There seems to have been a lot of abrasiveness on here recently.
If you could all empathise, try to understand, sympathise and show a higher level of humanity, towards/with those that hold differing views to yourself then I think we'll be heading in the right direction.
Yes, that even means finding common ground with those who you feel to be far less caring than yourself.
No, Seth, I don't have an answer to the Irish border question
There seems to have been a lot of abrasiveness on here recently.
If you could all empathise, try to understand, sympathise and show a higher level of humanity, towards/with those that hold differing views to yourself then I think we'll be heading in the right direction.
Yes, that even means finding common ground with those who you feel to be far less caring than yourself.
No, Seth, I don't have an answer to the Irish border question
Show common ground with cunts like Redwood and the other 35 Tory hard Brexiteers who, backed by Russian trolls, dark money and the Daily Mail, are leading this country off a cliff? You are insane. People have voiced concerns about violence around the Irish border in the event of a hard Brexit. When people see what a hard Brexit has done to the UK in 5 or 10 years I think there will be some retribution on the mainland and it won't be pretty. Redwood and some of those other 35 MPs will need 24 hour bodyguards.
There seems to have been a lot of abrasiveness on here recently.
If you could all empathise, try to understand, sympathise and show a higher level of humanity, towards/with those that hold differing views to yourself then I think we'll be heading in the right direction.
Yes, that even means finding common ground with those who you feel to be far less caring than yourself.
No, Seth, I don't have an answer to the Irish border question
Show common ground with cunts like Redwood and the other 35 Tory hard Brexiteers who, backed by Russian trolls, dark money and the Daily Mail, are leading this country off a cliff? You are insane. People have voiced concerns about violence around the Irish border in the event of a hard Brexit. When people see what a hard Brexit has done to the UK in 5 or 10 years I think there will be some retribution on the mainland and it won't be pretty. Redwood and some of those other 35 MPs will need 24 hour bodyguards.
No, just those on here.
I include morons in that as well.
Insane? My mental health is not there to be ridiculed, thank you very much.
There seems to have been a lot of abrasiveness on here recently.
If you could all empathise, try to understand, sympathise and show a higher level of humanity, towards/with those that hold differing views to yourself then I think we'll be heading in the right direction.
Yes, that even means finding common ground with those who you feel to be far less caring than yourself.
No, Seth, I don't have an answer to the Irish border question
35 Tory hard Brexiteers who, backed by Russian trolls, dark money and the Daily Mail, are leading this country off a cliff?
Don't forget the aliens. Must remember their influence.
Alternatively ask any religious person and they'll confirm that it's all gods will.
I am certainly not advocating violence against anybody at all. I do feel uncomfortable about the apparent glee that some posters on here feel about the possible re emergence or increase of violence due to the Irish border situation. At it's most civilised it seems to be framed and accepted as a price that has to be paid for brexit. If one could extrapolate that attitude from some posters on here to the wider population, then the proportion of 'don't give a damners' starts to become genuinely alarming. I ask again (tediously and boringly) has anybody, meaning anybody who voted brexit, got any fresh and practical solutions to the Irish border question?
I am certainly not advocating violence against anybody at all. I do feel uncomfortable about the apparent glee that some posters on here feel about the possible re emergence or increase of violence due to the Irish border situation. At it's most civilised it seems to be framed and accepted as a price that has to be paid for brexit. If one could extrapolate that attitude from some posters on here to the wider population, then the proportion of 'don't give a damners' starts to become genuinely alarming. I ask again (tediously and boringly) has anybody, meaning anybody who voted brexit, got any fresh and practical solutions to the Irish border question?
To be fair I haven't seen anyone emitting glee at the prospective re emergence of violence. Apparent or otherwise.
I am certainly not advocating violence against anybody at all. I do feel uncomfortable about the apparent glee that some posters on here feel about the possible re emergence or increase of violence due to the Irish border situation. At it's most civilised it seems to be framed and accepted as a price that has to be paid for brexit. If one could extrapolate that attitude from some posters on here to the wider population, then the proportion of 'don't give a damners' starts to become genuinely alarming. I ask again (tediously and boringly) has anybody, meaning anybody who voted brexit, got any fresh and practical solutions to the Irish border question?
To be fair I haven't seen anyone emitting glee at the prospective re emergence of violence. Apparent or otherwise.
I accept what you say. I suppose I am interpreting the reaction of some as gleeful. Maybe it really means a casual acceptance. Of course I would like others to be as concerned as I am, but as that is unreasonable I at least ask others for their suggested solutions.
I am certainly not advocating violence against anybody at all. I do feel uncomfortable about the apparent glee that some posters on here feel about the possible re emergence or increase of violence due to the Irish border situation. At it's most civilised it seems to be framed and accepted as a price that has to be paid for brexit. If one could extrapolate that attitude from some posters on here to the wider population, then the proportion of 'don't give a damners' starts to become genuinely alarming. I ask again (tediously and boringly) has anybody, meaning anybody who voted brexit, got any fresh and practical solutions to the Irish border question?
To be fair I haven't seen anyone emitting glee at the prospective re emergence of violence. Apparent or otherwise.
I accept what you say. I suppose I am interpreting the reaction of some as gleeful. Maybe it really means a casual acceptance. Of course I would like others to be as concerned as I am, but as that is unreasonable I at least ask others for their suggested solutions.
I completely get where you're coming from but believe there isn't even a casual acceptance. By some saying that that one issue, although a biggie, should not stop Brexit it doesn't mean they accept the violence.
I don't know the answer, and doubt many do, but to lay the blame for any future violence at the feet of a referendum result, and not at the doors of the twisted f**kwits that will carry it out, seems a bit shallow to me.
The blame is squarely with the fuckwits. However the platform for action is provided by brexit. The fuckwit spree killers in the USA are to blame, but American gun laws provide a platform.
I am certainly not advocating violence against anybody at all. I do feel uncomfortable about the apparent glee that some posters on here feel about the possible re emergence or increase of violence due to the Irish border situation. At it's most civilised it seems to be framed and accepted as a price that has to be paid for brexit. If one could extrapolate that attitude from some posters on here to the wider population, then the proportion of 'don't give a damners' starts to become genuinely alarming. I ask again (tediously and boringly) has anybody, meaning anybody who voted brexit, got any fresh and practical solutions to the Irish border question?
Seth to me the same thing has to happen now with brexit as happened previously to bring peace. Politicians need to sit round a table talk and find a compromise solution that is acceptable to both parties. The recent brexit perplexed series on radio 4 suggested that the Eu had been quite good at finding solutions to complex issues when it had the will. I believe Cyprus was mentioned. I see no reason why this cannot happen now. Both parties will need to compromise and nobody needs to pick up guns and bombs.
I am certainly not advocating violence against anybody at all. I do feel uncomfortable about the apparent glee that some posters on here feel about the possible re emergence or increase of violence due to the Irish border situation. At it's most civilised it seems to be framed and accepted as a price that has to be paid for brexit. If one could extrapolate that attitude from some posters on here to the wider population, then the proportion of 'don't give a damners' starts to become genuinely alarming. I ask again (tediously and boringly) has anybody, meaning anybody who voted brexit, got any fresh and practical solutions to the Irish border question?
Seth to me the same thing has to happen now with brexit as happened previously to bring peace. Politicians need to sit round a table talk and find a compromise solution that is acceptable to both parties. The recent brexit perplexed series on radio 4 suggested that the Eu had been quite good at finding solutions to complex issues when it had the will. I believe Cyprus was mentioned. I see no reason why this cannot happen now. Both parties will need to compromise and nobody needs to pick up guns and bombs.
You're right. (Except that, of course, it's more than just two sides). But Seth is also right to ask what that solution looks like. Because, now that we are past the half-way point between the vote to hurtle towards the cliff and reaching the cliff itself, there has not been a credible, sensible, workable, safe solution to the UK/EU land border presented by anyone on the side that voted for its necessity.
Putting up a physical, impenetrable, policed border is possible, but would be monumentally expensive, utterly undesirable, would threaten the Good Friday Agreement (and by "threaten", I mean completely nullify) and would be very likely to anger Republicans into resuming hostile, possibly violent, possibly fatal action.
Leaving the boundary as a porous, un-policed, invisible border would mean it would be impossible to prevent "economic migration" from the EU, require us to stay in the Single Market and Customs Union and admit complete and total failure to bring about "control of our borders".
Which of these two, impossible solutions do you Brexiters want? Or is there a secret, third version you've been sitting on, waiting to unveil?
I am certainly not advocating violence against anybody at all. I do feel uncomfortable about the apparent glee that some posters on here feel about the possible re emergence or increase of violence due to the Irish border situation. At it's most civilised it seems to be framed and accepted as a price that has to be paid for brexit. If one could extrapolate that attitude from some posters on here to the wider population, then the proportion of 'don't give a damners' starts to become genuinely alarming. I ask again (tediously and boringly) has anybody, meaning anybody who voted brexit, got any fresh and practical solutions to the Irish border question?
Seth to me the same thing has to happen now with brexit as happened previously to bring peace. Politicians need to sit round a table talk and find a compromise solution that is acceptable to both parties. The recent brexit perplexed series on radio 4 suggested that the Eu had been quite good at finding solutions to complex issues when it had the will. I believe Cyprus was mentioned. I see no reason why this cannot happen now. Both parties will need to compromise and nobody needs to pick up guns and bombs.
The Good Friday Agreement went before a referendum to the whole of Ireland where it was overwhelmingly accepted Link Why would this anybody look to rip it up without offering any assurances or solutions to this major obstacle?
Here is an article written by a Remainer who seeks to be self-critical about why we lost the referendum vote, namely:
The answer, of course, is that we were and are too busy being smug know-it-alls: certain before the referendum that the idealism of the EU was plain for everyone except the terminally thick and racist to see; and certain afterwards that surely at some point even the terminally thick and racist will start having buyers’ remorse.
I wonder how this will go down here, on both sides of the line.
Here is an article written by a Remainer who seeks to be self-critical about why we lost the referendum vote, namely:
The answer, of course, is that we were and are too busy being smug know-it-alls: certain before the referendum that the idealism of the EU was plain for everyone except the terminally thick and racist to see; and certain afterwards that surely at some point even the terminally thick and racist will start having buyers’ remorse.
I wonder how this will go down here, on both sides of the line.
I read this too. There was also a comment BTL who compared the Remainers' lacklustre public support to not feeling the need to stand in the street with a sign saying 'The Earth is Round'. Simply put, Remainers had far too much faith in the British voters not to vote for something so clearly not in their own interests.
I am certainly not advocating violence against anybody at all. I do feel uncomfortable about the apparent glee that some posters on here feel about the possible re emergence or increase of violence due to the Irish border situation. At it's most civilised it seems to be framed and accepted as a price that has to be paid for brexit. If one could extrapolate that attitude from some posters on here to the wider population, then the proportion of 'don't give a damners' starts to become genuinely alarming. I ask again (tediously and boringly) has anybody, meaning anybody who voted brexit, got any fresh and practical solutions to the Irish border question?
To be fair I haven't seen anyone emitting glee at the prospective re emergence of violence. Apparent or otherwise.
I accept what you say. I suppose I am interpreting the reaction of some as gleeful. Maybe it really means a casual acceptance. Of course I would like others to be as concerned as I am, but as that is unreasonable I at least ask others for their suggested solutions.
I completely get where you're coming from but believe there isn't even a casual acceptance. By some saying that that one issue, although a biggie, should not stop Brexit it doesn't mean they accept the violence.
I don't know the answer, and doubt many do, but to lay the blame for any future violence at the feet of a referendum result, and not at the doors of the twisted f**kwits that will carry it out, seems a bit shallow to me.
You don't need to provide the answer - that's the point. Under the social contract which Rousseau explored, he was not impressed by monarchies. Rousseau did not believe that inheriting a throne made you an inherently better or divine ruler. He thought that the best way to rule was not through force, but by following the will of the people. Any government or sovereign who did not rule with the best interest of the people in mind should be overthrown. Two hundred years later, that is the essence of our democracy.
Once Article 50 was triggered, the EU27 very swiftly asked for proposals and responses around three questions: the Irish border, the rights of 3 million EU citizens and the basic premise (not amount) around settling obligations whilst the UK had been a member of the EU.
It looks very unlikely that the UK delegation will provide enough to move forwards to phase 2 of the discussions in December. So that becomes nine months since Article 50 was triggered and approximately 50% of the time allowed before any proposals have to go around Europe, and Westminster for agreement. These EU meetings occur every three months so it will be March 2018 or 12 months after A.50 when we have some insight.
It's not one issue which is stopping Brexit - but the complete failure of this Government to address the issues which is preventing them from moving to a negotiation phase around the future relationship. At what point will the beliefs of Rousseau kick in? When will the perception that the government is not rulling in the best interests of the people become the majority view?
Whichever middle class Liberal is the latest to spell out their view of the 2016 referendum is irrelevant! Answers and progress need to be forthcoming now or either the Government will fall/implode or it will attempt to shift to a hard Brexit / no deal stance.
At that point the markets, the Labour Party and the EU27 will have their say. The overall position looks completely unplayable - as before, the only playable option (which also addresses the Irish border) is the one suggested by Varoufakis and is now being adopted by the Irish. And that is a five year Norway style interim deal.
This does not sit well with the Redwood/Gove/Johnson wing. Gove and Johnson have come out against that perspective demanding a short term arrangement and leaving everything - but they simply don't have electoral support beyond their base and their billionaire backers. May should pay up and clear out hardcore brexiteer minority is a view that many share. We will see what she does and how the story moves on - time will tell.
I don't know if I have an opinion on her one way or the other, but I think this article is worth considering. I think its a bit rich for her to brand us all as smug. I already knew long before the referendum that summarising the advantages of EU membership in a pub discussion is a tough ask. On the other hand I think she has correctly captured how a large chunk of Leavers think of all Remainers, and why free movement was the big driver for most of them. I assume this is also what Robert Peston's new book explores, and i'm looking forward to receiving my copy tomorrow (gone for the hardback version, so effective has been his marketing of it).
I think she makes an important point that we will never shift opinion if the best argument we can make for Remaining is "look at the hassle of leaving, it's not worth it". And I don't know how to argue with people like those on here who mock me for the very act of verifying what I want to assert using Wikipedia or via Google, before posting.
Contrary to @seriously_red 's remarks (Whichever middle class Liberal is the latest to spell out their view of the 2016 referendum is irrelevant!) I think she makes points which are highly relevant. There might be a second referendum. Despite the mounting evidence of the folly, take a look at the CL battle lines. Do you see a Brexit supporting Lifer whom you can see changing sides? I don't. No matter how many facts you throw at them, they remain completely un-moved, even those like @stonemuse who clearly take the time to at least consider an opposing viewpoint.
The problem is the lack of political leadership for the Remain side. What's needed is a movement which recognises:
1. that indeed the lives of ordinary people (and not just in the UK) were made worse as a result of the follies which led to the crash, and have not been made better since, while those that caused it, and supported it, have done just fine, and
2. That Brexit is a massive red herring if the genuine goal is to improve the lives of ordinary people.
Unfortunately Corbyn has always thought the entire EU project is a capitalist plot. So there is no effective opposition to the current charge to the cliffs - although people like Keir Starmer do their best. There has never been a more important time for a Centrist coalition in British politics, but sadly, the British (both the politicians and the people) like it tribal, and I cannot see it happening.
We are more than half-way there. Today is the 506th day since the referendum and there are 504 days until the date on which we are due to leave the EU. So it's worth re-capping on what we have achieved, in terms of agreements, already and what we still need to agree. This is not a comprehensive list.
What still needs to be agreed - The status of EU citizens in the UK, UK subjects in the EU, and which courts they have reference to, to ensure their status. - The land border between the UK and Ireland: where it will physically be; how it will be controlled and by whom; what restrictions will be in place for cross-border travel; what controls will be in place to ensure goods are correctly charged for. - The net cost of any settlement between the UK and the EU (ie the "divorce bill"). - Whether the UK will be in the Customs Union - Whether the UK will be in the Single Market - What transitional arrangements will be in place, for whom, for how long, how they will be policed and which courts have jurisdiction. - What will happen to current EU subsidies; for how long will the EU continue to meet subsidy commitments; how will they be met - and by whom - after that time. - How flights into and out of the UK will be allowed to continue if the UK is removed from the European Single Skies Policy; or whether the UK retains membership, for how long and at what cost. - Which geographical areas within the UK will have exemptions from Brexit; and, if not, how those areas' specific social and economic requirements will be met. (Exampe: Scotland). - Which industries in the UK will have exemptions from Brexit; and, if not, how those industries' specific social and economic requirements will be met. (Example: fishing, financial services). - What levels of immigration are appropriate; how they will be policed; how UK citizens will have to prove they have the right to remain in the UK. - How we deal with the UK's exit from Euratom; who owns Euratom's physical infrastructure in the UK; who meets the cost of redundant British staff in Euratom. - Trade agreements between the UK and the EU. - Trade relationships between the UK and every country outside the EU.
(Note, this list isn't as daunting as it might appear. Because we only have to finalise agreement on the first 13 of those 14 items before March 2019. (As well as their associated votes in both Houses of Parliament and taking into account the mood, desire and aspiration of the British public).
What has been agreed - Triggering Article 50. (Although there is still disagreement as to whether it's reversible, what the article contains, whether it can be delayed, whether it can be paused, and whether triggering it was lawful in the first place).
So, we have reached half-time and it seems like we haven't made the best start. Does anyone still think we can achieve agreement on everything that's still outstanding (which is basically, everything) in the second half?
As they like to say in the EU, nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.
There seems to have been a lot of abrasiveness on here recently.
If you could all empathise, try to understand, sympathise and show a higher level of humanity, towards/with those that hold differing views to yourself then I think we'll be heading in the right direction.
Yes, that even means finding common ground with those who you feel to be far less caring than yourself.
No, Seth, I don't have an answer to the Irish border question
Show common ground with cunts like Redwood and the other 35 Tory hard Brexiteers who, backed by Russian trolls, dark money and the Daily Mail, are leading this country off a cliff? You are insane. People have voiced concerns about violence around the Irish border in the event of a hard Brexit. When people see what a hard Brexit has done to the UK in 5 or 10 years I think there will be some retribution on the mainland and it won't be pretty. Redwood and some of those other 35 MPs will need 24 hour
I don't know if I have an opinion on her one way or the other, but I think this article is worth considering. I think its a bit rich for her to brand us all as smug. I already knew long before the referendum that summarising the advantages of EU membership in a pub discussion is a tough ask. On the other hand I think she has correctly captured how a large chunk of Leavers think of all Remainers, and why free movement was the big driver for most of them. I assume this is also what Robert Peston's new book explores, and i'm looking forward to receiving my copy tomorrow (gone for the hardback version, so effective has been his marketing of it).
I think she makes an important point that we will never shift opinion if the best argument we can make for Remaining is "look at the hassle of leaving, it's not worth it". And I don't know how to argue with people like those on here who mock me for the very act of verifying what I want to assert using Wikipedia or via Google, before posting.
Contrary to @seriously_red 's remarks (Whichever middle class Liberal is the latest to spell out their view of the 2016 referendum is irrelevant!) I think she makes points which are highly relevant. There might be a second referendum. Despite the mounting evidence of the folly, take a look at the CL battle lines. Do you see a Brexit supporting Lifer whom you can see changing sides? I don't. No matter how many facts you throw at them, they remain completely un-moved, even those like @stonemuse who clearly take the time to at least consider an opposing viewpoint.
The problem is the lack of political leadership for the Remain side. What's needed is a movement which recognises:
1. that indeed the lives of ordinary people (and not just in the UK) were made worse as a result of the follies which led to the crash, and have not been made better since, while those that caused it, and supported it, have done just fine, and
2. That Brexit is a massive red herring if the genuine goal is to improve the lives of ordinary people.
Unfortunately Corbyn has always thought the entire EU project is a capitalist plot. So there is no effective opposition to the current charge to the cliffs - although people like Keir Starmer do their best. There has never been a more important time for a Centrist coalition in British politics, but sadly, the British (both the politicians and the people) like it tribal, and I cannot see it happening.
'Summarising the benefits of the EU in a pub discussion is a tough ask', you bet it is. Summarising the problems of the EU on the other hand is straightforward. Don't take my word for it but read President Macron's article in the Spectator in which he accurately describes a lot of what is wrong with the EU and why it is failing through lack of democracy and bureaucratic incompetence.
His solution of course is more Europe and a renewed drive to political union,which has only ever been supported by a tiny minority in this country.
So that is why Leavers will not change their minds-the EU is a failing project and the only 'solution' put forward is a European super state. No thanks.
I don't know if I have an opinion on her one way or the other, but I think this article is worth considering. I think its a bit rich for her to brand us all as smug. I already knew long before the referendum that summarising the advantages of EU membership in a pub discussion is a tough ask. On the other hand I think she has correctly captured how a large chunk of Leavers think of all Remainers, and why free movement was the big driver for most of them. I assume this is also what Robert Peston's new book explores, and i'm looking forward to receiving my copy tomorrow (gone for the hardback version, so effective has been his marketing of it).
I think she makes an important point that we will never shift opinion if the best argument we can make for Remaining is "look at the hassle of leaving, it's not worth it". And I don't know how to argue with people like those on here who mock me for the very act of verifying what I want to assert using Wikipedia or via Google, before posting.
Contrary to @seriously_red 's remarks (Whichever middle class Liberal is the latest to spell out their view of the 2016 referendum is irrelevant!) I think she makes points which are highly relevant. There might be a second referendum. Despite the mounting evidence of the folly, take a look at the CL battle lines. Do you see a Brexit supporting Lifer whom you can see changing sides? I don't. No matter how many facts you throw at them, they remain completely un-moved, even those like @stonemuse who clearly take the time to at least consider an opposing viewpoint.
The problem is the lack of political leadership for the Remain side. What's needed is a movement which recognises:
1. that indeed the lives of ordinary people (and not just in the UK) were made worse as a result of the follies which led to the crash, and have not been made better since, while those that caused it, and supported it, have done just fine, and
2. That Brexit is a massive red herring if the genuine goal is to improve the lives of ordinary people.
Unfortunately Corbyn has always thought the entire EU project is a capitalist plot. So there is no effective opposition to the current charge to the cliffs - although people like Keir Starmer do their best. There has never been a more important time for a Centrist coalition in British politics, but sadly, the British (both the politicians and the people) like it tribal, and I cannot see it happening.
I think some have gone awfully quiet. Which, paradoxically, speaks volumes...
Comments
the disrespect continues
PS I had Ibborg down as having hair
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/13/labour-accuses-john-redwood-of-talking-britain-down
If you could all empathise, try to understand, sympathise and show a higher level of humanity, towards/with those that hold differing views to yourself then I think we'll be heading in the right direction.
Yes, that even means finding common ground with those who you feel to be far less caring than yourself.
No, Seth, I don't have an answer to the Irish border question
I include morons in that as well.
Insane? My mental health is not there to be ridiculed, thank you very much.
Alternatively ask any religious person and they'll confirm that it's all gods will.
Let's blame God.
I do feel uncomfortable about the apparent glee that some posters on here feel about the possible re emergence or increase of violence due to the Irish border situation. At it's most civilised it seems to be framed and accepted as a price that has to be paid for brexit.
If one could extrapolate that attitude from some posters on here to the wider population, then the proportion of 'don't give a damners' starts to become genuinely alarming.
I ask again (tediously and boringly) has anybody, meaning anybody who voted brexit, got any fresh and practical solutions to the Irish border question?
I don't know the answer, and doubt many do, but to lay the blame for any future violence at the feet of a referendum result, and not at the doors of the twisted f**kwits that will carry it out, seems a bit shallow to me.
Putting up a physical, impenetrable, policed border is possible, but would be monumentally expensive, utterly undesirable, would threaten the Good Friday Agreement (and by "threaten", I mean completely nullify) and would be very likely to anger Republicans into resuming hostile, possibly violent, possibly fatal action.
Leaving the boundary as a porous, un-policed, invisible border would mean it would be impossible to prevent "economic migration" from the EU, require us to stay in the Single Market and Customs Union and admit complete and total failure to bring about "control of our borders".
Which of these two, impossible solutions do you Brexiters want? Or is there a secret, third version you've been sitting on, waiting to unveil?
Why would this anybody look to rip it up without offering any assurances or solutions to this major obstacle?
The answer, of course, is that we were and are too busy being smug know-it-alls: certain before the referendum that the idealism of the EU was plain for everyone except the terminally thick and racist to see; and certain afterwards that surely at some point even the terminally thick and racist will start having buyers’ remorse.
I wonder how this will go down here, on both sides of the line.
Once Article 50 was triggered, the EU27 very swiftly asked for proposals and responses around three questions: the Irish border, the rights of 3 million EU citizens and the basic premise (not amount) around settling obligations whilst the UK had been a member of the EU.
It looks very unlikely that the UK delegation will provide enough to move forwards to phase 2 of the discussions in December. So that becomes nine months since Article 50 was triggered and approximately 50% of the time allowed before any proposals have to go around Europe, and Westminster for agreement. These EU meetings occur every three months so it will be March 2018 or 12 months after A.50 when we have some insight.
It's not one issue which is stopping Brexit - but the complete failure of this Government to address the issues which is preventing them from moving to a negotiation phase around the future relationship. At what point will the beliefs of Rousseau kick in? When will the perception that the government is not rulling in the best interests of the people become the majority view?
Whichever middle class Liberal is the latest to spell out their view of the 2016 referendum is irrelevant! Answers and progress need to be forthcoming now or either the Government will fall/implode or it will attempt to shift to a hard Brexit / no deal stance.
At that point the markets, the Labour Party and the EU27 will have their say. The overall position looks completely unplayable - as before, the only playable option (which also addresses the Irish border) is the one suggested by Varoufakis and is now being adopted by the Irish. And that is a five year Norway style interim deal.
This does not sit well with the Redwood/Gove/Johnson wing. Gove and Johnson have come out against that perspective demanding a short term arrangement and leaving everything - but they simply don't have electoral support beyond their base and their billionaire backers. May should pay up and clear out hardcore brexiteer minority is a view that many share. We will see what she does and how the story moves on - time will tell.
I think she makes an important point that we will never shift opinion if the best argument we can make for Remaining is "look at the hassle of leaving, it's not worth it". And I don't know how to argue with people like those on here who mock me for the very act of verifying what I want to assert using Wikipedia or via Google, before posting.
Contrary to @seriously_red 's remarks (Whichever middle class Liberal is the latest to spell out their view of the 2016 referendum is irrelevant!) I think she makes points which are highly relevant. There might be a second referendum. Despite the mounting evidence of the folly, take a look at the CL battle lines. Do you see a Brexit supporting Lifer whom you can see changing sides? I don't. No matter how many facts you throw at them, they remain completely un-moved, even those like @stonemuse who clearly take the time to at least consider an opposing viewpoint.
The problem is the lack of political leadership for the Remain side. What's needed is a movement which recognises:
1. that indeed the lives of ordinary people (and not just in the UK) were made worse as a result of the follies which led to the crash, and have not been made better since, while those that caused it, and supported it, have done just fine, and
2. That Brexit is a massive red herring if the genuine goal is to improve the lives of ordinary people.
Unfortunately Corbyn has always thought the entire EU project is a capitalist plot. So there is no effective opposition to the current charge to the cliffs - although people like Keir Starmer do their best. There has never been a more important time for a Centrist coalition in British politics, but sadly, the British (both the politicians and the people) like it tribal, and I cannot see it happening.
Will post soon in more detail.