RugbyRebels

Mellsblue wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: Again, perception.

No it's not. We do not send £350 million to the EU.

Lib Dem MP Norman Lamb filed a complaint to the UK Statistics Authority after Brexiteers kept using the £350m-a-week figure. Sir Andrew Dilnot replied saying the number was "potentially misleading".
So, not incorrect but potentially misleading. Just as Osborne's quotes are potentially misleading.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote: No it's not. We do not send £350 million to the EU.

Lib Dem MP Norman Lamb filed a complaint to the UK Statistics Authority after Brexiteers kept using the £350m-a-week figure. Sir Andrew Dilnot replied saying the number was "potentially misleading".
So, not incorrect but potentially misleading. Just as Osborne's quotes are potentially misleading.

. If you can't see that the UK statistics authority in the middle of campaign might choose to use modified language then you're either stupid (which you clearly aren't) or you're being disingenuous. We do not send £350 million to the EU. They repeatedly stated that we did, whilst knowing that we do not. That is a lie. It is not a matter of perception.

zer0 wrote:On a related, and mildly interesting, note, I came across a live update web-map that records the locations of people officially requesting a second EU referendum.

Lizard wrote:Wow. I'm not even going to bother posting the obvious Life of Brian clip.

I suppose you can always posit the question of net value given the UK's contributions to the EU, but on a regional basis (and relying on that article alone) I doubt it would be in favour of the EU.

I guess I'm completely naive to think that a successful Leave movement (not to mention a prepared governing party) would already have answers to questions like:
1. When and by whom shall clause 50 be invoked?
2. What are the intended terms to be sought in a negotiation under clause 50 (at least to the level of Norway/Switzerland/ordinary FTA/complete divorce level of generality)
3. Will the central government in any event make up for specific lost EU funding or not.

This is especially so after the Scottish independence movement was rightly criticised for not doing the equivalent of 2 and 3 in that context.

"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 legislation 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-manoeuvred 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

Lizard wrote:Wow. I'm not even going to bother posting the obvious Life of Brian clip.

Lizard wrote:I guess I'm completely naive to think that a successful Leave movement (not to mention a prepared governing party) would already have answers to questions like:
1. When and by whom shall clause 50 be invoked?
2. What are the intended terms to be sought in a negotiation under clause 50 (at least to the level of Norway/Switzerland/ordinary FTA/complete divorce level of generality)
3. Will the central government in any event make up for specific lost EU funding or not.

This is especially so after the Scottish independence movement was rightly criticised for not doing the equivalent of 2 and 3 in that context.

Len wrote:The place is turning into a right shambles mate. This is the state of it: In regards to the exit plan. Not sure what the whole context of this is i.e who the reporter was talking to but it seems the politicians around here don't know their asshole from their elbows

https://twitter.com/wrongisland/status/ ... 6026289152

Len wrote:
https://twitter.com/wrongisland/status/ ... 6026289152

Len wrote:

zer0 wrote:On a related, and mildly interesting, note, I came across a live update web-map that records the locations of people officially requesting a second EU referendum.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... _b-gdnnews

Its actually astonishing. Another one is Port Talbot who voted leave. They've literally learnt nothing. I'd love to say I'll have no sympathy if it goes tits up but it wouldn't be the truth.

Lizard wrote:

Len wrote:
https://twitter.com/wrongisland/status/ ... 6026289152

I was laughing in a similar fashion at an interview on BBC World last night when someone called Marr* was putting to the formerly Remainist Minister of Business (or something like that, a well-spoken swarthy chap anyway) all sorts of doom-mongering statements he'd made about GDP, employment, house-prices etc in the event of Brexit and asking if he stood by them. It was a very impressive display of resolute refusal to answer bloody good questions. Instead he blathered on about needing to get to work and do his job to implement the instructions of the electorate.

The interview ended with a real killer:
Marr: "Oh, one more thing, where is your chancellor?"
Minister: "Doing his job to implement [blah blah blah]. You should have invited him on your show and asked him yourself"
Marr: "We did. He said no."

I imagine that this is now a staple routine, question whenever a Remain minister is in front of a microphone: "Do you intend to retain your portfolio and rule over the inevitable, unmitigated disaster in [name area of responsibility] you predicted with absolute certainty about 5 minutes ago?"

I'm not surprised DC shot the gap. Smartest move in the circumstances.

*Who I though just made medieval documentaries about a barely imaginable time when England was riven with factions among the ruling class and had a complicated relationship with France.

UGagain wrote:

Len wrote:

zer0 wrote:On a related, and mildly interesting, note, I came across a live update web-map that records the locations of people officially requesting a second EU referendum.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... _b-gdnnews

Its actually astonishing. Another one is Port Talbot who voted leave. They've literally learnt nothing. I'd love to say I'll have no sympathy if it goes tits up but it wouldn't be the truth.

What people like you don't realise, and the media won't tell you, is that every pound that comes from the EU was created by the UK government.

The EU accounts for zero net spending anywhere in the UK.

But laugh at the other fools all you want.

Len wrote:

UGagain wrote:

Len wrote:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... _b-gdnnews

Its actually astonishing. Another one is Port Talbot who voted leave. They've literally learnt nothing. I'd love to say I'll have no sympathy if it goes tits up but it wouldn't be the truth.

What people like you don't realise, and the media won't tell you, is that every pound that comes from the EU was created by the UK government.

The EU accounts for zero net spending anywhere in the UK.

But laugh at the other fools all you want.

I'm laughing at the majority of people I know who voted leave because they can't handle the fact their neighbour speaks Polish. I hope for everybodys sake that you are correct and everything is hunky dory.

UGagain wrote:

Len wrote:

UGagain wrote:
What people like you don't realise, and the media won't tell you, is that every pound that comes from the EU was created by the UK government.

The EU accounts for zero net spending anywhere in the UK.

But laugh at the other fools all you want.

I'm laughing at the majority of people I know who voted leave because they can't handle the fact their neighbour speaks Polish. I hope for everybodys sake that you are correct and everything is hunky dory.

I know people who voted to leave because they believe in democracy and national sovereignty. As I would have.

And you are falling for Project Fear propaganda.

Like most of the mob here have and will.

Lizard wrote:Wow. I'm not even going to bother posting the obvious Life of Brian clip.

I suppose you can always posit the question of net value given the UK's contributions to the EU, but on a regional basis (and relying on that article alone) I doubt it would be in favour of the EU.

I guess I'm completely naive to think that a successful Leave movement (not to mention a prepared governing party) would already have answers to questions like:
1. When and by whom shall clause 50 be invoked?
2. What are the intended terms to be sought in a negotiation under clause 50 (at least to the level of Norway/Switzerland/ordinary FTA/complete divorce level of generality)
3. Will the central government in any event make up for specific lost EU funding or not.

This is especially so after the Scottish independence movement was rightly criticised for not doing the equivalent of 2 and 3 in that context.

UGagain wrote:All sorts of terrible things can happen in the press that aren't real.

Digby wrote:

Lizard wrote:Wow. I'm not even going to bother posting the obvious Life of Brian clip.

I suppose you can always posit the question of net value given the UK's contributions to the EU, but on a regional basis (and relying on that article alone) I doubt it would be in favour of the EU.

I guess I'm completely naive to think that a successful Leave movement (not to mention a prepared governing party) would already have answers to questions like:
1. When and by whom shall clause 50 be invoked?
2. What are the intended terms to be sought in a negotiation under clause 50 (at least to the level of Norway/Switzerland/ordinary FTA/complete divorce level of generality)
3. Will the central government in any event make up for specific lost EU funding or not.

This is especially so after the Scottish independence movement was rightly criticised for not doing the equivalent of 2 and 3 in that context.

Just on point 3 I found it one of the most astonishing parts of the campaign, in that various investigative/analytical bodies stated an opinion that mainly suggested staying was better than leaving, and the leave campaign countered (before suggesting we were all fed up with hearing from experts) that many of these bodies are funded by the EU and as such their views are biased, I could sort of accept the concerns of bias but what really struck is the thought does that mean the Brexisters don't think such 'independent' bodies should be funded in the event we voted to leave

I realise EU funding goes way beyond just funding research, but I am left wondering where do they think cuts should go when it comes to needless independent research, would they go as far as the Office for National Statistics for instance?

UGagain wrote:

Len wrote:

UGagain wrote:
What people like you don't realise, and the media won't tell you, is that every pound that comes from the EU was created by the UK government.

The EU accounts for zero net spending anywhere in the UK.

But laugh at the other fools all you want.

I'm laughing at the majority of people I know who voted leave because they can't handle the fact their neighbour speaks Polish. I hope for everybodys sake that you are correct and everything is hunky dory.

I know people who voted to leave because they believe in democracy and national sovereignty. As I would have.

And you are falling for Project Fear propaganda.

Like most of the mob here have and will.

UGagain wrote:

Len wrote:

UGagain wrote:
What people like you don't realise, and the media won't tell you, is that every pound that comes from the EU was created by the UK government.

The EU accounts for zero net spending anywhere in the UK.

But laugh at the other fools all you want.

I'm laughing at the majority of people I know who voted leave because they can't handle the fact their neighbour speaks Polish. I hope for everybodys sake that you are correct and everything is hunky dory.

I know people who voted to leave because they believe in democracy and national sovereignty. As I would have.

And you are falling for Project Fear propaganda.

Like most of the mob here have and will.

Banquo wrote:

UGagain wrote:

Len wrote:
I'm laughing at the majority of people I know who voted leave because they can't handle the fact their neighbour speaks Polish. I hope for everybodys sake that you are correct and everything is hunky dory.

I know people who voted to leave because they believe in democracy and national sovereignty. As I would have.

And you are falling for Project Fear propaganda.

Like most of the mob here have and will.

Definitely one of the cohorts who voted leave, alongside the xenophobes, racists, disenfranchised. folks who object to the organisational shambles of the EU, and right wing nostalgics. A strange alliance, that Remain failed to recognise or know how to deal with.

Sandydragon wrote:

Banquo wrote:

UGagain wrote:
I know people who voted to leave because they believe in democracy and national sovereignty. As I would have.

And you are falling for Project Fear propaganda.

Like most of the mob here have and will.

Definitely one of the cohorts who voted leave, alongside the xenophobes, racists, disenfranchised. folks who object to the organisational shambles of the EU, and right wing nostalgics. A strange alliance, that Remain failed to recognise or know how to deal with.

I think Remain just thought they needed to turn up to win. What does concern me quite a lot is the lack of a real plan at the moment. I understand Cameron resigning, I think that was inevitable following the Leave win. But we seem to have a state of paralysis at th moment. Surely the weekend was time for lots of reassuring stuff to investors and so on to stay calm, etc, etc. Yet is all seemed a bit quiet and overshadowed by the Conservative leadership contest and the upheaval in the Labour Party.

The only person Ive seen on the TV who has looked slightly competent and in control is Mark Carney.

Banquo wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Banquo wrote:
Definitely one of the cohorts who voted leave, alongside the xenophobes, racists, disenfranchised. folks who object to the organisational shambles of the EU, and right wing nostalgics. A strange alliance, that Remain failed to recognise or know how to deal with.

I think Remain just thought they needed to turn up to win. What does concern me quite a lot is the lack of a real plan at the moment. I understand Cameron resigning, I think that was inevitable following the Leave win. But we seem to have a state of paralysis at th moment. Surely the weekend was time for lots of reassuring stuff to investors and so on to stay calm, etc, etc. Yet is all seemed a bit quiet and overshadowed by the Conservative leadership contest and the upheaval in the Labour Party.

The only person Ive seen on the TV who has looked slightly competent and in control is Mark Carney.

Neither Remain nor Leave saw the big Leave vote from the disenfranchised coming- though the GE gave a clue. Dave bought time by resigning, and deferring succession til October- I'd like to think that was always the plan to try and wring some concessions from Brussels, but I think he was just placing the onus on those he felt had betrayed him to do what they'd promised; btw I don't think fine words will reassure businesses to be honest.