Jump to content

Border controls ?


observer

Recommended Posts

Just explained: the Leave campaign was never in a position to promise anything, as they don't control Government.  Half the current cabinet voted Remain, as did the majority in Parliament .  Surprised your not quoting Vince Cable, he's now come up with the notion that we'll be £300million per week better off if we STAY in the EU, clearly a sore loser.   :rolleyes: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to let facts get in the way but the actual wording was "We send the EU £350 million a week", "Let's fund our NHS instead". Even if I was a believer I would not have taken that as a promise to divert all of the money. it very clearly isn't and to claim that it is shows political motivation not seeking the truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Confused52 said:

Sorry to let facts get in the way but the actual wording was "We send the EU £350 million a week", "Let's fund our NHS instead". Even if I was a believer I would not have taken that as a promise to divert all of the money. it very clearly isn't and to claim that it is shows political motivation not seeking the truth.

ahem.  In a 4,000-word article for the Telegraph, the Foreign Secretary restates the key demand of the Leave campaign - that £350m a week currently sent to Brussels should be redirected to fund the NHS.

 

Now,  how much then do you think the NHS will see of this mighty windfall?

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Foreign Secretary isn't the PM, neither does he have control of the Cabinet, even less so, the Parliament; so his personal opinion is basically irrelevant.   Confused is correct, I think Baz put a photo of the bus on one post, which clearly says what Confused said.    So, all this (re)moaning is becoming rather tiresome.         :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Togger,

It is heart-warming that you rely on the Telegraph for a source of truth. I must confess that I do not! However the answer I would give to your direct question is that consistent with my earlier answer and cognisant of your summary of the Telegraph article, which I take to be true, is some. 

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, observer said:

The Foreign Secretary isn't the PM, neither does he have control of the Cabinet, even less so, the Parliament; so his personal opinion is basically irrelevant.   Confused is correct, I think Baz put a photo of the bus on one post, which clearly says what Confused said.    So, all this (re)moaning is becoming rather tiresome.         :ph34r:

He made this claim prior to the referendum vote,  and the claim is believed to have been instrumental in swaying the less observant voters.  He was and is still very influential amongst the Brexit brigade and a pretty influential force within the Conservative party so very relevant.  Constant whinging is all you have done before, during and after the referendum, despite it going your way. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Confused52 said:

Togger,

It is heart-warming that you rely on the Telegraph for a source of truth. I must confess that I do not! However the answer I would give to your direct question is that consistent with my earlier answer and cognisant of your summary of the Telegraph article, which I take to be true, is some. 

I didn't choose the Telegraph, Boris Johnson did.  I didn't summarise it,  the Telegraph did that for its headline. I don't suppose it would have mattered though which publication he used to present his views, you would have tried to poo poo it as its all you really have.  Perhaps you could try to make your responses more factual and less pompous, a request that could be asked equally of yourself and the Foreign secretary.

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, observer said:

I think we can agree on that, that the Ref campaign was mainly lies on both sides, which frankly made little difference imo; as most will have made their minds up years before.  Having said that, the Leave campaign was never in a position to take any responsibility for the result, as they were never going to become the Gov charged with implementing the result, so any promises were meaningless.  The only reason the negotiations are "going so badly", is simply because, to varying degrees, the Gov and Parliament don't really believe in it .     What we do know, is that we were the second biggest net contributor to the EU, The £350million per week was an accurate gross figure (OBS); less the rebate (negotiated by Thatcher); less monies for EU projects dictated by the EU in the UK (thus recycling our money via Brussels).   With regard to "trade", I recall my thoughts in the first referendum on the EU, when I asked the question, why are we entering a block that has identical economies to our own (manufacturing based), when we still had the Commonwealth producing food and raw materials, that we then converted into finished products, thus a symbiotic trading relationship.   But the reality is much more than a trading relationship, as we have now discovered, it's a dream of a United States of Europe, with the gradual accession of poorer Nations being funded by the richer.  Thus throughout S/Europe and now E/Europe, we have brand new infrastructure funded by the EU, whilst our own has declined.  We also know from Greece and S/Europe, that much of this new bounty was wasted on a social spending binge, which they are now paying for in austerity and unemployment.       :ph34r:

"...the Ref campaign was mainly lies on both sides..."

 

That's a false equivalence, you're suggesting that the campaign to remain was as misleading as the leavers; it wasn't.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, fugtifino said:

Here's the Vote Leave Twitter account on 26/4/2016:

 

Now, if that doesn't mean that this money would be given to the NHS, could somebody please tell me what it does mean?

It doesn't mean that the money would be given to the NHS, it is clearly a suggestion that it could be a good idea to do it. However as the suggestion was being made by Vote Leave, an organisation that was not in power at the time and is not in power now, it is all rather academic. How are finances are arranged after/if we leave the EU will be a matter for the government in power.

By the way not everyone has a Twatter account!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Togger1 said:

I didn't choose the Telegraph, Boris Johnson did.  I didn't summarise it,  the Telegraph did that for its headline. I don't suppose it would have mattered though which publication he used to present his views, you would have tried to poo poo it as its all you really have.  Perhaps you could try to make your responses more factual and less pompous, a request that could be asked equally of yourself and the Foreign secretary.

 

What semantic nonsense. YOU chose both to read it and to quote it. Boris didn't make you do it. YOU wrote a summary of it on this blog, the Telegraph didn't. It wouldn't have mattered what paper it was because as Obs pointed out it was not the Government saying it. That point was made many times on the BBC during the campaign. Those who claim that they believed that what any of the groups said was going to be implemented simply reveal that they are gullible or argumentative.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, asperity said:

It doesn't mean that the money would be given to the NHS, it is clearly a suggestion that it could be a good idea to do it. However as the suggestion was being made by Vote Leave, an organisation that was not in power at the time and is not in power now, it is all rather academic. How are finances are arranged after/if we leave the EU will be a matter for the government in power.

By the way not everyone has a Twatter account!

I get that Vote Leave aren't and never have been in power, what I can't be doing with is people claiming that this particular piece of campaigning wasn't misleading because it clearly was.

"Vote Leave director Dominic Cummings admission: The Brexit referendum was won by lying to the public."

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/vote-leave-director-admits-won-lied-public/08/02/

At least one MP swapped her allegiance precisely because of this and other false claims:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36485464

And, no, I don't have a Twitter account either, but I know I'm not the only one on here who has a telly:

https://jonworth.eu/the-two-versions-of-the-350-million-for-the-nhs-slogan/

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Confused52 said:

What semantic nonsense. YOU chose both to read it and to quote it. Boris didn't make you do it. YOU wrote a summary of it on this blog, the Telegraph didn't. It wouldn't have mattered what paper it was because as Obs pointed out it was not the Government saying it. That point was made many times on the BBC during the campaign. Those who claim that they believed that what any of the groups said was going to be implemented simply reveal that they are gullible or argumentative.

No, I posted a link, and then asked a question. Claiming someone is being semantic seems to be the goto on here when you have been proven wrong,  I now have 2 in the bag :wink:  After that your post goes from dim to dimmer pretty quick.  We did not have a governmentally sided referendum did we? We had a Leave /Remain referendum and the Leave campaigners lied and apparently cheated their way through it.  Who is in power now was irrelevant back then when people were deciding how to vote.    

The final part of your post I have to agree with and judging by the result there were plenty of gullible folk duped into voting for a bunch of self serving xenophobes.

p.s.  Many thanks for toning down the pomposity as requested, I know it doesn't come naturally to you so I appreciate the effort :D

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Confused52 said:

Sorry to let facts get in the way but the actual wording was "We send the EU £350 million a week", "Let's fund our NHS instead". Even if I was a believer I would not have taken that as a promise to divert all of the money. it very clearly isn't and to claim that it is shows political motivation not seeking the truth.

As you are so intelligent, would you explain the meaning of the word semantic please.  You have provided a wonderful example of it above which was kind, just wondered how you interpret the words actual meaning? lol

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Togger,

 

The most important word was nonsense, that is why you chose the other one (semantic) to pick a fight. That is also why you now goad with a definition question so that you can pick on a mistype or argue about the dictionary quoted or find some other fault.  Why should anyone discuss anything with you Togger?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The biggest clanger that was dropped re the referendum was when Cameron declared he would let the people decide the future of Britain staying in or leaving Europe. He fully believed his  voters  were so enamoured  with everything  European & its star spangled banner that they would swallow anything his limp wristed  2015 negotiations produced & give a referendum result that would take the decision making out of his hands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Confused52 said:

Togger,

 

The most important word was nonsense, that is why you chose the other one (semantic) to pick a fight. That is also why you now goad with a definition question so that you can pick on a mistype or argue about the dictionary quoted or find some other fault.  Why should anyone discuss anything with you Togger?

What a complete capitulation, never expected it to be so easy. Much like we are capitulating to the EU over the Irish border question.

If you don't wish to be held accountable for your own words, don't post them.

 

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, if we accept the Snowflake's argument, it suggests that the vast majority of the electorate, were so gullible that they believed the claims and counter-claims in the Referendum Campaign.   The reality is however,  that the majority had clearly made their minds up years before the referendum, which finally gave a democratic outlet for long pent up frustration with a dictatorial and undemocratic regime, that was wasting their money and overriding the sovereignty of their own Country; and voted accordingly.      :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Togger1 said:

What a complete capitulation, never expected it to be so easy. Much like we are capitulating to the EU over the Irish border question.

If you don't wish to be held accountable for your own words, don't post them.

 

 

Just an attempt at misdirection again. Why should anyone discuss anything with you Togger?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Davy51 said:

The biggest clanger that was dropped re the referendum was when Cameron declared he would let the people decide the future of Britain staying in or leaving Europe. He fully believed his  voters  were so enamoured  with everything  European & its star spangled banner that they would swallow anything his limp wristed  2015 negotiations produced & give a referendum result that would take the decision making out of his hands.

I agree wholeheartedly with the first sentence. I do not see the point in the second sentence like that however. There was before the event much discussion of unhappiness with immigration matters in many of the other Member states before Cameron's attempt to get a renegotiation ahead of the referendum. There was a clear expectation, as I remember it, that the Visegrad members would back changes on rights of expats too, as some of them wanted their nationals to be back working in their own countries. Somehow the Commission and Tusk managed to persuade them not to give way so we had the worthless promises, which then lapsed, from the EU. Cameron was made to look weak and the referendum took place with no evidence that the EU was on our side, indeed quite the opposite. It has been said that the Europeans just do not understand the Anglo-Saxon mind-set and it seems that they thought a bad deal with Cameron would put the public off a leave vote. It really did show that they don't understand and leaving we are. I think that the "limp wristed" negotiations could not have been avoided except by abandoning the promised referendum, which is what should have happened.

I suppose that Cameron believed it would be to show weakness to not have the referendum but actually if would have shown wisdom. I know many don't appreciate Ken Clarke but I remember his answer to being asked on radio why he had made a U-turn on something which was "when the facts change I change my mind!" More politicians should follow that maxim in my book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, fugtifino said:

"Well, if we accept the Snowflake's argument..."

Who is this snowflake of which you speak?

Crikey, someone's given me the thumbs down for asking a simple question.

Not had the courtesy to discuss the merits or otherwise of my post.

Nor have they identified themselves.

Isn't that a bit snowflakey?

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, observer said:

Well, if we accept the Snowflake's argument, it suggests that the vast majority of the electorate, were so gullible that they believed the claims and counter-claims in the Referendum Campaign.   The reality is however,  that the majority had clearly made their minds up years before the referendum, which finally gave a democratic outlet for long pent up frustration with a dictatorial and undemocratic regime, that was wasting their money and overriding the sovereignty of their own Country; and voted accordingly.      :ph34r:

Only a moron would believe that the campaigning during the referendum build up had no effect on how people voted.  Why else would the Leavers overspend and lie?  

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Confused52 said:

Just an attempt at misdirection again. Why should anyone discuss anything with you Togger?

Some on here not only need to sound off, they need to think they are right, I probably shake up the pensioners and retirees to a point that they need to respond.  I am probably doing certain members a favour by adding some spice to their dour existences :wink:  This is why you respond, and to try to make yourself feel superior.  I see the EU are favourites to get  what they wanted from the Irish talks,  we were warned about what would happen.  Still its better to be bankrupt than to be in the EU huh?

 

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...