head and shoulders?
Boris Johnson knew this yesterday, when he emerged subdued from his home and was even more subdued at the press conference. He has been out-maneouvered and check-mated.
If he runs for leadership of the party, and then fails to follow through on triggering Article 50, then he is finished. If he does not run and effectively abandons the field, then he is finished. If he runs, wins and pulls the UK out of the EU, then it will all be over - Scotland will break away, there will be upheaval in Ireland, a recession ... broken trade agreements. Then he is also finished. Boris Johnson knows all of this. When he acts like the dumb blond it is just that: an act.
The Brexit leaders now have a result that they cannot use. For them, leadership of the Tory party has become a poison chalice.
When Boris Johnson said there was no need to trigger Article 50 straight away, what he really meant to say was "never". When Michael Gove went on and on about "informal negotiations" ... why? why not the formal ones straight away? ... he also meant not triggering the formal departure. They both know what a formal demarche would mean: an irreversible step that neither of them is prepared to take.
All that remains is for someone to have the guts to stand up and say that Brexit is unachievable in reality without an enormous amount of pain and destruction, that cannot be borne. And David Cameron has put the onus of making that statement on the heads of the people who led the Brexit campaign.
I woke up confused this morning, as to whether Brexit was right after all. After reading this, my reaction was "Bugger!"
I guess deep down I have a real preference for Brexit...
Not sure how I feel about that.
It's funny, Dave Cameron with all his skill and talents couldn't achieve the square root of feck all in negating a better position for the UK in two years bit has managed to "check mate" all his rivals the morning after his failure was completed.
Yeah not buying it.
There isn't a allot of splits in the story party beyond the EU and that question has been put to bed. I think the power hungry will want the top job no matter what may or may not be attached.
How do you promote your Hobby? - Legoburner "I run some crappy wargaming website "
It's just sad they had to drag the rest of Europe Into what is essentially a British power struggle over a disenfranchised electorate. It's worse than sad its down right irresponsible.
You know, it occurs to me there's one final person who could legally pull the plug on Brexit, and may just do it if she feels it's not in the UKs best interests.
Royal Assent is still, apparently, a real thing.
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
Selym wrote: It is, but the theory is that actually employing it against anything other than a renegade government is monarchical suicide.
Though having the Queen block Brexit would be pretty hilarious as she's often held up as the pinnacle of British Sovereignty seeing as she is the sovereign
What would the next campaign be, take our country back from the Queen?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/06/25 23:59:47
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
Selym wrote: It is, but the theory is that actually employing it against anything other than a renegade government is monarchical suicide.
Weirdly, she has a whole suite of powers for that.
But no, I can see how solid reasoning that it's necessary for the security of the union could keep her on the throne and at the same time shut down Brexit. She used it's lesser cousin, the Queen's Consent, 39 times in Parliament, effectively shutting down certain legislation by preventing it from being debated. (and it cannot be denied that Brexit effects the Monarchy's interest, what with all the threats of secession and the Spanish demanding that Gibraltar be handed over.)
Don't underestimate her Majesty. When it comes to politics, she's got game. My money is she waits for it to get Bad, parliament to fail to act, or something else to come along to make it look like the right move, and intervenes.
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
Selym wrote: It is, but the theory is that actually employing it against anything other than a renegade government is monarchical suicide.
Though having the Queen block Brexit would be pretty hilarious as she's often held up as the pinnacle of British Sovereignty seeing as she is the sovereign
Yeah, that would be so much facepalm. more than the guy who voted 'exit' expecting it to lose.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-px27tzAtVwZpZ4ljopV2w "ashtrays and teacups do not count as cover"
"jack of all trades, master of none; certainly better than a master of one"
The Ordo Reductor - the guy's who make wonderful things like the Landraider Achillies, but can't use them in battle..
Selym wrote: It is, but the theory is that actually employing it against anything other than a renegade government is monarchical suicide.
Though having the Queen block Brexit would be pretty hilarious as she's often held up as the pinnacle of British Sovereignty seeing as she is the sovereign
What would the next campaign be, take our country back from the Queen?
Also, couldn't it potentially be blocked by the Lords?
I mean I know there are ways around that but still, would be nice for them to try just to get people pissed off at them so we can finally get rid of them.
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
I mean I know there are ways around that but still, would be nice for them to try just to get people pissed off at them so we can finally get rid of them.
True, but the fastest way to shut it down entirely would be to withhold royal consent. Which isn't always done publicly, and it actually takes a FOI application to find out about in some cases. Neither house can debate the issue without that. And since foreign affairs still get lumped under the broader heading of the royal prerogative, she could intervene thus, legally.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/06/26 00:15:56
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
The Queen could certainly throw the brexit under the bus if she wanted to, but I doubt anyone outside of MI5 would know if she had. It is also possible that she backs the brexit, but again we would never know for sure. Just as planned.
I wouldn't get too excited about the idea of TPTB nerfing the brexit because if they still want in then it is because they haven't finished pulling the EU down from the inside. The fact that the brexit has come this far, is probably some evidence that TPTB have sensed the time is right to get out as the EU is ripe for collapse. Nigel Farage and the rest are just a democratic smokescreen. Just as planned.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/06/26 00:29:27
The Queen does have power in law, and occasionally uses them. Mostly plays an advisory role to the PM, and is a "backup government" in case Parliament fails.
But that's all silly anyway as there is no way that the UK will get a trade deal that doesn't include free movement of EU citizens and the right to work in the UK.
Anyone coming into the EU from outside needs to present official identity papers (i.e a passport) at border crossings. Unless the UK joins Schengen (hah!) then there will have to be a hard border.
I think a better solution would be to have N.Ireland join the schengen zone instead, and therefore there'll be a hard border between N.Ireland and the rest of the UK.
And yes that will be a huge boost for the Irish Republican cause. I'm ok with that, I think one day Ireland should be reunited.
And thankfully you have absolutely no say in that.
Well no gak, I'm not Irish. Its just my opinion on what might be best for Ireland as a whole. Whats with the passive aggression? Are you Northern Irish? Are you opposed to Irish unification?
I don't think the republican cause needs a boost. I think the fragile but peaceful status quo in Northern Ireland needs to be protected and sheltered and time needs to carry on. As long as everyone in the population is being treated fairly and there is no great impediment along the Border, I see no reason to push for a United Ireland.
But brexit has stirred things up. I hope it all stays quiet.
I don't think it should be forced onto Northern Ireland at all, I'm just saying that if theres a democratic mandate to break from the UK and unite with Ireland, I will respect that decision, just like I would have respected Scotland's right to leave. It was a hypothetical scenario, if Northern Ireland one day changes its mind and it can be achieved peacefully.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/06/26 00:43:11
And if remain does not win - do you keep voting still or do you think only a specific section of the population should get what they want?
No, I'm sure the government and remainers can sweeten the deal enough to win the 2nd vote.
Then they won't need any more.
If they can't sweeten the pot enough, they deserve to fail, as they would be tstl.
I don't beleive that juncker would allow that since that would have been the best tactic for 'remaining' in the referendum; he reasoned that if they gave anything to the UK then everybody else in the EU would start making demands too, so i do not expect to see any movement on that at all - especially since that last bit he said after the vote.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-px27tzAtVwZpZ4ljopV2w "ashtrays and teacups do not count as cover"
"jack of all trades, master of none; certainly better than a master of one"
The Ordo Reductor - the guy's who make wonderful things like the Landraider Achillies, but can't use them in battle..
I saw the 'Teebs' feed rehashed a lot on Twitter and was looking for the original comment.
The main gist as far as I am concerned is that the comment recognises the advisory nature of the rfeferendum. Cameron by falling on his sword has not triggers Article 50.
EU leaders however are already howling that he does, and it is likely that his attendance on one day only of the two day leaders conference next Tuesday is to extract from him the trigger to enact Article 50 and that his all.
BRUSSELS, June 26 (Reuters) - Britain need not send a formal letter to the European Union to trigger a two-year countdown to its exit from the bloc, EU officials said, implying British Prime Minister David Cameron could start the process when he speaks at a summit on Tuesday.
"'Triggering' ... could either be a letter to the president of the European Council or an official statement at a meeting of the European Council duly noted in the official records of the meeting," a spokesman for the council of EU leaders said.
A second EU official, asked about mounting frustration among leaders with the British prime minister's delay in delivering the formal notification required to launch divorce proceedings, said: "It doesn't have to be written. He can just say it."
Cameron will brief the other 27 national leaders over dinner at a European Council summit in Brussels on Tuesday on the outcome of Thursday's referendum at which Britons voted to leave the EU, prompting him to announce he will resign.
On Friday, he said he would leave it to his successor as Conservative party leader and premier to trigger Article 50 of the EU treaty, which sets out a two-year process to quit the bloc. That appeared to be a reversal of a pledge to launch the process immediately after the vote. It has angered EU leaders who want a quick settlement to limit uncertainty.
Is the EU referendum legally binding? The EU referendum result is not legally binding so in theory Parliament could ignore the will of the people by deciding to stay in the EU.
This is because Parliament is sovereign and the EU vote was an “advisory referendum”, as opposed to a “binary” referendum which has a fixed outcome.
Legislation for the UK’s last referendum in 2011 would have forced the Government to change the law if the public had voted for a new voting system.
Corbyn is being an arse by insisting on Article 50 being triggered now, for fairly wooly reasons.
If he was as remain as he claims he is this would be the last thing on his mind right now.
Jeremy Corbyn has said Article 50 must be invoked immediately and that a Leave vote prevailed because of anger against marginalisation and austerity.
He said the result of the poll means the exit clause – Article 50, which would give a two year period for Britain to leave – must be observed as soon as possible in an interview with the BBC.
“The British people have made their decision. We must respect that result and Article 50 has to be invoked now so that we negotiate an exit from European Union.
“Obviously there has to be strategy but the whole point of the referendum was that the public would be asked their opinion. They’ve given their opinion. It is up for parliament to now act on that opinion.
There is yet hope we can replace one constitutional nightmare with a lesser one. I would be quite happy to ignore a plebiscite that had immediately negative, it is likely most Brexit voters didnt forsee the problems this vote would cause.
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
But that's all silly anyway as there is no way that the UK will get a trade deal that doesn't include free movement of EU citizens and the right to work in the UK.
Anyone coming into the EU from outside needs to present official identity papers (i.e a passport) at border crossings. Unless the UK joins Schengen (hah!) then there will have to be a hard border.
I think a better solution would be to have N.Ireland join the schengen zone instead, and therefore there'll be a hard border between N.Ireland and the rest of the UK.
And yes that will be a huge boost for the Irish Republican cause. I'm ok with that, I think one day Ireland should be reunited.
And thankfully you have absolutely no say in that.
Well no gak, I'm not Irish. Its just my opinion on what might be best for Ireland as a whole. Whats with the passive aggression? Are you Northern Irish? Are you opposed to Irish unification?
SolarCross wrote: The Queen could certainly throw the brexit under the bus if she wanted to, but I doubt anyone outside of MI5 would know if she had. It is also possible that she backs the brexit, but again we would never know for sure. Just as planned.
The 'Queen backs Brexit' stories might be just outright lies. Apparently Murdoch is anti EU because the EU has blocked expansion of his business empire. So there is motive to go further than usual.
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
The 'Queen backs Brexit' stories might be just outright lies. Apparently Murdoch is anti EU because the EU has blocked expansion of his business empire. So there is motive to go further than usual.
Yes it is possible those stories were made up, though it is fairly dangerous to take the Monarch's name in vain, accidents do happen, it is also equally possible those stories were on orders. The Telegraph ran a similar story, on some comments of hers during a dinner conversation. The Telegraph is owned by the Barclay Brothers, not Murdoch.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/06/26 00:53:21
The 'Queen backs Brexit' stories might be just outright lies. Apparently Murdoch is anti EU because the EU has blocked expansion of his business empire. So there is motive to go further than usual.
Yes it is possible those stories were made up, though it is fairly dangerous to take the Monarch's name in vain, accidents do happen, it is also equally possible those stories were on orders. The Telegraph ran a similar story, on some comments of hers during a dinner conversation. The Telegraph is owned by the Barclay Brothers, not Murdoch.
If I remember correctly, those comments was just asking her guests for reasons to stay in the EU. Now, I'm sure she already knew the pros and cons of both sides and so was more likely testing her guests rather than actually asking for them to persuade her but of course the press will run it their own way.
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
The 'Queen backs Brexit' stories might be just outright lies. Apparently Murdoch is anti EU because the EU has blocked expansion of his business empire. So there is motive to go further than usual.
Yes it is possible those stories were made up, though it is fairly dangerous to take the Monarch's name in vain, accidents do happen, it is also equally possible those stories were on orders. The Telegraph ran a similar story, on some comments of hers during a dinner conversation. The Telegraph is owned by the Barclay Brothers, not Murdoch.
If I remember correctly, those comments was just asking her guests for reasons to stay in the EU. Now, I'm sure she already knew the pros and cons of both sides and so was more likely testing her guests rather than actually asking for them to persuade her but of course the press will run it their own way.
Telegraph also covered the story, but the Sun made a meal of it.
I agree with Malus that the story likely has a kernel of truth in it which is taken out of proportion.
Even post referendum there arfe a lot of lies floating around. Some very transparent.
President Barack Obama released a brief statement on Friday, saying the US respected the decision, and that the relationship between the two countries was "enduring".
"The people of the United Kingdom have spoken, and we respect their decision. The special relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom is enduring," he said.
He added: "The United Kingdom and the European Union will remain indispensable partners of the United States even as they begin negotiating their ongoing relationship to ensure continued stability, security, and prosperity for Europe, Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the world."
However, the White House on Friday night said that the president stood by his warning that Britain would move to the back of the queue when it comes to trade deals.
This is not too major an issue because the WTO limits tarrifs, but it will not be insignificant to pricing.
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
I mean I know there are ways around that but still, would be nice for them to try just to get people pissed off at them so we can finally get rid of them.
As if getting rid of the EU, PM, and Scotland wasn't reform enough for one week.
Incidentally, the way the lords are now is probably the optimal configuration from the government's perspective. If the lords were ever reformed then they would probably be replaced with some kind of elected senate, which would have far more legitimacy, thus undermining the government's power. That's probably why no government ever puts much effort in trying to reform the House of Lords.
But that's all silly anyway as there is no way that the UK will get a trade deal that doesn't include free movement of EU citizens and the right to work in the UK.
Anyone coming into the EU from outside needs to present official identity papers (i.e a passport) at border crossings. Unless the UK joins Schengen (hah!) then there will have to be a hard border.
I think a better solution would be to have N.Ireland join the schengen zone instead, and therefore there'll be a hard border between N.Ireland and the rest of the UK.
And yes that will be a huge boost for the Irish Republican cause. I'm ok with that, I think one day Ireland should be reunited.
And thankfully you have absolutely no say in that.
Well no gak, I'm not Irish. Its just my opinion on what might be best for Ireland as a whole. Whats with the passive aggression? Are you Northern Irish? Are you opposed to Irish unification?
Could be from ROI.
Gak's fethed.
I'm from NI. Lets just say that round some parts the words "United Ireland" if mentioned too often in the wrong company will get you killed, no word of exaggeration. I'm not trying to paint a bleak picture of the country but there are some pretty deep divisions that won't be solved by an expedient border shuffle that many people north and south wont want. That said many have fought and died for exactly that. Right now we're all just hoping to survive marching season and threats of a Scottish vote out cause then who knows what will happen. It won't be all political and contained within Stormont unfortunately. When people here get worried enough the place goes lala.
If I remember correctly, those comments was just asking her guests for reasons to stay in the EU. Now, I'm sure she already knew the pros and cons of both sides and so was more likely testing her guests rather than actually asking for them to persuade her but of course the press will run it their own way.
Indeed. Though the EU does present a long term threat to Her Majesty's strategic interests, they do want a superstate that will absorb all the armed forces of europe including her own... They want her job. You or I are just ordinary pretentious plebs when we look at the EU we are either seeing cheap holidays without all the bother of visas or we are seeing lots of polish and turkish people swarming "our" country and making us feel like foreigners in our own country. TPTB aren't interested in such petty concerns, they are in the game of security and strategics, they are in the game of power. The only way Her Majesties government would want the EU to succeed and for the UK to remain in it would be if Her Majesty was plotting to become Empress of Europe and the EU the nub of a new British Empire. That seems exceedingly ambitious, so more likely they just want to scupper the project so it is no more a rival to them, than Napoleon's Empire, The German Empire, the Fourth Reich or the Soviet Union became in the end.
SirDonlad wrote: That statement by the EU on scottish membership was a strange one for sure, but i suppose it stops any chance of them being accused of trying to influence scotland to leave the UK.
Certainly puts a strange context to an independence referendum - leave without knowing how you would be seen or treated by the (presumably stronger?) 'other' option.
It's a calculated statement to prevent other EU nations with separatist movements to be destabilized.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/06/26 02:02:54
theCrowe wrote: I'm from NI. Lets just say that round some parts the words "United Ireland" if mentioned too often in the wrong company will get you killed, no word of exaggeration. I'm not trying to paint a bleak picture of the country but there are some pretty deep divisions that won't be solved by an expedient border shuffle that many people north and south wont want. That said many have fought and died for exactly that. Right now we're all just hoping to survive marching season and threats of a Scottish vote out cause then who knows what will happen. It won't be all political and contained within Stormont unfortunately. When people here get worried enough the place goes lala.
Like I said, I favour Irish unification when theres a democratic mandate (i.e. a referendum)and if it can be done peacefully. If that means in 10 years time, or a century, or never, so be it. Basically, if enough of the Unionists change their minds. Its the responsibility of the Republicans to do that and persuade people to come around to the idea of a unified Ireland.
