Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
No-deal Brexit may force rethink of vote - ex-civil service head
Impact would be so grave UK would have to review decision to leave EU, says Bob Kerslake
Press Association
Sat 18 Aug 2018 11.35 BST Last modified on Sat 18 Aug 2018 11.52 BST
Britain may have to rethink the decision to leave the EU if the government is unable to strike a Brexit deal with Brussels, a former head of the civil service has said.
Bob Kerslake said the consequences of a no-deal exit would be so serious that the UK parliament would have to consider whether it could allow it to go ahead.
Lord Kerslake, who has been advising Labour on preparing for government, said that at the very least the article 50 process – under which the UK is set to leave the bloc on 29 March next year – would have to be paused.
In those circumstances, the European commission would almost certainly insist on some “re-examination” of the original decision to leave, he said.
His comments came as the government prepares to publish a series of technical notes on preparations for a no-deal Brexit across dozens of areas of British life, from farming to financial services.
Kerslake said the measures were “too little, too late” and that the government had not allowed itself enough time to prepare for such an outcome.
He told the the BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “The consequences of a no deal would be so serious as I think parliament would have to seriously consider whether it could contemplate this.
“The question people need to ask themselves is, is this a risk that they think we should be taking?
“If the government can negotiate a good deal, then so be it. But if they can’t and we end up in this position, then we have to reopen the question of whether we go forward with Brexit at all. It is not too late to do that.
“A pause to reflect would certainly be necessary. I think that is a pretty high probability now.
“But I think that pause would need to include – and I suspect this would be insisted on by the commission – some re-examination of the decision itself.”
The co-chairman of the pro-Brexit Leave Means Leave campaign group, Richard Tice, said Kerslake’s intervention was intended to “soften people up” for a delay to Britain’s withdrawal.
“That would be absolutely appalling. People up and down the country would be furious that our civil servants and government have deliberately ignored the will of he people,” he told the Today programme.
“What we have just heard from Lord Kerslake is part of the deliberate negativity from the civil service who are looking to soften people up in order to extend article 50. It is completely unacceptable.”
It was earlier announced that Nigel Farage was to become vice-chairman of Leave Means Leave to spearhead the campaign against Theresa May’s Chequers plan, which critics regard as a sellout.
Writing in the Daily Telegraph, the former Ukip leader said: “It is now beyond doubt that the political class in Westminster and many of their media allies do not accept the EU referendum result.
“It is equally clear to me that, unless challenged, these anti-democrats will succeed in frustrating the result.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/18/rethink-of-brexit-vote-may-be-necessary-ex-civil-service-head-warns-lord-kerslake
Impact would be so grave UK would have to review decision to leave EU, says Bob Kerslake
Press Association
Sat 18 Aug 2018 11.35 BST Last modified on Sat 18 Aug 2018 11.52 BST
Lord Kerslake also told BBC Radio 4 that plans for a no-deal Brexit were ‘too little, too late’. Photograph: Peter Byrne/PA
Britain may have to rethink the decision to leave the EU if the government is unable to strike a Brexit deal with Brussels, a former head of the civil service has said.
Bob Kerslake said the consequences of a no-deal exit would be so serious that the UK parliament would have to consider whether it could allow it to go ahead.
Lord Kerslake, who has been advising Labour on preparing for government, said that at the very least the article 50 process – under which the UK is set to leave the bloc on 29 March next year – would have to be paused.
In those circumstances, the European commission would almost certainly insist on some “re-examination” of the original decision to leave, he said.
His comments came as the government prepares to publish a series of technical notes on preparations for a no-deal Brexit across dozens of areas of British life, from farming to financial services.
Kerslake said the measures were “too little, too late” and that the government had not allowed itself enough time to prepare for such an outcome.
He told the the BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “The consequences of a no deal would be so serious as I think parliament would have to seriously consider whether it could contemplate this.
“The question people need to ask themselves is, is this a risk that they think we should be taking?
“If the government can negotiate a good deal, then so be it. But if they can’t and we end up in this position, then we have to reopen the question of whether we go forward with Brexit at all. It is not too late to do that.
“A pause to reflect would certainly be necessary. I think that is a pretty high probability now.
“But I think that pause would need to include – and I suspect this would be insisted on by the commission – some re-examination of the decision itself.”
The co-chairman of the pro-Brexit Leave Means Leave campaign group, Richard Tice, said Kerslake’s intervention was intended to “soften people up” for a delay to Britain’s withdrawal.
“That would be absolutely appalling. People up and down the country would be furious that our civil servants and government have deliberately ignored the will of he people,” he told the Today programme.
“What we have just heard from Lord Kerslake is part of the deliberate negativity from the civil service who are looking to soften people up in order to extend article 50. It is completely unacceptable.”
It was earlier announced that Nigel Farage was to become vice-chairman of Leave Means Leave to spearhead the campaign against Theresa May’s Chequers plan, which critics regard as a sellout.
Writing in the Daily Telegraph, the former Ukip leader said: “It is now beyond doubt that the political class in Westminster and many of their media allies do not accept the EU referendum result.
“It is equally clear to me that, unless challenged, these anti-democrats will succeed in frustrating the result.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/18/rethink-of-brexit-vote-may-be-necessary-ex-civil-service-head-warns-lord-kerslake
Last edited:
I don't accept the referendum result either and never will on the following grounds.No-deal Brexit may force rethink of vote - ex-civil service head
Impact would be so grave UK would have to review decision to leave EU, says Bob Kerslake
Press Association
Sat 18 Aug 2018 11.35 BST Last modified on Sat 18 Aug 2018 11.52 BST
Lord Kerslake also told BBC Radio 4 that plans for a no-deal Brexit were ‘too little, too late’. Photograph: Peter Byrne/PA
Britain may have to rethink the decision to leave the EU if the government is unable to strike a Brexit deal with Brussels, a former head of the civil service has said.
Bob Kerslake said the consequences of a no-deal exit would be so serious that the UK parliament would have to consider whether it could allow it to go ahead.
Lord Kerslake, who has been advising Labour on preparing for government, said that at the very least the article 50 process – under which the UK is set to leave the bloc on 29 March next year – would have to be paused.
In those circumstances, the European commission would almost certainly insist on some “re-examination” of the original decision to leave, he said.
His comments came as the government prepares to publish a series of technical notes on preparations for a no-deal Brexit across dozens of areas of British life, from farming to financial services.
Kerslake said the measures were “too little, too late” and that the government had not allowed itself enough time to prepare for such an outcome.
He told the the BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “The consequences of a no deal would be so serious as I think parliament would have to seriously consider whether it could contemplate this.
“The question people need to ask themselves is, is this a risk that they think we should be taking?
“If the government can negotiate a good deal, then so be it. But if they can’t and we end up in this position, then we have to reopen the question of whether we go forward with Brexit at all. It is not too late to do that.
“A pause to reflect would certainly be necessary. I think that is a pretty high probability now.
“But I think that pause would need to include – and I suspect this would be insisted on by the commission – some re-examination of the decision itself.”
The co-chairman of the pro-Brexit Leave Means Leave campaign group, Richard Tice, said Kerslake’s intervention was intended to “soften people up” for a delay to Britain’s withdrawal.
“That would be absolutely appalling. People up and down the country would be furious that our civil servants and government have deliberately ignored the will of he people,” he told the Today programme.
“What we have just heard from Lord Kerslake is part of the deliberate negativity from the civil service who are looking to soften people up in order to extend article 50. It is completely unacceptable.”
It was earlier announced that Nigel Farage was to become vice-chairman of Leave Means Leave to spearhead the campaign against Theresa May’s Chequers plan, which critics regard as a sellout.
Writing in the Daily Telegraph, the former Ukip leader said: “It is now beyond doubt that the political class in Westminster and many of their media allies do not accept the EU referendum result.
“It is equally clear to me that, unless challenged, these anti-democrats will succeed in frustrating the result.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/18/rethink-of-brexit-vote-may-be-necessary-ex-civil-service-head-warns-lord-kerslake
Disregarding the small majority gained by leave even a much more impressive one would not negate the following facts
- We do not have an operational Government that was capable of running the country even while we were members of the EU, so the chances they can do it succesfully when we leave are ZERO.
- This situation was not due to simply to faults on the EU's part, and yes there was plenty of those, as the Government and media would have us believe, but rather to reliance on running the country as little more than a betting shop, and allowing industry to decline and be sold off into Foreign hands.
- The investor class that should have invested in our industries have chased a quick profit in the Far east financing what are in fact our enemies.
- What little the Government have put into Industry has not gone into useful production, but to feed the production of weapons of mass destruction for sale to dodgy regimes.
- Our natural resources are either neglected or sold off, and certainly no investment worthy of the name put into them
- Rail Privatisation and others has been a disaster for the Public
- We have degraded ourselves from being a senior member of the EU to being at best inferior to all the other member states.
- This has been done not for the benefit of the Public, but a cadre of Fascists who do not care what damage and misery they inflict in pursuit of profit and power.
- People didn't vote for Brexit no matter what reason they originally had to end up with this utterly shambolic disaster.
I agree.
The leave means leave mob have the brass nerve to establish themselves using a .eu domain!
Our campaign has been set up to make sure Leave really does mean Leave. Before the referendum, it was very clear what Leave meant. And it is very clear what Leave means today. We will not be a member of the Single Market, we will not be a member of the customs union and we will not be sending UK taxpayers’ money to Brussels. We have brought together some of the leading Leave voices from politics, academia and business to support the government as it sets out to deliver on the public’s decision. We look forward to the UK regaining democratic control over our borders, laws and our money. We urge those who supported Remain not to seek to delay, obstruct or dilute the Brexit process – but to accept the verdict of the British people and embrace the huge opportunities on the horizon for a free and independent United Kingdom.
www.leavemeansleave.eu
It isn't clear what Leave meant. Not before the referendum. Not now.
We will be sending taxpayers' money to Brussels as part of whatever settlement or, even if it is a total crash out, as the costs to the UK of that disaster.
We do not believe it truly is the verdict of the British people and most especially not the verdict of all those who were excluded from the referendum despite being directly threatened by the result.
It is amazing that the leave campaign are still pushing the Big Lies that they started with, with this nonsense.
" We urge those who supported Remain not to seek to delay, obstruct or dilute the Brexit process – but to accept the verdict of the British people and embrace the huge opportunities on the horizon for a free and independent United Kingdom."
Let's pass on the fact that there is no mandate worthy of the name in so narrowly won an election bought with Lies and illegal money usage for the moment
What are the Huge opportunities ? Show us your business plan
How far away is the Horizon they are on? show where it is
Who is capable of Navigating to them and making them reality? show us a capable Government.
Free and independent? so we won't enter unto any Trade or Legal arrangements we desperately need to survive ever again?
After our recent behavior and duplicity who in the outside world can trust us any more?
Show us some politicians that our potential trading partners now don't perceive as untrustworthy liars.
Our Politicians have demonstrated incompetence and bad faith at every turn.
Is this plea aimed at School kids who are wet behind the ears?
What are the leave campaign offering us really?
A Fantasy
" We urge those who supported Remain not to seek to delay, obstruct or dilute the Brexit process – but to accept the verdict of the British people and embrace the huge opportunities on the horizon for a free and independent United Kingdom."
Let's pass on the fact that there is no mandate worthy of the name in so narrowly won an election bought with Lies and illegal money usage for the moment
What are the Huge opportunities ? Show us your business plan
How far away is the Horizon they are on? show where it is
Who is capable of Navigating to them and making them reality? show us a capable Government.
Free and independent? so we won't enter unto any Trade or Legal arrangements we desperately need to survive ever again?
After our recent behavior and duplicity who in the outside world can trust us any more?
Show us some politicians that our potential trading partners now don't perceive as untrustworthy liars.
Our Politicians have demonstrated incompetence and bad faith at every turn.
Is this plea aimed at School kids who are wet behind the ears?
What are the leave campaign offering us really?
A Fantasy
From "The Times" this morning
"
Racists flock to Boris on Facebook
Johnson’s official page hosts anti-Islam rants
Boris Johnson is at the centre of a new row over racism after an investigation into online abuse revealed his official Facebook page hosts hundreds of Islamophobic messages. Under entries that publicise Johnson’s articles and speeches, the MP’s followers left comments including calls to ban Islam...
Now there's a suprise!
"
Racists flock to Boris on Facebook
Johnson’s official page hosts anti-Islam rants
Boris Johnson is at the centre of a new row over racism after an investigation into online abuse revealed his official Facebook page hosts hundreds of Islamophobic messages. Under entries that publicise Johnson’s articles and speeches, the MP’s followers left comments including calls to ban Islam...
Now there's a suprise!
I remember discussions between my sister and parents in the car from when I was about four. "What's the distance?" "It's over there - as far as you can see." "Are we in the distance now?"... And round and round in circles.
Nor can we ever reach the horizon.
Regarding brexit, we are like Moses. None of us will ever reach the promised land. (After all, JRM suggested it might be 50 years before we really gain. And many of us will not be around even then.)
Wiki also says: The imagery of the "Promised Land" was invoked in African-American spirituals as heaven or paradise and as an escape from slavery, often which can only be reached by death.
One who didn't make the brexit promised land:
Sir Peter Tapsell, Tory veteran and fierce critic of EU, dies aged 88
Father of the House from 2010-2015 began political career as speech writer to Anthony Eden
Sir Peter Tapsell, Tory veteran and fierce critic of EU, dies aged 88
Father of the House from 2010-2015 began political career as speech writer to Anthony Eden
On the basis that there is no such thing as a Heaven, the only promised land we have is one many of us do reach.
It's retirement, but it's up to us how good that is when reach it, though it's duration is partly down to luck.
.
The term has also given rise to some good rock n roll or perhaps more accurately in this case, rockabilly.
Chuck Berry is credited with writing this version although I prefer the rendition by Johnnie Allan and it seems the poor boy did actually 'make good' in Chuck Berry's writing. The song title is one of those that is shared with completely different lyrics, the Bruce Springsteen version for example.
"Promised Land"
I left my home in Norfolk Virginia
California on my mind
I straddled that Greyhound,
And rolled in into Raleigh and all across Carolina
Stopped in Charlotte and bypassed Rock Hill
And we never was a minute late
We was ninety miles out of Atlanta by sundown
Rollin' out of Georgia state
We had motor trouble it turned into a struggle,
Half way 'cross Alabam
And that 'hound broke down and left us all stranded
In downtown Birmingham
Right away, I bought me a through train ticket
Ridin' cross Mississippi clean
And I was on that midnight flier out of Birmingham
Smoking into New Orleans
Somebody help me get out of Louisiana
Just help me get to Houston town
There are people there who care a little 'bout me
And they won't let the poor boy down
Sure as you're born, they bought me a silk suit
Put luggage in my hands,
And I woke up high over Albuquerque
On a jet to the promised land
Workin' on a T-bone steak a la carte
Flying over to the Golden State
Oh when the pilot told me in thirteen minutes
We'd be headin' in the terminal gate
Swing low chariot, come down easy
Taxi to the terminal zone
Cut your engines, cool your wings
And let me make it to the telephone
Los Angeles give me Norfolk Virginia
Tidewater four ten o nine
Tell the folks back home this is the promised land callin'
And the poor boy's on the line
Who is Johnnie Allan? This explains:
Johnnie_Allan
Tom
Why are we having all these problems with muslim extremists? There are several answers to that question but the AAV web blog suggests it was precipitated by this matter in the 1950's while we were all proclaiming ourselves to be world champions at warfare:
Another Angry Voice
On 19 August 1953 Britain orchestrated a coup against the democratically elected government in Iran.
The reason they decided to overthrow democracy in Iran and replace it with a brutal dictatorship was that the Iranian government had voted to nationalise their country's oil reserves because the Anglo-Indian Oil Company (later rebranded British Petroleum) had outright refused to comply with an audit of their books.
The deliberate toppling of a democracy because they dared to try to assert control over their own natural resources was a watershed moment in the history of the Middle East.
Britain (and the Americans who helped them to carry out the coup) trashed their reputation in the region. The dictator they installed was so savage and repressive that he was eventually ousted in another coup; the 1979 Islamic Revolution that created the repressive Islamist regime that exists in Iran today.
By toppling a democracy in order to protect the financial interests of an oil company, the British and American governments set in motion a sequence of events that is still having enormous repercussions in the region today, 65 years later.
Anyone would have thought that Britain and America would have learned from this, and figured concepts like "blowback", the law of unintended consequences into their foreign policy decisions.
But apparently no. In 2003 Britain and the US instigated another catastrophic sequence of events (costing hundreds of thousands of people their lives, and culminating in the rise of ISIS) by toppling the Sadam Hussain government in Iraq with no real plan for what comes next (except for divvying up the oil contracts and handing out lucrative security contracts to private corporations like Blackwater and Halliburton).
Then in 2011 they repeated the same thing again, toppling Gaddafi in Libya, turning that nation into another vast lawless terrorism breeding ground, then allowing a Libyan terrorist to waltz back through the UK border, then plan and execute the horrific Manchester Arena attack.
Given how many times these government-toppling interventions have resulted in appalling consequences, you would have thought the British and American political class would have learned their lesson.
But there is another potential explanation than fools arrogantly doing the same thing over and again out of pig-headed stupidity. There's the argument that destabilisation and militarisation of the Middle East is no longer an unwanted by-product of these interventions, but the actual intended consequence, because instability and militarisation is clearly fantastic news for British and American arms dealers.
This would mean that stuff like the mass killings in the region, the grotesque repression by Islamist militias like Al Qauida and ISIS, the refugee crisis in the Mediterranean, and the horrific terrorist atrocities across Europe (Paris, Nice, Manchester, London, Berlin ...) are the expected "blowback" from foreign policy decisions designed to line the pockets of arms company shareholders and executives.
Seems a reasonable description of events to me!
Tom
Another Angry Voice
On 19 August 1953 Britain orchestrated a coup against the democratically elected government in Iran.
The reason they decided to overthrow democracy in Iran and replace it with a brutal dictatorship was that the Iranian government had voted to nationalise their country's oil reserves because the Anglo-Indian Oil Company (later rebranded British Petroleum) had outright refused to comply with an audit of their books.
The deliberate toppling of a democracy because they dared to try to assert control over their own natural resources was a watershed moment in the history of the Middle East.
Britain (and the Americans who helped them to carry out the coup) trashed their reputation in the region. The dictator they installed was so savage and repressive that he was eventually ousted in another coup; the 1979 Islamic Revolution that created the repressive Islamist regime that exists in Iran today.
By toppling a democracy in order to protect the financial interests of an oil company, the British and American governments set in motion a sequence of events that is still having enormous repercussions in the region today, 65 years later.
Anyone would have thought that Britain and America would have learned from this, and figured concepts like "blowback", the law of unintended consequences into their foreign policy decisions.
But apparently no. In 2003 Britain and the US instigated another catastrophic sequence of events (costing hundreds of thousands of people their lives, and culminating in the rise of ISIS) by toppling the Sadam Hussain government in Iraq with no real plan for what comes next (except for divvying up the oil contracts and handing out lucrative security contracts to private corporations like Blackwater and Halliburton).
Then in 2011 they repeated the same thing again, toppling Gaddafi in Libya, turning that nation into another vast lawless terrorism breeding ground, then allowing a Libyan terrorist to waltz back through the UK border, then plan and execute the horrific Manchester Arena attack.
Given how many times these government-toppling interventions have resulted in appalling consequences, you would have thought the British and American political class would have learned their lesson.
But there is another potential explanation than fools arrogantly doing the same thing over and again out of pig-headed stupidity. There's the argument that destabilisation and militarisation of the Middle East is no longer an unwanted by-product of these interventions, but the actual intended consequence, because instability and militarisation is clearly fantastic news for British and American arms dealers.
This would mean that stuff like the mass killings in the region, the grotesque repression by Islamist militias like Al Qauida and ISIS, the refugee crisis in the Mediterranean, and the horrific terrorist atrocities across Europe (Paris, Nice, Manchester, London, Berlin ...) are the expected "blowback" from foreign policy decisions designed to line the pockets of arms company shareholders and executives.
Seems a reasonable description of events to me!
Tom
When you are feeling crap, and really can't get yourself to do anything else, the internet is a wonderful place. (Broken tooth followed by emergency filling followed by severe infection/inflammation. Ideally timed for a weekend.)
Brexit: Tory MPs warn of entryism threat from Leave.EU supporters
Pro-Brexit group urges supporters to join to back Boris Johnson or Jacob Rees-Mogg in leadership contest
Heather Stewart Political editor
Sun 19 Aug 2018 13.00 BST Last modified on Sun 19 Aug 2018 13.26 BST
Conservative MPs are warning of a risk of entryism in the party as the pro-Brexit group Leave.EU encourages its supporters to become members in order to back Boris Johnson or Jacob Rees-Mogg in a future leadership contest.
Brexit: Tory MPs warn of entryism threat from Leave.EU supporters
Pro-Brexit group urges supporters to join to back Boris Johnson or Jacob Rees-Mogg in leadership contest
Heather Stewart Political editor
Sun 19 Aug 2018 13.00 BST Last modified on Sun 19 Aug 2018 13.26 BST
Anna Soubry is one of the Tory MPs warning of entryism: ‘You don’t need an awful lot of people to make a huge amount of difference … it’s really worrying.’ Photograph: David Levene for the Guardian
Conservative MPs are warning of a risk of entryism in the party as the pro-Brexit group Leave.EU encourages its supporters to become members in order to back Boris Johnson or Jacob Rees-Mogg in a future leadership contest.
Last edited:
Looks like a bit of a clanger there!
The Anglo-Persian Oil Company (APOC) was a British company founded in 1908 following the discovery of a large oil field in Masjed Soleiman, Iran. It was the first company to extract petroleum from Iran. In 1935 APOC was renamed the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC) and in 1954 it was renamed again to the British Petroleum Company (BP), one of the antecedents of the modern BP public limited company, while its assets in Iran were nationalised and taken over by the National Iranian Oil Company. Britain's treasury purchased 51% of the company in 1914
Sorry to Bother You: is this the most shocking anti-capitalist film ever?
Would you run a workforce of slaves if the price was right? Would you give up your freedom for a job, food and a bed for life? Welcome to the chilling, absurdist world of Sorry to Bother You
Touré
Sun 19 Aug 2018 15.00 BST Last modified on Sun 19 Aug 2018 15.05 BST
That picture doesn't half remind me of Clockwork Orange.
Would you run a workforce of slaves if the price was right? Would you give up your freedom for a job, food and a bed for life? Welcome to the chilling, absurdist world of Sorry to Bother You
Touré
Sun 19 Aug 2018 15.00 BST Last modified on Sun 19 Aug 2018 15.05 BST
That picture doesn't half remind me of Clockwork Orange.
Last edited:
Labour 'finished' if it backs Brexit in a snap election, says Adonis
Poll suggests party would fare much better by opposing UK’s departure from EU
Jessica Elgot Political correspondent
Sun 19 Aug 2018 22.00 BST
Lord Adonis said Labour could not afford to be seen as an ‘accomplice to Brexit’. Photograph: Simon Dawson/Reuters
A pro-EU Labour peer and former cabinet minister has said the party is “finished” if it contests another election promising to back Brexit, as a new poll suggested the party’s support depends heavily on remain voters who could switch their allegiance to the Lib Dems.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/19/labour-finished-if-it-backs-brexit-in-a-snap-election-says-adonis
Poll suggests party would fare much better by opposing UK’s departure from EU
Jessica Elgot Political correspondent
Sun 19 Aug 2018 22.00 BST
Lord Adonis said Labour could not afford to be seen as an ‘accomplice to Brexit’. Photograph: Simon Dawson/Reuters
A pro-EU Labour peer and former cabinet minister has said the party is “finished” if it contests another election promising to back Brexit, as a new poll suggested the party’s support depends heavily on remain voters who could switch their allegiance to the Lib Dems.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/19/labour-finished-if-it-backs-brexit-in-a-snap-election-says-adonis
In the Telegraph this morning
"
MPs demand bigger expenses budget to cope with additional workload 'created by Brexit'
Who didn't see that one coming?
"
MPs demand bigger expenses budget to cope with additional workload 'created by Brexit'
Who didn't see that one coming?
Usual tripe in the Express
"
'It's an INSULT to the British people!' Brexiteer MP ridicules THIS common Remainer claim
BREXITEER MP Martin Vickers said it is an “insult” to claim that the 17.4 million British people who voted to leave the European Union in the 2016 Brexit referendum did not know what they were voting for..
It's not an insult, it's a fact, they were told for instance we would not be leaving either the Single Market or Customs by Farage and the other Leave Champions, now we are told that in fact they voted for the opposite!
And since the Government had no idea of the ramifications , and in fact they still don't know, and won't till after the event, how could the public possibly know?
The truth is we are taking an awful risk leaving the EU, and there is really no reason whatsoever that has been advanced to show there will be anything other than problems afterwards.
No reason has been put forward for doing it other than
"The will of the people" or more correctly the "will of a bunch of conning sharks, misleasing the public for personal profit"
It's high time someone made a stand and said
"leave supporting Politicans who made claims of the benefits of Brexit should be made to deliver,on those promises, or face prosecution for Fraud and Conspiracy against the State and People.
They created this situation and shouldn't be allowed to get away scot free if it hurts the National interest, and proves to have been an act of Sabotage."
"
'It's an INSULT to the British people!' Brexiteer MP ridicules THIS common Remainer claim
BREXITEER MP Martin Vickers said it is an “insult” to claim that the 17.4 million British people who voted to leave the European Union in the 2016 Brexit referendum did not know what they were voting for..
It's not an insult, it's a fact, they were told for instance we would not be leaving either the Single Market or Customs by Farage and the other Leave Champions, now we are told that in fact they voted for the opposite!
And since the Government had no idea of the ramifications , and in fact they still don't know, and won't till after the event, how could the public possibly know?
The truth is we are taking an awful risk leaving the EU, and there is really no reason whatsoever that has been advanced to show there will be anything other than problems afterwards.
No reason has been put forward for doing it other than
"The will of the people" or more correctly the "will of a bunch of conning sharks, misleasing the public for personal profit"
It's high time someone made a stand and said
"leave supporting Politicans who made claims of the benefits of Brexit should be made to deliver,on those promises, or face prosecution for Fraud and Conspiracy against the State and People.
They created this situation and shouldn't be allowed to get away scot free if it hurts the National interest, and proves to have been an act of Sabotage."
Last edited:
The independent this morning
"
Brexit: Ford warns UK it will take 'whatever action is needed' after profits hit
The car company blamed withdrawal from the EU for a £760m drop in profitability in 2017
Car manufacturer Ford has issued a Brexit warning to British politicians that it will take “whatever action is needed” to protect its business.
The ominous words came after the American car giant blamed uncertainty over Brexit for a colossal £760m drop in its European earnings in 2017.
The firm pointed the finger at plummeting confidence in the UK since the Brexit referendum and raised fears of long-term damage from European Union withdrawal.
"
Brexit: Ford warns UK it will take 'whatever action is needed' after profits hit
The car company blamed withdrawal from the EU for a £760m drop in profitability in 2017
Car manufacturer Ford has issued a Brexit warning to British politicians that it will take “whatever action is needed” to protect its business.
The ominous words came after the American car giant blamed uncertainty over Brexit for a colossal £760m drop in its European earnings in 2017.
The firm pointed the finger at plummeting confidence in the UK since the Brexit referendum and raised fears of long-term damage from European Union withdrawal.