Did they? Really?

My comment to all who are now of that opinion is simple. It’s that it’s time to stop such petty self-indulgent nonsense and realise that there are bigger issues to deal with in life, like the existential crisis facing this country.

Let’s not beat about the bush. This week the government will start the process of getting parliamentary authority for a course of action they quite specifically said in their manifesto that they would not pursue and for which they will only publish a whiter paper when the Act is passed.

The manifesto said they would ignore the result of a referendum, did it?

My word.

32 comments on “Did they? Really?

  1. Page 72 – “We will hold that in-out referendum before the end of 2017 and respect the outcome.”

  2. the existential crisis facing this country

    Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together… mass hysteria!

  3. How is it that someone has been allowed to make posts on TRUK under the name John Whiting?

    Hats off, whoever you are mate!

  4. I do know that ‘the’ John Whiting has actually posted on TRUK in the past. I briefly corresponded with him on the futility of trying to reason with the Murphatollah.

  5. This was my favourite line:

    ‘And Brexit will leave us isolated and diminished internationally, dependent on tyrants and bigots for political alliances.’

    What he has got against Norway – firstly its a ‘secrecy jurisdiction’ – now it’s a tyranny or a haven for bigots? It’s surreal……

  6. The Conservative Manifesto for 2015 states on page 73, “We will honour the result of the referendum, whatever the outcome”.

  7. Being absorbed into a USE, of course, would never leave us diminished internationally. Oh no. And the fact that being in the EU leaves us currently less able to act autonomously than, say, New Zealand, isn’t evidence of the same phenomenon at all.

  8. Slightly before the promise to honour the referendum result is the phrase “We say: yes to the Single Market”. This, however, is in a section saying how they would like to see the EU change and is setting up the promise of a renegotiation and going to the people on the basis of a renegotiation. It is therefore quite hard to read it as an unambiguous promise to remain in the SM regardless of the outcome of the referendum. Later on the manifesto talks about extending the SM (eg to digital and services), but again a holistic reading of the document would have to take that as being contingent on winning e referendum. Which they didn’t.

  9. @Charlie Suet: on the subject of New Zealand, I had a rather heated ‘discussion’ with a friend of mine (she being a Kiwi) about the whole Trump/Brexit thing, and she was sounding off about how it made her feel unwanted as an immigrant etc. I then asked if she actually knew what the immigration rules were if I (as a UK citizen) wished to go and live permanently in NZ, and pointed out that those rules were considerably stricter than anything anyone has even considered for the UK post Brexit.

    That was different apparently, and not relevant.

  10. Some great comments here but obviously we are dealing with someone whose aversion to knowledge in any form is almost preternatural. Who can forget his classic riposte when told that fiscal stimulus (or ‘People’s QE’) had been tried in one country and failed singularly to break them out of their slump:

    ‘I know nothing about Japan’

    subsequent replies to this rare admission of ignorance obviously fell foul of the comments policy.

    I think people misunderstand Murphy’s motives. If you look at the type of state he is advocating, historical examples (and the main contemporary ones) redefine history to suit their purposes all the time, justifying it by whatever means they see fit. He sees nothing wrong with this. The end justifies the means.

  11. like the existential crisis facing this country.

    Lol. Fucking bellend.

    “The fat twat who cried wolf”, an updated fable.

  12. “The fat twat who cried wolf”, an updated fable.

    More like “The fat twat who cried ‘Look at me! No, me! Meeee!'”

  13. …and for which they will only publish a whiter paper when the Act is passed.

    WTF is a whiter paper? A paper that has to check its privilege even more?

  14. Existential crisis?

    What is it with these idiots?

    We existed, traded, and thrived for a thousand years before the EU was even thought of. We’ll do just fine when it’s gone.

  15. “It’s that it’s time to stop such petty self-indulgent nonsense and realise that there are bigger issues to deal with in life”

    For normal people the “bigger issues” would include vital questions of social importance such as “whose round is it?”; only the Left could assume it involved re-reading old manifestos.

  16. I love it that he thunders about stopping “petty self-indulgent nonsense” and then pearl-clutches about “the existential crisis facing this country” in the very next sentence.

    He’s just a fatter version of Corbyn really.

    🙂

  17. John Whiting says:
    January 30 2017 at 12:49 pm
    “This week the government will start the process of getting parliamentary authority for a course of action they quite specifically said in their manifesto that they would not pursue…”

    I have just checked that, and I’m afraid you are wrong. The Conservative Manifesto for 2015 states on page 73, “We will honour the result of the referendum, whatever the outcome”.

    Reply
    Richard Murphy says:
    January 30 2017 at 2:56 pm
    They said we would not leave the single market

    TRhe referndum was not about the single market

    Stop distorting what I said

    Reply
    John Whiting says:
    January 30 2017 at 3:21 pm
    Sorry, Richard, nowhere in the Conservative manifesto of 2015 does it say that they would not leave the Single Market.

    The manifesto states: “We say: yes to the Single Market”. This, however, is in a section saying how they would like to see the EU change, and promising a renegotiation and then a referendum. It is not a promise to remain in the Single Market regardless of the outcome of the referendum.

    Richard Murphy says:
    January 30 2017 at 3:34 pm
    But the vote was not on the single market

    So it was entirely reasonable to think the outcome was the single market whatever the vote

    In fact, impossible to think otherwise

  18. FFS, how many times is Guido going to have to post all those clips of Leave leaders saying that Leave would mean leaving the SM and CU before they get it in to their thick skulls? There’s even clipper of Remainers making exactly the same point.

    They were so sure of their superiority that they didn’t even try to make a case FOR the EU and didn’t pay attention to what was being said in the debates.

    “Andrew Duffin

    Existential crisis?

    What is it with these idiots?

    We existed, traded, and thrived for a thousand years before the EU was even thought of. We’ll do just fine when it’s gone.”

    Indeed and as I’ve said before, people were living, working and doing business in other countries long before the EU was dreamed up as well.

  19. @Jim

    Any Kiwi who is anti-Brexit should be asked why their country hasn’t become a state of Australia yet, as provided for in Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900

  20. “Any Kiwi who is anti-Brexit should be asked why their country hasn’t become a state of Australia yet, as provided for in Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900”

    Now that is a good one, I didn’t know about that. I shall drop it into the debate next time!

  21. Great anecdote Jim.

    I’m a pretty liberal kind of guy but I feel it in my gut when a non-citizen guest starts sounding off about things like that.

    Maybe respect of other nations business makes me an old fashioned type, but unless I committed myself to that country I’d try not to take a strong view.

    Did she believe she should have had a vote in the ref too by chance?

  22. All those clips of unelected leaders of campaigns to Remain or Leave saying that voting Leave meant leaving the SM were expressing an opinion that that would necessarily be the outcome. Hence all those clips are from the sorts of politics show where people state their opinions, rather than being taken from the text of the Referendum Act or included in the question on the ballot.
    I recall many campaigns where both sides agreed that X would be the outcome if A won, and Y would be the outcome if B won. Only in 2015 are these sort of claims regarded as factual. It makes no sense.

  23. “Should all Bremoaners be applying for Aussie or kiwi visas?”

    A few SJW-inclined chums asked me about moving to ‘Straya because they couldn’t bear to stay in the UK. I had to point out that Australia has very strict immigration controls and will *literally* shoot at boats getting silly ideas. Also, it’s not in the EU and doesn’t plan on joining.

    And all the Brits I know here, over the age of 30, were cheering the result.

    I think it’s fine to think that Brexit is an anti-immigration thing, and that racism drives that. Right or wrong, it’s a valid opinion. But these people have to understand that there’s nobody else out there voting for anything different.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.