Johnson was only one of many, he also made it clear in some interviews that a vote for leave means being outside of the internal market. It is possible to be outside but to have access. There have been several surveys to find out the reasons why people voted leave.
I agree, SH, but I don't think we as a public were remotely qualified. Again, were they less prejudiced (I mean that in its literal sense) than over 18s? I agree that under-18s shouldn't vote. The question as to who should be eligible is an interesting one. The main tenet of my argument is none of us (maybe there were a few - I don't know any) were knowledgeable enough to make the vote serious. It's like choosing government on the advice of the under 11s based on them seeing spurious party political broadcasts full of lies - it's not a way a 'serious' democracy should be run. As I've said before, we have been involved in the invasion of countries whose idea of democracy was not up to the perceived standards we have of our own system. Any banana republic now has the right to invade us based on this sort of decision-making.
OK - you cannot - but you cannot claim the will of the people ruled out a Norway solution as it was one of the "futures" offered during the referendum
The winning side were only interested in the UK leaving the EU. Like me, I expect the vast majority of leave voters are quite happy to leave the details up to the elected government to negotiate the best possible deal. Any deal must need to satisfy the main concerns, i.e. immigration, sovereignty and a halt to sending large amounts to Brussels.
Support for the Euro from some EU countries has dipped in the last year, particularly in Italy and France. In France there has been a 10 point swing against the Euro. please log in to view this image
Support for the Euro is not the same thing as support for the EU. and commitment to making it work SH. If you asked the question 'do you wish the Euro had never been introduced' I would also say yes to this. Had there been a referendum, at the time, in Germany, they would have turned it down - I know, because I was there at the time and have earned my money both in Deutschmarks and in Euros. The Euro was not necessary at the time. There were other possibilities such as 'pegging' of compatible currencies - such as the Belgian and Luxemburg Francs, which had been pegged for years and could be used in both countries. It would also have been possible to introduce the Euro as a second currency used only for international trade. I agree fully that there were times when the Italians or Greeks could devalue there currencies (the Italians did it several times) and it worked for them. They can't do it now and so we have to find other ways, which we will do. If you were to ask the question 'should we abandon the EU. idea altogether', then you would not get much of a response. Criticism of the EU. is a completely different thing to wanting it to break up altogether. Many people criticize the government of the UK. but they do not want the country itself to break up.
I am amazed that no countries actually think it is a bad thing despite having a one size fits all model.
I was in Italy the year before the Euro was introduced, and the people I spoke to then couldn't wait for the Euro to come in. They were sick of having a joke currency where they gave people change with a couple of boiled sweets. What they were looking for was something that would give their money some value. It was the only time I was a millionaire.
By this chart Italy, Lithuania and Cyprus consider it a bad thing. Portugal and France have moved significantly against the Euro in the last year.
It is. The alarming fact for EU supporters is the large increase in negative views and the decrease in positive views. There is certainly increasing dissatisfaction within the eurozone, especially it seems in France.
So still not one benefit for the person in the street. Most of your arguments SH have been about sovereignty and the economic argument. You still have not shown one shred of evidence that the average UK person will be better off financially and how. As i read it just about every commentator is indicating we are going to be worse off for years. I think we can expect at least 5 years of being worse off
I think you have made a very poor case SH. I know you are a lone voice crying in the wilderness and we are a pack of wolves howling at you but can I summarise where I think we have got to? Whatever the flaws of the referendum the UK voted brexit. This has no specific conditions as none were included in the referendum. Provided we are technically not a member of the EU then brexit is achieved. Nobody can tell us what was or was not voted for. The range is from a total withdrawal from everything in the EU with UK then either doing or not doing a trade deal at one extreme. The other end is a Norway deal. Both were spoken about on both sides of the referendum debate so it is impossible to talk about anything being against the will of the people - we do not have the will of the people defined. In fact the only way to see if the people's will has been upheld is to ask them when negotiations are concluded if they consent. The positives you have spoken of from your perspective is a nebulous Sovereignty. Almost nobody knows or cares what that means - it is tantamount to "my dad is bigger than your dad" Nowadays countries pool and share sovereignty to get themselves good deals on the world stage. What else? Less unrestricted immigration. I am not sure anybody will see much benefit. Perhaps some in areas where the additional few people overload public services. That could have been solved in a lot of other ways. Many people will see a reduction in both skilled and unskilled labour as a bad thing. Less money paid to EU. This has been more than offset already by the lower pound. If you are really so concerned about the loss of that potential to the NHS a much less contentious way would be to put a penny or two on income tax if you really want to help. Perhaps future trade deals worldwide could offset the adverse effect of less trade with the EU. This is a dubious, nebulous and unconvincing basket of potential benefits. Against that we know we have upset our former partners, pushed inflation up, lowered the value of sterling, made the stock market a more uncertain place for those of us relying on pensions, almost certainly lowered the standard of living especially for ordinary people maybe for years to come and left a club which saw the UK go from a basket case in themid 70's to the fourth or fifth strongest economy in the world. I know a bad bargain when I see it.
The government will be relatively satisfied with the Supreme Court's decision. The split decision completely justified the appeal. The government fully expected a defeat and will ensure the forthcoming bill will have limited scope for remainers to cause problems. The court's ruling on the denial of devolved governments to affect the government's negotiations will delight the ministers.
Recent YouGov poll which gives the government overwhelming support for the priorities the PM has outlined. Clearly most posters on here only speak for the minority view.
