Re: Brexit discussion
 

Sorry but that really is tosh. The statement (as opposed to a government pledge) was made by a campaign group who clearly couldn't promise any such thing because they had no power to do so. Are you seriousl telling us you really thought it was official government policy?

The fact is that it was an aspiration concerning the amount we send to the EU and what we'd be able to use it for - the NHS. Only time will tell whether the amount quoted will be freed up and what it'll be used for.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

So does that mean that any political party/grouping (if they are not currently in office) can be treated as a campaign group, as they are not in government (therefore cannot set "official government policy"), and any and all of their Manifestos can be dismissed, if they are later elected, as "aspirational"?

Re: Brexit discussion
 

The 'Leave' campaign was not a political party. Both Labour and the Conservatives had MPs contributing to the campaign.

The use of the wod 'Let's' also indicates that it was a suggestion. It certainly was not meant as a pledge.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Isn't it funny the deadly silence when I call out the Antisemitism going on in the Labour party / Momentum. I mean look what Labour was called out for doing earlier in the week, selling tickets to a Corbyn rally and depending on your ethnicity, you got a discount on the ticket price, absolutely disgusting and racist practices and dead right there is now an equality probe investigating them.

---------- Post added at 14:40 ---------- Previous post was at 14:39 ----------

Simple answer, no they cannot. Next question ?

Re: Brexit discussion
 

It means what I said - that a campaign group can't make promises which only a government can. Simple. You can call it what you like but it wasn't a promise. We've been over and over this time and time again and there really is no point carrying on. The figure quoted is clearly debatable but whatever the number, the sentiment was and is the same - the money we send to the EU can be spent on the NHS instead. Clearly the government of the day would need to decide that and any successor government could choose to reverse it if they so wished.

The fact that politicians of all colours routinely lie or renege on their pre-election promises is neither here nor there but it surprises me that so many supposedly intelligent people who're highly cynical when it comes to politics and soundbites seem to be claiming they were taken in by that one statement for some reason and it altered everything. I wonder why... :rolleyes:

Re: Brexit discussion
 

I quoted the title verbatim and supplied the source link. You don't usually ask to be spoonfed TD ;)

Re: Brexit discussion
 

But members of the Leave campaign work for the government as well and voted against an amendment to fulfill this ambition, suggestion, idea, whatever it's called. That included Michael Gove and Boris Johnson - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7570591.html

---------- Post added at 16:37 ---------- Previous post was at 16:13 ----------

Still struggling on corrupt practices by the EU by the way. Are there any examples of corrupt practices performed by the EU out there? Certainly there doesn't seem to be any systemic bribery culture as far as I can find and I am sure people have looked for it.

I did find what initiatives the EU have put in place to fight corruption which explains why EU tenders I have helped complete are a right pain - https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/wh.../corruption_en

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Which still isn't relevant to the campaign, you do know what a campaign is don't you?

The official leave campaign was not a Manifesto of government policy.

---------- Post added at 16:45 ---------- Previous post was at 16:39 ----------

Are you being deliberately obtuse ?

I gave you perfect examples of corruption in the EU and I am sick of telling you I do not want to be part of a United States of Europe which is exactly what the EU wants to become, eventually.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Hugh's point is that the Government doesn't campaign for reelection. A political party who are a independent organisation from that government does if you want to get into very technical reasons.

I think a lot of this is very disingenuous to be honest. As far as I am concerned the Leave campaign lied. Yes you can do the cynical political defence of parsing the words very carefully and going into the legal status of the campaign but the Remain campaign wasn't the Government either - at least not in the campaigning period when Cameron couldn't act as 'the government' - and that defence curiously doesn't seem to apply to them.

The Leave campaign was clearly being dishonest. The Remain campaign did the same thing, the 'cost' per each family, was clearly a lie. Now if you use the right formulas and read the small print then 'technically' it wasn't a lie but it clearly was! We all know they were being dishonest and although I supported them I don't feel the need to cortort myself to defend them. I didn't run that campaign.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

The assertion

Is false, I've not only not forgotten I've posted on here moaning about it frequently. The thing with politics is that it's reciprocal, in time an election will be won using these nasty dirty little ways you don't support and you'll be the first to bleat about it, we'll see what your reaction is then when someone replies oh well will of the people

Re: Brexit discussion
 

That still has nothing whatsoever to do with what YOU posted this morning and what I replied to, you were bleating on about a crappy article in the mirror about % of what people believed about the red bus and I pointed out the bullshit within it and lack of balance, where are the % of the people took in regarding the lies from the Remain side?

You still haven't answered that, conveniently.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

I also said the people that run and funded the leave campaign were of the opinion the bus lie was vital to winning, something you conveniently chose to ignore or are those yet more people whose opinion you couldn't give a crap about

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/ne...-public/08/02/

Oh and what I posted this morning had plenty to do with what YOU posted earlier, the very first paragraph of your post being the clue

Re: Brexit discussion
 

No it did not. Rubbish.

Still no answer on the crappy mirror article, thanks for highlighting you don’t do balanced arguments, just like the Mirror you linked to.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Because it suits their purpose...nothing more.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Good on Damian Collins for tackling this situation.

https://www.ft.com/content/7ee61df6-...0-9c0ad2d7c5b5