Bank holiday weekend: 27th, 28th & 29th August

extankie · Post by **extankie** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 4:07 am

Morning all:)
All hail the weekend!
(Except those who don`t like weekends)

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 7:49 am

Lumpen and ungroomed, apppparently

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Good headline

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f8d56f04-54a9 ... z4IVpj8Z58" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Why businesses our now turning on Labour

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5138ae48-6b90 ... z4IVpj8Z58" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 8:25 am

most of us won't be able to read the ft ones and the other is just another right-wing hack's opinion on something with little to add

waste of time

Post by **refitman** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 8:36 am

extankie wrote:Morning all:)
All hail the weekend!
(Except those who don`t like weekends)

Morning extankie. I've changed your post title to be for the entire bank holiday.

nickyinnorfolk · Post by **nickyinnorfolk** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 9:19 am

Article from Wednesday's Guardian which I don't think has been mentioned here yet: While Labour complains, the Tories simply govern https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ies-govern" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It's by Rafael Behr, which never bodes well, and does rather state the bleedin' obvious, although misgovern would be more appropriate (and they all seem to be on holiday at the mo anyway).

Behr's thesis is that most people aren't that bothered about politics (no doubt true) although he makes a duff assumption that Osborne was booed at the Paralympics simply because the crowd didn't want to be reminded of his existence when they were out enjoying their non political fun. Most people attending such an event would have at least a passing interest in disability issues, and Osborne was one of the main architects of policies making life even harder for disabled people.

Behr does however make a fairly valid point when he describes the 'febrile' state of mind that characterises Labour at the moment, whereas the electorate just want rational people who know what they're doing (the Tories can maintain the fiction that they know what they're doing - they're actually shambolic).

I think there is a place for passion and angry energy in politics. However, most of that seems to be misdirected at the moment, for example bitterly accusing the likes of Tony Robinson of being a 'Blairite warmonger'. That was the reaction to his tweet that he could afford another Tory government but the poor and vulnerable couldn't, which was why he was voting for Smith. Robinson pointed out that he'd been an opponent to the Iraq invasion from the start.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 9:57 am

Virgin Trains 'teams up' with Labour to offer discounts (and a seat)

Virgin said: “Labour’s annual conference is one of the high profile political events in Europe. Attracting over 10,000 people, it’s the ideal place to network, share great ideas and an opportunity to mingle with like-minded people.” (Guardian - my emphasis)

Oh, my aching sides!

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... and-a-seat

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 9:57 am

Good morfternoon.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 10:13 am

SpinningHugo wrote: Why businesses our now turning on Labour

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5138ae48-6b90 ... z4IVpj8Z58" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Our"?? Tut tut

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 10:16 am

(I won't say anything as I've noticed of late that everyone disappears when I do. however i would still like access to a flicking the v's emoticon if such a thing is possible)

Ta

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 10:18 am

(oops, I said "Ta")

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 10:46 am

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... vice-chief" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Brexit is not inevitable and Britain could still remain a part of a changed European Union, the former head of the civil service has said.

I haven't read the Times piece, but heard O'Donnell on R4 this morning and he was clear that his expectation was that we would leave, the point being more about how he doesn't think any of our EU related laws will be repealed or changed, that it would be a technical exit, in word only, for some considerable time. There are also some hints in this article about the impact of UK exit on the EU, which lead me to return to my original suspicions that the Tory intent is not to simply leave, but in doing so to attempt to fracture the current EU structure and reform it in some way more acceptable to right wing capitalists. How realistic such a plan may be remains to be seen, but doubts over if and when the UK may invoke article 50 would certainly fit into such a scenario.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 11:00 am

(there you go)

: vs.png (2.09 KiB) Viewed 14774 times

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 11:01 am

Max Whitlock fronts ITV switchoff as part of UK day of sport

Coronation Street fans can head to the soap’s set in Manchester, where the gold medal-winning cyclist Elinor Barker will be taking part in an event on the cobbles. (Guardian)

Don't really know why, but that made me laugh - muchly.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/ ... y-olympics

Other than the mirth it caused me, I regard the whole stunt as a pretty pointless exercise. (No pun intended. None taken, I hear you cry.)

Edited

Many typos

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 11:07 am

Large blue butterfly thriving in UK since reintroduction

Numbers of the endangered butterfly, once pronounced extinct in the UK, have reached their highest level in 80 years, according to conservationists
Large blue butterflies (Guardian)

Well, I haven't seen any. Just the odd, lone cabbage white.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... troduction

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 11:13 am

Ah. Will go with this.

: vs2.jpg (1.84 KiB) Viewed 14759 times

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 11:15 am

Willow904 wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... vice-chief

Brexit is not inevitable and Britain could still remain a part of a changed European Union, the former head of the civil service has said.
I haven't read the Times piece, but heard O'Donnell on R4 this morning and he was clear that his expectation was that we would leave, the point being more about how he doesn't think any of our EU related laws will be repealed or changed, that it would be a technical exit, in word only, for some considerable time. There are also some hints in this article about the impact of UK exit on the EU, which lead me to return to my original suspicions that the Tory intent is not to simply leave, but in doing so to attempt to fracture the current EU structure and reform it in some way more acceptable to right wing capitalists. How realistic such a plan may be remains to be seen, but doubts over if and when the UK may invoke article 50 would certainly fit into such a scenario.

There are some in the Tories/on the right more generally who think that desirable, but I think that credits many Brexiters with more sophistication than they actually possess tbh.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 1:04 pm

Post by **refitman** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 1:11 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:Boo!

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 2:28 pm

Well?

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 4:27 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... -elephants" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tories’ failure to halt ivory trade ‘risks extinction of elephants’
Campaigners attack broken election pledge to shut down domestic market

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 4:38 pm

http://www.bathchronicle.co.uk/virgin-c ... story.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Health bosses have made their choice in a bid for a multimillion contract to run community care services in Bath and north east Somerset.

Virgin Care has been chosen over a consortium led by Sirona care and health in a battle to win the publicly funded £500m contract.

NHS privatisation by the back door advancing rapidly under the new Tory majority BANES council as the not for profit Sirona Health and Care favoured by previous council leaders, the Libdems, is elbowed out of the way in favour of fat cat Virgin for this lucrative long term contract.

Hobiejoe · Post by **Hobiejoe** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 6:11 pm

Well, that was noisy.

A Eurofighter just did a ten minute low level display over the town. Not sure aeroplanes should be able to do things like that.

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 7:07 pm

Hobiejoe wrote:Well, that was noisy.

A Eurofighter just did a ten minute low level display over the town. Not sure aeroplanes should be able to do things like that.

I blame their pilots.

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 7:28 pm

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ver-brexit

The shadow international trade secretary, Barry Gardiner, also spoke out against May’s plans. “The logic of saying the prime minister can trigger article 50 without first setting out to parliament the terms and basis upon which her government seeks to negotiate – indeed, without even indicating the red lines she will seek to protect – would be to diminish parliament and assume the arrogant powers of a Tudor monarch.
“Parliament cannot be sidelined from the greatest constitutional change our country has debated in 40 years,” he added.

The article doesn't live up to the headline, I was expecting a more specific comparison, she's done better than Lady Jane Grey so can't be her.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 7:43 pm

tinybgoat wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ver-brexit

The shadow international trade secretary, Barry Gardiner, also spoke out against May’s plans. “The logic of saying the prime minister can trigger article 50 without first setting out to parliament the terms and basis upon which her government seeks to negotiate – indeed, without even indicating the red lines she will seek to protect – would be to diminish parliament and assume the arrogant powers of a Tudor monarch.
“Parliament cannot be sidelined from the greatest constitutional change our country has debated in 40 years,” he added.
The article doesn't live up to the headline, I was expecting a more specific comparison, she's done better than Lady Jane Grey so can't be her.

Aren't all Labour MPs supposed to be concentrating on the important stuff, the leadership contest?

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 7:48 pm

tinybgoat wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ver-brexit

The shadow international trade secretary, Barry Gardiner, also spoke out against May’s plans. “The logic of saying the prime minister can trigger article 50 without first setting out to parliament the terms and basis upon which her government seeks to negotiate – indeed, without even indicating the red lines she will seek to protect – would be to diminish parliament and assume the arrogant powers of a Tudor monarch.
“Parliament cannot be sidelined from the greatest constitutional change our country has debated in 40 years,” he added.
The article doesn't live up to the headline, I was expecting a more specific comparison, she's done better than Lady Jane Grey so can't be her.

The obvious analogy I suppose would be Henry VIII who unilaterally decided to extricate England from the Roman Catholic Church. Although comparing the disruption that will be caused by May acting on the result of an ill thought through referendum to the upheaval spawned by Henry VIII's personal desire* for a divorce is perhaps a bit harsh. Besides, parliament (in its infinite stupidity) passed the referendum act that precipitated current events, so saying parliament hasn't been consulted is, quite simply, factually wrong.

*I'm well aware this is a gross simplification and has been put this way purely for facetious effect.

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 8:07 pm

StephenDolan wrote:
tinybgoat wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ver-brexit

The shadow international trade secretary, Barry Gardiner, also spoke out against May’s plans. “The logic of saying the prime minister can trigger article 50 without first setting out to parliament the terms and basis upon which her government seeks to negotiate – indeed, without even indicating the red lines she will seek to protect – would be to diminish parliament and assume the arrogant powers of a Tudor monarch.
“Parliament cannot be sidelined from the greatest constitutional change our country has debated in 40 years,” he added.
The article doesn't live up to the headline, I was expecting a more specific comparison, she's done better than Lady Jane Grey so can't be her.
Aren't all Labour MPs supposed to be concentrating on the important stuff, the leadership contest?

He can do both, besides, multitasking's a prerequisite of being in the shadow cabinet now.

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 8:19 pm

Willow904 wrote:
tinybgoat wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ver-brexit

The shadow international trade secretary, Barry Gardiner, also spoke out against May’s plans. “The logic of saying the prime minister can trigger article 50 without first setting out to parliament the terms and basis upon which her government seeks to negotiate – indeed, without even indicating the red lines she will seek to protect – would be to diminish parliament and assume the arrogant powers of a Tudor monarch.
“Parliament cannot be sidelined from the greatest constitutional change our country has debated in 40 years,” he added.
The article doesn't live up to the headline, I was expecting a more specific comparison, she's done better than Lady Jane Grey so can't be her.
The obvious analogy I suppose would be Henry VIII who unilaterally decided to extricate England from the Roman Catholic Church. Although comparing the disruption that will be caused by May acting on the result of an ill thought through referendum to the upheaval spawned by Henry VIII's personal desire* for a divorce is perhaps a bit harsh. Besides, parliament (in its infinite stupidity) passed the referendum act that precipitated current events, so saying parliament hasn't been consulted is, quite simply, factually wrong.

*I'm well aware this is a gross simplification and has been put this way purely for facetious effect.

Technically that casts Liz Truss in Thomas More's role, although suspect Johnson/Davies/Fox are better comparisons.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 9:00 pm

If May is Henry VIII breaking with Europe, then the pro-EU Liz Truss sort of mirrors her Lord Chancellor predecessor More, but I doubt she'd put her job on the line to oppose May on Brexit, let alone her neck! Thankfully, the analogy to Tudor monarchs is proving to be pretty slim, after all, and our modern day schism with the continent will hopefully prove rather less bloody.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 9:19 pm

Dominic Chappell to wind up company involved in BHS acquisition
Swiss Rock will cease trading this week as controversial entrepreneur moves family assets out of reach of investigators

By putting Swiss Rock into administration, Chappell could walk away from its debts, which are thought to include a tax bill on his earnings from BHS. (Guardian)

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... s-rock-bhs

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 27 Aug, 2016 9:24 pm

Brexit will put 75% of workers at risk of pension shortfall
People will have to save more for pensions to have income they were on course for before Britain voted out, say City experts

Only 25% of people now have a good chance of meeting the level of retirement income regarded as appropriate by the DWP

The Brexit vote is having “terrifying” effects on the pension schemes of millions of British workers, with 75% of people now expected to have a retirement income below the government’s recommended level, City experts warn.

Leading pensions consultants Hymans Robertson say the combination of interest rates and weaker projections for growth post-Brexit mean people will have to save far more towards their pensions to receive the level of income they were on course for before Britain voted to leave the EU. (Observer)

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/ ... tfall-city

extankie · Post by **extankie** » Sun 28 Aug, 2016 4:08 am

refitman wrote:
extankie wrote:Morning all:)
All hail the weekend!
(Except those who don`t like weekends)
Morning extankie. I've changed your post title to be for the entire bank holiday.

Many thanks, often said I`m a bit dim:)

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 28 Aug, 2016 8:40 am

PorFavor wrote:
Brexit will put 75% of workers at risk of pension shortfall
People will have to save more for pensions to have income they were on course for before Britain voted out, say City experts

Only 25% of people now have a good chance of meeting the level of retirement income regarded as appropriate by the DWP

The Brexit vote is having “terrifying” effects on the pension schemes of millions of British workers, with 75% of people now expected to have a retirement income below the government’s recommended level, City experts warn.

Leading pensions consultants Hymans Robertson say the combination of interest rates and weaker projections for growth post-Brexit mean people will have to save far more towards their pensions to receive the level of income they were on course for before Britain voted to leave the EU. (Observer)

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/ ... tfall-city

Brexiteers

: vs2.jpg (1.84 KiB) Viewed 14243 times

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sun 28 Aug, 2016 8:52 am

On how it is human nature to seek out only those views we find congenial, and this fuels partisanship

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... dApp_Tweet" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 28 Aug, 2016 9:10 am

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... referendum" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Mary Dejevsky (discussed here https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives ... nane_mary/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; by Craig Murray ) in bid to out-Tudor May.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 28 Aug, 2016 9:16 am

From a few months ago, but pertinent nevertheless:

The question of what is propaganda and what is truth has plagued politics since politics began. But the nature of information in the social media age means it keeps getting easier for politicians, partisans, computerized “bots” and foreign governments to manipulate news, and it keeps getting harder to correct this. Fact-checkers are, for the moment, one of the best solutions. But they work only for people who want them to work, and that number may be shrinking.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... d032434af7" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

TinyClanger: flicking the vs so you don't have to

: vs2.jpg (1.84 KiB) Viewed 14227 times

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sun 28 Aug, 2016 9:29 am

Not well judged IMO

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/la ... ed-8719591" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sun 28 Aug, 2016 10:07 am

I don't think he is that popular these days, tbh.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sun 28 Aug, 2016 10:29 am

AnatolyKasparov wrote:I don't think he is that popular these days, tbh.

Why not?

http://www.cityam.com/208400/business-p ... red-people" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/discover" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://news.sky.com/story/richard-brans ... l-10389093" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Contrary evidence?

I don't think that is necessarily justified

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n06/david-runc ... e-stuntman" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

But even if it were true, then it is still a truly dumb thing for McDonnell to suggest.

McDonnell, during the campaign, has returned to type.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sun 28 Aug, 2016 10:34 am

AnatolyKasparov wrote:I don't think he is that popular these days, tbh.

Branson may not be popular, but mentioning him against the backdrop of the Philip Green saga and questions about knighthoods undermines the broader argument about fat cats being inappropriately rewarded with honours, as it comes across as a petty personal vendetta rather than an objective argument. Branson isn't currently in the news for losing ordinary peoples pensions or anything like that, just for getting in a personal row with Corbyn, so it comes across as "he should lose his knighthood for disagreeing with the Labour leader", I'm afraid.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 28 Aug, 2016 11:14 am

Good-morning, everyone.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 28 Aug, 2016 11:20 am

I'm away from home and using a borrowed device. I've come to say hello and see the news.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sun 28 Aug, 2016 11:20 am

Willow904 wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:I don't think he is that popular these days, tbh.
Branson may not be popular, but mentioning him against the backdrop of the Philip Green saga and questions about knighthoods undermines the broader argument about fat cats being inappropriately rewarded with honours, as it comes across as a petty personal vendetta rather than an objective argument. Branson isn't currently in the news for losing ordinary peoples pensions or anything like that, just for getting in a personal row with Corbyn, so it comes across as "he should lose his knighthood for disagreeing with the Labour leader", I'm afraid.

Not necessarily disagreeing there, just saying he isn't now the "pop culture icon" that he was back in 1997 when all parties earnestly (and vainly) sought his endorsement.

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Sun 28 Aug, 2016 11:25 am

Willow904 wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:I don't think he is that popular these days, tbh.
Branson may not be popular, but mentioning him against the backdrop of the Philip Green saga and questions about knighthoods undermines the broader argument about fat cats being inappropriately rewarded with honours, as it comes across as a petty personal vendetta rather than an objective argument. Branson isn't currently in the news for losing ordinary peoples pensions or anything like that, just for getting in a personal row with Corbyn, so it comes across as "he should lose his knighthood for disagreeing with the Labour leader", I'm afraid.

Good morning all

I think this sums it up pretty well....I don't think the intention was to suggest Branson loses an honour for disagreeing with Corbyn but was mentioned as being an example of the megarich who receive honours for little reason and spend their time trying to give as little back as possible

I find Branson an absolutely appalling, self-aggrandising individual who has lost any claim to entrepreneurship many years ago...he is another who sucks at the teat of the public purse. It does not mean that McDonnell was wise in using him as an example for this at this time though

Sometimes you just wish people would just think a little bit before opening their mouths.....it just gives ammunition and hides the tour message

I am also again disappointed at the reaction of Woodcock (I think those last four letters sum up my view of this particular MP) and Owen Smith

I would just say to Smith that accepting Branson's view of things on this subject without a critical eye does not endear him to the membership and makes him look a bit weak. The Virgin press release was selective and was made to make their case look better

H could have handles this a bit better in my view - in terms of the Labour leadership election i think his pronouncements will have lost him more than he has gained - I know I found them so

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sun 28 Aug, 2016 11:38 am

tinyclanger2 wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... referendum
Mary Dejevsky (discussed here https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives ... nane_mary/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; by Craig Murray ) in bid to out-Tudor May.

The comments btl suggest this article went down a treat with the "out" voters, but there are some major holes. If it's democratic to ask the nation whether or not they want to be in the EU, surely it's just as democratic to follow this up by asking them whether or not they want to be in the single market, whether or not they want to stop all immigration, whether or not they want to withdraw from the ECHR etc etc. Indeed, there are so many questions, perhaps it would be best if all the parties put together a list of their preferred options and people voted according to which they liked best. We could call it a general election and whoever won would have a mandate to implement their list according to the principles of representative democracy, which is the kind of democracy we have, however much some might prefer to override this with direct democracy when it suits them, and only when it suits them judging by the howls of "foul" when Smith suggests having a further referendum with a different question.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 28 Aug, 2016 11:44 am

I've got to return the device I'm using to one with better claim it. I'll read everyone again soon.
I love you.
cJA

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sun 28 Aug, 2016 11:47 am

citizenJA wrote:I'm away from home and using a borrowed device. I've come to say hello and see the news.

Your absence is a reason why it was so quiet here yesterday. You are always missed when you are not contributing.

Have fun

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sun 28 Aug, 2016 12:06 pm

Paul Mason

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/la ... se-8722027" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Just sad now, IMO.

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Sun 28 Aug, 2016 12:36 pm

Willow904 wrote:
tinyclanger2 wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... referendum
Mary Dejevsky (discussed here https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives ... nane_mary/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; by Craig Murray ) in bid to out-Tudor May.
The comments btl suggest this article went down a treat with the "out" voters, but there are some major holes. If it's democratic to ask the nation whether or not they want to be in the EU, surely it's just as democratic to follow this up by asking them whether or not they want to be in the single market, whether or not they want to stop all immigration, whether or not they want to withdraw from the ECHR etc etc. Indeed, there are so many questions, perhaps it would be best if all the parties put together a list of their preferred options and people voted according to which they liked best. We could call it a general election and whoever won would have a mandate to implement their list according to the principles of representative democracy, which is the kind of democracy we have, however much some might prefer to override this with direct democracy when it suits them, and only when it suits them judging by the howls of "foul" when Smith suggests having a further referendum with a different question.

I have a problem with the second referendum to be honest - it is not that I am against the principle of being able to go back to the people it is just that the way the process works as I see it doesn't look realistic.

I may be wrong but I just can't see where it fits in apart from in one place....

The chronology that we are looking at is:

British Government (incompetently) devises a British 'Exit' scenario
Shares that with British People
Has referendum to gain approval for initial position
Invoke A50
Defines Exit conditions with EU and starts preliminary talks on Trade
Has referendum to gain approval for agreed deal
Exits EU
Finalises Trade Deal
Has referendum to gain approval for trade deal
Brexit and UK future trade relationship completed

I have put in three possible timings for a second referendum

The first seems to be the one that would do the least harm long term (apart from making us look stupid of course) but I cannot see how this would work in practice as the Government's initial position will bear only a limited influence on the final decision. This is the only point a referendum could halt Brexit though in my view

The second one would be incredibly damaging as we would have gone all the way through the negotiation and have a deal but if this was rejected by the British people it would cause massive damage....we would leave the EU without any deal and there would be no real going back on Exit anyway so we have the worst of both worlds

The final one is just windowdressing to be honest....

Now, I know that there are some who feel that we should wait until we have an essentially agreed deal before we invoke A50, so in effect the negotiations will all be completed before we even give notice to leave. Personally, I think this is whistling in the wind - I have seen zero evidence that the EU will allow us to negotiate like this before we invoke A50.....

Again, this is all down to that idiot Cameron and his lack of thought before the referendum. He never indicated that the result was anything but binding, and neither did anyone else for that matter. The Remain camp were particularly loud about this as they wanted to block any further vote in the event of a narrow Remain win.

These tactics have now backfired, and although there may be a political argument (although perhaps not legal one) for Parliamentary approval prior to Exit, we are on the road to Exit and only a great disturbance in the Force will prevent it now

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sun 28 Aug, 2016 12:40 pm

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... gle-market" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A number of senior figures, including the chancellor, Philip Hammond, according to the Sunday Times, are thought to believe that all options including staying part of the economic area should remain on the table.

But many Brexit campaigners, including cabinet members David Davis and Liam Fox who will lead negotiations, are thought to believe Britain may have to quit the single market in order to impose adequate border controls.

There's no mandate for either option, this is May's essential problem. People weren't asked if they wanted to curb immigration or if they want to remain in the single market. A vote to leave the EU gives us no insight into people's thoughts on these issues. There is far too much being tied to the EU vote which, although not unreasonable inferences are just that - inferences. Guesswork doesn't provide a sound basis for a mandate for such a huge decision. We need an election or further referendums in order to provide the democratic mandate on which to proceed. That's not to say we'll get one, but May does need to be challenged on the democratic basis for her decisions at every step.