The EU debate - Part III

Simple. The House needs to hold a debate and vote on what 'Brexit means Brexit' actually consists, before Article 50 is invoked, and what is May and the 3 Stooges intending to have as sacrosanct in the negotiations and based on what assumptions and perceived mandate?

Once that debate has been had and the vote taken, it'll go to the Lords for their approval i.e. the correct democratic process.

Once article 50 is invoked but before the negotiations with the EU are formally concluded, May should call a GE and put before the Nation the proposed agreement, then the Nation can decide whether the proposed terms of exit are something they back or not. If the Tories lost then it'd be up to the new Govt to renegotiate and conclude the deal based on their electoral pledges.

 

Its mental that it appears they never even contemplated that a majority might vote leave.

I mean there were only 2 choice. Surely you would plan for both outcomes?!

 

It's also mental that the people who ran the Leave campaign didn't have a plan or a clue what Leaving meant

Gove even tried to become PM off the back of his planless campaign!

 

Not even Leave thought Leave would win.

Boris didn't even want Leave to win

Cameron totally misjudged the issue and thought that Brits would do what Brits have always done when it comes to voting when there's significant economic risk at stake i.e. make the pragmatic choice.

He got it hugely wrong.

My other half has dealings with senior civil servants at Westminster and there was ZERO planning even behind the scenes for a Brexit scenario. Not a single piece of paper. They're literally making it up as they go along.

 

That's an assumption and also stretching it.

Nobody knows for sure what will happen.

Its a risk - that some were, and are, willing to take.

 

A competent institution should always consider the outcomes and how to deal with then.

The fact they didn't is scandalous.

They also miscalculated the unrest that a lot of people feel towards politicians - as they are, living in their our bubble away from the plebs.

 

Are they going to reveal the plan at some point then? It's been 4 months but not a squeak so far!

 

It's neither.

It was a massive leap into the unknown. People voted for something that the winning side hadn't even defined, merely some ridiculous notion that we'd 'take back control' playing on the jingoistic bollocks that Brits have loved since the days of the Empire. Combined with sticking 2 fingers up to foreigners. **** the economy, **** the expert opinion on the long term economic outlook, **** our currency, **** the consequences. It was pleb politics that won the day.

 

Yep, agreed.

The 'protest vote' was as much a kick in the ribs aimed at those who 'have' by those who 'have not' as it was a protest against politicians imo. It think the social divide has widened and the prospect of the economy take a nose dive may have appealed to some, as in their heads it would have given the 'haves' a knock. Unfortunately, how it works is that the 'have nots' will be kicked the hardest anyway.

 

Lads i'll have to come back to you - up against today after a few quiet days

 

In practice we can't 'Vote them out' - the coalition parties at the last election got nearly 15% less of the vote than they did at the previous one but we ended up with a majority Tory Govt on about 37% of the vote. 63% of us tried to vote them out and failed! Same thing last week - the Tory candidate in Witney got 45% of the vote, Witney doesn't want a Tory MP but they've still got one because they can't agree on which progressive party should replace him. The EU Council of minsters and the EU Parliament is much more representative of the spread of public opinion than the UK Govt is!

 

Watch from 10:00
Cameron says that if we leave the EU that would mean leaving the single market
All the "yearly referendum advocates" are saying that when people voted they didn't know what it meant - especially whether we would leave the single market. It was made quite clear by David Cameron. Of course, we can do a deal to have access to the EU to have a trade agreement. This is a matter for the British Government.

 

Er - surely you can't be saying that people who voted against Cameron's recommendation did so because they agreed with his analysis?

 

Can he still see you...?

 

So by your logic Witney didn't want an MP because the Conservatives got more votes than any of the other parties.
I know you aren't a democrat but that is taking it to extremes!
"progressive party"? don't you mean backward?

 

so you think that people who voted Out wanted to remain in the heart of the EU - the EUs own words?

 

It s a monumental gamble with the nation's economic future. And for the little bit of so called independence we may gain, one then was never worth taking!

 

Got to agree. There needs to be a move towards the same method as the Scottish parliament elections where second preferential votes are counted when no candidate gets 50%.
You can't just assume everyone who didn't vote for the main candidate was completely opposed to them.

 

Spot on!...

The xenophobes won the key to the asylum...

 

You can't know I'm not a democrat becaues I am one!
How is it 'democratic' for a candidate who commanded only 45% in Witney to be elected? How is it 'democratic' that our Brexit decisons are made by a Govt who commanded only 37% support at the last election with nothing in their manifesto about what they would do in the event of a 'leave' vote?
Anyone who claims that the UK is 'democratic' must have an odd definition of the world.
And no - the Conservatives are the backward party, the very word means that they dislike change.