Effect of Brexit

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
I see they have wheeled out AC Grayling to challenged the 'will of the people' over the referendum. In desperation the remainers are trying to add the abstainers, too young to vote, disqualified ex pats, Tom Cobley and all to their share of the vote to gain a mythical majority.

Maybe the Supreme Court can save them tomorrow?
I only involve the non-voters as an example of how I don't think the result was "clear". If the turnout was 100% it would be 'clearer', but at that % still not 'clear' IMHO.
It's also because of the misinformation, from both sides. The people voted from positions of ignorance - on both sides. It's not the way a sophisticated civilisation makes important decisions. And there wasn't another more important than membership of the EU.
 
People who abstain get what they deserve.
But how do you justify Brits living abroad who were not given the vote.
How do you justify not giving the vote to 16 to 18 year olds? Do not say that it is because in General Elections they do not have the vote - this was not a GE. For the Scottish referendum they were given the vote - so why the change? For something that affected their entire future and not just the next five years how can you justify the failure to follow the previous referendum's rules?
Your clear result as I said before was clear because we could see it but it was narrow and by denying a number of people the right to vote it was not fair.
That could be corrected by having a second referendum after the terms of exit are known. You must welcome the chance to reinforce the excellent job you feel TM will have her team negotiate. Let me pose a little teaser. If negotiations end up with a Norway deal - still in the single market, still paying into Europe, Still subject to a European Court and still with unrestricted movement of people - would you be content? According to you the people would have got their way brexit and return of sovereignty.

I believe 16-18 year olds should not be given the vote because most lack the necessary knowledge or interest. It was the SNP Scottish government that gave this group the right to vote as they felt it would increase the leave vote. The UK government quite rightly did not see the merit it following this idea.
The referendum decided the UK should leave the EU, nothing should now prevent this.

I can guarantee the UK will not be in the internal market, it may however end up with some access. We will not be subject to the ECJ or unrestricted movement, our leader clearly ruled this out last week.
 
Then if Parliament decided that a second referendum was necessary because of a) changed circumstances or b) significant changes in the electorate ( a few Brexiters popping off, and others coming of age) or c) because they believed that in such an important case as this a second opinion was necessary or d) The last referendum was invalid because Colognehornet wasn't allowed to vote in it, although his legal position could be changed by it. Then in that case it would be just as democratic to have a second referendum as the first one was. If at the time of actual leaving (ie. in 2 years time) there were a majority in favour of staying it would be undemocratic to force the issue on the basis of a referendum taken 3 years earlier. Parliament is sovereign in the UK.

The government has ruled out a second referendum because parliament commissioned the June 2016 referendum to decide on membership.
 
I believe 16-18 year olds should not be given the vote because most lack the necessary knowledge or interest. It was the SNP Scottish government that gave this group the right to vote as they felt it would increase the leave vote. The UK government quite rightly did not see the merit it following this idea.
The referendum decided the UK should leave the EU, nothing should now prevent this.

I can guarantee the UK will not be in the internal market, it may however end up with some access. We will not be subject to the ECJ or unrestricted movement, our leader clearly ruled this out last week.
Harsh on 16 to 18 year olds when their whole future was at stake.
There are 50 shades of leave. Humour me though. (who knows TM could be deposed) What if a Norway style solution were offered?
 
The government has ruled out a second referendum because parliament commissioned the June 2016 referendum to decide on membership.
The government has ruled out a second referendum because parliament commissioned the June 2016 referendum to decide on membership.
You forgot to quote the mantra 'The will of the people' this time, you were beginning to sound a bit like Robespierre. They believed that in those days as well but modern democracy believes that government also works to protect the interests of minorities, like the 48% for example, like all the non voters and, most importantly, the 6 million British passport holders living overseas - they are also 'The People'. Yes SH, 6 million. Just over 10% of all Brits live abroad, and it is a fair guess that well over half were disenfranchised. Does their status suddenly become that of illegals without them ever being asked ? This is not the work of a democracy - if a German citizen lives abroad then they hold onto voting rights until death. The referendum asked the simple question 'do you want to leave the EU', nothing else. It did not say anything which ruled out a Norway solution. It did not say 'for evermore'. It did not forbid a second referendum. The character of what came next ie. Nexit was left open (as we now find out without any plan whatsoever).
 
  • Like
Reactions: andytoprankin
Harsh on 16 to 18 year olds when their whole future was at stake.
There are 50 shades of leave. Humour me though. (who knows TM could be deposed) What if a Norway style solution were offered?

Everyone's future is at stake, it is preferable that voters are suitably qualified but I know that is a dangerous road to go down.

Sorry Leo, I cannot imagine the UK having a deal which allows free movement or remaining control by the ECJ. I would add no deal can possibly be agreed which would prevent the UK doing bi-lateral deals outside of the EU. There are far too many political careers on the line.
 
The will of the people could be taken to mean anything. Boris assured everyone that the country would be able to stay in the single market and provide huge sums of money for the NHS. How many people believed that to be the case and cast their vote to leave because of it? That was their will. Two of my friends as frequent users of the NHS voted to leave on the basis of what he said. It is their will that we stay in the single market. Maybe you should say that they should have had more sense than to believe him, but if that is the case why should we believe anything he says today? Different people who voted to leave had many different reasons for doing so, therefore there is no overall will of the people.
 
You forgot to quote the mantra 'The will of the people' this time, you were beginning to sound a bit like Robespierre. They believed that in those days as well but modern democracy believes that government also works to protect the interests of minorities, like the 48% for example, like all the non voters and, most importantly, the 6 million British passport holders living overseas - they are also 'The People'. Yes SH, 6 million. Just over 10% of all Brits live abroad, and it is a fair guess that well over half were disenfranchised. Does their status suddenly become that of illegals without them ever being asked ? This is not the work of a democracy - if a German citizen lives abroad then they hold onto voting rights until death. The referendum asked the simple question 'do you want to leave the EU', nothing else. It did not say anything which ruled out a Norway solution. It did not say 'for evermore'. It did not forbid a second referendum. The character of what came next ie. Nexit was left open (as we now find out without any plan whatsoever).

The time to debate the rules on the referendum was prior to the actual event. I don't suppose you would have mentioned these perceived injustices had the result favoured your views. The remainers in the Tory government decided on the rules, they were obviously over confident about the result they wanted.
 
The will of the people could be taken to mean anything. Boris assured everyone that the country would be able to stay in the single market and provide huge sums of money for the NHS. How many people believed that to be the case and cast their vote to leave because of it? That was their will. Two of my friends as frequent users of the NHS voted to leave on the basis of what he said. It is their will that we stay in the single market. Maybe you should say that they should have had more sense than to believe him, but if that is the case why should we believe anything he says today? Different people who voted to leave had many different reasons for doing so, therefore there is overall will of the people.

Most senior politicians for leave and remain clearly stated a vote to leave meant we would be out of the internal market. Once the UK saves wasting the billions on EU membership funds can be diverted into the NHS. The main reason for voting leave was about uncontrolled immigration. The second reason was sovereignty.
 
The time to debate the rules on the referendum was prior to the actual event. I don't suppose you would have mentioned these perceived injustices had the result favoured your views. The remainers in the Tory government decided on the rules, they were obviously over confident about the result they wanted.

If the result went the other way Farage would have been yapping away 24/7 about it and he'd already be asking for a 2nd referendum on the matter due to 'Project Fear'.

The point remains that it was never a one-off referendum, Leave never claimed it would be, and leaving EU gives us no way back whilst enjoying the current privileges we have.

You're still to give us one single benefit of leaving. One single benefit...When I wake up on April 1st 2019 what perks will I have?
 
Most senior politicians for leave and remain clearly stated a vote to leave meant we would be out of the internal market. Once the UK saves wasting the billions on EU membership funds can be diverted into the NHS. The main reason for voting leave was about uncontrolled immigration. The second reason was sovereignty.

That's nonsense, May was claiming until recently that we could cherrypick the bits we wanted, and still thinks she stands a chance. Boris (and yourself) said the Germans 'will still want to sell us cars' (god I hate that soundbite), yet now you're saying that the plan all along was to Hard Brexit?

Making it up as you go along...Life must be pretty easy as a Brexiter. If all else fails just fall back onto soundbites...
 
Most senior politicians for leave and remain clearly stated a vote to leave meant we would be out of the internal market. Once the UK saves wasting the billions on EU membership funds can be diverted into the NHS. The main reason for voting leave was about uncontrolled immigration. The second reason was sovereignty.

I gave you an example of one who was clear that we could cherry pick. I take it that you regard him as a senior politician? There is no evidence to show why people voted as they did, yet I showed how some felt betrayed by the way that things are moving.
 
If the result went the other way Farage would have been yapping away 24/7 about it and he'd already be asking for a 2nd referendum on the matter due to 'Project Fear'.

The point remains that it was never a one-off referendum, Leave never claimed it would be, and leaving EU gives us no way back whilst enjoying the current privileges we have.

You're still to give us one single benefit of leaving. One single benefit...When I wake up on April 1st 2019 what perks will I have?

It was a one off referendum just as the original one was on the common market. When we leave the benefit will be that you will no longer need to debate an issue that had been decided.