Current Affairs EU In or Out

[Barnfred 55]

Firstly, it was evidenced and largely factually correct, although open to challenge based on interpretation.
It was a point of view (professional admittedly) presented to the pubic as a fact. It presented a worse case scenario and justified this by using the word "could".
Secondly, as I've repeated over and over in this thread, the government is duty bound to act in the interests of it's electorate and the leaflet fell into the category of informing the public, based on an assessment of evidence. Fully agree. I just believe they over egged their predictions to emphasise their point. As far as I'm aware, not one of their warnings has turned out to be as bad as they predicted. I may stand corrected as I haven't been keeping a close eye on it.

Thirdly, it didn't campaign on behalf of Remain as this would've meant it fell foul of the electoral commission who found 'no collusion' between the government and Remain Campaign.
Oh come on. Give me some credit here. Every single recommendation that Govt made was in support of remain. There was not one single statement made that highlighted a benefit of leaving. Not one. You say there was no collusion between the Govt and the Remain Campaign. The Govt WAS the remain campaign.
[/QUOTE
I have agreed on numerous occasions that Leave campaign lied and at times gave ridiculously false information out. In fact I would say it was downright amateurish. But I have yet to see one remain supporter on here admit that the Govt overstated the risks of leaving when clearly they were. As, on the whole, has been proven.

 

[Jebus_lives]

@Barnfred 55
The point is, the risks, which the government highlighted, in their leaflet, weren't time limited. It was entirely sourced, which were referenced for scrutiny. The point about collusion stands, regardless of what you think, as it's been challenged and rejected through the EC.

I'm not sure what 'benefits of leaving the EU' the government could reasonably priced forward in the leaflet that they didn't present.

I'm not being dismissive here, though I recognise I may be being too narrow in my veiw point. So, what specifically in the government leaflet are you pointing to that was factually incorrect or was an omission of benefit?

 

[Carl O'Ancelotti]

'The Labour Party will back an attempt to block a no-deal Brexit and put forward or support an amendment in favour of a public vote to prevent a "damaging Tory Brexit", Jeremy Corbyn will announce. The party leader is set to tell a meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party that he will do "everything" in his power to prevent Britain crashing out of the European Union without a deal, and will back the Cooper-Letwin amendment to take the option off the table. And he will say Labour is "committed to also putting forward or supporting an amendment in favour of a public vote to prevent a damaging Tory Brexit being forced on the country".

The party will seek to enshrine Labour's five Brexit demands in law by tabling an amendment to the Government's Brexit motion which is set to be debated on Wednesday. The demands include a permanent and comprehensive customs union with the EU and close alignment with the single market, as well as a dynamic alignment on rights and protections and commitments on participation in EU agencies and funding programmes. If the plan is rejected, Labour will then support a second referendum.'

And about time too, though better late than never.

 

[roydo]

'The Labour Party will back an attempt to block a no-deal Brexit and put forward or support an amendment in favour of a public vote to prevent a "damaging Tory Brexit", Jeremy Corbyn will announce. The party leader is set to tell a meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party that he will do "everything" in his power to prevent Britain crashing out of the European Union without a deal, and will back the Cooper-Letwin amendment to take the option off the table. And he will say Labour is "committed to also putting forward or supporting an amendment in favour of a public vote to prevent a damaging Tory Brexit being forced on the country".

The party will seek to enshrine Labour's five Brexit demands in law by tabling an amendment to the Government's Brexit motion which is set to be debated on Wednesday. The demands include a permanent and comprehensive customs union with the EU and close alignment with the single market, as well as a dynamic alignment on rights and protections and commitments on participation in EU agencies and funding programmes. If the plan is rejected, Labour will then support a second referendum.'

And about time too, though better late than never.

Even if that was by far the best idea ever, the loons in the HOC will never vote for an opposition ammendment.

 

[tsubaki]

Even if that was by far the best idea ever, the loons in the HOC will never vote for an opposition ammendment.

They'd never vote for a Corbyn amendment, but they would if it was from someone they see is hostile to him.

Peter Kyle is on the right of the party, though he is a lot cleverer than many over there. What he has proposed has the benefit of being both common sense (as it surely is, given that the Commons will not agree May's deal) and also has the benefit of providing certainty. It is the best proposal to emerge from the Commons in years.

 

[roydo]

They'd never vote for a Corbyn amendment, but they would if it was from someone they see is hostile to him. Peter Kyle is on the right of the party, though he is a lot cleverer than many over there. What he has proposed has the benefit of being both common sense (as it surely is, given that the Commons will not agree May's deal) and also has the benefit of providing certainty. It is the best proposal to emerge from the Commons in years.

Fair point. Hope you are right

 

[JimmyJeffers]

Calling for a second referendum might suit both parties. May can claim labour blocked the ‘will of the people’ without her having to go through a brexit she didn’t want to happen and which will dictate her legacy. labour can claim Tory incompetence in being unable to negotiate a suitable deal for leaving the eu which they also don’t want to happen. Everyone plays out a daft dance and we pretend the whole thing didn’t happen

 

[Jib in lad]

Calling for a second referendum might suit both parties. May can claim labour blocked the ‘will of the people’ without her having to go through a brexit she didn’t want to happen and which will dictate her legacy. labour can claim Tory incompetence in being unable to negotiate a suitable deal for leaving the eu which they also don’t want to happen. Everyone plays out a daft dance and we pretend the whole thing didn’t happen

Then Farage is right back in business and millions will vote for him and his ilk.

 

[tsubaki]

Then Farage is right back in busines and millions will vote for him and his ilk.

Doubt it. If you want Brexit, this (May's deal) is what it will mean. If you don't want Brexit, you can vote for that too.

The fantasy WTO / rebuild the Empire crowd will have to take their yellow jackets and do one.

 

[Jebus_lives]

Then Farage is right back in business and millions will vote for him and his ilk.

I think there will be a United coalition against Farage, the arguments are much better tested and people will rightly all him to outline his plans in detail - which he is completely unable to do.

 

[Jib in lad]

Doubt it. If you want Brexit, this (May's deal) is what it will mean. If you don't want Brexit, you can vote for that too.

The fantasy WTO / rebuild the Empire crowd will have to take their yellow jackets and do one.

But if remain win it which I think I will then Farage and co can say we was robbed put up candidates in the next GE and i think millions will vote for them then the whole thing starts again.

The far right are on the march and this just plays into their hands.

The whole thing is a nightmare created by the kin Tories.

 

[Jib in lad]

I think there will be a United coalition against Farage, the arguments are much better tested and people will rightly all him to outline his plans in detail - which he is completely unable to do.

The amount of brain dead people out there is terrifying mate people will still vote for him whatever he says or doesn't say.

 

[JimmyJeffers]

Then Farage is right back in business and millions will vote for him and his ilk.

I think you’re right. He suddenly becomes relevant again. As someone who voted remain there is no outcome I’d be particularly happy with. The damage has been done

 

[tsubaki]

But if remain win it which I think I will then Farage and co can say we was robbed put up candidates in the next GE and i think millions will vote for them then the whole thing starts again.

The far right are on the march and this just plays into their hands.

The whole thing is a nightmare created by the kin Tories.

You don't deal with the far right by giving them what they want.

 

[Jib in lad]

You don't deal with the far right by giving them what they want.

Of course but a vote was had leave won it so I believe it has to be carried out or it just goes on and on and on, a unintended consequence of not seeing it though is it helps the far right narrative

That not giving them what they want it denies them the vehicle to drive it through.