EU referendum are you in or out

[Rhythm]

In response to the petition, a debate on revoking Article 50 will apparently take place on April Fools Day.

The response has been, predictably, "fucking nope". And Labour's come out to announce they'll whip to ensure revoke is voted against.

Talk about staying in touch with the electorate :-/

[merman]

Theresa Maybe has gone kamikaze, she will resign sooner if her deal goes through.

So predictably Bozo Johnson and Jacob Rees-Smug are now rushing to hold their posh noses and vote for her deal so they have a shot at being leader.

[KlaxonCow]

Here is that response in full:

This Government will not revoke Article 50. We will honour the result of the 2016 referendum and work with Parliament to deliver a deal that ensures we leave the European Union.

It remains the Government’s firm policy not to revoke Article 50. We will honour the outcome of the 2016 referendum and work to deliver an exit which benefits everyone, whether they voted to Leave or to Remain.

Revoking Article 50, and thereby remaining in the European Union, would undermine both our democracy and the trust that millions of voters have placed in Government.

The Government acknowledges the considerable number of people who have signed this petition. However, close to three quarters of the electorate took part in the 2016 referendum, trusting that the result would be respected. This Government wrote to every household prior to the referendum, promising that the outcome of the referendum would be implemented. 17.4 million people then voted to leave the European Union, providing the biggest democratic mandate for any course of action ever directed at UK Government.

British people cast their votes once again in the 2017 General Election where over 80% of those who voted, voted for parties, including the Opposition, who committed in their manifestos to upholding the result of the referendum.

This Government stands by this commitment.

Revoking Article 50 would break the promises made by Government to the British people, disrespect the clear instruction from a democratic vote, and in turn, reduce confidence in our democracy. As the Prime Minister has said, failing to deliver Brexit would cause “potentially irreparable damage to public trust”, and it is imperative that people can trust their Government to respect their votes and deliver the best outcome for them.

Department for Exiting the European Union.

The government will not revoke Article 50. And, also, it will not revoke Article 50, lest you weren't listening the first time.

It will deliver on the result of the referendum. Also, it will deliver on the result of the referendum and it will deliver on the result of the referendum.

You had a choice, during the General Election, to vote for a party that supported Brexit or the opposition party that also supported Brexit. It's your fault for voting for a party that supported Brexit.

We respect your vote and also respect your vote and, further, will respect your vote.

Repetition is an indicator of someone who doesn't really have legitimate arguments and repeats the few arguments they do have to hide the fact that they don't really have any legitimate arguments. Also, repetition is used by those who don't really have legitimate arguments to pad out their lack of legitimate arguments, by repeating their arguments repeatedly, with slightly different wording.

Yours Sincerely,
The Totally Unbiased Department that Only Exists because of Brexit and, thus, could have no vested interests whatsoever.

[KlaxonCow]

Also, can you believe their gall to suggest that this might "reduce confidence in our democracy", as we all witness daily the truly ludicrous display in Parliament lately?

Lulz.

[Ollie]

What's the point in debating it if they've already made up their mind?

[rowan]

Also, can you believe their gall to suggest that this might "reduce confidence in our democracy", as we all witness daily the truly ludicrous display in Parliament lately?

Lulz.

Can you not see they're delivering an exit which benefits everyone!


Given the facts, I can't really expect them to do anything else with that petition.
Meanwhile one of my EU colleagues said it's like watching the fall of a mini Roman Empire as the rest of the world shifts toward US/China/EU superpowers.
Coded a few enhancements today to mitigate costs in the event of leaving single market. We'll push it all through a new Dutch LE we're just registering at the moment.
Longer term I wouldn't be surprised to see my employer shift more + more revenue away from the country.

[Cloudane]

So surprise surprise they've held the indicative votes and can't agree to anything.

What an absolute mess

Seems it's May's deal or no deal, and very likely still to be the latter (as to when, who knows, I can't see a second extension happening). Never know though, she might just about get enough support from the number of MPs waiting for her to fuck off.

[zip accident]

Labour's come out to announce they'll whip to ensure revoke is voted against.

That's a shot to the foot alright.

I think they're both due to be dumped come the next election, but I thought that about the last one too and it didn't happen.

[Harlequin]

Repetition is an indicator of someone who doesn't really have legitimate arguments and repeats the few arguments they do have to hide the fact that they don't really have any legitimate arguments. Also, repetition is used by those who don't really have legitimate arguments to pad out their lack of legitimate arguments, by repeating their arguments repeatedly, with slightly different wording.

It reads like Lino[*][/size] still micromanages the DfEtEU and dictated the response personally.

What's the point in debating it if they've already made up their mind?

May has; Parliament has not.

So surprise surprise they've held the indicative votes and can't agree to anything.

I do note, however, that the highest vote was for a confirmatory referendum (although the customs union option had fewest votes against it).

H.

[*][/size] Leader In Name Only. John Crace's follow-up to 'Maybot', defined as "hard to nail down but easy to walk over".

[KlaxonCow]

Meanwhile one of my EU colleagues said it's like watching the fall of a mini Roman Empire as the rest of the world shifts toward US/China/EU superpowers.

That's exactly what's happening.

And, in fairness to the former British Empire, which these Brexiteers have clearly failed to realise is very much "former" - and they're, as I've noted before, simply accelerating its final days, as this will eventually tear the UK apart - it was actually bigger than the Roman Empire in its hey day (and, infamously, the Sun never set on the British Empire), so no "mini" is required, other than to psychologically satisfy your EU colleague that the UK didn't once win "the Empire Game" completely.

This has all been "Project Little England", clinging onto a delusion that, in their minds, the British Empire was / is still an actual thing.

[gilesgoat]

Meanwhile one of my EU colleagues said it's like watching the fall of a mini Roman Empire as the rest of the world shifts toward US/China/EU superpowers.

That's exactly what's happening.

And, in fairness to the former British Empire, which these Brexiteers have clearly failed to realise is very much "former" - and they're, as I've noted before, simply accelerating its final days, as this will eventually tear the UK apart - it was actually bigger than the Roman Empire in its hey day (and, infamously, the Sun never set on the British Empire), so no "mini" is required, other than to psychologically satisfy your EU colleague that the UK didn't once win "the Empire Game" completely.

This has all been "Project Little England", clinging onto a delusion that, in their minds, the British Empire was / is still an actual thing.

Stuff to think about : for everyone, not just UK, but in this special case in particular .. : "The empire begins at home" .. i.e. "you have enough shit to sort out/never sorted yet in UK itself you don't need to think expanding/outside UK" ( that could be a valid principle for almost all nations in the world ).

I think "part of the idea of EU" was a bit to "counter act those super powers" and think/do "we can do good togeher as EU we don't need - that much - to go looking for USA/China/etc." but overall can't say it did work that much I am sure a lot abused/misused what EU was meant to be

You can't make any 'empire' if you don't have extremely solid basis at home .. which in this day and age almost no nation in the world has.

Anyway .. it's all fucked up, it's going to me even more fucked up, I am starting prepping for the nuclear winter.

[merman]

4 million children living in poverty, 2.9 million of them in homes where one or both parents work.

But hey, it's more important to talk about which of the horrible asshats will succeed Theresa The Incompetent

[Rubisco]

4 million children living in poverty, 2.9 million of them in homes where one or both parents work.

But hey, it's more important to talk about which of the horrible asshats will succeed Theresa The Incompetent

Relative poverty? How nationalistic of you. How very... Brexit.

[gilesgoat]

4 million children living in poverty, 2.9 million of them in homes where one or both parents work.

But hey, it's more important to talk about which of the horrible asshats will succeed Theresa The Incompetent

Poverty apart, that's all it always worked/still working in Italy.

Fundamentally 'nearly unthinkable' in a family ( typical italian family was/is 4 people, wife, husband, max 2 children ) you don't have both parents working because normally "one salary goes for the rent/bills/taxes, the other for the food/things/children".

All this while '0 savings' because in that situation is nearly impossible to save for anything

I started to have a some regular job/odd jobs at the age of 16 ( was lucky ) to have some money for myself to be able to buy some stuff I wanted ( computer ).

The fact is rent/TAXES/lot of other things makes near impossible to live with ONE salary alone ( rent and/or mortgage is the same, actually in Italy rents can be much higher than mortgages rate easily ).

If you live alone and you are lucky to have a place to stay you are not paying that much ( unless you are MEGA lucky you inherited some apartment/place ) you can go on alone with a 'standard salary' but having 'not much of a very exciting life'

But yeah a thing like "one salary dad/mum pays for all we are rich we can do well" .. "does not exist" .. UNLESS .. unless you go into politics and you get 'some position in some places' .. you can see a pattern forming here ..

[MattyP]

4 million children living in poverty, 2.9 million of them in homes where one or both parents work.

But hey, it's more important to talk about which of the horrible asshats will succeed Theresa The Incompetent

Poverty apart, that's all it always worked/still working in Italy.

Fundamentally 'nearly unthinkable' in a family ( typical italian family was/is 4 people, wife, husband, max 2 children ) you don't have both parents working because normally "one salary goes for the rent/bills/taxes, the other for the food/things/children".

All this while '0 savings' because in that situation is nearly impossible to save for anything

I started to have a some regular job/odd jobs at the age of 16 ( was lucky ) to have some money for myself to be able to buy some stuff I wanted ( computer ).

The fact is rent/TAXES/lot of other things makes near impossible to live with ONE salary alone ( rent and/or mortgage is the same, actually in Italy rents can be much higher than mortgages rate easily ).

If you live alone and you are lucky to have a place to stay you are not paying that much ( unless you are MEGA lucky you inherited some apartment/place ) you can go on alone with a 'standard salary' but having 'not much of a very exciting life'

But yeah a thing like "one salary dad/mum pays for all we are rich we can do well" .. "does not exist" .. UNLESS .. unless you go into politics and you get 'some position in some places' .. you can see a pattern forming here ..

Surely these days through people have higher expectations? They want all the gadgets, new cars etc etc. Sometimes its the choices people make that means they are in a situation they are in?

Not saying its 100% like that for everyone... when I was growing up we didn't have half as much "stuff" as we seem to have now... food was never wasted and hardly bought from a supermarket (usually local shops). We had the basics in the house. One TV for example for the whole family. We tended to use stuff until it fell to bits and not replace things because they were "outdated". If they had a purpose and worked they were used until they were no good! We even repaired things.

I think today we tend to choose how we spend our money differently that's all perhaps... sometimes necessitating a dual income. However I largely agree. Be interesting to work out the relative costs of say % of income going to towards accommodation and food vs average income back in the say mid 70s compared to now.