The sensible thing for the UK government to do would be to cancel the article 50 and the whole Leave process now.
Last edited:
Off Topic The Politics Thread
- Thread starter Stroller
- Start date
-
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
-
The sensible thing for the UK government to do would be to cancel the article 50 and the whole Leave process now.
Yes, to the EU punitive deal. So far as "referendum now" is concerned, you're the only person I've heard suggesting this, Stan. Even Vince the Remainer isn't proposing it. We've just had a referendum. We voted Leave. You weren't happy with the result and want it re-run, for no other apparent reason other than...you weren't happy with the result. Nothing material has happened since last year's referendum. The UK economy has shown no signs of the catastrophe that Osbourne and his economic experts promised us.
A transition period looks fine to me, so long as we're allowed to negotiate trade deals outside the EU sect during that period.
We don't have a sensible government Jock. We barely have a government at all, just a bunch of very limited politicians jockeying for position. For balance, the alternatives are pretty terrifying too. It's a bit of a problem.
I don't particularly want another referendum, but a fast one is an option - and with a very limited campaign time, we couldn't stand the months of it again. The argument for it is that we actually know a bit more now about what this Brexit thing is doing to us (probably the inflation and £1=€1 for tourists will be most noticeable for the majority, plus the continued presence of immigrants), how insanely complex the thing is, and the limitations of the politicians in handling it. Plus some of the lies (money for the NHS, end to immigration) peddled by the Brexit campaign were retreated from instantly (you can also argue that the instant financial disaster predicted by the Remain campaign didn't happen of course) are now exposed. It would also save a lot of time in the negotiation process if it were clear that the public either wanted to stay, or were genuinely prepared to walk away with no deal. The latter strengthens Davis' hand considerably. I have no idea what the outcome of such a poll would be.
These figures about 24% are selective. made up by the press and corporate that didn't want Brexit. No way will there be another referendum on Brixit and people need to move on. The people wouldn't want one and it would be undemocratic.
A lot of the Brexit problems are being over inflated by the press (BBC/SKY). Their coverage is all one way, its either anti Brexit or anti Trump. They are causing problems and the people of Europe actually believe their news.
The 'remoaners' need to stop trying to derail the process and work for the country.
A lot of the Brexit problems are being over inflated by the press (BBC/SKY). Their coverage is all one way, its either anti Brexit or anti Trump. They are causing problems and the people of Europe actually believe their news.
The 'remoaners' need to stop trying to derail the process and work for the country.
I'm delighted you think so. Presumably, that also goes for having a Tory Government, so as they lost, all Labour supporters need to shut up and stop getting in Theresa May's way? And we surely need to repeal all the acts of parliament that changed laws they had before, like disbanding the NHS, repealing the anti-slavery act, and making homosexuality illegal? After all, people fighting for freedoms, gay rights, equality and a decent standard of healthcare for all need to shut up and not get in people's way, right?
Nobody ever said that this was the one and only time this could be discussed, and nobody ever said that this is something that those of us who voted remain should stop debating. If you don't like democracy, just say so...
That's not the first thing that needs to be agreed. First of all, are we all in agreement that the 52% had many differing visions of what form our leaving of the EU would take and what our subsequent relationship with it should look like? In other words, agree that we know the vote was to eat ice cream, but we don't yet know what flavour the voters want to eat?
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
We have had a democratic vote. It was 52% to 48% for a Brexit. Out means out. Get on with it and stop trying to re run the referendum.
As it ever occurred to you that the 'remoaners' want the best for the country as they see it, just as much as the 'brextards' do from their perspective? You have a pro Brexit government, the leadership of the two biggest political parties is pro Brexit, most of the popular press is pro Brexit and if the BBC and Sky aren't to your liking, there's always Russia Today.
It's all stacked in the Brexiters favour, or it was until the party which stood for a hard Brexit/no deal is fine option didn't win a majority, and the anti EU/foreigner purist party was wiped out. Now, as is typical with an 'anti' form of politics (anti EU, anti immigrants) the search is on for who to blame when it all goes tits up. It'll be the 'enemy within' and the EU foreigners who **** us up, not Brexiter incompetence and the fact that it was a stupid decision, presented and handled appallingly from the word go (cheers Dave 'n Treez).
And now we are told to shut up if we disagree and that it's 'anti democratic' to say, why not ask the people again? Well, as some privileged, self serving, nasty Minister said in Parliament, 'go whistle'.
Last edited:
.....
OK, so you're not certain there should be a second referendum. As to voters motives, remember too, to evaluate the motives of Remainers. Some were terrified that the economy would tank the day after Brexit (as the government and economic "experts" had warned). Some were worried there would be a Third World War (as the government had warned). Some just went with the recommendation of the prime minister - who has since buggered off and been seen to be taking a lot of holidays.
You open up a can of worms when you try to gauge voters motives on both sides. During the referendum campaign, Gove and Johnson made it clear leaving the EU would mean leaving the Single Market. Cameron and Osborne said the same.
Enough said.
I think not. I'm not saying any of these things you're trying to put in my mouth. A second referendum (or not) is not the first thing to be agreed.
It's funny - I'm saying we should agree we don't know what the 52% wanted their post-Brexit world to look like and so we should find out. You seem to be saying we don't know what the 52% wanted their post-Brexit world to look like but we shouldn't ask them in case it wrecks our ability to deliver a Brexit that we don't actually know is the one they wanted.
It's theft of the result by hardliners, pure and simple. They won't ask us because they don't want the answer to be something they don't favour themselves.
It was made clear to all voters in the referendum that voting to leave the EU meant leaving the Single Market. This has been accepted by the Tories, and yesterday, by Corbyn for Labour. No need to ask again. All the stuff raised about motives (which were varied for Brexiteers and Remainers) is simply an attempt to cloud the water and overturn a democratic vote by stealth imho. Of course, the misnamed Liberal "Democrats" are not above this.
Last edited:
If it was a great decision and clearly the will of the people, what's the harm in asking the people if they still feel that way now they can see how the politicians delivering this brave new world are getting on with it?
If I wanted Brexit at all costs, I'd be sh**tting myself at the thought the public might now be asked to advise the government what specific form Brexit should take. Especially if I wanted an unpleasant, economically disastrous hard Brexit for other, more idealogical reasons that would never gain electoral support in a million years if the people feeling that way were up front about it.
Democratic decisions, like so much in life, are temporary and subject to people changing their minds when they start thinking about things a little deeper. Otherwise, we'd never have had this referendum in the first place. We made our decision 40 years ago to join. Why have a referendum to see if we want to change our minds? The answer - because circumstances and situations change and we might have changed our minds with it.
There's nothing undemocratic about asking again if you think enough people feel it's a good check and balance before doing something fairly permanent. It's trying to suppress discussion that's undemocratic. Take a look at what's happening inTurkey right now if you want to see a master class in doing that.
Memory failing Goldie?
"Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market" Daniel Hannan MEP
"Only a madman would actually leave the Market"Owen Paterson MP, Vote Leave backer
"Wouldn’t it be terrible if we were really like Norway and Switzerland? Really? They’re rich. They’re happy. They’re self-governing" Nigel Farage, Ukip leader
"The Norwegian option, the EEA option, I think that it might be initally attractive for some business people" Matthew Elliot, Vote Leave chief executive
"Increasingly, the Norway option looks the best for the UK" Aaron Banks, Leave.EU founder
Want some evidence?
You must log in or register to see media
Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?
Many Leave voters would say that was not the case - that they voted to leave the EU fully believing the UK would have tariff-free access to the Single Market even if we were no longer members of it. They thought they could have their cake and eat it because politicians kept telling them so.
The fundamental reason that hard line Brexiteers want to deny the public the chance to say what they think, now they've had some time to reflect, is that these hardliners think they'll lose the vote now all the lies are being exposed.
Is anyone on here a hard line Brexiteer, I wonder?
These were mavericks (some barely known) with their own campaigns and agendas. Who would listen to them, when they had the prime minister, the chancellor of the exchequer and the leaders of the Leave campaign (including the ex major of London) telling them that we would be leaving the Single Market?
Desperate stuff by desperate Remainers.
Which politicians guaranteed voters that there would be tariff-free access to the Single Market after we left it? Please name and quote them.
Of course, there probably will be. It's perfectly doable unless the wonderful EU dinosaur is in punishment mode, and willing to beat itself up in the process
Last edited:
Agree with some of that but people and public opinion can change with propaganda and media feeding them negative information. Hitler did it and people believed his lies.
We can be as democratic as we want, however we must respect the vote otherwise where will it stop, people demanding a rematch because they didn't like the way a team won a match? A rerun of all general elections because we didn't get the result we wanted?
They were clear about Brexit. Stay in the EU or Leave. Out meant out. Now the 'remoaners' are complaining about the way we leave because what else can they do?
I will agree that things have not gone as well as I expected but when you are consistently having the Press/Media knocking you at every turn because of their own agenda, what do you expect?
We are very lucky in this country that all have the right to vote. There are plenty of countries on this planet that would have you arrested and imprisoned for going against the government.
Are you familiar with the phrase 'in denial'. If the Remainers stressed leaving the single market it was a failed attempt to scare people into a remain vote, as I think people pointed out at the time.
Boris of course famously changed his mind a lot on the EU and Single Market, trying to work out what position was best for his career. Here's what he said in 2013
You must log in or register to see media
A long time ago, he's entitled to change his mind of course. But, according to you, the electorate aren't. Only takes 650,000 to have changed their mind for the result to change.