Brexit (merged threads)

[Davie P]

42 minutes ago, Windwalker said:

My issue with not accepting democracy was aimed at those who keep saying it was not done democratically, whilst at the same time unwilling to provide any proof of that.

I'll take the bait on this  

The fundamental problem with the referendum was that it was an indicative vote, not a legally binding vote. The legislation was clear on that. If the Tories had wished for a legally binding vote they would have likely had to have sought parliamentary agreement on a more robust legislative mechanism such as a 2/3 'supermajority' rather than a simple majority.

The Tories then tried to bypass parliament claiming that the referendum was in fact legally binding when it demonstrably wasn't, and the High Court had to intervene to force the decision back to parliament.

Bun-fights were then had and years were wasted, but then the Tories won the election on a Brexit ticket and Brexit went ahead due to their majority in parliament.

It was the same result in the end and was achieved through democratic means, but the fact remains that the Tories tried to illegally bypass our democratic processes the first time around.

--------

I should imagine the whole referendum legislation thing will end up as a footnote in history, but with a Scottish Independence Referendum on the horizon we'd do well to learn the lessons on how not to do things.

Edited February 1, 2021 by Davie P

[Windwalker]

46 minutes ago, Davie P said:

I'll take the bait on this  

The fundamental problem with the referendum was that it was an indicative vote, not a legally binding vote. The legislation was clear on that. If the Tories had wished for a legally binding vote they would have likely had to have sought parliamentary agreement on a more robust legislative mechanism such as a 2/3 'supermajority' rather than a simple majority.

The Tories then tried to bypass parliament claiming that the referendum was in fact legally binding when it demonstrably wasn't, and the High Court had to intervene to force the decision back to parliament.

Bun-fights were then had and years were wasted, but then the Tories won the election on a Brexit ticket and Brexit went ahead due to their majority in parliament.

It was the same result in the end and was achieved through democratic means, but the fact remains that the Tories tried to illegally bypass our democratic processes the first time around.

--------

I should imagine the whole referendum legislation thing will end up as a footnote in history, but with a Scottish Independence Referendum on the horizon we'd do well to learn the lessons on how not to do things.

I agree that the tories attempts to bypass parliament was unacceptable. This was quite rightly dealt with by the high court. The final decision on the outcome was democratic. My general concern about democracy is to do with both Brexit and Scottish independence and continued unjustified quotes that they were undemocratic made on these pages. If folk want to make these statements, they should at least back them up.

For the record I have no more love for the Tories than I do for the SNP.

[Davie P]

4 hours ago, Windwalker said:

My general concern about democracy is to do with both Brexit and Scottish independence and continued unjustified quotes that they were undemocratic made on these pages. If folk want to make these statements, they should at least back them up.

Agreed. It's no better than Trump supporters repeatedly claiming the vote was rigged without presenting any evidence.

Democracy has its flaws, but as Churchill said, “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.”

[admin]

This feels like a good time to remind folk of the Forum use - guidelines and netiquette, so here's a few edited highlights with relevant emphasis added.

Anyone who has been temporarily blocked and/or had posts removed recently for breaching the guidelines may find their bans getting longer....

On 01/12/2006 at 01:07, admin said:

As a last resort, folk who persistently don't play by the rules will be warned, temporarily banned, and potentially permanently banned.
 
Engage in discussion - Our aim is to provide a welcoming space for discussion that develops over time as ideas and opinions are posed and reflected upon: don't just bomb-in your point without taking the time to engage with what other forum members have written, don't just post links without explanation or comment, and be prepared to back up your points with evidence or reasoning.

Avoid sweeping statements and generalised moaning, particularly with regard to whole local authorities, political parties, governments or organisations - These activities translate as "blah, blah, moan, moan" and do nothing to encourage constructive debate. If you have specific examples and/or reasoning, please refer to them and keep them relevant to the topic's subject matter.

Needless Negativity - We want to the forums to be a friendly, supportive and positive 'living room' where people can discuss issues and share their thoughts. As such we welcome and encourage constructive criticism and discussion, but discourage needless negativity, antagonism and hostility. 

Repetitious overly negative, antagonistic and hostile posts discourage other people from joining in discussions - this is the number one complaint the Shetlink moderators receive and is the main reason folk stop, or don't start, contributing the forums. All too often threads are snuffed out due to voracious and repetitive groaning, griping and belly-aching.

The odd rant, moan and whine are inevitable but there's a line to be drawn.

Don't purposely post misleading information - there's too much bruck written on the internet already. Let's keep Shetlink a place where discussion is based on facts.

Sarcasm, insinuation, rhetorical questioning and generally skirting around the point - this has its place in debate, but for there comes a point when you have to nail your colours to the mast and spit it out!
 

 

[Roachmill]

15 hours ago, Windwalker said:

Not at all roachmill everyone is entitled to their views and to question the government. God help us when folk don’t.

My issue with not accepting democracy was aimed at those who keep saying it was not done democratically, whilst at the same time unwilling to provide any proof of that.  You go ahead and and stick to your views. Fill your boots.

I don't follow. You pulled Evil Inky up for not being able to accept democracy when, IMO, all he did was highlight a sadly ironic turn of events. One whereby we leave the EU market on our doorstep and then make a thing about applying to join a trade partnership we're already technically part of halfway around the world. One which yields a total turnover similar to what the UK saw from trade with just Germany alone. Does that not sound like a bit of a bad idea (the details are in the article he linked)? That's how his post came across to me anyway.

I've not caught the bit where anyone said the Brexit vote wasn't done democratically. People voted and the result is well known. What got that result and how it was achieved is widely documented, however. I find it hard not to acknowledge that, although it was a democratic process, there was no end of manipulation carried out at the highest levels (e.g. big data being used to manipulate us plebs and the same old monumental smear campaigns trotted out against political parties). To ignore that is only begging for the same to happen again and again.

[Davie P]

23 minutes ago, Roachmill said:

I find it hard not to acknowledge that, although it was a democratic process, there was no end of manipulation carried out at the highest levels (e.g. big data being used to manipulate us plebs and the same old monumental smear campaigns trotted out against political parties). To ignore that is only begging for the same to happen again and again.

This is a key point. A democracy goes beyond just votes. It requires the voting population to have access to accurate information and an understanding of what it is they are voting for. In my humble opinion, neither box was ticked for the Brexit referendum. It was a reasonable gauge of public opinion at that point in time perhaps.

However, I feel the discourse and subsequent election was influenced by the misinformation which came after the referendum along the lines that anyone who questioned Brexit, preached caution or spoke in opposition to the 'will of the people' was fundamentally undemocratic. In some instances Brexit supporters might as well have been chanting 'stop the steal'. This undoubtedly influenced the election which eventually pushed Brexit over the finish line.

So it was democratic in principle, but a debased version! Let's hope we learn from it.

Edited February 2, 2021 by Davie P

[Windwalker]

45 minutes ago, Roachmill said:

I don't follow. You pulled Evil Inky up for not being able to accept democracy when, IMO, all he did was highlight a sadly ironic turn of events. One whereby we leave the EU market on our doorstep and then make a thing about applying to join a trade partnership we're already technically part of halfway around the world. One which yields a total turnover similar to what the UK saw from trade with just Germany alone. Does that not sound like a bit of a bad idea (the details are in the article he linked)? That's how his post came across to me anyway.

I've not caught the bit where anyone said the Brexit vote wasn't done democratically. People voted and the result is well known. What got that result and how it was achieved is widely documented, however. I find it hard not to acknowledge that, although it was a democratic process, there was no end of manipulation carried out at the highest levels (e.g. big data being used to manipulate us plebs and the same old monumental smear campaigns trotted out against political parties). To ignore that is only begging for the same to happen again and again.

Whilst I’ve already explained in a few posts above my comment on democracy, I’ll try and clarify it again. If you go through a number of posts on here they state the outcome of either Brexit or independence was not democratic, whilst offering no supporting evidence to clarify or justify their views. In my opinion they just can’t accept democracy. 

my comments were not aimed directly at Evil Inky but in general and we’re giving with the same level of sarcasm he offered me.  As I’ve already confirmed in a post above, I have no issue with him or anyone else having different views and making them known. That after all is democracy. 
 

 

 

Edited February 2, 2021 by Windwalker

[Windwalker]

30 minutes ago, Davie P said:

This is a key point. A democracy goes beyond just votes. It requires the voting population to have access to accurate information and an understanding of what it is they are voting for. In my humble opinion, neither box was ticked for the Brexit referendum. It was a reasonable gauge of public opinion at that point in time perhaps.

However, I feel the discourse and subsequent election was influenced by the misinformation which came after the referendum along the lines that anyone who questioned Brexit, preached caution or spoke in opposition to the 'will of the people' was fundamentally undemocratic. In some instances Brexit supporters might as well have been chanting 'stop the steal'. This undoubtedly influenced the election which eventually pushed Brexit over the finish line.

So it was democratic in principle, but a debased version! Let's hope we learn from it.

Completely agree. I can’t think of any vote I’ve made recently where I felt either side was providing sufficient information for myself to make a “well” educated decision. Sometimes you just have to go with your gut.

[Davie P]

Yes indeed @Windwalker. I'm quite interested in politics but I felt iill-equipped to make an informed decision on Brexit due to the amount of conflicting information in circulation, and most other people I spoke in any depth about it were in the same boat. TBH I was quite suspicious of folk's motives if they proclaimed to be absolutely sure one way or the other!

I did find it helpful to discuss it here on Shetlink though as there are many people with different views and discussion was often around the Shetland context, and I find it helpful to have my opinion challenged - all too often discussion happens in groups or media sources that have already made up their minds and it just attracts people with the same opinions, thus bolstering the single point of view.

At the end of the day, I suppose any vote comes down to (a) how satisfied you are with the status quo and (b) how willing you are to roll the dice in the hope something better will emerge if you vote for a change.

[Roachmill]

1 hour ago, Windwalker said:

Whilst I’ve already explained in a few posts above my comment on democracy, I’ll try and clarify it again. If you go through a number of posts on here they state the outcome of either Brexit or independence was not democratic, whilst offering no supporting evidence to clarify or justify their views. In my opinion they just can’t accept democracy. 

my comments were not aimed directly at Evil Inky but in general and we’re giving with the same level of sarcasm he offered me.  As I’ve already confirmed in a post above, I have no issue with him or anyone else having different views and making them known. That after all is democracy. 

You quote Evil Inky directly and mimicked his reply so apologies for thinking you were addressing him directly. I'm also coming up short on the repeated claim that there's numbers of posts claiming past referendums weren't democratic. To me that would imply Trumpish level claims of vote tampering and suchlike which I don't recall seeing much of anywhere.

I've seen plenty piddled off mentions about how, although Scotland as a nation voted to remain in the EU, we were taken out due to the voting power of England. You may rightly have a claim on such posts being against the "democratic will of the UK" - but do keep in mind we (Scotland) were told during Indyref1 that staying in the UK was the only way to stay part of the EU. When a democratic result is achieved through lies and false promises, that is true anti democracy in action.

[Windwalker]

17 minutes ago, Roachmill said:

You quote Evil Inky directly and mimicked his reply so apologies for thinking you were addressing him directly. I'm also coming up short on the repeated claim that there's numbers of posts claiming past referendums weren't democratic. To me that would imply Trumpish level claims of vote tampering and suchlike which I don't recall seeing much of anywhere.

I've seen plenty piddled off mentions about how, although Scotland as a nation voted to remain in the EU, we were taken out due to the voting power of England. You may rightly have a claim on such posts being against the "democratic will of the UK" - but do keep in mind we (Scotland) were told during Indyref1 that staying in the UK was the only way to stay part of the EU. When a democratic result is achieved through lies and false promises, that is true anti democracy in action.

Having followed many discussions for some time, it comes up, particularly with one individual, in addition whilst the word may not be mentioned the content says it all.

unfortunately all governments be it U.K. or SNP make false and misleading statements all the time, as far as I’m concerned I really don’t trust any of them. My worry is those who can’t see fault in certain parties and hit out at anyone who dares not to agree with their views, over powering the conversation, nit picking and therefore stiffening discussion. I’ve seen that on many forums including Shetlink.

For clarity the last sentence is not aimed at you or anyone in particular, it’s how I often feel and why I gave up posting earlier in the year. Dealing with COVID was enough hassle. 
 

Whilst I accept that government are constantly trying to score political points against each other, wouldn’t it be great if those in power would all work together to defeat this pandemic for the good of the population. Rant over.

[Windwalker]

 

Great to see that despite Brexit Cadbury has decided to bring most of its production of dairy milk chocolate back to Bournville from factories in Germany and across Europe. This has to be good for British jobs and the economy. 
 

Plus, it just happens to be my favourite chocolate  

[MuckleJoannie]

Is this because most of the chocolate is consumed in the UK and import red tape means it is far simpler to make it here.

[Colin]

3 minutes ago, MuckleJoannie said:

Is this because most of the chocolate is consumed in the UK and import red tape means it is far simpler to make it here.

It most likely means that it has become cheaper to make it here than elsewhere..

Anyway, there's always time for chocolate.. 

[Windwalker]

8 hours ago, MuckleJoannie said:

Is this because most of the chocolate is consumed in the UK and import red tape means it is far simpler to make it here.

I would assume that would have been  one of the key considerations in reaching their decision.  The outcome of more jobs and manufacturing has to be a bonus.