Revoke A50 Petition

You're wrong their Dek...there are enough supporters on this board to fill one of Gordon's 53 seaters mate.

 

tha wants to be careful marlon,thal start believing thisen

now pi55 off to bed

 

they must be in the 3% of voters in this parliamentary seat that have signed that petition then lol

 

I believe in everything I post otherwise I wouldn’t post .

 

That’s more down to the north suffering more from Tory Austerity and lashing out at EU in most cases .

 

practically everyone i know has wanted out of the eu for years,long before tory austerity

the rise of the bnp and their anti eu stance was in the 2000's,while labour were in power

 

There’s been anti establishment in the industrial heartlands since thatcher , I’m not denying that and it’s been simmering for quite a while before Austerity but there’s no doubting Austerity tipped the balance for Farage in the ex industrial areas.but let’s be reight about this it’s well known and proven in history that once a population is suffering the first thing they hit out at is immigrants and the poorest and if tha denies that fact dek I’ve done because thar knows as well as I do that’s a fact.

 

I'm not sure though Marlon if you can attribute WW1 to populism,..in fact I would disagree, WW1 was caused by elites acting recklessly, few of the participants had any kind representation, democracatic or otherwise.

 

I would say though Marlon, your perception of populism appears to be that it is purely a right wing phenomenon, but historically the Labour Party itself was formed to combat elites, it was undoubtedly populism but not right wing.

 

Whatever happens.... Revoke A50 or leave no deal (God forbid we sign up to May's 'deal' as that is neither in nor out), the country will be split. The only way the wounds will heal is if we leave no deal, the 'disaster' foretold doesn't materialise, and medium (several months) /long term the economy prospers. I suspect, regardless of the marches, unofficial petitions etc all the arguments re "we didn't know what we voted for", revoking article 50 would lead to longer term resentment as the leave voters would see it as a betrayal of the democratic system.
Anyway we can argue that all day.

As an aside, and as a counter to one or two on here who think racism was the reason behind Leave votes, here is an interesting article written a short time after the referendum which explains why I, for one, voted leave..

“Game, set and match” was not a phrase John Major uttered as he returned from the sleepy Dutch town of Maastricht in December 1991....

It was, however, the takeaway phrase from the government’s statement on the negotiation of the eponymous treaty. That treaty was signed exactly 25 years ago. A quarter of a century on, a paradox has been revealed. Maastricht was both a triumph and disaster for Britain’s place in the EU.

Mr Major played a blinder at the summit. He secured not only an opt-out of economic and monetary union – ensuring that it would be up to Britain whether or not to join the single currency – but also the removal of the social chapter from the body of the treaty itself.

He also played a critical role in the creation of the pillar structure that maintained key policy areas such as defence policy and immigration separate from the EC institutions.

Britain emerged having secured exceptions from those bits of the treaty it most opposed. Yet Maastricht represented a turning point in our relationship with European integration and contributed, albeit indirectly, to our decision to leave.

Politically, the angry parliamentary debates over the ratification of the treaty brought into the open a rift within the Conservative Party that has remained a feature of our politics to the present day.

The Fresh Start Group was created and immediately raised 84 signatures for an early day motion calling for the Maastricht Treaty to fall.

Several Conservative MPs prominent in the 2016 referendum were either among the rebels or were converted to Euroscepticism at the time of Maastricht.

Iain Duncan Smith subsequently boasted of having voted with Labour 11 times to oppose the treaty. Liam Fox signed an early day motion against it. Ironically, the Brexit minister David Davis earned the ire of many of these people at the time for his role as a government whip at the time of the Maastricht debates.

And the passions were not confined to parliament. In 1991, a new party committed to ending British participation in European integration, the Anti-Federalist League, was created. Shortly thereafter, it changed its name to the UK Independence Party.

Maastricht also revealed and reinforced the fundamental cleavage that had divided us from our partners since the late 1980s. After the Single European Act of 1987, the UK effectively became a status quo member state.

While London had been the driving force behind the creation of the single market, thereafter we were a satisfied, status quo power. The market, as far as we were concerned, made European integration complete.

Other states, of course, viewed things rather differently. For them, the EC, as it then was, was a work in progress. For them, the notion of political union had real meaning and the state-like qualities of the nascent European Union were something to celebrate. Yet the further forward they pushed, the more disgruntled many in Britain became.

And it wasn’t just the impact of the treaty on Britain that has shaped subsequent events here. Maastricht created a raft of problems for the EU itself.

During the negotiations, and motivated by concerns about the implications of German unification, European leaders chose to endow the European Union with competence across a range of new policy areas, notably monetary policy, asylum and immigration.

Equally, however – anxious to maintain their own authority – they stopped short of providing the EU with the tools for effective action.

The member states did not so much empower the EU as dump competences on it while giving it as few powers as possible. And the areas where this was most true – fiscal policy, justice and home affairs – now haunt today’s leaders as a result.

Both the migration crisis and the eurozone crisis betray the traces of the incomplete integration so rashly entered into at Maastricht. In both cases, the EU has sufficient competence to attract the blame for failure, while lacking the ability to actually solve complex problems.

Schengen has opened borders, but there is no way of ensuring that member states take equal or proportionate shares of the migrants who enter the zone. The euro exists, but alongside purely national fiscal policies, it has run into the sand.

The obvious shortcomings of the EU in these areas played an important role in the debate that led to Britain’s referendum. The chaos of attempts to deal with the migrant crisis fed into debates about migration and freedom of movement.

The Eurozone crisis eroded the belief that, whatever its failings, EU membership was good for the British economy. Maastricht, in other words, came back to haunt us.

The warning signs were, of course, there from the start. Denmark initially rejected the treaty in a referendum, while the French came perilously close to doing so. Meanwhile, the German constitutional court signalled its unease about the direction of integration.

European leaders then, and subsequently, chose to ignore public discontent. The treaty they signed is part of the explanation why their contemporary British counterparts cannot.

 

Sorry, I know it's a serious matter, but I'm struggling to get past "fundamental cleavage" without sniggering.

Apologies for the interruption. As you were.

 

So your grandad saw that the evil of the nazis was going to change his country, ideals, etc. Plus was already doing that across Europe... whether your great grandad walked to ponty or not, is not an issue. Most people would walk to ponty from Barnsley back then. You can make things fit your own ideals and supposed party politics, but to say values were the same then as they are now is laughable. The only thing that isn’t different, is that people would still be swung into different things by propaganda. Many signed up to both wars to protect Britain and British values.....

 

You seem to have high opinions of yourself to know that the opinions of people were laughable.
Of course opinions were same as today because the issues were similar .
Revolutions were happening all over the world on these principles .
Revolution on these principles almost happened in the British Army . I’d suggest you educate yourself on these matters instead of thinking that you know. people went abroad before the war to fight o these principles and the evil of nazi in the Spanish civil war etc,
I think your Ill informed and post out of your ar se tbh

 

By populism I mean party’s that gain power on the back of certain issues the population are in Tandem with but have no substance as the Nazi and Fascist did . The Labour Party were are mainstream party with cross the board policies printed on a manifesto and didn’t advocate violence or persecution of opponents .
Most left wing parties were formed to help the less represented people in society and there’s no doubt the principles have been hijacked after coming to power and Russia amongst others are prime eg .
However most right wing populist party’s are for the elite and have policies to enact once in power on populist agendas mainly anti immigration and the lest well off in society .
There are many incidents and historical facts to back this up . Argentina is a case in point .

 

This to me highlights the fundamental problem with British politics, 25 years on and the same MPs are still there. It shouldn't be a 'jobs for life" system.

 

My grandfather walked to ponte to enlist and paid the ultimate price not to buy a fekin loaf of bread you pi lock .
It may not be a. Issue to you but tbh I don’t give a fek what you think .
You know nothing of my family and what they believed In back then or otherwise , I know my family history and I know why my grandfather joined up and what he believed in .
I didn’t make any up thing to fit anything you arrogant too hat what I put is fact whether you think it is or not is totally irrelevant to me you your nithing.
If you want to put facts forward to debate then put them in but don’t tell me about my family and what they did or didn’t do because your devoid of any substance . Fek off

 

Just had a look at the Revoke A50 Petition and it's ny on 5 million I suppose the Brexiteer's will say it's false/fake .
And on the other hand Farage led a leave march of which some news programs said only 250 to 350 attended if true then people are wakening up and smelling the gravy.

 

marlon,it a contributing factor,no doubt bud,but i will still argue that austerity(since 2010) had very little to do with farages rise, ukip , like i've already said had made huge strides prior to the tories taking office, indeed by 2009 they were our second largest party in the eu parliament and this was more to do with the open door immigration policy that was taking place and also that the two major parties had both promised referendums then not delivered....lets not forget that ukip were described as a one trick party as they stood on their promise of a referendum

i'll also make a point about WW1 enlistment,..this period in history,especially at the very begining of the war had record amounts of enlistment and this was because much of the population saw themselves as patriotic and wanted to defend not only this island but also the then empire and commonwealth,they did not enlist to fight 'populism and facism' certainly not in the way you are portraying it,..you only have to look at the propaganda that was around at the time to see this is the case.During the WW1 years it was seen as your moral duty to fight and woe betide you if you did not,its well documented pal.

I am not for one second saying that your grandfather did not hate hitler and facism but i would have thought that this train of thought came 20 years later with the spanish civil war and the events of WW2,and the rise of fascism in europe...My grandfather was a staunch union leader and an anti facist too , as am i and this is why i get proper fed up when people start comparing fascism of that period in time with wanting to leave the eu, fukcin scargil,bob crowe, dennis skinner and many other socialists and union men are also anti eu to the core and these can hardly be described as fascists and others who want CONTROLLED immigration are not fascists either

having said that and judging by you last comments to austinho your great grandad died during ww1,so i cant quite understand how he hated hitler as that ******* was just an infantryman during ww1 and would have been unknown to him. please excuse me if i've got the wrong end of the stick as to when he died,i'm not trying to be awkward mukka.

My greatgrandfatha is dead,and buried in Terlincthuan cemetary just outside boulogne,he was killed on the western front,he died trying to protect britain and british values from the onslaught of the german empire

 

16 million voted to remain,its not hard to envisage that around a third of them have signed the petition,

 

I know that your not winding me up dek we’ve had decent debates in the past
No my grandfather fought hitler my great grandfather was in world war 1 . He enlisted at the very beginning of the war before the pals brigade .
I dare say it was a sense of adventure but thrown into that the papers at the time were full of propogand about the kaiser and his he had invaded Belgium and was terrorising population .
The propaganda caused outrage st the time and were printing drawings of German soldiers with babies on their bayonets laughing .
I recall my grandmother mentioning at the time of how my great grandfather and his mates were plotting to join the West Yorkshire’s in the pub and citing the kaiser as a demon who wanted to crush the worlds working class .