Statement #1 : it's going to be shit ..merman wrote:*SNIP*
On multiple occasions he spoke publicly of the "detailed" impact statements, and that revealing them would be detrimental to the negotiations. The Mirror website had a list of SEVEN such statements.
*snip*
In essence it's still not 100% clear what's going to happen to EU nationals living/working in UK and to UK nationals living/working in EU, apart that they seems to say that "EU citizens will be subject to UK law" which "does not say anything in particular" at this point I assume that "UK citizens in EU will be subject to EU law" .. that again "does not say anything in particular" .. yet ..Dio wrote:It's slightly more than that, in that you also have to layer on the mistrust of the Leave side towards the formal institutions of government's attitude to exit. They thoroughly expect that any prepared position papers would contain that sort of thing not just "because it's true" but because everyone is too invested / blind to see past the downsides.
So it's not merely the philosophy of the ostrich. There is a logic to it, from where they're sitting.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/c ... 126-17.htmDavid Davis: There is a proper role for referendums in constitutional change, but only if done properly. If it is
26 Nov 2002 : Column 202
not done properly, it can be a dangerous tool. The Chairman of the Public Administration Committee, who is no longer in the Chamber, said that Clement Attlee—who is, I think, one of the Deputy Prime Minister's heroes—famously described the referendum as the device of demagogues and dictators. We may not always go as far as he did, but what is certain is that pre-legislative referendums of the type the Deputy Prime Minister is proposing are the worst type of all.
Referendums should be held when the electorate are in the best possible position to make a judgment. They should be held when people can view all the arguments for and against and when those arguments have been rigorously tested. In short, referendums should be held when people know exactly what they are getting. So legislation should be debated by Members of Parliament on the Floor of the House, and then put to the electorate for the voters to judge.
We should not ask people to vote on a blank sheet of paper and tell them to trust us to fill in the details afterwards. For referendums to be fair and compatible with our parliamentary process, we need the electors to be as well informed as possible and to know exactly what they are voting for. Referendums need to be treated as an addition to the parliamentary process, not as a substitute for it.
What David Davis's admission reveals is the tip of a very large iceberg and that iceberg is a secret coup d'etat that has taken place within the Tory party to use brexit as a Trojan horse to smuggle radical neoliberal policies into the heart of government.
If you are committed to forcing hard brexit and a total break with the EU, why would you bother with assessing the impact of this on the economy? And if you did actually produce such reports and they showed a massive impact costing vast numbers of jobs, exports, investment lost and that hard brexit would lead to a deep recession and the halving or worse of real incomes, if this leaked it would destroy any case for brexit.
David Davis also let slip that he considers any economic forecasting on brexit to be worthless because brexit will be a "paradigm shift" in the economy.
Translating this into political realities, what he really means is that he sees brexit not as evolutionary change in the economy, but a revolutionary one. This is in effect a right-wing revolution - David Cameron refused to be the puppet of the Brexit junta in the Tory party, so they put Theresa May in to do the job.
She in turn appointed the three horsemen of the Brexit apocalypse to manage the coup.
I suspect if you ask Liam Fox to produce information on trade impact of hard brexit, you would get the same raspberry as Davis gave. Ask Johnson about the assessment done by the FCWO on how hard brexit impacts diplomacy and our influence in the world - another raspberry.
What this tells us is that there is no attempt to assess options and choose those that offer the biggest advantages and the least downside. This is about forcing hard brexit through at any price, whilst doing their utmost never to allow any objective assessment of what that price is likely to be.
The media reports brexit as a tussle over detail, a Byzantine Brussels negotiation process and infighting in Tory ranks and mud slinging by Labour.
What is really going on is akin to the secret plan developed to smash the mining industry and the NUM in the 1980s,but on a vastly more extreme scale. Behind the scenes there is an inner cabal of neoliberal fanatics hell bent on using brexit to completely reshape Britain.
Quite simply they plan to apply chaos capitalism to the economy and use it to force drastic changes on us all. Welfare, the NHS, public services? Unaffordable once tax revenues collapse. Regulation, taxation and state intervention? All must go to attract in the feral rich by turning the UK into their wet dream offshore tax haven.
And the resources, Money and media support they received to narrowly win the referendum and sustain them now came from foreign interests who stand to make a killing out of the deep economic crisis that hard brexit will cause.
So how would you characterise such activity?
I would call it treachery. I would call it treasonous. I would describe those involved as staging a coup d'etat to seize power from within to impose policies on the people of this country that would never receive a mandate at the ballot box,let alone get into a Tory manifesto.
Democracy is being dispensed with. We and our elected representatives are being played for fools.
Once hard brexit happens, the economy will go off a cliff. Once we are in the deep crisis the junta will have taken control of every facet of government, the real business of smashing the state can begin.
Already the plan to deploy the armed forces at the borders once brexit has happened has been announced.
The brexit bill proposes to end the process of parliament making law. Ministers will issue decrees to make new law, not MPs.
This country is undergoing a secret coup that will see democracy suspended, force used to quell unrest and complete economic chaos deliberately caused to allow a radical restructuring of our society and economy to be imposed on us against our will.
This is treason.
gilesgoat wrote: *snip*
Question for NI could be "are you Irish or are you British or are you both" ??
