Do you think Dave will be held properly accountable for the fact that he prejudiced the interests of the country to enable him to undermine UKIP, and help him reunite the Tories, so that he could try to win an election?. The irony is that he never expected to have to hold a referendum as he thought the most likely outcome was another Con-Lib coalition and they would never have allowed it. No doubt he'll be elevated to the peerage some time soon.
Yes but the Boing venture has happened despite the Brexit vote. That would have happened either way its not a positive because of the vote We are seeing now real problems caused because of the vote - lets see when we get positives because of it but I am not expecting many for a long time - especially if we leave the single market
He should hang his head in shame. Having campaigned against Scottish independence as well as for our maintaining our place in Europe he has brought us closer to the first and ruined the latter in the pursuit of keeping his party in power for another five years.
It's a global economy you're stuck with. We have limited control. Accountability is not the same as "control". Though "control" is a description I find happiness with too. I won't go on about this again, but as far as Europe is concerned, you cannot hammer various different shaped heads into one hole. The southern European economies are too different. For us. We can be partners, traders, friends, security co-operators etc. Why be more than that and get to be told what we must do, from time to time, against our own wishes and interests? Others will follow us now.
Thing is whoever the PM is they can't invoke article 50, they just don't have that power. Hopefully it'll never happen. And before anyone says it has to ..,no it doesn't.. The referendum wasn't legally binding. Hopefully sense will prevail and the MPs will throw it out. Does any really think we could thrive outside the EU? A few questions. Who owns our utilities? Who are our trading partners? Who funds the majority of regeneration projects in the UK (esp in the north)?
Unfortunately I dont think he will be held accountable All that you said above and then he expected to win the remain vote so phrased the question on a simple in out 50% way hoping that would be the end of it. Then when he lost he immediately took his bat and ball home to mummy and has left someone else to sort out the mess (along with all the leave campainers disappearing and saying it wasnt up to them to have a plan) Still he has united the Tories so he can go to his peerage happy
So you've campaigned to take back control, I believe that was the phrase used in the run up to the referendum. And now say that we don't have control. But you want accountability. In a global economy. Where's the accountability there? Are Opec accountable to us? Are the US, China, Japan, India accountable? It's a massively complex world.The lack of accountability within the EU is a minor irritant compared to the greater risks we now face on our own in the global economy.
There have been a few new Prime Ministers who took over mid term. It is not part of the PM's remit to stay the full term. Why pick on this one? May was voted in as an MP. For them all to follow a set of policies/ manifesto etc.
The public never elects a prime minister. You vote at a GE for who you you would like as your local MP, to best represent you in Parliament.
Whilst I agree with you it will happen She will be Prime Minister by Wednesday evening She has also said she wont hold an election until 2020 even more frighteningly it could have been Gove and we still had no say Good to have our democracy back eh She has also said she has no intention of invoking article 50 until the end of the year - chance for some backpedalling despite what she says?
True we get the 2nd biggest level of R&D funding, almost 8bn from EU, almost on a par with Germany who are first. or should I say we did.
I work for a Disability Sports charity. I know all about making a case for funding. I've been pretty much doing it for 20+ years. The original post was about "remain folks being bitter". Well, I for one do feel a little bit peeved that everything we've worked to build up, in my line of work, (having recovered from the unbelieveable withdrawal of core funding immediately after the Paralympics) , has been blown out of the water, on the basis of thousands, probably tens of thousands of people voting out, on promises of money going to the NHS, and us "getting or country back" or "sorting out immigration". I feel bitter that I may lose my job, that the charity I work for may go under. However, it's not about me. I'm pretty confident I'd get a job. But the charity wouldn't be replaced, and the projects we run and support would end immediately. The events programme would go. The thousands of disabled people we support would have no other organisation to turn to, and ironically, in one district in particular, the projects that have diverted people from accessing NHS services, and medical professions, would stop, costing the NHS in the long run. I'm not denying that some people may have equally compelling reasons to leave as I had to stay, BUT the majority of what I have seen, has been people voting leave on the basis of utter ****** promises relating to the NHS, and "getting our country back". So yes, it grates, knowing the upheaval our organisation has to go through yet again, based on ill informed decisions pretty much made on social media. The funding we sourced, in this instance, was via a local authority that would like to continue funding us, because they have reaped the benefits of our work. Unfortunately, they can no longer rely on their European Funding, so that's that. But at least we have our country back, and our "democracy".
Perhaps you could remind us of who you had the chance to vote for when you went into the booth at the last election. Did it say David Cameron by any chance? Maybe Jeremy Corbyn? If you had the chance to vote for PM then you have a point. Otherwise, well.............
You know as well as I do that legally your vote may only be for your local mp but in practice the vast majority of us put a large weighting on who the prime minister could potentially be, how the perceive them and what their policies are. Otherwise what is the point of the national debates and all the campaigning that the party leaders do? What is this talk of Jeremy corbyn being unelectable? Nobody votes for the prime minister anyway right? It makes hormone bit of difference who the party leader is. Of course it matters. How many people do you think have said that Cameron is a pig shagging smug **** who I can't stand. He's trying to destroy our NHS and if he in in power that is exactly what will happen. Oh but my local conservative mp seem a nice guy so I'll vote for him anyway. Of course some do but the vast majority don't. The vast vast majority of people know that whichever no they vote in is a one in 650 vote for that party and that party leader. That's why the party leader is on TV delivering a party manifesto. Unless you vote independent then you are voting for a potential prime minister regardless of what is printed on the ballot paper
Wrong. So if you get no overall majority, and the parties cook up a deal (e.g. Con/Dem) then where's your leader argument then? Owt could happen. Brown taking over after Blair - who bleated then? PM can do little without a vote - especially war, now. At least you got the manifesto bit right. It's not the PM, it's what gets done. We have enough of a personality cult in life.
I know that. People vote on personalities, or for whoever the tabloids tell them to. But pointing out someone is an unelected PM is a technical irrelevance, when none of them are elected PM.
No I can't, I can throw my vote down a massive Tory majority and wait for it to thud at the bottom after a few years.