BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
Bozman wrote:Interesting point-
From the guardians comments section:
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 legistlation 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-maneouvered 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.
They miss the point that the 'Spooners were told all of this and they still voted out. I imagine disliking experts is not cured by them being proved right.0 -
Coopster the 1st wrote:Lookyhere wrote:Lookyhere wrote:Mr Goo wrote:
yes would be interesting to ignore democracy but what about the 16 million who voted IN, what is democratic about ignoring their wishes ?
at least the losing side in a GE get an opposition voice and chance to fight again 5 years later.
You wouldn't think that if the result had been 52% Remain / 48% Leave would you?
Remaining IN wont be costing us our reputation, our childrens futures or jobs and investment BUT your right, i would nt, however any decent Tory leader, would never have given this referendum.
As for immigration, french politicians "are taking back control" and demanding the UK border move back to UK, should do wonders for illegal immigration.
as someone said to me "this is what happens when you use a hammer to fix a watch"
The Calais situation is a complete red herring. It would become the responsibility of those transporting illegal immigrants into the UK to check they are eligible and it is their responsibility to transfer those people back to the country they moved from at their cost.
It is why we do not have a 'jungle' style camp near Heathrow or Gatwick
Bizarrely I agree it is a red herring but because the numbers are small.
You can remove them to the EU country where they were first registered (can you see the future problem) or their country of origin (they destroy their docs)
You have jungle style camps at the point of departure - where would they be going to?0 -
Bozman wrote:Interesting point-
From the guardians comments section:
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 legistlation 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-maneouvered 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.
Seen this. :roll:
Desperation seems to be setting in.
Look at the UK vote map from Thursday. If Art 50 is not started before the 2020 GE the vast majority of that blue will turn to purple and Nigel Farage will become PM. Let's hope the British electorate are listened to so that this does not occur0 -
Coopster the 1st wrote:Bozman wrote:Interesting point-
From the guardians comments section:
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 leavie 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 legistlation 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-maneouvered 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.
Seen this. :roll:
Desperation seems to be setting in.
Look at the UK vote map from Thursday. If Art 50 is not started before the 2020 GE the vast majority of that blue will turn to purple and Nigel Farage will become PM. Let's hope the British electorate are listened to so that this does not occur
This is one persons opinion - not desparation setting in.
You need Art 50 in weeks if not days. The longer it takes the less likely it is to happen.
Overlay the referendum result map with the last GE and you will see it is not the Tories who would worry0 -
Bozman wrote:
If Boris Johnson looked downbeat yesterday, that is because he realises that he has lost.
The Brexit leaders now have a result that they cannot use. For them, leadership of the Tory party has become a poison chalice.
Someone will step forwards, I suspect Boris will find some form of words of supporting the 'experienced' candidate and try to ride out the cries of 'coward', and run the subsequent time.
Idle speculation is all, we will find out soon enough.
I understand the European point of view of 'let's get the uncertainty over with as quickly as possible and let the markets settle - you want to leave, then get on with it'. The free flow of people throughout Europe appears to be more important to the EU than British membership.0 -
If political turmoil takes hold completely and we get a GE, then Tony Benn's son might be taking us out of the EU. That would be ironic given their opposing views.
I think there will be internal and external pressure to trigger Article 50 from the markets, backbench MPs, EU gov' t's and EU officials that will come to a head in the next few weeks. I don't think the world wait for Boris and co.0 -
The numbers are indeed small, but weve just removed any incentive the French may have had to control our borders for us. Frankly were I Hollande Id be giving out free inflatables and life jackets at Calais.Surrey Commuter wrote:Coopster the 1st wrote:Lookyhere wrote:Lookyhere wrote:Mr Goo wrote:
yes would be interesting to ignore democracy but what about the 16 million who voted IN, what is democratic about ignoring their wishes ?
at least the losing side in a GE get an opposition voice and chance to fight again 5 years later.
You wouldn't think that if the result had been 52% Remain / 48% Leave would you?
Remaining IN wont be costing us our reputation, our childrens futures or jobs and investment BUT your right, i would nt, however any decent Tory leader, would never have given this referendum.
As for immigration, french politicians "are taking back control" and demanding the UK border move back to UK, should do wonders for illegal immigration.
as someone said to me "this is what happens when you use a hammer to fix a watch"
The Calais situation is a complete red herring. It would become the responsibility of those transporting illegal immigrants into the UK to check they are eligible and it is their responsibility to transfer those people back to the country they moved from at their cost.
It is why we do not have a 'jungle' style camp near Heathrow or Gatwick
Bizarrely I agree it is a red herring but because the numbers are small.
You can remove them to the EU country where they were first registered (can you see the future problem) or their country of origin (they destroy their docs)
You have jungle style camps at the point of departure - where would they be going to?Fitter....healthier....more productive.....0 -
Beat me to it.Coopster the 1st wrote:bobmcstuff wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:It is the jet-set graduates versus the working class
My entire ars* it is - graduates on the whole are not jet setters. That entire argument is false.
Of that whole article, that is all you could pick up on. It looks like you hold a very weak argument"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
On the subject of porky pies Sajid Javid is getting something of an interogation by Andrew Marr. Apparently there were no lies by either side just a "robust debate".0
-
Lots of anecdotal evidence that the result appears to have legitimised racist behaviour. I know it's only small numbers but plenty of people are saying they've been getting open abuse for the first time in years (mainly black and Asian people who, even if not born here, aren't affected by the result of the vote but the racist loons don't understand that). No matter that it's just a few, it's a worry they feel they have been given a mandate to openly make racist comments. Britain First put up a message thanking UKIP for starting things so that they can finish them. Hopefully there'll be a few high profile results for incitement to racial hatred and everything will calm back down.0
-
Sturgeon might have an issue here. If no PM will call a second referendum for Scotland what have they to lose? One con seat?
Scotland is already against Westminster. Any PM would be a fool to agree with it.My blog: http://www.roubaixcycling.cc (kit reviews and other musings)
https://twitter.com/roubaixcc
Facebook? No. Just say no.0 -
With regards to that Guardian article, whoever becomes PM can easily invoke Article 50 and absolve themself of blame by saying they're are performing their duty after a democratic vote instigated by the predecessor. They won't win the next election anyway so may as well be PM for 3.5 years.0
-
Not all 'loons are racist BTW0
-
bendertherobot wrote:Sturgeon might have an issue here. If no PM will call a second referendum for Scotland what have they to lose? One con seat?
Scotland is already against Westminster. Any PM would be a fool to agree with it.
I thought I read somewhere that there was a clause in the original legislation that a further referendum could be held if there were significant changes?0 -
Actually this article makes a good point, despite the source.Coopster the 1st wrote:Bozman wrote:Interesting point-
From the guardians comments section:
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 legistlation 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-maneouvered 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.
Seen this. :roll:
Desperation seems to be setting in.
Look at the UK vote map from Thursday. If Art 50 is not started before the 2020 GE the vast majority of that blue will turn to purple and Nigel Farage will become PM. Let's hope the British electorate are listened to so that this does not occur
The political will in parliament based on the views of the majority of MPs from all major parties is against Brexit, notwithstanding the referendum result. For article 50 to be triggered it needs parliament to ratify the referendum. Big question is whether that will happen on something that is so fundamental and on which MPs views are very strong..
And as I've said above, if that happens we are in uncharted waters. I agree that UKIP would likely make big gains in that case but I doubt they would ever get near enough support to get power and ratify."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
bendertherobot wrote:Sturgeon might have an issue here. If no PM will call a second referendum for Scotland what have they to lose? One con seat?
Scotland is already against Westminster. Any PM would be a fool to agree with it.
Sorry you have lost me there - interested to hear your view as Sturgeon is not hanging around and am guessing this is a well thought out playlist.0 -
Pross wrote:With regards to that Guardian article, whoever becomes PM can easily invoke Article 50 and absolve themself of blame by saying they're are performing their duty after a democratic vote instigated by the predecessor. They won't win the next election anyway so may as well be PM for 3.5 years.
With the boundary changes and without Scotland the Tories are highly unlikely to lose0 -
In the news: HSBC is looking at relocating 1,000 staff from London to Paris. To put this into perspective, HSBC currently employs 48,000 in the UK and earlier this year announced job reductions of 8,000 in the UK as a part of a cost cutting drive."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0
-
Surrey Commuter wrote:bendertherobot wrote:Sturgeon might have an issue here. If no PM will call a second referendum for Scotland what have they to lose? One con seat?
Scotland is already against Westminster. Any PM would be a fool to agree with it.
Sorry you have lost me there - interested to hear your view as Sturgeon is not hanging around and am guessing this is a well thought out playlist.
Lost you how? The Government says no. Scots are annoyed. They want to rant. They do that at a GE and vote out, one conservative. Unless somehow the rest of the Country also votes out the Cons. But, I suspect, the brexiters want to keep Britain great.My blog: http://www.roubaixcycling.cc (kit reviews and other musings)
https://twitter.com/roubaixcc
Facebook? No. Just say no.0 -
A feather is kinky, a whole chicken is just perverse.0
-
Stevo 666 wrote:
Actually this article makes a good point, despite the source.Coopster the 1st wrote:Bozman wrote:Interesting point-
From the guardians comments section:
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 legistlation 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-maneouvered 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.
Seen this. :roll:
Desperation seems to be setting in.
Look at the UK vote map from Thursday. If Art 50 is not started before the 2020 GE the vast majority of that blue will turn to purple and Nigel Farage will become PM. Let's hope the British electorate are listened to so that this does not occur
The political will in parliament based on the views of the majority of MPs from all major parties is against Brexit, notwithstanding the referendum result. For article 50 to be triggered it needs parliament to ratify the referendum. Big question is whether that will happen on something that is so fundamental and on which MPs views are very strong..
And as I've said above, if that happens we are in uncharted waters. I agree that UKIP would likely make big gains in that case but I doubt they would ever get near enough support to get power and ratify.
Steveo I do not disagree with your analysis but this is the same 650 wankers who a year ago felt so strongly about the dangers of Brexit that they voted to allow the public a referendum on it.
Of the people who voted Out the vast majority would never vote Tory and a lot of the others would vote for a monkey with a blue rosette. My own view is that it will prove to the spooners that they are ruled by an undemocratic elite and voting is a waste of time.0 -
True. But Parliament's duty is to work for the best interests of the people, sometimes against their will. Austerity? What would a referendum on that look like? A referendum is just an indication of how people feel about things. Remember that Parliament represents those who cannot vote as well. I don't think Parliament would dare ignore the referendum. But it can. And it can do that legally easily. It's not even truly inconsistent with democracy. It would be mad to do do politically and, in the end, might see an end to this party system.My blog: http://www.roubaixcycling.cc (kit reviews and other musings)
https://twitter.com/roubaixcc
Facebook? No. Just say no.0 -
bendertherobot wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:bendertherobot wrote:Sturgeon might have an issue here. If no PM will call a second referendum for Scotland what have they to lose? One con seat?
Scotland is already against Westminster. Any PM would be a fool to agree with it.
Sorry you have lost me there - interested to hear your view as Sturgeon is not hanging around and am guessing this is a well thought out playlist.
Lost you how? The Government says no. Scots are annoyed. They want to rant. They do that at a GE and vote out, one conservative. Unless somehow the rest of the Country also votes out the Cons. But, I suspect, the brexiters want to keep Britain great.
There will come a time when Sturgeon will have the balance of power in Westminster and will use it to get her referendum. If she plays her cards right she could keep our EU membership. From an EU point of view it reduces downside of us leaving by 10% and sends a pound warning to anybody thinking of following us.0 -
bendertherobot wrote:True. But Parliament's duty is to work for the best interests of the people, sometimes against their will. Austerity? What would a referendum on that look like? A referendum is just an indication of how people feel about things. Remember that Parliament represents those who cannot vote as well. I don't think Parliament would dare ignore the referendum. But it can. And it can do that legally easily. It's not even truly inconsistent with democracy. It would be mad to do do politically and, in the end, might see an end to this party system.
They have dug quite a hole for themselves!
The EU could chuck them a bone to justify Westminster ignoring the referendum but I think they are minded to tell us to fuck off.
They have already reneged on invoking Article 50 so maybe they are hoping to play the long game and hope everybody calms down. Again I am not sure the EU will let this happen as the instability hinders them as well.0 -
My reading is that there is a very interesting dynamic within the EU hierarchy too, exemplified by the different noises coming from Tusk (pragmatic) and Juncker (hardline). Juncker seemed to be trying to promote his view by intervening on the eve of the referendum by restating the 'ever closer union' line in such an antagonistic way, knowing it wouldn't be helpful to Remain, but hoping it would undermine pragmatism and compromise. Outside of the actual EU bubble, I suspect that individual governments wouldn't be unsympathetic to a refocus of the EU's ambitions. France would make our contortions look like a village fête if the genie were unleashed there.Surrey Commuter wrote:The EU could chuck them a bone to justify Westminster ignoring the referendum but I think they are minded to tell us to fark off.
They have already reneged on invoking Article 50 so maybe they are hoping to play the long game and hope everybody calms down. Again I am not sure the EU will let this happen as the instability hinders them as well.0 -
briantrumpet wrote:
My reading is that there is a very interesting dynamic within the EU hierarchy too, exemplified by the different noises coming from Tusk (pragmatic) and Juncker (hardline). Juncker seemed to be trying to promote his view by intervening on the eve of the referendum by restating the 'ever closer union' line in such an antagonistic way, knowing it wouldn't be helpful to Remain, but hoping it would undermine pragmatism and compromise. Outside of the actual EU bubble, I suspect that individual governments wouldn't be unsympathetic to a refocus of the EU's ambitions. France would make our contortions look like a village fête if the genie were unleashed there.Surrey Commuter wrote:The EU could chuck them a bone to justify Westminster ignoring the referendum but I think they are minded to tell us to fark off.
They have already reneged on invoking Article 50 so maybe they are hoping to play the long game and hope everybody calms down. Again I am not sure the EU will let this happen as the instability hinders them as well.
My understanding is that the refocus has already occurred0 -
If it has, Juncker's intervention isn't helping anyone comprehend what it is. I'm quite expecting him to start quoting Jacques Delors.Surrey Commuter wrote:My understanding is that the refocus has already occurred0 -
Here's one perspective from a non-British source: http://www.spiegel.de/international/eur ... 99797.html
But I think it's underplaying the tensions within individual countries, especially France. The French are much more like the British then we might care to admit, but with a bit more of a penchant for direct action when things get contentious.0
