UKC

Writing in today's Telegraph:

"There will still be intense and intensifying European cooperation and partnership in a huge number of fields: the arts, the sciences, the universities, and on improving the environment.

"EU citizens living in this country will have their rights fully protected, and the same goes for British citizens living in the EU.

"British people will still be able to go and work in the EU; to live; to travel; to study; to buy homes and to settle down. As the German equivalent of the CBI - the BDI - has very sensibly reminded us, there will continue to be free trade, and access to the single market.

"The only change - and it will not come in any great rush - is that the UK will extricate itself from the EU's extraordinary and opaque system of legislation: the vast and growing corpus of law enacted by a European Court of Justice from which there can be no appeal."

In reply to BnB:

He a complete fu#king idiot.

In reply to BnB:

I don't think most people were ever looking for massive change, they were probably content with 50% of the EU anyway, not always the same 50% of course. I think if we lose a few elements of EU we dislike or don't need, plus there is sentiment developing in the EU that they need to change there. Then once the dust settles I see no losers in the long run.

In reply to Indy:


On the contrary. I despise what he has done but his failure is to have over-achieved and this is the logical response. You'll find idiots everywhere, including the Remain campaign.

As a big Remain supporter (I'm English but ethnically European) I'm trying to be dispassionate.

In reply to summo:

Oh for FFS not you as well. After months of agitating, scaremongering and belittling the EU, you now say its OK really and you just want a few tweaks. Perhaps you could have said this before stirring up racism, causing the pound to crash, wiping billions off shares globally and leaving the UK with no effective government or opposition? In the word of Alistair Campbellabout your fellow traveller Hannan, "twat".

In reply to MG:


I don't think you'll find any post of mind where I said I was against migration or trade. Get rid of the legal side, cap, strasbourg and fisheries. I'd be quite happy. If you call that a few tweaks, then great I see no reasons for the negotiations to be anything other than a breeze.

ps. the markets haven't crashed. I never once stirred up racism. The UK government hasn't had any effective opposition for at least 5 years and if you can't debate politely then I shall not bother.

In reply to summo:

Reasoned and dignified. Keep that tone.

MG: why do you want to keep fighting? Let it go, Move on.

In reply to Just Another Dave:


Oh, I don't know. Maybe I want to live in a stable, prosperous, outward looking society or something stupid.

In reply to BnB:
lets seperate optimism from delusional thoughts.
its completely delusional to believe any of that. to suggest that there will not be massive negative implications to everyone on a personal level is the kind of manipulative behaviour you would expect from a politician like old borris.
why would the EU countries let britain get away with it ? they are going to make us pay not even for revenge , just to show other member states what happens when you exit.

In reply to BnB:

I've no idea where Boris is coming from here, but this isn't a possibility. Those EU laws and regulations are the basis, the whole point of the single market, which is based on integrating regulation for products, trade and labour - adopting eu laws and regulations is, in a practical sense, what being a member of the single market means.

In reply to BnB:

Meanwhile Osborne is looking for a prime job in the new parliament;

In reply to BnB:

I am Nigel's complete lack of surprise.

D

In reply to BnB:

Our new relationship with the EU will be exactly the same as our old one except will costs us more money, with no say and everyone will rightly despise us and treat us like the f*ckwits that we are for voting out.

In reply to snoop6060:


often isn't far from jealousy.

In reply to Indy:


At least he thinks we are, which is not got the same thing.

In reply to BnB:

Interesting.....

http://indy100.independent.co.uk/article/people-are-really-really-hoping-th...

In reply to summo: i can barely believe you wrote that. You got to be top poster moaning about the wicked EU, and the perils of uncontrolled and trade figured strongly.

BoJo's stuff isn't credible, and any fule can see it. It would have been an uncomfortable weekend for him , but c'est la vie. Any sign Gove yet?

In reply to Ben1983:

"I've no idea where Boris is coming from here," maybe he doesn't either? One thing is clear: his rhetoric on brexit is as dishonest as ever (for the EU, free trade without free movement simply isn't possible).

In reply to wbo:


I give up; not once have I complained about migration or trade. 99% of the UK have no idea what migration is, they should try visiting any of the Scandi countries. I think the UK should remain in some sort of EEA agreement and have said it many times and like yourself I am part of EU wide employment migration. I see one being linked to other and have no disagreement with either.

In reply to summo:

The trouble with Boris is that he peaked at school.

In reply to Pete Pozman:


guess you are still waiting for yours?

In reply to Just Another Dave:



Let's leave it to the "experts" shall we?

In reply to summo:


I suppose everybody else gets that as usual...

In reply to Offwidth:


Nothing in his statement precludes free movement of labour. In fact he postively champions it. You're not the first respondent to miss this point so please don't feel I'm picking a fight with you.

Can't anyone see that this looks just like membership of the EEA on the same terms as Norway?

In reply to Just Another Dave:

Jesus! This isn't a football result or a bad meal in a restaurant. It's not some thing that can be 'got over' as the effects are going to be devastating and last for generations so of course people are going to fight until Article 50 is invoked. Our MPs can vote it down and I'll vote for any candidate in my constituency who does, maybe that'll be enough to sway enough of them, let's face it the unthinking tw*ts who have turned out to bolster the leave vote will probably not be voting in the general election. That may be undemocratic but I have a clear conscious on that given the lies that these people were basing their vote on. Example, I was talking to my professed socialist neighbour yesterday, she is intelligent and educated and environmentally concerned yet voted out because "she didn't want her grand children to be forced to join a European army and then be dragged into a war by Turkey", she was horrified by what she had done when I pointed out there was no such thing a European army, Turkey weren't going to join the EU and the UK had a veto anyway.

In reply to BnB:


I think everyone can hence the outrage, we have moved from a priviedged position in the union to a poor deal

In reply to MG:


Then perhaps you need to set an example by behaving like a grown up. If everyone goes around screaming "wah wah racist" at anyone with a different view, we are not going to get very far.

In reply to wintertree:


Some people got this memo;

http://cdn.someecards.com/someecards/usercards/are-you-losing-the-debate-sh...

In reply to Ben1983:


That hits the nail on the head. It's just more bullshit while he tries to defuse the traps left for him on the path to 'leadership'.
jk

In reply to summo:


Yes, but you cannot read the invisible writings in your posts.

In reply to Pete Pozman:


Nope, rather than delete or edit that comment out, I'll apologise. I am being drawn into the nasty hate driven side of the unhappy remainers and it's often impossible online for 'in the pub' comments to come across in a joking or sarcastic manner in which they are meant to be. So sorry.

I think I will exit the politics debates anyway. They are becoming too hate driven. The referendum is dividing people on this site, far more than climbing is uniting and the real debate is dying, whilst bitterness is building.

The EU and UK can both better in the long run, if people are willing to accept change and that 28 countries have differences as well as things in common. But for the UK to thrive 'in' or 'out' the average UK resident needs to support their own country more. Shop high street, not amazon. Shop UK chains not Lidl, netto etc... Shop where each pound spent will benefit the most UK workers and also best for UK tax take. It might mean buying a little less initially, but the knock on effect will grow and go full cycle.

In reply to Big Ger:


I've said I'm pro EEA and migration to many people on here. Either way, I'm ending my debate as it's just turning nasty and bitter now.

In reply to Indy:

Hahahaha brilliant. I've always disliked Cameron but it does appear he's done a great big dump on Johnsons career and who can dislike that?

In reply to wintertree:
Yes. But then no one here has done that.

In reply to wbo:

What on earth is wrong with saying everything will remain the same apart from getting rid those tedious laws. I am sure the EU will agree instantly. In fact the only people moving faster to cheer him will be all those people voting out on the assumption that might lead to lower immigration and more money spent on the NHS.


Dont think so. I was impressed by IDS claiming that he hadnt actually supported the 350m claim. Despite doing a speech in front of it.

In reply to summo:

You've spent the last six months denigrating the organisation that most facilitates both, and supporting the movement to leave that organisation. That movement relentlessly opposed immigration and posted highly xenophobic posters showing pictures of refugees under the heading "breaking point". Now you try and pretend it's nothing to do with you.

In reply to Greasy Prusiks:


I can dislike it immensely. To have supposedly used the futures of my kids and everyone else's too in the country to settle a personal score would be beneath contempt.

But then, the whole ****ing lot of them (Boris, Cameron, Gove, Smith, Corbyn and their ilk) fit quite neatly into that category

In reply to MG:


Perhaps I misunderstood when you said


Perhaps you just mean nobody should associate with a view if a minority of racists align with it. I'm not sure that's any more acceptable.

In reply to MG:


It isnt as such. Summo and co have just been using anyone who feels impacted by immigration etc as useful idiots to push the cause.
Just think how upset those disillusioned people are going to feel when they realise those fearless fighters against the elite were happy with all the things that upset them and just wanted to get rid of tedious laws.

In reply to BnB:
I just don't get how he could possibly want the Norwegian model after this horrible divisive campaign: the same trade, the same free movement, the same laws to meet and no vetos or direct influence. It would be better for Parliament to ignore the people than a pro brexit leader to ignore the concerns on immigration that they stoked in order to win.

In reply to Greenbanks:

Conveniently enough, Cameron would have done more damage to our futures by enacting Article 50 immediately. The fact he's handed a bomb to Johnson is merely a bonus. Don't get me wrong, we're still going to be totally diminished as a nation but I'll take some schadenfreude at Johnson whatever the weather.

In reply to wintertree:

I'm saying supporting a campaign that post pictures of refugees under a provocative heading is stirring up racism.

In reply to MG:

And I don't think anyone reasonable can argue with that.

Someone on Facebook has collated a photo album called "worrying times" detailing more than a hundred recorded incidents of racism and xenophobia in the three days since the referendum. It made me want to cry.

In reply to summo:


In the long run we are all dead.

In reply to wintertree:



That's brilliant isn't it?

If we find a campaign that we disagree with, say "Corbyn for PM", we just get some EDL members to agree with it, then no one is allowed to support it!

I cannot think why we haven't done it before, it should enter the lexicon as "MG" strategy.

In reply to Greenbanks:

I don't quite understand what you mean? Boris campaigned to leave surely it's only fair that he be the one to face that decision and activate article 50?

In reply to MG:


The campaign is not the vote. A flawed campaign does not excuse you basically accusing Summo of storing up racism.

I voted remain - I had reasons to vote leave but they were nowhere near strong enough to justify the risks. Like many others, the leave campaign did not feature in my reasons for considering a leave vote.

Edit: by "basically" I mean "actually".

In reply to summo:

I'll reply to summo and Big Ger, just as two examples. I voted remain, and whilst we disagree on our views, you have all have given well expressed reasons for voting Leave. Over the past few days it has felt to me at times like the country has been taken over by far right morons - in the main due to the media focus been placed firmly on the knuckle heads who did vote with their xenophobic hat on. But to aid my depression, I have been looking at some of the statistics, and I'm at least comforted that these idiots are were still a minority in the voting stats, and that breakdown of the Vote Leaver covers a wide demographic, many/most of whom quite reasonably don't want to pull the drawbridge up.

Again today, there is a rush to report the rise of the hate against immigrants by the thumb heads. If these kind of people feel validated by the result, its best they get clamped down hard on soon. But you take the idiots out of the equation in the figures, the Brexiters that are left are not the goose stepping nutters portrayed by many.

As an example. I voted remain, but am as far away from being a conservative as you can get. But Cameron wanted in, so am I therefore a Tory by association. No.

Common ground is what we need, and if at the end of this we come away with something palatable and watered down, then its better than the alternative.

In reply to Greasy Prusiks:

Absolutely it is. Boris should carry the can for the whole lot of it. But he'd not have needed to if the who referendum gig had not been a game played between egos in a political party. A decision made on fact, votes cast on the basis of what truths we know - this would at least be enough (however bad the taste) to convince me (and my kids) that a democratic process is at work. As it is it looks like it has been subverted - and lethally so.

In reply to summo:


This is nonsense.

Had they campaigned on keeping borders open and the single market they would not have won. You know that.

In reply to summo:


Jo Cox's kids?

In reply to Greenbanks:

Yeah you're right there. I think Cameron called the referendum just to get into power.

In reply to Indy:

I see another alternative. DC currently holds a lot of respect (never thought I'd write that in a million years). BJ, MG and NF have realized that they have not just stirred the pot, but f(&ing tipped it over. They know they will be committing seppuku by exiting the EU. DC can pledge his support of his successor, in exchange for the successor coming clean that they ran a smear campaign of lies and half-truths - and then do a proper analysis of what a Brexit would entail, and present these facts in the media (with an unprecedented level of truth, over several days). This will give the successor enough support to run an office (consisting of some of their original support base, + some of DC's support base, + most remainers).
The actual excuse to annul the non-binding referendum, they could either choose an MP vote in Parliament (after the extensive, unprecedented media campaign that really shows how horrible an idea Brexit is) or go all in, and run a second legally binding referendum that requires a 2/3 majority (after the extensive media campaign).

In my opinion this is possible, and is probably the best case scenario for everyone bar the hard-right (well it is the best outcome for them, they just don't know it IMO). The outcome of this would have probably doubled or tripled the size of the hard-right anti-establishment movement, and they will require significant attention in the coming years to avoid them growing.

In reply to Roadrunner5:

Not quite nonsense. I voted remain whilst I disagree with elements of the current EU model. Certainly people voted leave who weren't against everything the EU had to offer.

In reply to BnB:



I'm just waiting for him to set the date of the first weekly 350m payment into the NHS.

A lot of the brexit voters simply will not accept anything close to free movement and will turn to UKIP as they realize they have been shafted. What will UKIPs purpose be once we are out of the EU?

In reply to SenzuBean:




The one problem I see with all this is that our standing in Europe will be diminished. We'd have to be punished in some way for all the turmoil. It depends whether the voices of calm (i.e Merkel) win out against the harsher rhetoric, and also on the timescale of these announcements.

The other thing is that Boris is in an extremely dangerous position. Not just politically, but surely in terms of his physical safety. He's betrayed the entire electorate and jeopardised the future of the UK for his own ambitions. He wanted power without responsibility.

In reply to Bellie:


But would you have won with that argument?

In reply to doz generale:

I think people are slowly coming around to the fact that they were pawns in a leadership battle and what they were voting for was never an option. Totally duped.

In reply to Roadrunner5:


Sadly the outcome will be to bolster the ranks of the far right. What i don't get is that even throughout the campaign it was pretty clear that even if we left the EU we would not be able to close borders without significantly damaging the economy but yet lots of brexiters have voted out for that very reason? how things develop over the next few months will be very interesting.

Lib debs have also made a bid to capture the vacuum in the middle ground by offering to re-apply to the EU.

In reply to BnB:

Q. How many Brexiters does it take to change a lightbulb?
A. We never said there was a lightbulb.

In reply to Roadrunner5:


Yes, and that's what we're going to have to keep continuing if we want to trade with the EU - as far as I gather.

In reply to Ramblin dave:



I'm nickin' that. It's the first laugh I've had since Dead Ringers last Friday.

In reply to BnB:



I was looking at my "Which" magazine, printed in all innocence before the referendum. There was bit about something called Smokie a kind of dried meat product from Africa. Because it has animal skin left on the dried meat it is banned by an EU regulation concerning its danger for food poisoning. Now personally I am (was) quite reassured that there were continent wide laws/regs about food hygiene.
My point is we will still need that law after Brexit.Unless you believe that you are only truly free when you are free to eat poisoned meat. It is one of thousands of laws and regulations that may seem opaque to Boris and indeed most people, but which we are going to have to pay to be re-codified.
The man has talent.... but not enough.

In reply to Indy:


He's actually a very clever fu#king idiot which is why he's so dangerous. In my view, he was thoroughly shocked by the result, but he was clever enough to have a strategy whereby whatever the result he would in all likelihood be the next occupant of 10 Downing Street. He isn't really a Brexiteer at all in my view, but as long as his ambition is met he won't care, in or out. I can't see how anyone can want as their PM a liar, a fantasist, and someone who aided a friend Darius Guppy) to pay a criminal to inflict GBH on a journalist who had crossed him. He should have served time for being an accessory to a serious crime, but instead we let him run the country (I'm guessing now).

In reply to Rog Wilko:

Amen to that.

In reply to Rog Wilko:

You'll have seen this, presumably...

https://www.google.com/search?q=Liberation+Good+Luck&espv=2&biw=125...

In reply to Rog Wilko:


but but but. He is funny and he pretends to be a real person, sorry, is a real person unlike most of those politicians.

In reply to Rog Wilko:

Now this is rather interesting. From Tom Short, Guardian comments section (might be bit of wishful thinking, though):

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.

In reply to Offwidth:

It's simple "It's all about Me, me, me, me, me, me...."

In reply to elliott92:

Yeah you tell him. There's nothing to be debated, tomorrow the PM should tell Europe to f*ck off and watch them quiver before the mighty British Bulldog and our massive economy....

In reply to KevinD:


Yeah, yeah. And I'd like to have that witty surgeon who tells amusing jokes to the nurses and anaesthetist while he's doing my heart by-pass.

In reply to Rog Wilko:


To get the analogy straight: you want a witty surgeon who earns more money - and spends more time on - his very amusing magazine articles about being a doctor whilst the actual work gets done by one of his assistants, or not at all.

In reply to seankenny:


dont forget that the magazine articles can be somewhat economical with the true about what being a doctor actually entails.
I wonder if he will prove smarter than Gordon Brown, least with regards to career, and realise the job he has been aiming for has been nicely poisoned by his predecessor and now best sits as the definition of "poisoned chalice".

In reply to BnB:

Has this been posted yet? http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/27/brussels-rejects-boris-john...

In reply to BnB:

Is there really no legal mechanism for holding Johnson to account for this mess?

In reply to Yanis Nayu:


I think what you're looking for is called an election.

In reply to seankenny:

An election to vote for putting him in prison maybe. His lust for power is promising to do this country more damage than any single person since Hitler. He's lied, manipulated, instantly gone back on promises and done it all like it's a big game in the boarding school dorm, and is now looking sheepish because the headmaster's walked in. To see what winning at all costs means to him watch this:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2015/oct/15/moment-boris-johnson-...

We really shouldn't tolerate it.

In reply to KevinD:


how do you know if someone is 'real'. what does 'real' mean anyway ?
he is very very intelligent and cunning. maybe a genius.
and also very very egocentric.
that is observable at least.

In reply to summo:

Say that to all those who are going to lose their jobs, won't be able to put food on the table.
You can't just pick and chose, have all the benefits and none of the costs, you're as deluded as Boris it seems.