More Brexit lunacy

We have so little time to negotiate a Brexit deal and so many complications to overcome.

What does May do?

Bring up immigration and citizens rights.

Her judgement is just awful. We know how the last daft decision ended after millions spent by the tax payer in court.

God she is sooo stupid.

Can anyone tell me why the BBC is reporting that May is striking trade deals with China when we are constantly being told that no deals can be struck until after Brexit?

Who is lying

They will have a final vote on any deal.

Well of course they will vote; they have fought hard to get it. However you seem to be telling us that your crystal ball tells you the outcome. You do like to tell rather than offer an opinion don't you Lemons.

Only one party governs- we’ll sort of

Name one policy since May took office that has caught the imagination, and is he.ping the just managing

Both parties are beset by in-fighting actually.
I think also that all PM’s start off with good intentions but they are not an Emperor and are hamstrung by all sorts of things beyond their control.That doesn’t mean they can never achieve anything though.Yes, the government has to put our exit from the EU first, but government depts still carry on running the country.

No lemon neither statement is true.

All governments are capable of doing a lot, but it is what they do that is the issue at stake.

When May made her speech at the beginning of her being slotted into the premiership, she talked about helping the vast majority who are just managing. I think in part as a result of the Brexit vote, which was undoubtedly a reaction on the voters part to years of austerity, a choice the Tories made in order that the wealthy who had caused the problem in the first p,ace did not suffer.

I honestly think that she meant what she said, but her problem is that she is beset by self doubt and the full cry of a tiny minority who have tried to bullied her into the disaster of a hard Brexit.

The result is that her focus has been entirely on Brexit and the continual war in her party, and it isn’t getting any better.

Party above country seems to be the unspoken mantra, and in these perilous times I for one will never forgive them

We know that suppression of evidence whenever possible is the order of the day, and if we are lucky enough to get any information, the source is rubbished regardless from where it eminated.

what a way to run this country

It’s over four years to a GE, time for serious interest to be taken in anything........but there are some people on here who wouldn’t believe that a) anything other than a Corbyn led government is capable of doing anything and b) that we will be able to survive without the EU holding our hand.

My prediction of no serious interest being taken in domestic matters,*lemongrove*, is just forecasting future performance on the evidence of record to date.

Oh, winterwhite, you're so naive! Don't you know that 'forecasts' are just crystal ball gazing .

There are some people on here who wouldn't even believe the weather forecast... Though quite what they base their disbelief on it's hard to say because studying historical data and close observation of trends and patterns clearly count for nothing at all...

If Parliament had disagreed with Cameron they could have voted down a referendum and then voted down triggering article 50! They didn’t.
They will have a final vote on any deal.

Certainly not what I asked her to do and not what half the country wanted. However, we are where we are and she, and the Conservative party, will find it very difficult to have power ever again - especially with the way domestic matters are falling about their ears because of the way they have torn things apart - if they don't get an outcome that suits an actual majority.

May's doing what we asked her to do, she said this morning.
Really?

My prediction of no serious interest being taken in domestic matters,*lemongrove*, is just forecasting future performance on the evidence of record to date. What else can we do? I can't see anything that this govt has done to help the 'just about managing'. And just think how many people were lured into voting Leave by the promise of the £mmm per week for the NHS.

Otherwise it's not democracy, is it? You ask David Davis.

jura...you know as well as I do, that Cameron promised a referendum and that the result would be implemented and all MP’s ( or just about all) agreed that at the time and then they all voted to begin leaving preparations with article 50.

So Lemon, you have decided that whatever a PM promises, even if it is ultra vires and against our constitution they, and their successors must make this happen?

You also seem to miss the point, although you feel confident enough to dictate to jura that she must agree with you, that just as our government may choose to vote for Article 50 they could make other choices reversing this if the MPs felt that in doing that they were best representing their constituents.

infacts.org/mays-anti-immigration-obsession-threat-country/

Waiting for the next u-turn.

Probably because no interest is 'currently' being taken in homelessness, social care, prison reform, education, the NHS etc etc. Can't see them suddenly saying 'oh goody; we're now in the transition period so lets sort this country out'. Especially if Rees Mogg is PM by then#heavenhelpusall

As opposed to ‘trumpeting’ the unfairness of said vote?

How do you know that ‘no serious interest’ will be taken in domestic matters winterwhite ?

Many if not most of the voters who voted Leave didn't know that the govt had not the slightest idea how to go about it and would waste so much time pootering about. And these same voters are dismayed now, esp at the lack of any domestic agenda. The 'transition' period is a long time for no serious interest to be taken in homelessness, social care, prison reform, education, the NHS. Result, things will get worse for those whose needs are the greatest. While Leavers with heads in the sand trumpet about the infallibility of 52% over 48% of a non-binding vote.

I don’t know about ‘nodding it through’ Maizie but Parliament certainly voted to have the referendum and further to that, voted to trigger article 50.
So, Jura it was done democratically.

Nobody knows the consequences of staying IN either.The EU is predicted to have all kinds of trouble coming it’s way from various countries.

On the one hand, Brexiters say that they understood exactlythe implications and consequences of leaving- whilst saying almost at the same time, that no-one has a crystal ball, and that no-one knows what will happen - not even the best experts in the country.

Weird, that ?!?

Indeed:

4. Outcome of the Referendum
The Bill imposes no obligation on the UK Government to implement its results, nor does it
set any time limit by which to implement a vote to leave the EU. It is a consultative
referendum, enabling the electorate to express its opinion before legislation is introduced.
There are no constitutional provisions in the UK requiring the results of a referendum to be
implemented. This contrasts with e.g. Ireland, where the Irish Constitution states the
circumstances in which a binding referendum must be held.

No Prime Minister, weak and seeking approval, has the right to undermine the Laws and Constitution of this country. NONE.

I'd say that, being inexperienced in the use of referenda and also confident that 'the country' wouldn't be so stupid as to vote Leave, Parliament nodded it through without much question.

I'd also say, on evidence since the referendum, that a considerable number of MPs seem to have no understanding at all of how our Parliamentary democracy works. (along with a very large proportion of the populace).

And he had no right to say so, legally or politically. Her was just a PM, nothing more, and b****red of as soon as- weakening the case even further:

Start with the law

The referendum was not legally binding. There’s no one source that can prove this statement true (although here’s a respectable one). That follows from the fact that the European Union Referendum Act 2015 didn’t say anything about implementing the result of the vote.

It may have been advisory but neverthe less he did say it would be implemented and Parliament went along with that all the way.So, that being the case, what do you have to say?

I suppose not as she said she does not read links from 'some people'.

For the last time- the UK has a Parliamentary Democracy- and our own Laws say that a Referendum can only ever be advisory- meaning that the GVT, our MPs with the support of Lords - have the final say. You may not call that 'democratic' - you may prefer a direct democacy as in Switzerland - but then you need to begin to figth for that.

Cameron, as just a PM-had not right whatsoever, in British Law, to promise a referendum would be implemented, come what may - even if it proves to be disastrous for the country.

I am fully aware that I am repeating myself- but it seems that the message, about our own style/type of Democracy, our own Laws (NOT EU) is just not getting through- for some strange reason.