Topic: Brexit - doesn't really seem to be a very good idea does it? (*)

[Trim0582]

I just want to clarify the casual link I was suggestaing with religion.

It seems obvious why a muslim congregation would vote remain in these troubling times. Looking at the predominantly white Anglican church, I can see why believing in a god and an afterlife purely on faith, can make someone susceptible to just "believing" brexit will all be fine.

I am not suggesting any church or faith based leaders feel this way. I am simply suggesting it is just another faith based doctrine with little supporting evidence. If you are able to accept extremly large claims about life after death, it doesnt seem unreasonable to suggest you value faith and belief over evidence and the leaver camp played heavily on that.

[TheShanklyGates]

David Davis warns EU not to put 'politics above prosperity'

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/16/david-davis-warns-eu-not-to-put-politics-above-prosperity-in-brexit-talks

Said without even the slightest hint of irony or self awareness. It just beggars belief.

[Libertine]

David Davis warns EU not to put 'politics above prosperity'

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/16/david-davis-warns-eu-not-to-put-politics-above-prosperity-in-brexit-talks

Said without even the slightest hint of irony or self awareness. It just beggars belief.

Larry the Cat‏ @Number10cat

Summary of David Davis' speech:
The incompetent, promising the impossible, to the ill-informed, in front of the incredulous.

[ShakaHislop]

Brexit: Davis says the UK has compromised in talks

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42023765

[TheShanklyGates]

Brexit: Davis says the UK has compromised in talks

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42023765

My oh my the comments section.

[oldfordie]

Ive noticed the leave campaign are changing the facts again.
A few people on TV have been arguing that we have to have a deal thrashed out inside the 2yr ART 50 time limit. so we cant carry on negotiating for another 3 or more years because this has to be done and dusted inside 2 yrs.
Rubbish, the Art 50 bill is about reaching a agreement on leaving the EU.
It will probably come as bit of a shock to leave voters but these negotiations will go on for many years to come. expect 5 yrs but could easily last well over 10yrs.

[oldfordie]

David Davis warns EU not to put 'politics above prosperity'

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/16/david-davis-warns-eu-not-to-put-politics-above-prosperity-in-brexit-talks

Said without even the slightest hint of irony or self awareness. It just beggars belief.

He's more concerned about winning the applause of leave supporters than the EU.
Typical Tory. accuse others of doing something their far more guilty of themselves.
Whether it be, NHS, Debt. welfare. doesn't matter, bullshit voters into believing they fight for these things while doing the complete opposite.

[24/7]

Ive noticed the leave campaign are changing the facts again.
A few people on TV have been arguing that we have to have a deal thrashed out inside the 2yr ART 50 time limit. so we cant carry on negotiating for another 3 or more years because this has to be done and dusted inside 2 yrs.
Rubbish, the Art 50 bill is about reaching a agreement on leaving the EU.
It will probably come as bit of a shock to leave voters but these negotiations will go on for many years to come. expect 5 yrs but could easily last well over 10yrs.

Only if the other 27 agree on extensions. Otherwise it's game over.

[oldfordie]

Only if the other 27 agree on extensions. Otherwise it's game over.

Yes true but this is a different point entirely. It's a bit complicated, the point I was making was a few leave campaigners are now arguing we voted leave and the ART 50 BILL says we have to get a deal sorted inside 2 yrs. the public wont stand for these talks dragging on for 3 -5yrs. we saw it last night with Thornberry, Dimbleby asked her if Labour would carry on negotiating for another 3-5yrs. she went defensive and said .no no no.
Wrong answer, all the art 50 bill says is we have 2 yrs to come to a agreement on leaving. leave cannot argue the talks dragging on for years to come is a betrayal of the British public. that seems to be argument their making lately, art 50 says all done and dusted inside 2 yrs.

[Libertine]

And still the delusional "they need a deal more than we do" nonsense on the Daily Politics, unchallenged as usual of course.

This from Leo Varadkar, is spot on:

"It's 18 months since the referendum, it's 10 years since people who wanted a referendum started agitating for one. Sometimes it doesn't seem like they have thought all this through".

[24/7]

Yes true but this is a different point entirely. It's a bit complicated, the point I was making was a few leave campaigners are now arguing we voted leave and the ART 50 BILL says we have to get a deal sorted inside 2 yrs. the public wont stand for these talks dragging on for 3 -5yrs. we saw it last night with Thornberry, Dimbleby asked her if Labour would carry on negotiating for another 3-5yrs. she went defensive and said .no no no.
Wrong answer, all the art 50 bill says is we have 2 yrs to come to a agreement on leaving. leave cannot argue the talks dragging on for years to come is a betrayal of the British public. that seems to be argument their making lately, art 50 says all done and dusted inside 2 yrs.

Ah yes, sorry, I see your point - and I agree with it of course

[oldfordie]

Ah yes, sorry, I see your point - and I agree with it of course

It's maddening the way Labour are falling into line with the hard right arguments. not only are they still arguing for the impossible Brexit they are accepting they will have to do it inside a few years. impossible.
I would hope Labour start arguing the realty of what we face rather than falling into line with the leave arguments. these talks will drag on for many years to come and if anyone tells you different then their talking s.. this has nothing to do with voting leave or remain it's just realty.

[Lfsea]

Is the BBC comments section full of message bots and/or upvote aggregators does anyone know? The weirdest posts get upvoted on there now and when you sort by 'best', the 'best' are all staunchly pro-Brexit, borderline fascist messages all along similar lines, all written in a similar style.

No dissenting voices whatsoever. It's actually a bit odd. Just wondered really.

[Red-Soldier]

My oh my the comments section.

Look at all the likes they get too.

[TheShanklyGates]

Look at all the likes they get too.

The trick is to sort by lowest rated to find the more sensible comments.

[24/7]

It's maddening the way Labour are falling into line with the hard right arguments. not only are they still arguing for the impossible Brexit they are accepting they will have to do it inside a few years. impossible.
I would hope Labour start arguing the realty of what we face rather than falling into line with the leave arguments. these talks will drag on for many years to come and if anyone tells you different then their talking s.. this has nothing to do with voting leave or remain it's just realty.

I lost all faith in Labour's ability to represent our interests when Corbyn applied the three line whip for backing ART50. There appears to be no party in the UK now representing the likes of us. They're all seemingly engaged in winning votes by adjusting their positions towards varying degrees of rampant popularism and fervour. Its desperately sad.

[killer-heels]

It's maddening the way Labour are falling into line with the hard right arguments. not only are they still arguing for the impossible Brexit they are accepting they will have to do it inside a few years. impossible.
I would hope Labour start arguing the realty of what we face rather than falling into line with the leave arguments. these talks will drag on for many years to come and if anyone tells you different then their talking s.. this has nothing to do with voting leave or remain it's just realty.

Need to get away with thinking Labour are falling into line with the Right (no way are even some rabid Brexiteers on the Tory ranks Hard right) when euro scepticism is as strong on the Left.

[armchair-fan]

Honestly I think it’s a dodge by the.... erm more liberal minded section of remain, who don’t want to face facts, that 52% of the population are just that stupid, or that all the racism, xenophobia and prejudice that they all patted themselves on the back about ridding the country of never truly went away, a George Carlin quote comes to mind  “You think of how dumb the average person is, then you realise that 50% of the people are even dumber than that”

Your head's fallen off.

Need to get away with thinking Labour are falling into line with the Right (no way are even some rabid Brexiteers on the Tory ranks Hard right) when euro scepticism is as strong on the Left.

Absolutely.  82% of MPs are not 'Hard Right' and 52% of the population are not 'Hard Right'.

[armchair-fan]

It's a bit mad how Noel Gallagher gets it, and some of the brightest minds in politics, and indeed RAWK, don't.

“In England, the Brexit thing, it’s like, I can’t believe there’s so much noise about it - you know what I mean? It was put to the people as a vote, the people voted. That’s democracy. Fucking get over it," he said.

Noel added: “I didn’t vote because I didn’t think we should have been given the vote in the first place because as ordinary members of the public how are you qualified to talk about the break-up of the oldest continent in the fucking world? Then the people trying to get the vote overturned, they used to call that fascism. But they don’t call it fascism any more because they’re fucking ‘right on’. Personally, I don’t think we should have left the Union because I feel right at the time of it happening, we turned our back on the French, who were going through some dark terror shit. But it’s happened now. It was a legal vote. Fucking get it done and let’s move on.”

https://www.joe.co.uk/entertainment/noel-gallagher-on-brexit-people-should-just-fking-get-over-it-149491

[Bunter]

It's a bit mad how Noel Gallagher gets it, and some of the brightest minds in politics, and indeed RAWK, don't.

“In England, the Brexit thing, it’s like, I can’t believe there’s so much noise about it - you know what I mean? It was put to the people as a vote, the people voted. That’s democracy. Fucking get over it," he said.

Noel added: “I didn’t vote because I didn’t think we should have been given the vote in the first place because as ordinary members of the public how are you qualified to talk about the break-up of the oldest continent in the fucking world? Then the people trying to get the vote overturned, they used to call that fascism. But they don’t call it fascism any more because they’re fucking ‘right on’. Personally, I don’t think we should have left the Union because I feel right at the time of it happening, we turned our back on the French, who were going through some dark terror shit. But it’s happened now. It was a legal vote. Fucking get it done and let’s move on.”

https://www.joe.co.uk/entertainment/noel-gallagher-on-brexit-people-should-just-fking-get-over-it-149491

Yeah... it’s not like there are any details to discuss or contentious issues to debate. Just leave, simple as that and let half a dozen Tory ministers in a room dictate to us what Brexit means. We can’t possibly have the dissenting voices of MP’s exercising their parliamentary judgement in the face of
pending economic disaster.

[oldfordie]

Need to get away with thinking Labour are falling into line with the Right (no way are even some rabid Brexiteers on the Tory ranks Hard right) when euro scepticism is as strong on the Left.

Paul Blomfield Labours shadow minister for exiting the EU told Labour voters a massive lie and you have to wonder why he lied., I wont accept this is a mistake and he doesn't understand or he could have chosen his words more wisely as their misleading. he is deliberately telling Labour supporters to give up fighting to remain in the EU as we cant do anything about it now because we've triggered art 50. he knows that's untrue, the triggering of art 50 doesn't make leaving the EU a legal certainty.
Thats falling into line with the hard right.

"The triggering of art 50 made leaving the EU a legal certainty."  Paul Blomfield 14 Nov

[oldfordie]

I lost all faith in Labour's ability to represent our interests when Corbyn applied the three line whip for backing ART50. There appears to be no party in the UK now representing the likes of us. They're all seemingly engaged in winning votes by adjusting their positions towards varying degrees of rampant popularism and fervour. Its desperately sad.

Yeah, the tragedy is the Tories have been allowed to dictate public opinion unopposed and Labour have had to fall in line. think it started after Corbyn was re elected leader.
Corbyn arguing for a Norwegian type deal. suddenly he's accepting Mays argument of everyone voting to leave the SM+CU. how can he argue for a Norwegian type deal if he thinks we should leave the SM.

[armchair-fan]

Just leave, simple as that and let half a dozen Tory ministers in a room dictate to us what Brexit means. We can’t possibly have the dissenting voices of MP’s exercising their parliamentary judgement in the face of
pending economic disaster.

The House of Commons voted 544-53 to hold a referendum.  Following the referendum, and a Supreme Court ruling that Article 50 was 'irrevocable' the House of Commons then voted 494-122 to trigger Article 50.  What did the MPs think was going to happen?!

[Bunter]

The House of Commons voted 544-53 to hold a referendum.  Following the referendum, and a Supreme Court ruling that Article 50 was 'irrevocable' the House of Commons then voted 494-122 to trigger Article 50.  What did the MPs think was going to happen?!

That Brexit ministers responsible would apply logic, reason and thought and not promote the most extreme and damaging forms of Brexit available.

Also Article 50 isn’t irrevocable, the Supreme Court did not decide that, they have no say in it, as this is a matter of EU law and is up to the ECJ to decide.

[oldfordie]

It's a bit mad how Noel Gallagher gets it, and some of the brightest minds in politics, and indeed RAWK, don't.

“In England, the Brexit thing, it’s like, I can’t believe there’s so much noise about it - you know what I mean? It was put to the people as a vote, the people voted. That’s democracy. Fucking get over it," he said.

Noel added: “I didn’t vote because I didn’t think we should have been given the vote in the first place because as ordinary members of the public how are you qualified to talk about the break-up of the oldest continent in the fucking world? Then the people trying to get the vote overturned, they used to call that fascism. But they don’t call it fascism any more because they’re fucking ‘right on’. Personally, I don’t think we should have left the Union because I feel right at the time of it happening, we turned our back on the French, who were going through some dark terror shit. But it’s happened now. It was a legal vote. Fucking get it done and let’s move on.”

https://www.joe.co.uk/entertainment/noel-gallagher-on-brexit-people-should-just-fking-get-over-it-149491

I think you will find it's the leave camp obstructing Brexit far more than remain.
I dont want to leave the EU but if we have too then fine. lets leave the EU, agree to all the rules and regulations etc and were sorted. all done and dusted inside a few years.
I can hear the screams from leave voters already, we didn't vote for that, we voted for this .this this and this. we want it.
Well what about the people who voted for the cake and eat it Brexit etc because thats how Brexit was sold to the public. all ignored now, we have to get on with Brexit on the hard right terms, thats what your actually saying.
If leave can get us the Brexit people voted for then I cant see their being a problem.

[SP]

Is the BBC comments section full of message bots and/or upvote aggregators does anyone know? The weirdest posts get upvoted on there now and when you sort by 'best', the 'best' are all staunchly pro-Brexit, borderline fascist messages all along similar lines, all written in a similar style.

No dissenting voices whatsoever. It's actually a bit odd. Just wondered really.

Self selecting. Once twats reach a critical mass, no other bugger wants to go in there. That’s why we moderate and ban people.

[Trim0582]

"The triggering of art 50 made leaving the EU a legal certainty."  Paul Blomfield 14 Nov

Lord Kerr, the writer of Article 50 strongly disagrees, he spent all last week on any news show that would have him, to explain it is absolutely revocable and there would be no penalties, but what would the expert who wrote it know?
Down with experts and such

Can I ask where Paul Blomfield said that, I can't find it

[oldfordie]

Lord Kerr, the writer of Article 50 strongly disagrees, he spent all last week on any news show that would have him, to explain it is absolutely revocable and there would be no penalties, but what would the expert who wrote it know?
Down with experts and such

Can I ask where Paul Blomfield said that, I can't find it

Yes. I think we all know a lot more about Brexit now, art 50 is just about making arrangement to depart the EU and according to what ive read we can stop it any time we want without the consent of the EU.
Bloomfeild said it in Parliament. no idea if it's been reported.
EDIT, Found it in Hansard.
"The article 50 notification made our exit from the European Union in March 2019 a legal certainty,"
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2017-11-14/debates/B9A99D17-80B2-43F4-BFD8-620E40A24EE9/EuropeanUnion(Withdrawal)Bill#contribution-17FD38E1-5D2F-417A-BBCA-A8D1EE4162D2

[armchair-fan]

That Brexit ministers responsible would apply logic, reason and thought and not promote the most extreme and damaging forms of Brexit available.

Also Article 50 isn’t irrevocable, the Supreme Court did not decide that, they have no say in it, as this is a matter of EU law and is up to the ECJ to decide.

The judgement in the Miller case established that it was common ground between the parties that,

Under article  50(2) (which we shall call “Notice”) cannot be given in qualified or conditional terms and that, once given, it cannot be withdrawn.

It goes on to state that

It follows from this that once the United Kingdom gives Notice, it will inevitably cease at a later date to be a member of the European Union and a party to the EU Treaties.

https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2016-0196-judgment.pdf

Even the Scottish fella who wrote Article 50 who is a hardline Remainer and now wants a second referendum to overturn the first states that it cannot be reversed unilaterally.

So, at best, the UK would need to withdraw their decision to withdraw, and the other states would also have to agree to the withdrawal. What on earth makes you think the other 27 states want us to stay?!

[Trim0582]

Yes. I think we all know a lot more about Brexit now, art 50 is just about making arrangement to depart the EU and according to what ive read we can stop it any time we want without the consent of the EU.
Bloomfeild said it in Parliament. no idea if it's been reported.

Damn, I fancied Twitter trolling him asking how he know more about article 50 that the writer

[Trim0582]

The judgement in the Miller case established that it was common ground between the parties that,

Under article  50(2) (which we shall call “Notice”) cannot be given in qualified or conditional terms and that, once given, it cannot be withdrawn.

It goes on to state that

It follows from this that once the United Kingdom gives Notice, it will inevitably cease at a later date to be a member of the European Union and a party to the EU Treaties.

https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2016-0196-judgment.pdf

Even the Scottish fella who wrote Article 50 who is a hardline Remainer and now wants a second referendum to overturn the first states that it cannot be reversed unilaterally.

So, at best, the UK would need to withdraw their decision to withdraw, and the other states would also have to agree to the withdrawal. What on earth makes you think the other 27 states want us to stay?!

You mean Lord Kerr? That is 100% incorrect he was on the radio and news as the writer of Article 50 saying it is absolutely revocable.

We are still in the EU, under all our current terms, they could not force us out whether they wanted to or not, of which there is no sign they would not welcome us back. In fact there have been several articles and interviews from prominent EU officials saying they would very much like us back.

Pesky facts, they do get in the way of conjecture.

[SP]

The judgement in the Miller case established that it was common ground between the parties that,

Under article  50(2) (which we shall call “Notice”) cannot be given in qualified or conditional terms and that, once given, it cannot be withdrawn.

It goes on to state that

It follows from this that once the United Kingdom gives Notice, it will inevitably cease at a later date to be a member of the European Union and a party to the EU Treaties.

https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2016-0196-judgment.pdf

Even the Scottish fella who wrote Article 50 who is a hardline Remainer and now wants a second referendum to overturn the first states that it cannot be reversed unilaterally.

So, at best, the UK would need to withdraw their decision to withdraw, and the other states would also have to agree to the withdrawal. What on earth makes you think the other 27 states want us to stay?!

They established it as common ground means that the two parties agreed that for the purposes of that case only, it was true. Thus they did not have to present any evidence to back up that assertion. Neither party was disinterested though. The government wanted it to be irrevocable for political reasons. The Miller side wanted it to be irrevocable because it bolstered their case that Article 50 in effect repealed UK law without recourse to Parliament.

The irrevocability of Article 50 was not tested in that case. And for matters of Article 50 the Supreme Court is not supreme - the ECJ is.

[Trada]

Listening to what they are saying at the Swedish summit still lots of things to sort out and the not much time and sound like N Ireland will veto the deal as it stands right now.

Odd N Ireland have control of the Tory Government and Republic of Ireland have control of the Tories Brexit plans.   

[Trada]

David Davis must be joking if he wants EU to compromise on Brexit, European Council president Donald Tusk says

The president cited Mr Davis's 'English sense of humour'

The president of the European Council has suggested David Davis must be joking if he believes it is the EU’s turn to give ground in Brexit talks.

Asked whether he agreed with Mr Davis’s claim last night that the UK had been the one making all the concessions so far, Donald Tusk told reporters that the Brexit Secretary must be exercising his “English sense of humour”.

Speaking at a press conference just hours after a bilateral meeting with Theresa May in Gothenburg, Mr Tusk said “much more progress” was on needed on the issues of the Northern Ireland border and the financial settlement before the two sides could move to talks about trade.

He said the EU would be “ready” to move to trade talks in December if the UK made the right commitments after launching internal preparations back in October.

“But in order to do that we need to see more progress on the UK side. While good progress on citizens’ rights is being made we need to see much more progress on Ireland and on the financial settlement,” he added.

“In order to avoid any ambiguities about our calendar I made it very clear to the Prime Minister May that this progress needs to happen at the beginning of December at the latest. If there is no sufficient progress by then I will not be in a position to propose new guidelines at a future relationship at the December European Council.

Asked about Mr Davis’s comments on the state of talks, delivered in a speech in Berlin on Thursday night, Mr Tusk said: “I can only tell you that I really appreciate Mr Davis’s English sense of humour.”

In his speech to a German audience Mr Davis warned against putting "politics before prosperity" and said Theresa May had already "explained a bold ambition for the form of our future relationship".

Downing Street says Ms May's meeting with Mr Tusk earlier today had resulted in “positive discussions” in which both leaders "agreed that there is more work to be done and discussed how to take further steps forward together in advance of the European Council in December".

Next week the Prime Minister is also expected to continue her charm offensive and meet with officials behind closed doors in the European Parliament, though no date has yet been confirmed for the meeting.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-david-davis-donald-tusk-english-sense-of-humour-december-european-council-eu-a8060896.html

[armchair-fan]

You mean Lord Kerr? That is 100% incorrect he was on the radio and news as the writer of Article 50 saying it is absolutely revocable.

We are still in the EU, under all our current terms, they could not force us out whether they wanted to or not, of which there is no sign they would not welcome us back. In fact there have been several articles and interviews from prominent EU officials saying they would very much like us back.

Pesky facts, they do get in the way of conjecture.

'Lord' Kerr does indeed believe we should step back from the brink.  He is now an adviser to Nicola Sturgeon and is looking to find a way for Scotland to maintain its links with the EU.  I realise Kerr drafted Article 50 in the first place, but his is not the sole voice on the matter, others take a different view on the possibility of unilateral withdrawal of Article 50.

I believe even Kerr argues that we could only reverse the decision through a further General Election followed by a further Referendum.  Given that the Remain parties lost seats in the 2017 General Election and opinion polls (for what they are worth) on the matter are almost exactly as they were in 2016, even assuming Kerr, and those who agree with him, got their way it's a slim chance it could happen.

As we all know, if you employ a lawyer they will argue almost anything for you for as long as you pay them.  Your suggestion that you are presenting facts, and people who disagree are presenting conjecture is disingenuous.

Whatever the legal arguments either way, it's a political decision, and unless there is a radical, unforeseeable, change in public opinion, in the Conservative party, in Labour, in the EU itself, in the other 27 states, it's not going to happen, and we need to face up to that.

I understand the desperation, I really do, but it's crazy to be having these arguments now after the 2015 election of the party promising a referendum, after the referendum itself, after the Miller case in the Supreme Court, after Article 50, after the 2017 election.

Parliament may well be sovereign over the UK, indeed this is in my view the one good argument the Leave side had, but it certainly isn't sovereign over the other 27 EU members.  Suppose in March 2019 the unlikely event Parliament votes against whatever deal is cobbled together then, it cannot force the other 27, or the EU itself, to offer us some other deal.  We likely then leave without any deal, the government falls and we probably have a 3rd General Election in 5 years.  Then after that we get some lunatic like Rees-Mogg or Corbyn trying to negotiate a new relationship with the EU, which makes the current situation seem comparatively positive!

[armchair-fan]

Odd N Ireland have control of the Tory Government and Republic of Ireland have control of the Tories Brexit plans.   

And even more odd that if Labour were not led by men the DUP regard, with good reason, as IRA supporters, Labour could even have a chance to form a government themselves right now.

[TheShanklyGates]

Your head's fallen off.

Absolutely.  82% of MPs are not 'Hard Right' and 52% of the population are not 'Hard Right'.

Maybe not, but that's what they've voted for and a hard right Brexit is what they're getting.

[Trada]

And even more odd that if Labour were not led by men the DUP regard, with good reason, as IRA supporters, Labour could even have a chance to form a government themselves right now.

No change Labour would have worked with the DUP.

[SP]

I understand the desperation, I really do, but it's crazy to be having these arguments now after the 2015 election of the party promising a referendum, after the referendum itself, after the Miller case in the Supreme Court, after Article 50, after the 2017 election.

You clearly don't understand the supreme court decision. That forced the bill the Corbyn utterly capitulated on. It says nothing about whether Article 50 can be unilaterally revoked. None of the decisions that May has made have any real democratic mandate behind them. She took her party to the polls to secure a mandate for her vision of Brexit. The people rejected it. She failed to secure a parliamentary majority. There was not a ringing endorsement of her interpretation of the referendum. I see no sign that the Government will get anywhere near the unicorns and rainbows promised by the Leave campaign. And if the result is nothing like what was promised, what is the justification for following through?

[Alan_X]

It's a bit mad how Noel Gallagher gets it, and some of the brightest minds in politics, and indeed RAWK, don't.

“In England, the Brexit thing, it’s like, I can’t believe there’s so much noise about it - you know what I mean? It was put to the people as a vote, the people voted. That’s democracy. Fucking get over it," he said.

Noel added: “I didn’t vote because I didn’t think we should have been given the vote in the first place because as ordinary members of the public how are you qualified to talk about the break-up of the oldest continent in the fucking world? Then the people trying to get the vote overturned, they used to call that fascism. But they don’t call it fascism any more because they’re fucking ‘right on’. Personally, I don’t think we should have left the Union because I feel right at the time of it happening, we turned our back on the French, who were going through some dark terror shit. But it’s happened now. It was a legal vote. Fucking get it done and let’s move on.”

https://www.joe.co.uk/entertainment/noel-gallagher-on-brexit-people-should-just-fking-get-over-it-149491

And that is why you don't look to rock stars for political guidance.