Ah Beddy and percentages... it doesn’t need a 4% switch fella to change a 4% gap, but we know how you are with numbers Ps. On topic, you keep saying “you can’t ignore the vote” .... it’s not people ignoring the vote, it’s people saying that if that vote now looks to be the wrong decision or there is a feeling/poll/information available that the people think it is wrong, then it is perfectly acceptable in a democracy to ask the people again. One question I have though is if we did vote again and hypotheticallly it was suddenly a remain win, what would the implications be with us and the EU? Do we just stay and carry on as if it was June 2016, or would we face legal bills and costs for what has been happening over the last 2 years. Would we also be in a bad position in terms of EU future discussions? They’d all want to stop us getting anything we wanted in the future. Oh and Farage would probably reappear
In truth fats...... I was trying to get over that the original vote is not invalid or out of date. Hence the current negotiations. I agree a lot of people may have changed their minds. But in my view that is because of the turmoil in getting what they originally voted for. We have left it to the polititions to get on with it. Now if parliament rejects what she has proposed now that is a different question granted. I understand from people that know a lot more than me about politics than me. For the referendom to be referred for re-vote. A new act of parliament would be needed........or some such....... However I agree that it will cost the country more money if we decided we should stay.......personally I think I might emigrate if that were to happen the turmoil from that would make the current turmoil look like child’s play.......
Remaining would absolutely have its costs, including undermining the UK's credibility for years within that body. There are no clean options left, and sometimes the best choice is to go hat in hand and admit that you really ****ed up.
And demands for a third referendum would come as night follows day. The other issue is if we did proceed along this route, what would the questions be? Can’t see much consensus on that alone!
Not necessarily. First vote was blind for most people. I know that can be contested by hard brexiteers. Second vote, whatever people want to call it, will/should at least reflect what we now know, hence people being better informed and therefore democratic.
I think you all need to forget about this 2nd referendum option. It just isn't going to happen because ... They aren't going to say the 1st vote was undemocratic or flawed in any way so they can't include Remain, it could only be different flavours of Leave They can't include Renegotiate as an option as it doesn't mean anything and rather leads you into needing another one when you have negotiated, which really can't happen The options therefore can only be the MAY Deal or NO Deal and I think that the only option that would unite all sides, for different reasons, is NOT having a referundum on that basis Teresa May realises that the only option we have is to fudge a deal that gets us away from the disaster of NO Deal and gives us time to sort out the multitude of complex and divisive issues that can't be agreed in such a short timescale. It's not ideal, but in a scenario where there is no ideal solution you have to be pragmatic. For the Brexiteers it still means we are leaving and for the country maybe we can avoid the NO Deal meltdown Surely, the only reason the people believe a NO Deal is acceptable is because Rees-Mogg etc say the MAY Deal is Remainers trying to avoid it rather than than trying to give us more time to do it as best as we can, which is clearly untrue, whatever she is attempting it isn't to stay in without any representation
The Draft Agreement isn’t acceptable to many sections of the UK for many different reasons, most notably the future of Northern Ireland. Those Tory frontbenchers trying to change it won’t have any success because the EU are done negotiating. Remain is now the only option which is achievable which won’t ruin the UK both economically and socially for the next generation or more. The politicians just have to find a way to make it happen. Going back to @Beddytare’s argument about the referendum being binding, have you never heard of unacceptable laws being repealed? Different times, different situation, but remember the Poll Tax?
You haven't offered a single reason to say it is still representative other than I am ignoring the referendum result because it's what I want. Which i know I'm not. I've even come up with the most fair solution the the 3 main sides from the referendum that I believe will sort out many of the troubles while your solution is to ignore it. From your shallow responses I would say I've put in a lot more analysis to the result of the referendum and between us if if there is anyone ignoring the result because it's what they want it would be you. Given all the work I've put it is a really a personal insult to say I'm ignoring it which is why I'm getting annoyed.
It will lose them many more than it will gain. Most remainer Tories won't vote Labour and will mostly still vote Tory even though they hate the idea of leaving. The reverse is not true. Most Labour leavers that gave Corbyn the benefit of doubt over Labour's position will vote Tory just for Brexit. I don't think people realise this.# I could be wrong (but don;t think I am.)
* You don't understand my points r.e. cheap food. Food prices are cheap for all of us (you and me) because labour in that market has had wages kept low. Positives for you and people who focus on "cost of living." Negatives for people like me who get ignored for these jobs because we are "too expensive." Not a problem you think because benefits and top ups have replaced wages and thus we still benefit form that cheap food. Why would Citrus fruit be cheaper after leaving? Would we be importing from Morocco instead of Spain? Or just not charging tariffs on Spanish Oranges?
You are assuming the DUP would not come back on board with a new Tory leader. Also assuming that this will be a long drawn out thing rather than be an immediate 2 horse race. It is the "pragmatic" remain Tory MPs that are talking about flooding the number of candidates. The leave side are talking about putting up 1 candidate to get straight to a member's vote.
They might push for that but you have to get that through parliament as well. Thus IF a new referendum legislation were to be put to the house it would most definitely have to have some option for "remain." Most likely as suggested a 1st, 2nd preference type. Maybe 4 options: 1 This deal 2 No deal 3 EEA 4 Remain. I think EEA or No deal would win once 2nd preferences were counted.
May? Funny how now it is May in control of negotiations and not the EU. This is EU policy. State Aid has to be approved by EU at the moment.
While you are correct that the referendum was no legally binding it ignores that every politician campaigning for remain made a huge point of "If you vote leave there is no going back." Every house in the country also received a leaflet that stated "This is your choice. The government WILL implement what you decide." There is no vagueness there. It doesn't say it is our chance to voice an opinion and they will decide if it is right or not. It doesn't say Tory government, just government so it doesn't matter if the government changes. So legally, yes they can ignore it however then those who bang on about the leave argument being based on lies become the biggest liars as they renege on their own promises stated at every debate several times by virtually all of them and published over and over again. Not just Tories, not just Cameron. All of them Clegg, Sturgeon, Chukka etc. They all stated this was a one off and no going back.
But what if people changed their mind in 2 years based on the new arrangment with the EU after deciding now to remain. Surely once people saw that and IF public opinion had changed we should have a 3rd referendum to see if the public were happy with the new "punishment for the naughty boy" arrangement we would have with the EU. Then 2 years later when the next negotiation was handled terribly we could go back for No4 and see if we wanted a "severe punishment for a very very naughty boy" remain deal. We could go on forever because "IF public opinion changes.........."
