Jump to content

Brexit slowly becoming a Farce.


John Lambies Doos

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

People get the political representatives they deserve.

People who are critical of politicians need to get involved themselves.

 

We would just end up corrupted..............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

People get the political representatives they deserve.

People who are critical of politicians need to get involved themselves.

 

In fairness that's a "if you don't like it, you know where the door is" type of statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, cyderspaceman said:

It doesn't take a great deal of technical detail to describe the workings of the WTO from what I've read.

No, I'm not an 'expert'  but I have tried to read about it. I really doubt many brexiters have done the same. They are the ones touting it, not the reamainers. It's up to them to extol its virtues. 

So what do you think the problem with WTO rules are?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Delingpole is a fanny but the idea that you have to be able to explain your positions in technical detail in order to be entitled to hold them is extremely regressive.  If you go down that road you end up in a technocracy dominated by the super rich (like this one).
 


Nobody said “explain your positions in technical detail in order to be entitled to hold them”. I only asked that a frequently repeated option stated by Leavers should have been, at the very least, mildly critiqued.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

True.

Ironically it was Mogg who said there should be two referenda; the second once we all knew what the detailed proposal was. 

He seems to have changed his mind.

 

To be fair, that's not what he said at all and it has been skewed a bit.

The point he was making was that we should have a referendum to give Cameron a mandate for 'renegotiation' and then, once that was complete, that renegotiation should be put on the ballot against other option(s) which would include not leaving at all.

It's not really a position I hold but I do think there's a distinction with that sort of position (given that each question is openly stated prior to negotiations) since it doesn't 'undo' anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, NotThePars said:

 


Nobody said “explain your positions in technical detail in order to be entitled to hold them”. I only asked that a frequently repeated option stated by Leavers should have been, at the very least, mildly critiqued.

It's a fairly easy answer though. We should have tariffs that support UK industry and reflective of UK consumption varying by commodity and ensuring standards are met regardless of where the item is imported from.

My problem is that this kind of questioning is only ever used against those who challenge the status quo, it's never applied to the law as is it currently exists. Having zero tariffs on food that isn't produced in the UK seems perfectly sensible but no one ever has to explain EU tariffs on African agriculture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, oldbitterandgrumpy said:

But isn't that  a Catch 22? 

I personally am very disillusioned with politics. I find politicians unbearably patronising. I vote every 5 years, express my opinion then watch as things seem to carry on much as before. Ok, Brexit was out of the ordinary, didn't see that coming. But the 'representatives' we put in Westminster to deal with this are dealing with it the only way they know how, ie by shouting across the chamber at each other or forming unholy alliances. 

There is a system, and that system is long established. It's  firmly  ensconced at Westminster and known as First Past The Post. We live in what is essentially a conservative country and radical change to the voting system is something the UK is a long, long way from. 

So, yeah, I guess we do get the representatives we deserve. 

FPTP provides for strong and stable government so that we get things done instead of debating the same thing over and over again for months on end. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Detournement said:

It's a fairly easy answer though. We should have tariffs that support UK industry and reflective of UK consumption varying by commodity and ensuring standards are met regardless of where the item is imported from.

My problem is that this kind of questioning is only ever used against those who challenge the status quo, it's never applied to the law as is it currently exists. Having zero tariffs on food that isn't produced in the UK seems perfectly sensible but no one ever has to explain EU tariffs on African agriculture.

If we declare zero tariffs on all food imports why would any other country feel the need to reciprocate?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

If we declare zero tariffs on all food imports why would any other country feel the need to reciprocate?  

I didn't say all food imports. I said food we don't produce in great quantities.

Whether other countries reciprocate or not is irrelevant. The point is to lower the cost of essentials for consumers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...