UK Politics

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.

**MrDwhitey**

I'm of the opinion that people who wanted the article invoked right now before any kind of real prep is put in are either very foolish, or want the country to get shafted as hard as possible.

Get it done, but don't be a complete fool doing it.

**Kilkrazy**

Largely I believe -- present company excepted -- that they are people who don't understand the problems, or else do understand the problems and are worried that as the form of a possible agreement takes shape, the mood of the population will shift away from Leave. It started to the morning after the referendum.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

MrDwhitey wrote:
I'm of the opinion that people who wanted the article invoked right now before any kind of real prep is put in are either very foolish, or want the country to get shafted as hard as possible.

Get it done, but don't be a complete fool doing it.

In my defence as a leave voter, I was and still am, in favour of giving May a few months to get her feet under the table, plan a strategy, appoint a team etc etc

Late September, early October, is pretty reasonable in my view, but now we're getting wishy washy excuses about waiting for the French elections, or the German elections, or the elections in Timbuktu and so on...

Then it was article 50 at the end of 2016, then it was mid 2017, now it's the end of 2017, and tomorrow it'll probably be the year 2100 before we're ready...

If not now, when?

Are our politicians so used to out sourcing decisions to Brussels and other technocrats that they've forgotten how to do their jobs?

Good God almighty, the creation of the NHS was a decision was still reverberates in the UK to this day, and that was done in a matter of weeks!!!

**MrDwhitey**

I repeat my post.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

Kilkrazy wrote:
Largely I believe -- present company excepted -- that they are people who don't understand the problems, or else do understand the problems and are worried that as the form of a possible agreement takes shape, the mood of the population will shift away from Leave. It started to the morning after the referendum.

No buyer's remorse here.

I remain convinced, that our pro-EU parliament is prepared to do and say say anything to keep this country in the EU.

The Ruling elites have always been contemptuous of the great unwashed in this country, and the fact that a lot of working class voters voted to leave, only confirms their stereotypes. Leave voters were tricked, they're ignorant, racist, xenophobic etc etc We had months of that...

They think we're going to see the 'error' of our ways and come round to their way thinking. They're stalling for time...

That wasn't me having a go at you, it's just the general mood of our supposed liberal newspapers that annoys me and it's only gotten worse since June 24th...

Automatically Appended Next Post:

MrDwhitey wrote:
I repeat my post.

And I'll repeat what what I've been saying

The British people voted in good faith on June 23rd...

It was a leave vote, and they expect their wishes to be adhered too.

Talk of non-binding referendums, parliamentary sovereignty, we might have BREXIT in 2020 when it suits the Tory party etc etc

is neither here nor there...

To not invoke article 50 ASAP, would be a shameful betrayal of British democracy...

People keep citing this bullgak about economic uncertainty, but who runs this country? The people or the markets?

The transition to BREXIT was never going to be smooth, but the quicker it's done, the better for everybody...

You can put off a trip to the dentist for so long, but it's better to grasp the nettle and get it done with...

**MrDwhitey**

You've pretty much made my point for me.

**tneva82**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Are our politicians so used to out sourcing decisions to Brussels and other technocrats that they've forgotten how to do their jobs?

Good God almighty, the creation of the NHS was a decision was still reverberates in the UK to this day, and that was done in a matter of weeks!!!

No. But they know they are hard pressed to get access to free trade market without allowing free people access. That ain't going to fly well in face of leave voters. 2 years will go in a rush. And Brits are the ones who need that contract cleanly so the 2 year time limit is bigger issue for them...

If they had their way they would sort out agreements BEFORE precisely to avoid that 2 year time limit. Failing that at least get as far as possible before triggering the timer.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

MrDwhitey wrote:
You've pretty much made my point for me.

Paradoxically, the longer we postpone BREXIT in the name of waiting for a 'strategy' the more economic uncertainty it will cause, because long-term investment will go out the window...

**Kilkrazy**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
MrDwhitey wrote:
I'm of the opinion that people who wanted the article invoked right now before any kind of real prep is put in are either very foolish, or want the country to get shafted as hard as possible.

Get it done, but don't be a complete fool doing it.

In my defence as a leave voter, I was and still am, in favour of giving May a few months to get her feet under the table, plan a strategy, appoint a team etc etc

Late September, early October, is pretty reasonable in my view, but now we're getting wishy washy excuses about waiting for the French elections, or the German elections, or the elections in Timbuktu and so on...

Then it was article 50 at the end of 2016, then it was mid 2017, now it's the end of 2017, and tomorrow it'll probably be the year 2100 before we're ready...

If not now, when?

Are our politicians so used to out sourcing decisions to Brussels and other technocrats that they've forgotten how to do their jobs?

Good God almighty, the creation of the NHS was a decision was still reverberates in the UK to this day, and that was done in a matter of weeks!!!

These are questions you really have insisted the various Brexit campaign leaders answer before the vote. The trouble is they clearly didn't have a clue.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

tneva82 wrote:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Are our politicians so used to out sourcing decisions to Brussels and other technocrats that they've forgotten how to do their jobs?

Good God almighty, the creation of the NHS was a decision was still reverberates in the UK to this day, and that was done in a matter of weeks!!!

No. But they know they are hard pressed to get access to free trade market without allowing free people access. That ain't going to fly well in face of leave voters. 2 years will go in a rush. And Brits are the ones who need that contract cleanly so the 2 year time limit is bigger issue for them...

If they had their way they would sort out agreements BEFORE precisely to avoid that 2 year time limit. Failing that at least get as far as possible before triggering the timer.

I could never understand why a free trade deal involves free movement of people...

I'm the last person on Earth who likes agreeing with Farage, but his point about no other trade deal on earth involves free movement, was spot on...

We trade with Japan, but I've never seen or heard of thousands of Japanese migrants moving to Manchester or High Wycombe...

**tneva82**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
tneva82 wrote:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Are our politicians so used to out sourcing decisions to Brussels and other technocrats that they've forgotten how to do their jobs?

Good God almighty, the creation of the NHS was a decision was still reverberates in the UK to this day, and that was done in a matter of weeks!!!

No. But they know they are hard pressed to get access to free trade market without allowing free people access. That ain't going to fly well in face of leave voters. 2 years will go in a rush. And Brits are the ones who need that contract cleanly so the 2 year time limit is bigger issue for them...

If they had their way they would sort out agreements BEFORE precisely to avoid that 2 year time limit. Failing that at least get as far as possible before triggering the timer.

I could never understand why a free trade deal involves free movement of people...

I'm the last person on Earth who likes agreeing with Farage, but his point about no other trade deal on earth involves free movement, was spot on...

We trade with Japan, but I've never seen or heard of thousands of Japanese migrants moving to Manchester or High Wycombe...

It's called "not being able to cherry pick what you want". Want to enjoy benefits of EU? Play it's rules. Don't want to play by it's rules? Don't expect same benefits either.

You can get free trade IF you negotiate it individually by country like you have done with Japan. But if you want to get inside EU market(multiple countries with one contract) then surprise surprise you are expected to play by the same rules as rest of the guys. Would hardly be fair otherwise.

If you can arrange individual trade agreements with countries of course then rules are different.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

Kilkrazy wrote:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
MrDwhitey wrote:
I'm of the opinion that people who wanted the article invoked right now before any kind of real prep is put in are either very foolish, or want the country to get shafted as hard as possible.

Get it done, but don't be a complete fool doing it.

In my defence as a leave voter, I was and still am, in favour of giving May a few months to get her feet under the table, plan a strategy, appoint a team etc etc

Late September, early October, is pretty reasonable in my view, but now we're getting wishy washy excuses about waiting for the French elections, or the German elections, or the elections in Timbuktu and so on...

Then it was article 50 at the end of 2016, then it was mid 2017, now it's the end of 2017, and tomorrow it'll probably be the year 2100 before we're ready...

If not now, when?

Are our politicians so used to out sourcing decisions to Brussels and other technocrats that they've forgotten how to do their jobs?

Good God almighty, the creation of the NHS was a decision was still reverberates in the UK to this day, and that was done in a matter of weeks!!!

These are questions you really have insisted the various Brexit campaign leaders answer before the vote. The trouble is they clearly didn't have a clue.

I don't think anybody from either side covered themselves in glory. There was better, informed debate here on dakka then most places I encountered...

Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
tneva82 wrote:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Are our politicians so used to out sourcing decisions to Brussels and other technocrats that they've forgotten how to do their jobs?

Good God almighty, the creation of the NHS was a decision was still reverberates in the UK to this day, and that was done in a matter of weeks!!!

No. But they know they are hard pressed to get access to free trade market without allowing free people access. That ain't going to fly well in face of leave voters. 2 years will go in a rush. And Brits are the ones who need that contract cleanly so the 2 year time limit is bigger issue for them...

If they had their way they would sort out agreements BEFORE precisely to avoid that 2 year time limit. Failing that at least get as far as possible before triggering the timer.

I could never understand why a free trade deal involves free movement of people...

I'm the last person on Earth who likes agreeing with Farage, but his point about no other trade deal on earth involves free movement, was spot on...

We trade with Japan, but I've never seen or heard of thousands of Japanese migrants moving to Manchester or High Wycombe...

It's called "not being able to cherry pick what you want". Want to enjoy benefits of EU? Play it's rules. Don't want to play by it's rules? Don't expect same benefits either.

You can get free trade IF you negotiate it individually by country like you have done with Japan. But if you want to get inside EU market(multiple countries with one contract) then surprise surprise you are expected to play by the same rules as rest of the guys. Would hardly be fair otherwise.

If you can arrange individual trade agreements with countries of course then rules are different.

You'll probably disagree, but I can quite easily imagine a situation where the UK is given 'special status' within the EU, which will probably a lot of countries, but suit France and Germany, the real powers behind the EU throne...

**OrlandotheTechnicoloured**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
MrDwhitey wrote:
I'm of the opinion that people who wanted the article invoked right now before any kind of real prep is put in are either very foolish, or want the country to get shafted as hard as possible.

Get it done, but don't be a complete fool doing it.

In my defence as a leave voter, I was and still am, in favour of giving May a few months to get her feet under the table, plan a strategy, appoint a team etc etc

Late September, early October, is pretty reasonable in my view, but now we're getting wishy washy excuses about waiting for the French elections, or the German elections, or the elections in Timbuktu and so on...

Then it was article 50 at the end of 2016, then it was mid 2017, now it's the end of 2017, and tomorrow it'll probably be the year 2100 before we're ready...

If not now, when?

Are our politicians so used to out sourcing decisions to Brussels and other technocrats that they've forgotten how to do their jobs?

Good God almighty, the creation of the NHS was a decision was still reverberates in the UK to this day, and that was done in a matter of weeks!!!

I voted in favour of remain,

and even I agree with Do_I_Not_Like_That on this, allowing the new government a bit of time to bed in is fine

delay after delay before even starting the clock is not (especially since the EU has said no negociation before article 50 is invoked and so any theoretical agreements we get before then will be behind the scenes and totally deniable if they turn out to look bad to any of the member states)

and it will lead many leave voters to wonder if they heavily pro-remain powers that be are planning to cheat and say put anyway

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

Exactly.

Has it occurred to people that Britain's idea of a good deal and the EU's idea of a good deal, are unlikely to match?

Like Orlando said, any unofficial back room deal pre-article 50, could easily be denied, and their details leaked out to embarrass the UK government, or put pressure on them from the British public, if they're seen to be damaging to Britain.

And any damage or pressure to Britain, could give the EU the upper hand in negotiations...

If we invoke article 50, get it official, get it all in the open, there is less chance of this happening...

**r_squared**

You don't think there's any merit in making sure that the UK is adequately prepared for this monumental shift?
Not being cynical, but an immediate jump for article 50 plays into the SNPs hands very nicely, a disorganised, chaotic exit will play to a Nationalist narrative about the misrule of Westminster.
If we are going to go ahead with this utter debacle, I'd rather the 48% weren't betrayed with a shambolic and harmful exit.

**Future War Cultist**

There's the possibility that the more we delay triggering article 50, the more advantage it'll give us in the negotiations, because by then the eurozone will have finally collapsed and died and the migrant crisis will have gotten worse, and perhaps some other countries will have made moves to leave too. In other words, the eu will be completely over a barrel and at our mercy. But I'm not that optimistic. I want article 50 triggered sooner than asap.

Also, Anjem Choudary has been found guilty of peddling support for Isis. Whilst I'm pleased at this, I fear that he's the type of person who'd do more damage in prison.

**Mr. Burning**

For anyone interested.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37098751

Radical cleric Anjem Choudary guilty of inviting IS support

....Radical UK cleric Anjem Choudary has been convicted of inviting others to support the so-called Islamic State group, it can now be reported.
Choudary, 49, drummed up support for the militant group in a series of talks posted on YouTube, the Old Bailey heard.
He was convicted alongside his confidant, Mohammed Mizanur Rahman.
The Met Police said many people tried for serious offences "attended lectures or speeches given by these men".
Counter-terrorism chiefs have spent almost 20 years trying to bring Choudary, a father of five, to trial, blaming him, and the proscribed organisations which he helped to run, for radicalising young men and women.
Both men were charged with one offence of inviting support for IS - which is contrary to section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000 - between 29 June 2014 and 6 March 2015. The verdict on the two defendants was delivered on 28 July, but for legal reasons can only now be reported.
How Anjem Choudary's mouth was finally shut
The trial heard how the men decided in the summer of 2014 that the group then known as Isis [Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham/the Levant] had formed a "Khilafah", or Islamic State, that demanded the obedience and support of Muslims.
'Turning point'
They then invited others to support IS through speeches and announced their own oath of allegiance to its leader.
The oath of allegiance was a "turning point" which meant they could be put on trial, police said.
Choudary was once the spokesman for al-Muhajiroun, an organisation that can be linked to dozens of terrorism suspects.
Its leader Omar Bakri Muhammad fled the UK after the London suicide bombings on 7 July 2005. Over the years since, Choudary has become one of the most influential radical Islamists in Europe and a string of his followers have either left the UK to fight in Syria or tried to do so......

Well, he had to mistake at some point.

He is being sentenced in September so lets see what he gets then.

**Ketara**

I'm in favour of waiting until after the French elections to invoke it. France is our main opposition within the EU to us getting what we want, and Hollande is likely to be booted and replaced with someone more amenable. So it makes sense to wait for his replacement before proceeding with matters.

**Whirlwind**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Talk of non-binding referendums, parliamentary sovereignty, we might have BREXIT in 2020 when it suits the Tory party etc etc

is neither here nor there...

To not invoke article 50 ASAP, would be a shameful betrayal of British democracy...

What are views though if the population as a whole change their minds? Are we bound by one vote and that's it? How long is it until you would consider an alternative view might become prevalent 1 year, 5, 10, 1000?
What happens if the view of the populace becomes more positive to the EU in a couple of years (say we are knee deep in a recession). Do you have another vote, carry on regardless and annoy your populace, ignore them completely or decide democracy isn't working and we get Empress May?

I still would not expect any leaving of the EU until after the next general election. It won't happen at the moment because the French/German elections would cause Chaos. Both Merkel and Hollande would then take a hard line view because if they take a soft approach they leave themselves open both to those EU pro parties saying they aren't looking out for the EU and by the anti-EU parties which will point at the UK and say that leaving the EU means a 'better deal'. So we are looking at the end of 2017 at the earliest, then 2 years from then is 2019 which is right before the next GE. Given the lack of MP competency we have leading the trade deals/exit negotiations and even then it's not likely everyone will get what they want (there will be compromises all round) which will mean the Tories will be open from attacks from all angles and loss of seats.

**Shadow Captain Edithae**

Future War Cultist wrote:
Also, Anjem Choudary has been found guilty of peddling support for Isis. Whilst I'm pleased at this, I fear that he's the type of person who'd do more damage in prison.

Which should be grounds for indefinite solitary confinement, surely. Restrict his contact with other prisoners. The only people he should be permitted to see are his prison guards, visitors (vetted of course) and the prison Imam.

**Future War Cultist**

Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Future War Cultist wrote:
Also, Anjem Choudary has been found guilty of peddling support for Isis. Whilst I'm pleased at this, I fear that he's the type of person who'd do more damage in prison.

Which should be grounds for indefinite solitary confinement, surely. Restrict his contact with other prisoners. The only people he should be permitted to see are his prison guards, visitors (vetted of course) and the prison Imam.

I completely agree but I'm sure the human rights brigade won't allow it.

**loki old fart**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Baragash wrote:
Is it me or is there a conspicuous absence of a report on the BBC site about the Constituency Labour Party support?

Oh, yes there is, they buried it at the bottom of the article about bus service reforms.

It's not just you, and if you search the media for updates about the Tory election scandal from 2015, the silence is also deafening...

The media in this country is way to close to the politicians...

As a rule of thumb, if I want critical analysis of Russia and Putin, Western media is the place to go.

If I want to find out about stuff the BBC and other British newspapers are not keen on i.e stuff they'd rather the British public didn't know,

then Russia today and Al Jazeera are pretty good.

If you want to be informed, watch and read multiple news sources - that's my advice.

That deserves an exalt, for being the most insightful post to-date.

**Stranger83**

Whirlwind wrote:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Talk of non-binding referendums, parliamentary sovereignty, we might have BREXIT in 2020 when it suits the Tory party etc etc

is neither here nor there...

To not invoke article 50 ASAP, would be a shameful betrayal of British democracy...

What are views though if the population as a whole change their minds? Are we bound by one vote and that's it? How long is it until you would consider an alternative view might become prevalent 1 year, 5, 10, 1000?
What happens if the view of the populace becomes more positive to the EU in a couple of years (say we are knee deep in a recession). Do you have another vote, carry on regardless and annoy your populace, ignore them completely or decide democracy isn't working and we get Empress May?

A Counter argument to that however is how long do you wait for the populace to change their mind? What if 2 years from now the EU is in a right mess but having already lined up trade agreements with China and the USA for when we leave is it fair to wait around for 2 more years because the government was sitting twiddling it's thumbs waiting for the population to change it's mind?

I'm on the side of DINLT I voted leave but I'm happy to wait and get our ducks in order first, early to mid 2017 seems good to me.

As far as waiting for the next general election - do you really want a UKIP government? I voted leave and I don't want that. I truly believe however that if we haven't triggered article 50 by the next election this'll happen. To win a seat you normally only need around 35-40% of the vote. Outside London out won by around 55%. Even counting for people who change their mind, and people who go back to voting on party lines (which is dwindling by the day) can you honestly say that UKIP won't be able to convince this many people that out political masters are trying to renege of the referendum?

If out won the referendum before article 50 and we have a GE where most parties are saying remain and only one is voting out I can see UKIP winning by a large margin.

**Darkjim**

Ketara wrote:
I'm in favour of waiting until after the French elections to invoke it. France is our main opposition within the EU to us getting what we want, and Hollande is likely to be booted and replaced with someone more amenable. So it makes sense to wait for his replacement before proceeding with matters.

Yes, the French National Front are now probably our closest political allies in Europe, if they can get in next year they'll want to give us a good deal so they can leave in turn.

**Mr. Burning**

Future War Cultist wrote:
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Future War Cultist wrote:
Also, Anjem Choudary has been found guilty of peddling support for Isis. Whilst I'm pleased at this, I fear that he's the type of person who'd do more damage in prison.

Which should be grounds for indefinite solitary confinement, surely. Restrict his contact with other prisoners. The only people he should be permitted to see are his prison guards, visitors (vetted of course) and the prison Imam.

I completely agree but I'm sure the human rights brigade won't allow it.

Prison can offer the chance for segregation for his own protection. This only means going onto a different wing which is populated with Sex offenders and those who may be attacked for being too weak or who have other issues.

There will be no solitary confinement.

Choudry can refuse or not bother to mention it, I think he will go on mains.

**Ketara**

Darkjim wrote:
Ketara wrote:
I'm in favour of waiting until after the French elections to invoke it. France is our main opposition within the EU to us getting what we want, and Hollande is likely to be booted and replaced with someone more amenable. So it makes sense to wait for his replacement before proceeding with matters.

Yes, the French National Front are now probably our closest political allies in Europe, if they can get in next year they'll want to give us a good deal so they can leave in turn.

Hardly. Both Sarkozy and Alain Juppé have said they'd be more amenable towards us.

Unless you were just trying to make some vaguely antagonistic point about separatists being political extremists or somesuch?

**A Town Called Malus**

Darkjim wrote:
Ketara wrote:
I'm in favour of waiting until after the French elections to invoke it. France is our main opposition within the EU to us getting what we want, and Hollande is likely to be booted and replaced with someone more amenable. So it makes sense to wait for his replacement before proceeding with matters.

Yes, the French National Front are now probably our closest political allies in Europe, if they can get in next year they'll want to give us a good deal so they can leave in turn.

Conversely, being seen to be giving us a good deal may not sit well with some of their supporters as it means that, until France leaves, they are getting a worse deal for France.

Also, if the French are the driving force behind giving a "good" deal for us, then why would the other countries who didn't want to give us a "good" deal then suddenly change their tune and give France a "good" deal when France tried to leave? It's not like this is a court of law where precedent can win your case, just because country X got a specific deal doesn't mean that Y will get that deal, too.

**r_squared**

Darkjim wrote:
Ketara wrote:
I'm in favour of waiting until after the French elections to invoke it. France is our main opposition within the EU to us getting what we want, and Hollande is likely to be booted and replaced with someone more amenable. So it makes sense to wait for his replacement before proceeding with matters.

Yes, the French National Front are now probably our closest political allies in Europe, if they can get in next year they'll want to give us a good deal so they can leave in turn.

The French NF as our allies, rampant Nationalism and the threat of a UKIP Govt? What the actual feth.

Without exaggeration, this is the absolutely worst fething thing I have seen in my lifetime, and I've served in Afghanistan.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

r_squared wrote:
You don't think there's any merit in making sure that the UK is adequately prepared for this monumental shift?
Not being cynical, but an immediate jump for article 50 plays into the SNPs hands very nicely, a disorganised, chaotic exit will play to a Nationalist narrative about the misrule of Westminster.
If we are going to go ahead with this utter debacle, I'd rather the 48% weren't betrayed with a shambolic and harmful exit.

I doubt if you'll believe me, but I'm not seeing BREXIT as an opportunity for the SNP, even though I'm an SNP voter, I'm speaking first and foremost as a democrat...

The SNP are already gaining from BREXIT, so that's not my concern....

As I said weeks ago, my concern is the reaction on the streets and in the areas that were heaviliy in favour of Leave. A lot of these people are disllusioned with our leaders as it is, and election turnout is low at the best of times. If they feel their vote counted for nothing, feel betrayed, who knows what will happen...

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Whirlwind wrote:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Talk of non-binding referendums, parliamentary sovereignty, we might have BREXIT in 2020 when it suits the Tory party etc etc

is neither here nor there...

To not invoke article 50 ASAP, would be a shameful betrayal of British democracy...

What are views though if the population as a whole change their minds? Are we bound by one vote and that's it? How long is it until you would consider an alternative view might become prevalent 1 year, 5, 10, 1000?
What happens if the view of the populace becomes more positive to the EU in a couple of years (say we are knee deep in a recession). Do you have another vote, carry on regardless and annoy your populace, ignore them completely or decide democracy isn't working and we get Empress May?

I still would not expect any leaving of the EU until after the next general election. It won't happen at the moment because the French/German elections would cause Chaos. Both Merkel and Hollande would then take a hard line view because if they take a soft approach they leave themselves open both to those EU pro parties saying they aren't looking out for the EU and by the anti-EU parties which will point at the UK and say that leaving the EU means a 'better deal'. So we are looking at the end of 2017 at the earliest, then 2 years from then is 2019 which is right before the next GE. Given the lack of MP competency we have leading the trade deals/exit negotiations and even then it's not likely everyone will get what they want (there will be compromises all round) which will mean the Tories will be open from attacks from all angles and loss of seats.

There was 40 years between the EEC referendum and June's referendum. If people want another referendum in say, 40-50 years time, assuming there still is an EU, that would be a reasonable timeframe...

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ketara wrote:
I'm in favour of waiting until after the French elections to invoke it. France is our main opposition within the EU to us getting what we want, and Hollande is likely to be booted and replaced with someone more amenable. So it makes sense to wait for his replacement before proceeding with matters.

I've always said that basing our strategy on what happens in another country is a bad idea, as it leaves us hostage to fortune. What if Hollande wins? What if all the presidential candidates run on a ticket that says they'll drive a hard bargain with Britain?

Then what?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

loki old fart wrote:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Baragash wrote:
Is it me or is there a conspicuous absence of a report on the BBC site about the Constituency Labour Party support?

Oh, yes there is, they buried it at the bottom of the article about bus service reforms.

It's not just you, and if you search the media for updates about the Tory election scandal from 2015, the silence is also deafening...

The media in this country is way to close to the politicians...

As a rule of thumb, if I want critical analysis of Russia and Putin, Western media is the place to go.

If I want to find out about stuff the BBC and other British newspapers are not keen on i.e stuff they'd rather the British public didn't know,

then Russia today and Al Jazeera are pretty good.

If you want to be informed, watch and read multiple news sources - that's my advice.

That deserves an exalt, for being the most insightful post to-date.

See all, hear all, believe nothing...

**r_squared**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
r_squared wrote:
You don't think there's any merit in making sure that the UK is adequately prepared for this monumental shift?
Not being cynical, but an immediate jump for article 50 plays into the SNPs hands very nicely, a disorganised, chaotic exit will play to a Nationalist narrative about the misrule of Westminster.
If we are going to go ahead with this utter debacle, I'd rather the 48% weren't betrayed with a shambolic and harmful exit.

I doubt if you'll believe me, but I'm not seeing BREXIT as an opportunity for the SNP, even though I'm an SNP voter, I'm speaking first and foremost as a democrat...

The SNP are already gaining from BREXIT, so that's not my concern....

As I said weeks ago, my concern is the reaction on the streets and in the areas that were heaviliy in favour of Leave. A lot of these people are disllusioned with our leaders as it is, and election turnout is low at the best of times. If they feel their vote counted for nothing, feel betrayed, who knows what will happen...

...

I also know for a fact that Boston was the highest area in favour of leave, as the population has a high proportion of pensioners, I'd love to see what that riot would look like. Besides they'll be too busy fretting about the loss of their triple lock.