-
But you can also argue that is appeasement of something based on lies and threats that cannot be delivered. There is no "Brexit that works for jobs/one that stops the furrin's/one that gives the UK more sovereignity..."
The behaviour of May (invoking A50 and bypassing parliament and all sorts) hasn't exactly been of a good standard.
"Do vote for this, or you get Boris" is not really an argument, but a threat.
And some of the proposals for alternatives to the WA/stopping a hard Brexit failed on a few votes.
-
@BleakRefs If you are left leaning, pro freedom of movement etc all realistic outcomes post referendum are not nice. MPs should have voted for May’s deal if nothing else was feasible with the foresight that harder versions of Brexit were likely. They made their respective political calculations and largely voted against a withdrawal agreement.
There's a significant difference between 'not nice' and 'people dying unnecessarily because they can't get the drugs they need'. And I think while your view is correct with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, MPs don't in fact have foresight. May owns more of the blame here than they do.
You are reading a single comment by @miro_o and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
JWestland
ReekBlefs
@miro_o
Yes @andyp of course the ref was ill conceived and the advice based on a house of cards. Again. Does not change the political reality.
Why do you bring up A50? That’s a statement of intent... which has not been carried through. Doesn’t that compound my point?
@BleakRefs If you are left leaning, pro freedom of movement etc all realistic outcomes post referendum are not nice. MPs should have voted for May’s deal if nothing else was feasible with the foresight that harder versions of Brexit were likely. They made their respective political calculations and largely voted against a withdrawal agreement.
No ‘proposal’ since May’s deal has been better for peace in NI.
This result (no deal via a wrecking ball Boris) was entirely predicted.