The Brexit Arms

[BrexitArmsLandLady]

🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧

Article 50 has been triggered (finally!).
Now we move onwards to the future 🍻

All welcome, as ever...

🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧

I don't recall seeing that claim in the govt issued leaflet Kaija - perhaps you could point me to it?

I did, however, see the part where it was assured that the result would be enacted.

Ah but they never said they would, they said the COULD Kaija, because "lets fund our NHS instead" doesn't look like a promise to anyone does it? Just a lot of people seem to have mistaken it for that, but its not the fault of the politicians that its not going to happen.

BTW did some sums, PH has had to find £60 bn to put aside for dealing with Brexit and the problems that might arise. 7 Years net contributions!

I love leavers attempts to justify the course of action, based on an advisory referendum with a tiny majority win.

So you do believe a campaign leaflet overrides legislation then, semi.

There's also the matter of the single market and the manifesto of course.

So you do believe a campaign leaflet overrides legislation then, semi.

No.

Where did I state that?

BTW did some sums, PH has had to find £60 bn to put aside for dealing with Brexit and the problems that might arise. 7 Years net contributions!

So, from yr 8 onwards, no more [equivalent of] net contributions being waved goodbye to!

Good news!

Danny and Kaija

I feel for you. You're really trying to get some discussion going. It's too lovely outside today.

"No.

Where did I state that?"

In your last post where you pointed to the campaign leaflet as evidence of the referendum not being advisory.

"no more [equivalent of] net contributions being waved goodbye to"

No we will still be paying in something for access.

Essentially the net contribution thing was another red herring, the benefit we received from it was far greater than what we paid.

But its interesting that 60bn set aside and not spent on services, is seen as a good thing by you.

Thanks, Inkanta - thoughtful of you. I am outside

By the way I believe that, in law, Clinton unequivocally DID NOT have sexual relations with Lewinsky.

Or do you believe that common sense definitions override the law?

If, prior to the deed in question, both sides had agreed publicly that it would not constitute sexual relations, and this was enshrined in an act of Parliament, you might have yourself an analogy.

Well put.

Kaija,

Still notice you are ducking my questions like the political pro that you are.

You still have not told me your 'definition' of 'inform' in the context of this referendum or whether you believe it carried any more weight than a large MORI opinion pole.

Or, whether you believe Clinton and Lewinsky had sexual relations....

Thank you for the compliment.

What do you think I meant?

In your last post where you pointed to the campaign leaflet as evidence of the referendum not being advisory.

No.

Me:
'the ref was only ever advisory, therefore ignoring the result is a perfectly reasonable course of action' (except it isn't, because it was spelled out very clearly that the result would be enacted).

You:
Semi, it was spelled out very clearly in the referendum legislation that it was advisory. If you think campaign leaflets trump legislation you will be looking forward I'm sure to the £350 million per week NHS spending increase.

Me:
I don't recall seeing that claim in the govt issued leaflet Kaija - perhaps you could point me to it?

I did, however, see the part where it was assured that the result would be enacted.

You:
So you do believe a campaign leaflet overrides legislation then, semi.

There's also the matter of the single market and the manifesto of course.

Very clearly, at no point did I say:
"I believe a campaign leaflet overrides legislation".
You made that connection & tried to attribute it to me.
I didn't say that a campaign leaflet overrides legislation.
Not once.

Well then you believe that the legislation is the defining factor? So the referendum was, indeed, advisory.

I've never said otherwise, as you know.

However, the point was explicitly made by politicians on all sides (and within the govt produced literature regarding the ref) that the result would be acted upon.

Do you disagree?

The point was also explicitly made that it was advisory - I was certainly aware of it before the vote. Were you?

It was also made clear by Farage that a 52/48 split would leave unfinished business and that he would continue to campaign for another referendum. So as this was advisory, and it was such a split, I think we're ok to campaign, object and to point out that in an adivisory referendum nothing actually has to be done.

Quite, Danny. I wish we didn't have to, but there it is.

You are absolutely ok to campaign but, right now at least, it will have no effect.

I think we're ok to campaign, object and to point out that in an adivisory referendum nothing actually has to be done.

As is your democratic right.

Who has said you cannot do this?

Completely off topic (and a daily mail link) so apologies in advance - I have been sitting in the garden skimming through the Saturday papers and came across this gem which I thought I would share
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4393156/Ed-Miliband-performs-ha-s-Me.html

As you were.

Bless him 😂

He is certainly no Morten Harket