ChatterBank8 mins ago
Another Brexit Vote.
Can someone explain to me why Theresa May can have 2 votes and wants a third on the same thing but the public are told they had their vote on Brexit and can't have another.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by needawin. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
"...jno,yes,I sometimes wonder how other MP's,if they were at the helm,would have handled Brexit!"
In june 2016 they should have announced something along the lines of:
"We're leaving in two years time. We'd love to continue trading with your remaining members and in the meantime we must develop some pragmatic arrangements so that goods, people and money can continue between the UK and the EU 27 (as they do between "normal" countries". If those arrangements cannot be facilitated we're leaving anyway and we'll all have to get on with it."
Instead the "negotiators" approached the matter as a damage limitation exercise to be completed with as little change as possible.
In june 2016 they should have announced something along the lines of:
"We're leaving in two years time. We'd love to continue trading with your remaining members and in the meantime we must develop some pragmatic arrangements so that goods, people and money can continue between the UK and the EU 27 (as they do between "normal" countries". If those arrangements cannot be facilitated we're leaving anyway and we'll all have to get on with it."
Instead the "negotiators" approached the matter as a damage limitation exercise to be completed with as little change as possible.
Indeed so jno. The problem was actually the exact opposite: the PM went in with a wholly inflexible approach, thus boxing herself in for the duration. Tho on this she was probably badly advised by her (unelected) advisers.
Called an election and threw away her majority, ending with a less “Brexity” parliament. That was the time to rein in and seek compromising we across the new House, but she blundered blindly on with Davis and Johnson, until finally they had effectively to be bypassed.
Only when she was at the mercy of parliament’s vote on her deal did she try to sell it as a compromise Brexit acknowledging that the country may have voted marginally one way but was in reality divided, in other words as a Brexit for Remainers too.
We’ll probably end up with a very soft Brexit, which reflects that division.
Called an election and threw away her majority, ending with a less “Brexity” parliament. That was the time to rein in and seek compromising we across the new House, but she blundered blindly on with Davis and Johnson, until finally they had effectively to be bypassed.
Only when she was at the mercy of parliament’s vote on her deal did she try to sell it as a compromise Brexit acknowledging that the country may have voted marginally one way but was in reality divided, in other words as a Brexit for Remainers too.
We’ll probably end up with a very soft Brexit, which reflects that division.
I mean the other point is that neither May nor Cameron had any authority to do what they promised. Cameron said that he would trigger the A50 notification instantly the result was known, but we then learned that he would have been constitutionally forbidden from doing so, had he tried; Theresa May's constant promise that we would leave on March 29th, too, was not within her powers to assure, depending as it does both on the intentions of Parliament and on the EU.
Not that this absolves them of any blame, because then the sin is to make implies promises that, surely, they must have known, or been advised that, it would be impossible to keep.
Not that this absolves them of any blame, because then the sin is to make implies promises that, surely, they must have known, or been advised that, it would be impossible to keep.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles17 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles32 mins ago
ChatterBank109 mins ago
Jokes110 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles130 mins ago
 |
 |
 |
|
|
 |