I would say it has to be a 55% + winning majority in each of England, Scotland, Wales and NI
Off Topic YOUR VOTE COUNTED...
- Thread starter HugoEkitikeN01
- 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
-
I would say it has to be a 55% + winning majority in each of England, Scotland, Wales and NI
Absolutely, it's a monumental generational defining decision and it's not right that as we're seeing now English and Welsh people are deciding the fate of three other countries all of which beg to differ
I'd have agreed to all those in the first referendum.
Let's just say if a second happened now with those provisos I wouldn't want to live in England or Wales for a bit lol...
Haha, same I think a few more bus shelters might be getting smashed. Bad news as it took all week last week for them to clear up the glass from the one over the road here
I think in general there are too many issues.
On the one hand you've handed devolution out so you can't very well say to these areas they don't get a say.
On the other hand the populations combined or the 3 are not close to England's so why should they get to block?
This then begs the question.. is it a union or not... and if it is a union then the majority decide
On the one hand you've handed devolution out so you can't very well say to these areas they don't get a say.
On the other hand the populations combined or the 3 are not close to England's so why should they get to block?
This then begs the question.. is it a union or not... and if it is a union then the majority decide
So far, Frank, my conversation with you has comprised of you challenging me to defend some of the things I've said (not to mention a few I haven't actually said) so perhaps it's time for me to go on the offensive.
It seems to me that you're more intent on defending the mechanics of the democratic process as it stands than upholding the principle behind it.
As I asked earlier, if there is sufficient evidence to suggest that, on reflection, a substantial number of people have begun to change their minds, is it democratic to ignore that?
If we turn a corner onto a wrong road, do we have to continue down it through an intransigent adherence to a "process" without giving due consideration to the consequences?
Not that I think we will get a second vote, btw - I just don't think it's quite the constitutional catastrophe it's being made out to be.
We don't actually have a constitution anyway. I'm unfortunately ignorant of the legal framework surrounding a referendum, but the general opinion in the media seems to suggest that it is not legally binding.
So, a bit of a stink yes, but constitutional crisis? Perhaps not.
Yeah it would have been a more simple argument before devolution. It was one of the arguments put forward against devolution...you weaken Westminster's primacy immediately.
It's why I maybe wouldn't go for such a quick second ref. Talk to the EU and put forward the suggestion of regional EU membership. The regions that want continued membership have to sacrifice all the special perks the current UK enjoyed before the ref happens..
If England and Wales still vote out after and the other two vote in then they participate based on the new terms of membership.
1) you see if EU membership is still attractive under those terms for Scotland and NI to still vote remain. Takes away any of the more fanciful claims of Remainers in those two states.
2) It gives the Brexiteers time to put forward an actual post Brexit plan to present to the areas they think they'll win with a clearer idea from the public of the ramifications.
I still don't like the idea of a second one because of reasons I stated before but using the real Constitutional problems that weren't sorted out before the first could be a more convincing argument as to why a second is needed as opposed to "we didn't like the first result"
Its not possible as i understand it.
1. regions are not countries.
2. the laws and perks as you call them are all in or all out. you can't have half a country i nEU terms getting perks but the other half not.
3. the eu are on record. not talks about talks until article 50 is enacted
4. its a bit late now that the hawks across europe are shouting get it done fast.
In the end a decision was taken to leave and its got consequences. the ramifications for the union are one such consequence and its too late now. .
I quoted one of them. Which is the relevant one(s) I missed?
Another point, btw. If there was a second vote, and all those who originally voted leave were up in arms about being ignored the first time, they could just vote leave again and get the same result couldn't they?
If the result was different you'd have to ask why, and the answer would surely be that the electorate had changed its mind.
Wouldn't this then be democracy in action, rather than just "them's the rules"?.
And Saint...I've challenged a lot on here before and after the vote on both sides. I quoted you as support of a point I was making against Diego in fact!
And my last post directed at you did make clear that I wasn't necessarily attributing the points I included to you. You even quoted that sentence!
It's my nature...I like to break down and try and find flaws in either side of the argument as it helps me find the strongest stance to take after.
So in fact...by challenging you and others it reinforces things I agree with you about. I like discussing things in this detail with people that come out with good stuff...even if I didn't agree with all they say.
Most of the people discussing on this thread have come out with really insightful views. I don't want to have one big nodding session. These topics as you've pointed out are far too important not to have every idea scrutinised....including my own.
Hope no one has taken any personal offence at my approach...I've only been personal once and apologised to that person for it.
And my last post directed at you did make clear that I wasn't necessarily attributing the points I included to you. You even quoted that sentence!
It's my nature...I like to break down and try and find flaws in either side of the argument as it helps me find the strongest stance to take after.
So in fact...by challenging you and others it reinforces things I agree with you about. I like discussing things in this detail with people that come out with good stuff...even if I didn't agree with all they say.
Most of the people discussing on this thread have come out with really insightful views. I don't want to have one big nodding session. These topics as you've pointed out are far too important not to have every idea scrutinised....including my own.
Hope no one has taken any personal offence at my approach...I've only been personal once and apologised to that person for it.
My response to to Mito...I think.
It basically said there are probably more valid excuses to put to the electorate along the grounds that the first ref framework was flawed...I. e..it over rode the spirit if not the legislation of devolved power.
FTSE 100 v FTSE 250
London-listed stocks have tanked as shockwaves reverberated through financial markets since Britain chose to leave the EU.
Since close on Thursday, both the FTSE 100 and FTSE 250 have suffered steep falls.
FTSE 100
London-listed stocks have tanked as shockwaves reverberated through financial markets since Britain chose to leave the EU.
Since close on Thursday, both the FTSE 100 and FTSE 250 have suffered steep falls.
FTSE 100
- The blue chip index has fallen 5.7%
- More than £92bn has been wiped off its value
- Housebuilders and banks are the biggest losers
- Suffered worse two-day drops in August 2015
- The mid-cap index has dropped 14.2%
- More than £47bn has been wiped off its value
- It's trading at two-year lows
- Friday and today are the two worst consecutive days since Black Monday in 1987 for the FTSE 250
European stock markets closed firmly in the red this evening as banking stocks suffered sharp losses in the aftermath of Friday's referendum outcome.
By close:
FTSE 100: -2.55%
DAX: -3.02%
CAC 40: -1.86%
IBEX: -1.83%
FTSE 250: -6.96%
By close:
FTSE 100: -2.55%
DAX: -3.02%
CAC 40: -1.86%
IBEX: -1.83%
FTSE 250: -6.96%
Except they are not regions..they are states.
Politics is always negotiation it's the very foundation of politics..When the EU says no negotiation they mean the UK dipping their toe into trade agreements before leaving...and seeing if they like them..perfectly reasonable position to take..why give away your hand?
The All in or Out was based on trying to force a remain vote and now calling the bluff that we will actually push the button...said earlier...They've seen others crumble after referendums and have a second...why would they think it was impossible for us? The guy who said it has resigned.
If the EU is about anything it's diplomacy and diplomats never see a closed door...feck.Even North Korea knows that.
The hawks shout but for more intimate reasons than us...They've an eye over their shoulders at their own populace.
Do you honestly think if a proposal for a second referendum was put to them with the worst case scenario being only a repeat of England and Wales leaving, Greater control and influence over NI and Scotland and a nice fudge through this with trade deals in the back door with England? They wouldn't take it? That could be taken back to their own populace as a victory as opposed to the All out defeat they have now.
And....there's always the chance that as some on here think even England and Wales would change their mind....
Haha. Sorry Frank if I gave the impression that I was offended. Not at all.
I've enjoyed it so far, because you give a reasoned and comprehensive argument, and I've tried to respond in kind.
I'm always happy that I have enough about me to defend any sincerely held opinion on anything, and if I'm not convinced I won't argue it. I'm quite open to any reasonable and respectful challenge to it.
As I've said many times, democracy as we know it is deeply flawed, but what I outlined above could actually improve it's relevance.
The referendum cannot be thought of like a general election. If we make a mistake in the latter we can change our minds 4 or 5 years later (and make another mistake). The consequences of this decision are irreversible over any meaningful time-scale, so we should be absolutely certain that it is what we want and for all the right reasons.
Good stuff.Yeah don't get me wrong I've argued what I would call an academic view of things but as I've just put forward to Mito...in politics and diplomacy nothing is set in stone..
It's trying to find a convincing argument for doing something and reversing something that the opponent can live with privately even if they seem to shouting the opposite.
So...how to have either a second referendum now a lot of people more clearly see the ramifications they didn't see before but without telling them it's being ignored because they were stupid.
Or
Finding away of carrying out the first decision in a way that negates it so by the time you do so the best possible outcome occurs.
There's a way to do either but yet again I despair at the idea that any of our current politicians can carry it off lol
Errr... nice lecture. Nowt to do with what I posted but nice nonetheless.
Why did you make up a quote that I never said?
Also appreciate the patronising introduction to a manifesto. Once again nothing to do with what I posted but patronising nonetheless.
Now if we can put your 101 politics lesson to one side can we get back to the real world? We've had 2 referendums in 40 years just 2 ffs (both on the same issue). There's a reason why, and it's because we entrust our politicians (yes with all the political infrastructure you mentioned) to make those decisions for us. Democacy doesnt end with the ballot box. That's where it begins. It continues in parliament with our representatives introducing, debating AND then voting on issues that represent their constituents who voted them into power. (Ok the last bit is also a patronising lecture but mine was better
)