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

sense of country

I've never felt any less 'sense' of being British because we are also part of the EU.

I would volunteer that people 'feeling' this way about it is to a not insignificant degree created, or at least fuelled, by the decades-long campaign by quarters of the media to paint the EU as a superstate that foists things on us left, right and centre. The bendy banana shit that comes up every time there's anything remotely Eu-ish in the news. The EU army rubbish. The 'faceless'/'unelected'/insert your own anti-EU buzzword bureaucrats.

Tiggy, it didn't need to brainwash half the nation (we already had the Express and the Mail for that in any case), it just needed to tip the balance.

Lord Ashcroft asserts "Nearly half (49%) of leave voters said the biggest single reason for wanting to leave the EU was “the principle that decisions about the UK should be taken in the UK”

So 51% is not enough to say that the opposite point of view should prevail without question?
Funny that.

That area between 48.1 and 49% is a wonderland isn't it.

tiggy, I can't disagree with your assessment of British people as contrary and, oddly enough, that's one of the things I really like about us lot!

As for whether people are Eurosceptic because of the media, or the media is Eurosceptic in order to sell their offerings, yes, it's a bit chicken and egg. But I can't look at all those hate-filled Mail and Express front pages (for starters) and not feel that they have some influence.

Tiggytape, by that logic the remain position should prevail, as Leave were clearly split at least 2 ways between an EEA option and hard Brexit with an end to freedom of movement at any cost.

I agree that the press has become more self serving and disingenuous under the recent ownership of the big circulation rags, and that pre referendum it reached a new low with the sorts of emotive front pages we saw, whether they were selling newspapers, and exerting the influence their proprietors wanted, because it was what people wanted to read or simply by evoking some of the baser human emotions, hate, prejudice, resentment, xenophobia, insecurity, is another matter. They have certainly succeeded in normalising the expression of those emotions.

However I think there is a long term perspective to this which helps explain why Britain differs from the rest of Europe. Even countries like Germany, France, Italy and Spain that had empires were post war divested of them (for obvious reasons) whilst in the UK a whole baby boomer generation grew up still being fed the jingoism typified by "This Island Story". I certainly feel even at the very end of the boomers that I grew up with illusions of superiority and entitlement as a result of being British, the country that had /had had an Empire on which the sun never sets, the atlas's at school were all pink and there was rarely mention of the less "glorious" aspects of empire. The Press were an important tool in keeping Labour voters onside with the strategy of continuing to deny independence and exploit empire in order to fuel post war recovery (not the Labour party's finest hour). The Conservatives have been appealing to that rose tinted view of post war Britain and the feelings of superiority it evokes (think Goves education policies) just as much as UKIP and their union jacks and Boris's Churchillian rhetoric about Britains glorious future. You can't explain all that guff spouted by the older bits of the leave vote about how we were fine before we joined the EU by reference to what it was actually like in the 70s but if you think about how it felt to be British (at least for those not exposed to 70s Marxist history lecturers even in an RG university ) it makes more sense.

On the sovereignty issue -

I entirely agree with the point that the politicians and media have made it one historically, much more so than other countries. The UK has always been the more xenophobic for being an island, and the mistrust of 'abroad' goes right back to the reformation.

But another aspect of the sovereignty debate is, for me, the popular failure to grasp how the globalised world functions.

The notion that we can make all of our own laws and have full control of borders is not only obsolete, it’s not actually possible if we wish to participate in the emerging global rules based trading system.

As countries work, trade and operate more closely with each other, so we agree to share resources, laws, standards etc.

Involvement in any international body involves a tradeoff - (not just the EU, also UN or NATO etc). We accept certain obligations in return for greater political and economic influence. Rejection of those obligations for a notion of self-government is also a rejection of power & influence.

I've encountered numerous Leave voters enthusiastic about throwing off the EU for more trade with US which they are unaware will come (whether we accept TTIP as is or not) with the caveat of allowing corporations and authorities input into our legislative process where our laws affect their profits, with the potential to affect our labour protections, consumer standards and public services.

It's interesting, remainers are happy to accept laws forced upon them by unelected people they've never even heard of, yet when it comes to accepting their own countries democratic referendum they wont?
You either accept laws or you don't.

oh that's right, you only accept the laws that suit you.

Well, I, for one, have heard of my MEPs.

What laws have been forced on us, by the way?

It's interesting, remainers are happy to accept laws forced upon them by unelected people they've never even heard of

Oh dear, we're back with this old chestnut again.

Can we have an example of a law which has been forced upon us and which we'll overturn as part of Brexit?

Manon, I think you're absolutely right about the sovereignty thing.

surfer, I, like Bertrand, have heard of my MEPs. I've also heard of David Cameron, who was (until recently, of course) the elected British member of the Council of Ministers.

There is a good overview here on who runs the EU from a legislation point of view and how it's run.

Also, what's your view on a parliamentary democracy versus a plebiscite one?

Manon is on the money with their analysis of sovereignty issues.

Surfer just repeats statements, she can't defend that position because it would involve actually knowing how the EU works.

You may well have heard of our MEP's but I doubt you've heard of the other 700.
The 700 you haven't voted for but who decide things for you.

& smallfox, I'm sure you know what the EU had for breakfast, seeing as your head is so far up its arse.

& smallfox, I'm sure you know what the EU had for breakfast, seeing as your head is so far up its arse.

Surfer, can I ask you; are you familiar with the structure and workings of the EU, either from reading that FullFact link or from previously? I have to keep asking because, from your answers, you seem in equal parts not to be and to be convinced that your assertions about how it work are right.

BTW, how many unelected civil servant bureaucrats, in the event of Brexit and the new departments being fully staffed and operational, do you think will be employed to 'decide things' for us?

Out of interest, can you name all the MPs in the HofC? And, since somebody is bound to talk about "unelected bureaucrats" in a minute, can you name, say, 4 Permanent Secretaries?

....and people accuse smallfox of diatribe?

I was tempted to report surferjet's post, but I decided against it as I think it reflects accurately the level of his/her debate and it's good for people to see where the abuse really comes from.

You may well have heard of our MEP's but I doubt you've heard of the other 700.
The 700 you haven't voted for but who decide things for you.

What an utterly ridiculous comment when we have the House of Lords. Not to mention BertandRussell's comment.

That's just trying to score points rather than having making an argument that contains substance or merit.

I agree, pretty. I really do want to have an actual conversation on this thread and not just trade insults. It's quite hard though.

Fair enough.
I'll leave you to it.

"Fair enough.
I'll leave you to it."

Presumably because you can't name 4 Permanent Secretaries?

Well, the thing is, surfer (and I suspect you know this perfectly well), I meant I would like an actual conversation THAT INCLUDES YOU.

I am not here to just mock or scoff. I've tried asking you several times for answers or clarification on your answers.