LEAVERS - update on the 'invoke A50 now' petition. I have the reply.

[Surferjet]

You’re receiving this email because you signed this petition: “Invoke Article 50 of The Lisbon Treaty immediately.”.

To unsubscribe from this petition: petition.parliament.uk/signatures/23408528/unsubscribe?token=N5XWEqj08juvvjUWe76

Dear xxxxxx

The Government has responded to the petition you signed – “Invoke Article 50 of The Lisbon Treaty immediately.”.

Government responded:

The British people have voted to leave the EU and their will must be respected and delivered. We should not trigger Article 50 until we have a UK approach and objectives.

The British people have voted to leave the EU and their will must be respected and delivered. The process for leaving the EU and determining our future relationship will be a complex one, so we need to take time to think through our objectives and approach. We want to ensure the best possible outcome for Britain and the future UK-EU relationship. As part of this, the government will of course work closely with the devolved administrations to ensure we get the best deal for the UK as a whole. We should not trigger Article 50 until we have a UK approach and objectives, so Article 50 should not be invoked before the end of this year.

Department for Exiting the European Union

Click this link to view the response online:

petition.parliament.uk/petitions/133618?reveal_response=yes

This petition has over 100,000 signatures. The Petitions Committee will consider it for a debate. They can also gather further evidence and press the government for action.

The Committee is made up of 11 MPs, from political parties in government and in opposition. It is entirely independent of the Government. Find out more about the Committee: petition.parliament.uk/help#petitions-committee

Thanks,
The Petitions team
UK Government and Parliament

You’re receiving this email because you signed this petition: “Invoke Article 50 of The Lisbon Treaty immediately.”.

To unsubscribe from this petition: petition.parliament.uk/signatures/23408528/unsubscribe?token=N5XWEqj08juvvjUWe76

Not at all, I'm asking who honestly thought their leave vote through and on what basis did they make that decision.

There is a fair amount of anti immigrant feeling in NI that might have some influence on it.

Lynn, that is a fair comment. So how do the Leave voters in NI see the way forward?

Why though? What's with all this grilling and hectoring after the event?
I haven't discussed my vote with anyone outside my immediate family. As it happens it was a fairly unanimous 50/50 split. Not one xenophobe among us, we were able to thrash out opinions during the referendum, whilst still loving each other and taking on board the thoughts of others and dare I say it, changing opinions based on healthy discussion.
Maybe I'm a soft arse but all this anger and retribution is making me feel queasy. Round and round in circles the argument goes; it's good to debate but the same horse shit on this board is getting spewed out day after day with no circling the square in sight.

Sorry that was to.Bearbehind.
Beenthere I'll try get back to you tomorrow; I've got an ASD son who should have been in bed eons ago, grilling me about coagulation (a bloody scab!) but I'm not running out on you, promise!

So did the 44% who voted leave in NI know something we don't that persuaded them Britex would not adversely effect the GFA!

I'm not even confident that TM will survive long enough to deliver Brexit. PMs average about 5 years with Thatcher and Blair being two notable exceptions.

It does depend what is meant by Brexit means Brexit. Invoking Art 50 and then the divorce two years later, or rebuilding a post Brexit country?

I'm with RedToothBrush on this: the point and purpose if all my discussion post-Referendum is to stimulate a debate on what happens now, going forwards.

Not interested in 'recrimination' or circularity at all.

I hope any discussions will serve to raise awareness that 'Brexit' is far from over: it is a process with which the UK is presently engaged and it is in ALL our interests to try to engage with it as consciously as possible.

'Recriminations' suggests that it is a past event we are discussing. There is nothing 'past tense' about Brexit.

She'll survive long enough to kick it all off though, her successor will just carry it through.

Corcory, if Arlene Foster is anything to go by, no. She backed Brexit, but two weeks ago wrote, with Martin McGuinness, a letter to Theresa May highlighting the dangers of leaving and asking for assurances that NI would retain pretty much all the benefits of the EU. Her version of Brexit (and I don't know how representative it is of unionists as a whole) looks rather as though it involves commitment to freedom of movement. In fact it looks an awful lot like staying in the EU.

www.executiveoffice-ni.gov.uk/sites/default/files/publications/execoffice/Letter%20to%20PM%20from%20FM%20%26%20dFM.pdf

(I mention "unionists as a whole" as I believe they make up the bulk of the 44% in NI)

Beenthere if I resided in NI I might be able to explain why some of the 44% of eligible voters chose to vote Leave. Even then it would be a guess, as most people's votes are personal to them. So moving forward, I can't speak for others. I could try speculate but suspect I'd be wide off the mark.
Thecat if you don't view this particular board as being an ongoing and circulatory set of arguments then fair play to you. I'm not being dismissive when I say I feel it is, but I can honestly say I've had a more progressive debate with DD1 aged 16 over the whole Eu referendum debacle, without any aggro or sniping. And she's a No Borders necessary, environmently friendly- at all costs- kind of woman. We both sing from the same hymn sheet (left wing) but have differing perspectives. Like most posters here, I suspect.
The ballot paper was a binary choice involving a complex issue. So any issues that arise from the resulting vote lay squarely with the man that called the referendum in the first place, in my eyes. Not your average Joe Bloggs voter that ended up in this particular piecemeal.

Surferjet just on TTIP, leaving the EU will make it more likely it will happen, the French are strong voices against it. The U.K. Especially led by a Conservative party are more keen especially as Brexiteers are hollering for a US trade deal to prove we can be a great country that can negotiate, Liam Fox has already gone to the US to get a deal (and told to go away). And when it comes to us vs the US compared to us as part of the EU vs the US -- which is our stronger position?

My point I am trying to make is that in exchange for control, sovereignty, controlling immigration we are exchanging it for a weaker negotiating positions in trade deals, a worse trading relationship and a weaker economy.

But Lynn, it was you that suggested we needed to look at the reasons for the 44% leave vote in NI in the first place. What was that you were saying about circularity??

Long threads on serious subjects like this will always keep descending into sniping, but this one has also contained a lot of information and some strong arguments.

As others have said, the question to focus on now is where we want to go from the situation we are currently in, post-vote. (We are not yet post-Brexit or anywhere close.) This must mean taking into consideration the most likely consequences of the various options, and applies to all of us whether we voted to remain or to leave. And as you can see from the letter from NI's leaders to Theresa May (link in my previous post), the kind of Brexit envisioned in Belfast looks profoundly different from that of Boston.

The ballot paper was a binary choice involving a complex issue. So any issues that arise from the resulting vote lay squarely with the man that called the referendum in the first place, in my eyes. Not your average Joe Bloggs voter that ended up in this particular piecemeal.

So another 'not my circus not my monkey' comment then?

Blaming Cameron doesn't help now. That is a complete abdication of responsibility for where the leave vote has left us.

I'm fully aware that arguing why someone voted the way they did is pointless. As others have said, it's not about that it's about trying to understand what the future might hold by trying to ascertain how leave voters saw this panning out.

Sadly it has been proven that that is too much to ask as there is not even a glimmer of a consensus of opinion on what Brexit actually means.

Not your average Joe Bloggs voter that ended up in this particular piecemeal.

Your average Joe Bloggs still has a vote and still has an MP. We need to keep writing to them to state the case for the things we believe in. I wrote to mine specifically about the needs of our scientific research community. My MP was for Remain, but I got a woolly reply back saying that we would find other areas of research and other areas of funding. As far as I was concerned that wasn't an acceptable position - if she felt strongly before about the Science Research community she should be championing them in debates, and trying to get the best deal for them and if that isn't what the 'hard Brexit' want, then tough. Not looking over her shoulder to appease UKIP.

Regarding TTIP...

Full page article in today's print Observer on the opposition of both Trump and Clinton to the Trans Pacific Partnership. An almost identical article is on the website www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/20/trump-clinton-free-trade-policies-tpp

I can find no record of Clinton's attitude to the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership specifically, though there are hints that she now opposes it, and Trump most definitely does.

If the hope is that after Brexit, the UK will have free trade deals with the USA on favourable terms to itself, the political climate is not good. Trump opposes all such deals, and there's an interesting quote in the Observer article from Clinton: "“I will stop any trade deal that kills jobs or holds down wages..."

Thanks for that update PattyPenguin

The Arlene Foster issue is fextraordinary - they're basically asking for continuation of EU membership and single market - FOM of goods, services and people, EU skilled and unskilled labour, no additional costs for businesses (which withdrawing from single market will cause), EU funding/programmes (to be replaced if not continued), no non-tariff barriers - which are inevitable if we leave the single market. Quite apart from the border issue and the GFA.

From Martin McGuiness it's entirely understandable as he voted Remain, but Foster? Did she not grasp what she voted for?

Morning. I realise my posts mainly consisted of waffle, but it took me the best part of a bottle of wine to pluck up the courage to even delurk. I'm a naturally anxious person and what makes sense in my head often doesn't translate well in words.
My comments about Cameron come from frustration that he left this stinking shit on the proverbial doormat then legged it.
I realise that won't help the UK moving forward but I still feel like kicking his arse. I need to let that go though.
I'm also embarrassed at the mess the Labour party are in, it feels like they'd rather be arguing over a packet of biscuits than forming a stong opposition at a time the country really needs one.
Anyway I'll leave you to it but I will write to my local MP (even though he's a snivelling shit that I didn't vote for) and I'll be asking for some transparency and clarity about the plan for Brexit as at the moment there appears to be nothing but smoke, mirrors and rumours.
I'll go back to reading, yes there can be a lot of sniping (which saddens me) but I have learned a lot from these threads and will continue to do so

I'm not confident that we are going to get a more Remain than Leave deal. Although the it depends how you define either term.

Hammond has said we're coming out of the single market, the city have apparently given up hope of a Norway deal and are focusing now on a Switzerland max deal... which would be nothing like a Switzerland deal as they don't have access to the single market for financial services, and even they have to pay EU contributions and FOM...

It doesn't make any sense, quite apart from whether it's actually possible. And give that the Leave voters I know favour a Norway deal, I'm not sure it's even necessary.

lynn I am interested in the comment you made anyway I'll leave you to it but I will write to my local MP and I'll be asking for some transparency and clarity about the plan for brexit

red has quite rightly been pointing out Leave voters need to be telling their MP's what they want not asking them what the plan is.

If you voted Leave, what did you vote for?

You need to voice that, not ask them what will happen and that is where much of the frustration and sniping on this thread and IRL comes from- no one seems to be able to say what they want Brexit to look like that doesn't involve completely incompatible aspirations.

Gloria, It is extraordinary isn't it? I wonder if she backed leave for political reasons because there are a lot of Eurosceptic Unionists, while - like so many others - banking on a remain win.

Yes, not sure you'd get much out of asking what the plan is at the moment - but we should definitely all keep writing to exert whatever influence we can on the shape of future arrangements.

Current state of play:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/aug/20/tory-brexit-negotiators-unpromising-start?CMP=sharebtnn_tw

TTIP:

Germany and France were opposed to it. So who exactly in the EU was pushing for it?

And as has been pointed out its dead in the water due to Trump and Clinton.

BUT that doesn't mean that a deal that the British and Americans want which is like TTIP but on a smaller scale is not there to be had.

All the noises coming out of Trump support the US going all protectionist - EXCEPT for his comment about the UK being at the front of the queue.

The Leave campaign leaders have been doing their best to buddy up to Trump too.

Why?

Probably because there would be a deal to be made there despite protectionism due to how the UK - US relationship is viewed.

If Clinton wins, I think that there will still be protectism but not to the extent that Trump would have, and again we could still have that deal because it would not be as big as an EU one - and would therefore favour US interests a lot more and they could avoid the clauses that the EU didn't like (namely the ones that would protect things like the NHS).

That article had a leading anti-TTIP campaigner still saying there is a risk and the other commentator which surfer focused on said that it was in the UK's hands to decide - which doesn't mean that TTIP is dead, just that there are trades deal to be made - which could in effect equal TTIP on stereroids UNLESS we make it crystal clear to our MPs that TTIP or anything that looks like TTIP is not acceptable.

As for NI.

Whilst you have Republicans who don't recognise Westminster, you also have Unionist who don't recognise Dublin and would quite like to break with the GFA. As well as people who simply have concerns like the rest of the UK and disregard the possible implications of Brexit on it (They might be confident that the result will preserve the status quo and have been reassured by Johnson and co)

The point still stands though that the GFA has been undermined and that won't be easy to resolve and keep those leavers in NI happy too.