Let's not forget Brexit

What the Human Rights Bill which Phill Shiner used to percecute British soldiers, the Human Rights Bill which made Cherie Blair a millionaire, the Human Right Act which allowed double Albanian killer to remain and we paid his legal aid. No I don't give a monkeys for these people, if you do I feel something must be wrong.

^We are leaving behind our human rights as well.
Do Brexiteers think that's a good idea?^

I don't think that Brexiteers give a monkeys, dj.

Sorry, getting lost off with the posts. Previous one is to Oriel, as is this one

Re statistics MazieD

I don't understand your post.

Nor do I understand yours Oriel. I haven't said a word about statistics

I'm not hung up over a word. I'm hung up over extraordinary ignorance of how governance works; whether it be the EU or the UK.

What the human rights of terrorists and murderers to remain here instead of being deported yes bring it on.

Newspaper readership was a very significant factor in the likelihood of voting to leave the EU. People with a limited education are more likely to read The Express, The Sun and The Daily Mail than those who are better educated.

These papers, at the behest of their billionaire proprietors, have run anti-EU campaigns for many years and still do.

It was also the case that The Telegraph came out on the Leave side, but Telegraph readers are generally better educated than the readers of the right-wing tabloids and so the correlation was weaker.

Younger people are less likely to read any newspaper, and this, combined with their better educational level, meant that they were less likely to fall for the Leave propaganda.

"It was to be expected that leaving the European Union and the gargantuan task of ‘de-Europeanising’ our statute book would be legally complicated. But the simplest solutions are often the best – and the wholesale transfer of EU law into domestic law was the only realistic way this could ever have been achieved.

The Repeal Bill pretty much does that, but with one very troubling caveat. We’ll be leaving the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU behind – with serious consequences for human rights and equality protections.

In refusing to incorporate the Charter, the Government has made an exception to its own rule that “the same laws will apply on the day after exit as the day before”. As the Repeal Bill itself makes clear: “the Charter of Fundamental Rights is not part of domestic law on or after exit day”. "

We are leaving behind our human rights as well.
Do Brexiteers think that's a good idea?

Yes, it brought a wry smile I must say Petra

Lemongrove
I'm sure you can't have forgotten that cindersdad called us imbecil's and the best was just this Wednesday when Whitewave called us evil. That was the best yet

Exactly, Welshwife, and for May to say differently is just another one of her lies.
She is the one who is holding things up. I'd love to know why.

All politicians in the EU parliament are elected same as UK and the Beaurocrats are professional Civil Servants. People such as Junker are elected too.

The U.K. pays the same percentage in fees to the EU as every other country and then get a rebate!!!! They do not contribute the most to the funds.

Please stop peddling the lies.

Since almost the beginning of the negotiations the EU and Guy Verhofstadt has said that UK citizens should retain the same level of rights as we do now. He is also the instigator of the possibility of European citizenship and passports for those Brits already living in the EU. The EU cannot just say they will retain the rights as the UK needs to agree to paying the pensions and Health costs of these UK citizens who have paid for over 40 years UK. NI contributions. TM knows very well this is the case and she is simply bending the facts to say otherwise. Incidentally it is almost half the cost to the Exchequer if UK citizens continue the same Health care in the EU than if they return to the UK.
The EU have consistently tried to finalise the rights of UK citizens in the EU and the EU personnel in the UK.

There have been some misunderstandings about the EU though havn't there. Was it yesterday that someone was blaming the EU for Muslims living in a neighbouring property. That was clearly a misunderstanding. There was something else a while ago about the egg business, that was another clear misunderstanding about what the EU does.

ukandeu.ac.uk/no-the-eu-did-not-stop-theresa-may-getting-rights-for-eu-citizens/

"Earlier this week the European parliament passed a resolution declaring that in its view “sufficient progress” had not been made in the Brexit negotiations to move to the next stage. Although much of the debate focuses on money, the European parliament, perhaps more than any other institutional player in the negotiations, has been particularly focused on the issue of the rights of EU citizens currently living in the UK, and UK citizens living elsewhere in the EU.

The parliament has no direct role in the talks. But it does have a veto over the outcome, and – given it is the only EU institution that is directly elected by EU citizens – it is more likely to use it over this than anything else.

The resolution called for the UK government to table proposals that would “safeguard the full set of rights that 4.5 million EU and UK citizens currently enjoy”. The parliament’s chief representative in the negotiations, Guy Verhofstadt (not known for understatement) said: “Why are we discussing citizens’ rights? This could be settled immediately!” This aroused the ire of Nick Timothy, the Prime Minister’s former chief of staff, who responded by tweeting: “I was in government when the UK tried to get agreement on citizens’ rights in 2016. The EU refused.”

Astonishingly, there are still people who believe this myth. Obviously, Timothy knows far better than I do what behind-the-scenes approaches the UK government may or may not have made to “the EU”. But the public record is the following. The Prime Minister could have – at any time since she took office – said that she wanted to, in the parliament’s words, “safeguard the full set of rights that 4.5 million EU and UK citizens currently enjoy.”

She could have made this offer unilaterally, or she could have made it conditional on a reciprocal offer from the EU27. But she didn’t do either. Instead, she said that her objective was to give them “certainty and reassurance” – not the same thing by any means."

She's never made a u-turn, has she?
Would you trust this woman's certainty and reassurance?

Oriel
I haven't been browbeaten, I'm just bored. It's bad enough having to repeat yourself over and over to someone with dementia, and then the grandchildren without having to do it on here
I have to say, though, that I'm enjoying yours and Day6 posts.

I do have a statistics qualification, but apologies if I did not explain my point clearly. Nowhere did I say remainers more intelligent than leavers. I said statistically those who voted remain more likely to have higher qualifications. Not the same thing . Some may correlate the two variables but I haven't. Overall in the population fewer people of any age have higher level qualifications than those without. This may change in the future. What I was trying to say it's not necessarily age that was the decisive factor, since older people with higher qualifications more likely to vote remain than those without, and as you point out there are fewer of them in the population. This is not to say older people are less intelligent than younger or leave voters less intelligent than remainers. Just an interesting point about the stats that it's not just an old v young difference.

Re statistics MazieD

I don't understand your post.

My point is the statistics are sometimes not as black and white as they seem.

I'm not a statistician but I think the following:

In answer to someone's supposition that remainers are more intelligent/highly educated

Very few people went to university until relatively recently the rate was 3.4% in 1950. In 2016 it was 52.1%

Most young people voted to remain and it would be pretty likely that they would be classed in the higher education bracket.

Older voters, although more of them, would be incredibly unlikely to have gone on to higher education and they were more likely to vote leave.

That is why I don't believe the statistics that appear to show that remain voters are more intelligent than the leavers.

I am not sliding past anything MaizieD - you are hung up over a word, not me.

I fail to see how our civil service comes into it.

Maybe you didn’t suzied as you were talking about being educated to a certain level, but the ‘moron’ and ‘stupid’ and ‘thick’ insults have been thick on the ground on forums.

*bureaucrat
ˈbjʊərəkrat
noun
an official in a government department, in particular one perceived as being concerned with procedural correctness at the expense of people's needs*

Sounds about right to me!

Like a true Leaver, Oriel you slide straight past the point of my post.

Think about what our Civil Service, our bureaucrats, does. Does it rule the country?

No one mentioned intelligence

However, some bad tempered Remainers like to hurl the
‘Moron’ epithet around with gay abandon.

All the people we know who voted Leave were educated to degree level, and 40/50 years ago the percentage of population going to Uni was small.However, nobody asked us (for a poll on it) so you need to take stats warily.
Many intelligent people then did not go to university but straight into banks ( for instance) after A levels.
So, the stats may point to lack of degrees, but this doesn’t mean anything much with regard to intelligence.

oriel Statistics- I don't understand the logic above. Findings are that the biggest difference between voters was education levels , those educated to a higher level more likely to vote remain. More older people voted overall than younger people, if this was just about age then the educational level statistic would be reversed according to your logic. This means that whatever age group, those with higher education more likely to vote remain. So, older people with higher education level more likely to vote remain, as there are fewer people with higher education in any age group, this could be one element in explaining the result.

We should be long past the stage of Leavers and Remainers by now.We are leaving, and that’s it, so all the talk should be concentrated on discussing the how only.
There is no striaghtforward one way of doing it, Barnier has to speak for 27 countries, they don’t want to lose our money and are terrified that other countries may in time also break away, so are hoping for a punishment beating as it were.
However, we may be a small country, but are a significant one and we will be successful after Brexit.Yes, it may all take a bit of time, but the EU hopes for a good outcome for themselves and we will go all out for a good outcome for ourselves, if not we will have to walk away, as you need to do in any negotiation if needed.
All the public sees is a bit of this and a bit of that, rumours, leaks etc. We don’t see what is really happening at meetings,
And it suits some who can’t accept us leaving the EU to stir up trouble.
On forums, this one included, many are adding to the rumour mill and revelling in the prospect of Brexit supposed misery to come.