During the Conservative leadership campaign Hunt/Gove/Stewart/Javid/Raab all claimed to have the solution to Brexit,where are they now with their so called solutions? Surely they should've been banging on Boris's door with the magical cure that no one else can work out. As for Corbyn he's been demanding a general election for the past 2 years,now when he gets offered one,he declines it!!! The whole situation from Cameron's referendum,to May's three rejected deals and now the Boris debacle has been a complete farce,with no end game in sight in the foreseeable future.Perhaps it needs a new party to be formed from all the M.P's that have lost their positions and others who are fed up with all the shenanigans of those in charge up till now.
Chancellor announces end of austerity, largest spending increase in 15 years.
Someone with the first grasp of fiscal policy would wait until we have left the EU, and see how things look after a bedding-in period.
Assuming they were acting for the good of the country, rather than trying to buy a General Election, that is....
ha ha ha like implementing a referendum weather to leave the EU or not in their manifesto , that kinda thing , yeah that went well it never crossed my mind about leaving the EU until Cameron brought it all up . i didn,t vote tory in that election either
I was watching the lords live last night on sky t.v. and to be honest most of them looked like they only had a couple yrs left in them before crocking it there only motivation is money there investments if you really think any of them give a dam about the less well off then think again
During the Conservative leadership campaign Hunt/Gove/Stewart/Javid/Raab all claimed to have the solution to Brexit,where are they now with their so called solutions? Surely they should've been banging on Boris's door with the magical cure that no one else can work out. As for Corbyn he's been demanding a general election for the past 2 years,now when he gets offered one,he declines it!!! The whole situation from Cameron's referendum,to May's three rejected deals and now the Boris debacle has been a complete farce,with no end game in sight in the foreseeable future.Perhaps it needs a new party to be formed from all the M.P's that have lost their positions and others who are fed up with all the shenanigans of those in charge up till now.
There are no solutions to Brexit that will satisfy the majority.
Brexit is a series of choices that nobody wants to make.
A couple of quick examples are as follows,
Many would support Single Market membership, but you couldn't unless you allowed freedom of movement to continue. So lots of people would be in favour of single market membership to maximise trade, but wont wear freedom of movement continuing. It is the same story with the customs union, you couldn't be members of the customs union, and pursue an independent trade policy, again its one or the other. Some people don't care about a hard border in Ireland, others do. Some people say that an Irish Sea border splits up the UK, and the DUP wont wear it. The alternative is the backstop, but a majority wont accept that. So there is no solution to the Irish border problem, that a majority will vote for. In fact the majority will not accept any of the real solutions.
A no deal Brexit would mean customs checks on 10,000 trucks that go through Dover every day. Customs officers are trained to deal with particular products. Some of the trucks will contain more than 400 consignments of different products, which may require checking by a number of different officers, causing obvious delays. Some just in time car factories get deliveries on 300 trucks per day. It is a ronseal, you cant have delays and just in time manufacturing. No amount of preparation will solve this.
The EU have not received any proposals since Boris became PM. He just lies about what is going on.
I think that the Labour Party are acting sensibly about the election. In order to ensure we don't crash out with no deal, they shouldn't vote for one until November, after the extension has been properly secured.
An election could well result in no overall majority for any party, and move us no closer to a solution.
Its ironic that the 21 MPs have lost their jobs for voting against the Government, yet Boris and half the cabinet were recently guilty of doing this twice or three times.
During the Conservative leadership campaign Hunt/Gove/Stewart/Javid/Raab all claimed to have the solution to Brexit,where are they now with their so called solutions? Surely they should've been banging on Boris's door with the magical cure that no one else can work out. As for Corbyn he's been demanding a general election for the past 2 years,now when he gets offered one,he declines it!!! The whole situation from Cameron's referendum,to May's three rejected deals and now the Boris debacle has been a complete farce,with no end game in sight in the foreseeable future.Perhaps it needs a new party to be formed from all the M.P's that have lost their positions and others who are fed up with all the shenanigans of those in charge up till now.
There has been a new Party formed to deal with the issues..... it's called 'The Brexit Party' and hopefully it will help achieve what the majority of the people voted for in the 2016 Referendum....... Conservative's beware if you don't deliver Brexit
So true about Corbyn too. If he had confidence in his Policies and remaining in Europe, he would have a General Election.... even if he ended up having to have a coalition with the Lib Dems. and the SNP....... Now that would be FUN !
During the Conservative leadership campaign Hunt/Gove/Stewart/Javid/Raab all claimed to have the solution to Brexit,where are they now with their so called solutions? Surely they should've been banging on Boris's door with the magical cure that no one else can work out. As for Corbyn he's been demanding a general election for the past 2 years,now when he gets offered one,he declines it!!! The whole situation from Cameron's referendum,to May's three rejected deals and now the Boris debacle has been a complete farce,with no end game in sight in the foreseeable future.Perhaps it needs a new party to be formed from all the M.P's that have lost their positions and others who are fed up with all the shenanigans of those in charge up till now.
Labour's secret 'Stop Boris' deal with the Scots: 'Hypocrite' Corbyn holds talks with SNP to push General Election back to NOVEMBER to guarantee No Deal Brexit is dead (and because they believe they'd lose if it was any earlier)
Labour will block Boris Johnson's plans for an early General Election until November after entering into a pact with the SNP to stop a No Deal exit, it was revealed last night. Jeremy Corbyn held a secret meeting yesterday with Ian Blackford, the Scottish nationalists' Westminster leader, to agree an election should only be held after Britain has secured another Brexit delay from the EU. Mr Corbyn believes he can derail the Prime Minister's plans to hold a vote on October 15, forcing him to seek another delay to Brexit.
During the Conservative leadership campaign Hunt/Gove/Stewart/Javid/Raab all claimed to have the solution to Brexit,where are they now with their so called solutions? Surely they should've been banging on Boris's door with the magical cure that no one else can work out. As for Corbyn he's been demanding a general election for the past 2 years,now when he gets offered one,he declines it!!! The whole situation from Cameron's referendum,to May's three rejected deals and now the Boris debacle has been a complete farce,with no end game in sight in the foreseeable future.Perhaps it needs a new party to be formed from all the M.P's that have lost their positions and others who are fed up with all the shenanigans of those in charge up till now.
There has been a new Party formed to deal with the issues..... it's called 'The Brexit Party' and hopefully it will help achieve what the majority of the people voted for in the 2016 Referendum....... Conservative's beware if you don't deliver Brexit
So true about Corbyn too. If he had confidence in his Policies and remaining in Europe, he would have a General Election.... even if he ended up having to have a coalition with the Lib Dems. and the SNP....... Now that would be FUN !
The Brexit Party are only able to talk about one issue.
The Brexit Party are clearly only in favour of a no deal Brexit, which was not voted on in the referendum, and continually voted against in Parliament.
According to the legislation currently going through, the Tories will be unable to get us out by 31st October.
Corbyn would be silly to go for an election before November.
If the opposition could form a coalition they could remove the Tories with a no confidence vote, and take control without an election.
During the Conservative leadership campaign Hunt/Gove/Stewart/Javid/Raab all claimed to have the solution to Brexit,where are they now with their so called solutions? Surely they should've been banging on Boris's door with the magical cure that no one else can work out. As for Corbyn he's been demanding a general election for the past 2 years,now when he gets offered one,he declines it!!! The whole situation from Cameron's referendum,to May's three rejected deals and now the Boris debacle has been a complete farce,with no end game in sight in the foreseeable future.Perhaps it needs a new party to be formed from all the M.P's that have lost their positions and others who are fed up with all the shenanigans of those in charge up till now.
There has been a new Party formed to deal with the issues..... it's called 'The Brexit Party' and hopefully it will help achieve what the majority of the people voted for in the 2016 Referendum....... Conservative's beware if you don't deliver Brexit
So true about Corbyn too. If he had confidence in his Policies and remaining in Europe, he would have a General Election.... even if he ended up having to have a coalition with the Lib Dems. and the SNP....... Now that would be FUN !
During the Conservative leadership campaign Hunt/Gove/Stewart/Javid/Raab all claimed to have the solution to Brexit,where are they now with their so called solutions? Surely they should've been banging on Boris's door with the magical cure that no one else can work out. As for Corbyn he's been demanding a general election for the past 2 years,now when he gets offered one,he declines it!!! The whole situation from Cameron's referendum,to May's three rejected deals and now the Boris debacle has been a complete farce,with no end game in sight in the foreseeable future.Perhaps it needs a new party to be formed from all the M.P's that have lost their positions and others who are fed up with all the shenanigans of those in charge up till now.
There has been a new Party formed to deal with the issues..... it's called 'The Brexit Party' and hopefully it will help achieve what the majority of the people voted for in the 2016 Referendum....... Conservative's beware if you don't deliver Brexit
So true about Corbyn too. If he had confidence in his Policies and remaining in Europe, he would have a General Election.... even if he ended up having to have a coalition with the Lib Dems. and the SNP....... Now that would be FUN !
It seems strange that those that decry a second referendum, despite the fact that it would completely solve the Brexit problem, once and for all. Enabling our politics to move on and deal with the really important issues, are prepared to accept a general election, which is being described by politicians as putting it back to the people.
We are supposed to have general elections at 5 year intervals. Yet the one that is likely to take place in November, will be third in 4 years. Nobody is pointing to this as being undemocratic.
The problem is that a general election is unlikely to provide a solution.
Current forecasts are that 4 parties will receive significant support, and none of them will get an overall majority.
It seems to me that both a general election, and a second referendum would both be described by many people as a means of putting it back to the people. Faced with a choice of either, it seems that many people that regard a second referendum as undemocratic, and completely ignore the fact that it would provide a definitive solution, are prepared to accept yet another general election, and regard it as democratic, despite the fact that it will be unlikely to provide any solution, and is more likely to drag us closer to the disaster that is no deal.
If this occurred I am certain that many people will be wishing that we had gone for a second referendum.
Boris failing to achieve his do or die, leaving with or without a deal, on 31st October, surely assists the Brexit Party in improving their vote, and increases the likelihood of no overall majority.
Assuming that we end up in a cycle of more extensions, and more deadlines, you have to think that at some point we will end up with the disaster that is no deal.
For me this would be vastly more undemocratic than another referendum.
Is the latest cunning plan, an extension until the end of January, and the fourth general election in 5 years, taking place in mid January?
Companys that choose remedies that fail to solve their problems, rather than those that do, usually end up bankrupt.
During the Conservative leadership campaign Hunt/Gove/Stewart/Javid/Raab all claimed to have the solution to Brexit,where are they now with their so called solutions? Surely they should've been banging on Boris's door with the magical cure that no one else can work out. As for Corbyn he's been demanding a general election for the past 2 years,now when he gets offered one,he declines it!!! The whole situation from Cameron's referendum,to May's three rejected deals and now the Boris debacle has been a complete farce,with no end game in sight in the foreseeable future.Perhaps it needs a new party to be formed from all the M.P's that have lost their positions and others who are fed up with all the shenanigans of those in charge up till now.
If we had a vote in Parliament this afternoon, to find the most popular deal.
So it would include a Norway plus, Canada plus, Theresa Mays deal, and any other deal you care to mention.
Each MP would vote for or against each deal.
Majorities don't matter.
You would merely choose the deal with the most votes.
You then turn the clock back to 2016, and include on the ballot in the referendum, the most popular deal, no deal, and remain.
The result could have been immediately implemented, no ifs, buts, arguments or negotiations.
Nothing else to decide.
Surely most people could go along with that.
There would be a choice to suit everyone.
An Irish border plan could have been outlined before the vote.
The Brexit Party wouldn't exist.
We could have avoided completely wasting the last 3 years.
The referendum question was clearly inadequate, and a good reason for having another one.
During the Conservative leadership campaign Hunt/Gove/Stewart/Javid/Raab all claimed to have the solution to Brexit,where are they now with their so called solutions? Surely they should've been banging on Boris's door with the magical cure that no one else can work out. As for Corbyn he's been demanding a general election for the past 2 years,now when he gets offered one,he declines it!!! The whole situation from Cameron's referendum,to May's three rejected deals and now the Boris debacle has been a complete farce,with no end game in sight in the foreseeable future.Perhaps it needs a new party to be formed from all the M.P's that have lost their positions and others who are fed up with all the shenanigans of those in charge up till now.
There has been a new Party formed to deal with the issues..... it's called 'The Brexit Party' and hopefully it will help achieve what the majority of the people voted for in the 2016 Referendum....... Conservative's beware if you don't deliver Brexit
So true about Corbyn too. If he had confidence in his Policies and remaining in Europe, he would have a General Election.... even if he ended up having to have a coalition with the Lib Dems. and the SNP....... Now that would be FUN !
So basically there is no solution which everyone will agree on and we'll just carry on how we have been for the past 3 years,votes,defeats,extensions,votes,defeats,extensions... Gawd knows what'll happen when Scotland gains independence and rejoins the EU and they have to sort out that border problem as well.
So basically there is no solution which everyone will agree on and we'll just carry on how we have been for the past 3 years,votes,defeats,extensions,votes,defeats,extensions... Gawd knows what'll happen when Scotland gains independence and rejoins the EU and they have to sort out that border problem as well.
Regrettably, there is no positive move that more than 50% will agree on. We are able to vote against the EU or No Deal, but neither (on their own) mean much.
Scotland may well become independent. However, it is unlikely that they would be allowed to join the EU. This has nothing to do with Britain, but to do with vested interests within the EU.
Many countries have regions that were formerly countries in their own right. Catalonia is the most obvious example, but various regions in Germany, Italy etc were also countries. Spain is unlikely to readily agree to Scotland joining, due to the undoubted boost it would give to Catalonia.
So basically there is no solution which everyone will agree on and we'll just carry on how we have been for the past 3 years,votes,defeats,extensions,votes,defeats,extensions... Gawd knows what'll happen when Scotland gains independence and rejoins the EU and they have to sort out that border problem as well.
Regrettably, there is no positive move that more than 50% will agree on. We are able to vote against the EU or No Deal, but neither (on their own) mean much.
Scotland may well become independent. However, it is unlikely that they would be allowed to join the EU. This has nothing to do with Britain, but to do with vested interests within the EU.
Many countries have regions that were formerly countries in their own right. Catalonia is the most obvious example, but various regions in Germany, Italy etc were also countries. Spain is unlikely to readily agree to Scotland joining, due to the undoubted boost it would give to Catalonia.
A united Ireland could also be on the cards.
Brexit leading to a break up of the UK is a real possibility.
The politicians in favour of Scottish independence will not admit to voters that there are any difficulties in Scotland joining the EU.
The Scottish border is much more straightforward than the Irish one.
So basically there is no solution which everyone will agree on and we'll just carry on how we have been for the past 3 years,votes,defeats,extensions,votes,defeats,extensions... Gawd knows what'll happen when Scotland gains independence and rejoins the EU and they have to sort out that border problem as well.
Regrettably, there is no positive move that more than 50% will agree on. We are able to vote against the EU or No Deal, but neither (on their own) mean much.
Scotland may well become independent. However, it is unlikely that they would be allowed to join the EU. This has nothing to do with Britain, but to do with vested interests within the EU.
Many countries have regions that were formerly countries in their own right. Catalonia is the most obvious example, but various regions in Germany, Italy etc were also countries. Spain is unlikely to readily agree to Scotland joining, due to the undoubted boost it would give to Catalonia.
A united Ireland could also be on the cards.
Brexit leading to a break up of the UK is a real possibility.
The politicians in favour of Scottish independence will not admit to voters that there are any difficulties in Scotland joining the EU.
The Scottish border is much more straightforward than the Irish one.
Strangely a referendum would sort it all out.ockquote>
....but would it?
All the people (the Majority) who voted to leave in 2016 would be 'Up in Arms' led by Boris and Mr Farage, if the result was different, which it could be due to a different demograph of voters. If the original Referendum result wasn't adhered to, if it was different, why should a second one be adhered to?
We should have left the EU by now, and certainly should on October 31st, with or without a deal. As the Bank of England has said, No Deal isn't going to be as bad as first thought.
Hope you had the foresight to buy lots of Dollars and Euros (as I'm sure the Money Traders will have done), that when the Exchange rate reaches parity with the Pound you can cash in and make lots more money than you would with current bank interest rates...... I didn't
So basically there is no solution which everyone will agree on and we'll just carry on how we have been for the past 3 years,votes,defeats,extensions,votes,defeats,extensions... Gawd knows what'll happen when Scotland gains independence and rejoins the EU and they have to sort out that border problem as well.
Regrettably, there is no positive move that more than 50% will agree on. We are able to vote against the EU or No Deal, but neither (on their own) mean much.
Scotland may well become independent. However, it is unlikely that they would be allowed to join the EU. This has nothing to do with Britain, but to do with vested interests within the EU.
Many countries have regions that were formerly countries in their own right. Catalonia is the most obvious example, but various regions in Germany, Italy etc were also countries. Spain is unlikely to readily agree to Scotland joining, due to the undoubted boost it would give to Catalonia.
A united Ireland could also be on the cards.
Brexit leading to a break up of the UK is a real possibility.
The politicians in favour of Scottish independence will not admit to voters that there are any difficulties in Scotland joining the EU.
The Scottish border is much more straightforward than the Irish one.
Strangely a referendum would sort it all out.ockquote>
....but would it?
All the people (the Majority) who voted to leave in 2016 would be 'Up in Arms' led by Boris and Mr Farage, if the result was different, which it could be due to a different demograph of voters. If the original Referendum result wasn't adhered to, if it was different, why should a second one be adhered to?
So I presume you think that everyone is happy right now, as we suffer extension after extension.
The original referendum was set up very poorly. The 48% that voted to remain and their aims were clear, they voted for the status quo. However the 52% that voted to leave were clearly voting for a number of completely different outcomes. To this end there was never a leave majority for any particular outcome. Some leave voters prefer a Norway type deal, and hate no deal. Others would prefer a Canada type deal and maintain some distance between us and the EU, but they hate Norway, and no deal. Others sing the praises of no deal. So the only conclusion you can draw is that a small percentage that voted for the leave option voted for each particular outcome, and are not necessarily happy to leave with a different outcome. Whereas the 48% that voted to remain were all voting for the same thing. If everyone was over the moon about where we are today, you would have a point. The will of the people can only end up will a small percentage of the electorate who end up satisfied, if we ever reach a solution. Isnt everyone up in arms now? Wouldn't we be better off with some people up in arms objecting to a problem that has been solved? A second referendum as I set out earlier could have the result implemented immediately, with no need for any further discussion.
We should have left the EU by now, and certainly should on October 31st, with or without a deal. As the Bank of England has said, No Deal isn't going to be as bad as first thought.
We will not be leaving on 31st October, unless Boris gets a deal. This would appear unlikely as he has made no new proposals. The Bank of England said we are only going to be £700000 billion worse of instead of £700002 billion, and that we will only lose 300,000 jobs not 302,000.
Hope you had the foresight to buy lots of Dollars and Euros (as I'm sure the Money Traders will have done), that when the Exchange rate reaches parity with the Pound you can cash in and make lots more money than you would with current bank interest rates...... I didn't
All the people (the Majority) who voted to leave in 2016 would be 'Up in Arms' led by Boris and Mr Farage, if the result was different, which it could be due to a different demograph of voters. If the original Referendum result wasn't adhered to, if it was different, why should a second one be adhered to?
So I presume you think that everyone is happy right now, as we suffer extension after extension.
The original referendum was set up very poorly. The 48% that voted to remain and their aims were clear, they voted for the status quo. However the 52% that voted to leave were clearly voting for a number of completely different outcomes. To this end there was never a leave majority for any particular outcome. Some leave voters prefer a Norway type deal, and hate no deal. Others would prefer a Canada type deal and maintain some distance between us and the EU, but they hate Norway, and no deal. Others sing the praises of no deal. So the only conclusion you can draw is that a small percentage that voted for the leave option voted for each particular outcome, and are not necessarily happy to leave with a different outcome. Whereas the 48% that voted to remain were all voting for the same thing. If everyone was over the moon about where we are today, you would have a point. The will of the people can only end up will a small percentage of the electorate who end up satisfied, if we ever reach a solution. Isnt everyone up in arms now? Wouldn't we be better off with some people up in arms objecting to a problem that has been solved? A second referendum as I set out earlier could have the result implemented immediately, with no need for any further discussion.
We should have left the EU by now, and certainly should on October 31st, with or without a deal. As the Bank of England has said, No Deal isn't going to be as bad as first thought.
We will not be leaving on 31st October, unless Boris gets a deal. This would appear unlikely as he has made no new proposals. The Bank of England said we are only going to be £700000 billion worse of instead of £700002 billion, and that we will only lose 300,000 jobs not 302,000.
Hope you had the foresight to buy lots of Dollars and Euros (as I'm sure the Money Traders will have done), that when the Exchange rate reaches parity with the Pound you can cash in and make lots more money than you would with current bank interest rates...... I didn't
The country voted to leave and Parliament says that decision must be upheld so why not list all the major Brexit options such as No Deal/Norway/Canada/Theresa May's and any other popular deals out there and run a series of MP's votes like how the Conservative leadership race was run. All MP's must vote,no abstaining and their voting being made public,with the bottom option in each round being eliminated,leaving just two options in the final vote,with the winning option being declared as the one that the country goes ahead with.Nothing undemocratic about that solution.
So basically there is no solution which everyone will agree on and we'll just carry on how we have been for the past 3 years,votes,defeats,extensions,votes,defeats,extensions... Gawd knows what'll happen when Scotland gains independence and rejoins the EU and they have to sort out that border problem as well.
Regrettably, there is no positive move that more than 50% will agree on. We are able to vote against the EU or No Deal, but neither (on their own) mean much.
Scotland may well become independent. However, it is unlikely that they would be allowed to join the EU. This has nothing to do with Britain, but to do with vested interests within the EU.
Many countries have regions that were formerly countries in their own right. Catalonia is the most obvious example, but various regions in Germany, Italy etc were also countries. Spain is unlikely to readily agree to Scotland joining, due to the undoubted boost it would give to Catalonia.
A united Ireland could also be on the cards.
Brexit leading to a break up of the UK is a real possibility.
The politicians in favour of Scottish independence will not admit to voters that there are any difficulties in Scotland joining the EU.
The Scottish border is much more straightforward than the Irish one.
Strangely a referendum would sort it all out.ockquote>
....but would it?
All the people (the Majority) who voted to leave in 2016 would be 'Up in Arms' led by Boris and Mr Farage, if the result was different, which it could be due to a different demograph of voters. If the original Referendum result wasn't adhered to, if it was different, why should a second one be adhered to?
We should have left the EU by now, and certainly should on October 31st, with or without a deal. As the Bank of England has said, No Deal isn't going to be as bad as first thought.
Hope you had the foresight to buy lots of Dollars and Euros (as I'm sure the Money Traders will have done), that when the Exchange rate reaches parity with the Pound you can cash in and make lots more money than you would with current bank interest rates...... I didn't
Law to stop no-deal Brexit passed by Parliament
Boris Johnson’s Brexit plans suffered a further blow as a bill to block a no-deal outcome on Halloween completed its passage through parliament. The legislation, tabled by senior Labour backbencher Hilary Benn after MPs seized control of the Commons agenda, is now due to become law by going to the Queen for royal assent on Monday. It paves the way for a snap general election, now almost certain to take place in October or November.
The embattled prime minister says the legislation will “scupper” his chances of negotiating a Brexit deal with the EU, by giving Brussels confidence that the UK will not crash out on 31 October. Under the terms of the bill, Mr Johnson must request an extension to Brexit negotiations to the end of January next year unless he can secure a deal or parliamentary approval for no-deal by 19 October.
Comments
it never crossed my mind about leaving the EU until Cameron brought it all up .
i didn,t vote tory in that election either
Brexit is a series of choices that nobody wants to make.
A couple of quick examples are as follows,
Many would support Single Market membership, but you couldn't unless you allowed freedom of movement to continue.
So lots of people would be in favour of single market membership to maximise trade, but wont wear freedom of movement continuing.
It is the same story with the customs union, you couldn't be members of the customs union, and pursue an independent trade policy, again its one or the other.
Some people don't care about a hard border in Ireland, others do. Some people say that an Irish Sea border splits up the UK, and the DUP wont wear it. The alternative is the backstop, but a majority wont accept that.
So there is no solution to the Irish border problem, that a majority will vote for. In fact the majority will not accept any of the real solutions.
A no deal Brexit would mean customs checks on 10,000 trucks that go through Dover every day. Customs officers are trained to deal with particular products. Some of the trucks will contain more than 400 consignments of different products, which may require checking by a number of different officers, causing obvious delays.
Some just in time car factories get deliveries on 300 trucks per day. It is a ronseal, you cant have delays and just in time manufacturing.
No amount of preparation will solve this.
The EU have not received any proposals since Boris became PM. He just lies about what is going on.
I think that the Labour Party are acting sensibly about the election. In order to ensure we don't crash out with no deal, they shouldn't vote for one until November, after the extension has been properly secured.
An election could well result in no overall majority for any party, and move us no closer to a solution.
Its ironic that the 21 MPs have lost their jobs for voting against the Government, yet Boris and half the cabinet were recently guilty of doing this twice or three times.
So true about Corbyn too. If he had confidence in his Policies and remaining in Europe, he would have a General Election.... even if he ended up having to have a coalition with the Lib Dems. and the SNP....... Now that would be FUN !
Labour will block Boris Johnson's plans for an early General Election until November after entering into a pact with the SNP to stop a No Deal exit, it was revealed last night.
Jeremy Corbyn held a secret meeting yesterday with Ian Blackford, the Scottish nationalists' Westminster leader, to agree an election should only be held after Britain has secured another Brexit delay from the EU.
Mr Corbyn believes he can derail the Prime Minister's plans to hold a vote on October 15, forcing him to seek another delay to Brexit.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/brexit/labours-secret-stop-boris-deal-with-the-scots-hypocrite-corbyn-holds-talks-with-snp-to-push-general-election-back-to-november-to-guarantee-no-deal-brexit-is-dead-and-because-they-believe-theyd-lose-if-it-was-any-earlier/ar-AAGSNlw?ocid=spartanntp
The Brexit Party are clearly only in favour of a no deal Brexit, which was not voted on in the referendum, and continually voted against in Parliament.
According to the legislation currently going through, the Tories will be unable to get us out by 31st October.
Corbyn would be silly to go for an election before November.
If the opposition could form a coalition they could remove the Tories with a no confidence vote, and take control without an election.
It seems strange that those that decry a second referendum, despite the fact that it would completely solve the Brexit problem, once and for all. Enabling our politics to move on and deal with the really important issues, are prepared to accept a general election, which is being described by politicians as putting it back to the people.
We are supposed to have general elections at 5 year intervals. Yet the one that is likely to take place in November, will be third in 4 years. Nobody is pointing to this as being undemocratic.
The problem is that a general election is unlikely to provide a solution.
Current forecasts are that 4 parties will receive significant support, and none of them will get an overall majority.
It seems to me that both a general election, and a second referendum would both be described by many people as a means of putting it back to the people. Faced with a choice of either, it seems that many people that regard a second referendum as undemocratic, and completely ignore the fact that it would provide a definitive solution, are prepared to accept yet another general election, and regard it as democratic, despite the fact that it will be unlikely to provide any solution, and is more likely to drag us closer to the disaster that is no deal.
If this occurred I am certain that many people will be wishing that we had gone for a second referendum.
Boris failing to achieve his do or die, leaving with or without a deal, on 31st October, surely assists the Brexit Party in improving their vote, and increases the likelihood of no overall majority.
Assuming that we end up in a cycle of more extensions, and more deadlines, you have to think that at some point we will end up with the disaster that is no deal.
For me this would be vastly more undemocratic than another referendum.
Is the latest cunning plan, an extension until the end of January, and the fourth general election in 5 years, taking place in mid January?
Companys that choose remedies that fail to solve their problems, rather than those that do, usually end up bankrupt.
So it would include a Norway plus, Canada plus, Theresa Mays deal, and any other deal you care to mention.
Each MP would vote for or against each deal.
Majorities don't matter.
You would merely choose the deal with the most votes.
You then turn the clock back to 2016, and include on the ballot in the referendum, the most popular deal, no deal, and remain.
The result could have been immediately implemented, no ifs, buts, arguments or negotiations.
Nothing else to decide.
Surely most people could go along with that.
There would be a choice to suit everyone.
An Irish border plan could have been outlined before the vote.
The Brexit Party wouldn't exist.
We could have avoided completely wasting the last 3 years.
The referendum question was clearly inadequate, and a good reason for having another one.
How could you argue against doing this now?
Scotland may well become independent. However, it is unlikely that they would be allowed to join the EU. This has nothing to do with Britain, but to do with vested interests within the EU.
Many countries have regions that were formerly countries in their own right. Catalonia is the most obvious example, but various regions in Germany, Italy etc were also countries. Spain is unlikely to readily agree to Scotland joining, due to the undoubted boost it would give to Catalonia.
Brexit leading to a break up of the UK is a real possibility.
The politicians in favour of Scottish independence will not admit to voters that there are any difficulties in Scotland joining the EU.
The Scottish border is much more straightforward than the Irish one.
Strangely a referendum would sort it all out.
....but would it?
All the people (the Majority) who voted to leave in 2016 would be 'Up in Arms' led by Boris and Mr Farage, if the result was different, which it could be due to a different demograph of voters. If the original Referendum result wasn't adhered to, if it was different, why should a second one be adhered to?
So I presume you think that everyone is happy right now, as we suffer extension after extension.
The original referendum was set up very poorly.
The 48% that voted to remain and their aims were clear, they voted for the status quo.
However the 52% that voted to leave were clearly voting for a number of completely different outcomes.
To this end there was never a leave majority for any particular outcome.
Some leave voters prefer a Norway type deal, and hate no deal. Others would prefer a Canada type deal and maintain some distance between us and the EU, but they hate Norway, and no deal. Others sing the praises of no deal.
So the only conclusion you can draw is that a small percentage that voted for the leave option voted for each particular outcome, and are not necessarily happy to leave with a different outcome.
Whereas the 48% that voted to remain were all voting for the same thing.
If everyone was over the moon about where we are today, you would have a point.
The will of the people can only end up will a small percentage of the electorate who end up satisfied, if we ever reach a solution.
Isnt everyone up in arms now?
Wouldn't we be better off with some people up in arms objecting to a problem that has been solved?
A second referendum as I set out earlier could have the result implemented immediately, with no need for any further discussion.
We should have left the EU by now, and certainly should on October 31st, with or without a deal. As the Bank of England has said, No Deal isn't going to be as bad as first thought.
We will not be leaving on 31st October, unless Boris gets a deal. This would appear unlikely as he has made no new proposals.
The Bank of England said we are only going to be £700000 billion worse of instead of £700002 billion, and that we will only lose 300,000 jobs not 302,000.
Hope you had the foresight to buy lots of Dollars and Euros (as I'm sure the Money Traders will have done), that when the Exchange rate reaches parity with the Pound you can cash in and make lots more money than you would with current bank interest rates...... I didn't