I agree. But it's really the only "fair" way of deciding. Yes it's also good for me. But unless we ask the public specifically what they want there will always be controversy.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik @Rood and Imran @Annihilate Now! start with the good news by celebrating Manchester United Women's emphatic FA Cup win over Spurs at Wembley and the future of manager Marc Skinner.
Then it's the bad news and the ever worsening form of our Men with losses to Arsenal and Palace.
Finally the main debate - ETH Out now or keep him until the end of the season - if not longer. Are you Team Nik or Team Imran?
But the 17.4m all knew what they voted for unanimously apparently so surely they'd have no problem winning a 3-way referendum?
No, if you organize a new referendum it should be for, yes to the deal or no deal. The people already spoken on the "don't leave" part, that option is on the MPs exclusive hands, it's their responsibility and their duty, if they believe that leaving is too damaging.
You're right.
There’s no absolute rule though as referendums on EU membership have not always been one and done.
We live in a representative democracy, the ultimate responsibility lies with MPs. They should make a judgement when they see the deal and if they think it appropriate make the case for cancelling Brexit.
In that case, you make an other referendum on the question of Brexit or no Brexit. But you can't bamboozle the people who voted yes during the previous referendum. There is a point where our democracies need to act like they are supposed to.
If Brexit is deemed a really bad idea then it's on the MPs to make sure that it doesn't happen otherwise there is no need for a second referendum on that question. Now when it comes to the actual deal, if there is a referendum it should be on the base of take it or leave it.
I agree the MP’s have to take ownership. I’m just pointing out there is no such thing as a one and done referendum even if you bamboozle voters. Democracies are essentially whatever is made of it, there’s no hard and fast rule what a democracy really is.
You are arguing alone then because I didn't say that it was a rule let alone a hard rule, I said that it wasn't right in that particular scenario.
If I was a Brexiteer, some guy who hates what he feels this country is turning into and yearns for an obscure and romanticised notion of what the past was like, and a load of public school educated London-based toffs cancelled Brexit at the 11th hour after my side had won an historic referendum, I'd be seriously pissed off. That would be toxic. Can't see it happening.
It's hard brexit folks. It's happening. I've been war gaming scenarios all afternoon and there's no other way.
It's hard brexit folks. It's happening. I've been war gaming scenarios all afternoon and there's no other way.
Fair enough. I assumed you were speaking generally when you said there is a point where our democracies need to act like they are supposed to. I don't think there is anything special in this scenario that suggests you can never revisit it but completely get the emotional aspect of this call.
How have you been war gaming? Most people will get over a soft Brexit except the hard nuts, I don't think most Leave voters are that extreme as you put it and it wasn't solely about race. Most wrongly blame the EU for the woes.
A significant enough number are extreme, including the press, it would play very badly. And I never said anything about race - intentionally. I said people who don't like what this country is becoming.
Imagine if on Friday morning there is a breakthrough and the Irish Border issue is resolved which no matter how they word it basically means the UK remains in the Customs Union, then what..
You don't see anything special in a scenario where the three options concerning the deal are: No deal, deal or no Brexit?
The options aren't even balanced, they are heavily stacked in favour of no Brexit and I would like to read the question actually asked because I don't see one that would lead to that set of answers. So if the MPs decide to organize a referendum on the deal, it should be about the deal and only the deal; if they believe that the first referendum isn't right then they virtually answered the question themselves and should just do their job instead of dumping it on the voters.
Though there is a third option, if they believe that the voters have been cheated and based their votes on falsehoods then repeating the first referendum would be justified, imo.
I think you are exaggerating the extreme aspect of it. Most are having a hard struggle and wanted to lash out. Sorry Race was the obvious word for the fear of the unknown.
Not sure how you war gamed, but stuff like the Irish border are throwing spanner out of the woodwork so it’s still too early to call how it will pan out.
Well yeah a referendum based on 3 choices is weirdly unheard of. So agree there it would be quite unique. I was arguing more along the third option to say that revisiting Brexit as a whole isn’t completely out of the question, even if democracy and all that had its say.
And I've been war gaming by waking people up and telling them they've been in a coma and we left with no deal / cancelled Brexit / whatever. And then assessing their reactions on a scale of 1-10 in 8 different categories.
sounds goodRemainers did mentioned it but it was all thrashed under Project 'Fear'. Most Brexiteers said it quite frankly that its unthinkable for the UK to leave the single market. Actually the vast majority of them were sure that it will be the EU who will be banging at the UK's door to offer unrestricted access to the market as the Italian winemakers can't live without selling wine to the Brits, German carmakers cannot afford losing the British market and something about the French craving from some cake in some god forgotten place Boris know about.
I agree with Brexiters saying that it wasn't all about immigration. The concept of taking control was far more complex then simply taking control over the borders. It was about the UK cherry picking deals that are heavily staked in favour of the UK. Brexiteers were dubbed in thinking that its possible for the UK to have unrestricted access to the single market, without barely paying any money for the privilege, without the need to abide to any rules and regulations from the EU and which also meant taking control over immigration.
Fox even described that trade deal the easiest thing on earth. No wonder why Brexit won. No one is stupid enough to refuse a far better deal to the one he currently has.
Should the southern states nanny all immigrants on the remaining Europe behalf?
Have to call you mystic Meg - That's what May has just agreed - we are locked into "full allignment" if agreement is not reached!
Well thank god for that! - It will cost May her career - indeed i think she could be gone by Christmas now, but at least she has protected us from the WTO option that the more cranky parts of her party were lusting after.
I think it was always going to take a "suicide mission" approach. No-one gets out of this with their political career intact. Thank god for Ireland and Northern Ireland peace agrement - you may have saved the UK from Economic abyss!
Stunned silence in this thread this morning....
Its seems that the UK had folded to the EU demands
Except she hasn't. Not yet. The final deal has to be approved by parliament, and we're not there yet.
Just to be clear on what just happened, WTO rules insist on a hard border between different regulatory zones.
That means, the only way may can guarantee no hard border is if NI remains in the same regulatory zone as Ireland. 'alignment' will not fulfill WTO requirements. She just agreed to remain in the CU.
The saddest thing is, I am fairly sure that she does not understand this is what she did.
That means, the only way may can guarantee no hard border is if NI remains in the same regulatory zone as Ireland. 'alignment' will not fulfill WTO requirements. She just agreed to remain in the CU.
The saddest thing is, I am fairly sure that she does not understand this is what she did.
Stunned is the correct word. You are not leaving and I have no idea about how we are going to mask that.
This being the UK we could just formalise some sort of ceremony, like Black rod trying to get into the houses of parliament on queens speech day...so from this day forwards we pay to go be in the EU but at the opening of every session we get a character, let's call him "bell -end" who gets to ceremonially storm out wearing a tweed jacket and silk stockings.
I'm sure Nigel Farage will be up for that role!
This has been the only feasible option since day 0. Alarming that it’s taken us so long to realise it but at least we’re there in the end.
And by every EU member country.
But is any of this binding?
Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, right? So if we dont get the deal we want, if we arent satisfied with the outcome of the next round, we can tear up everything that came before? So the significance of this is principally the statement of intent? Which to be fair is still a big deal, as we have a better idea of where we are heading. A pointless Brexit that leaves us largely in the same situation as we were in before but with less influence is better than a damaging Brexit that pushes business out of the UK and increases the cost of living.
Still, this has surely got more twists and turns to go yet. Let's see what happens in the next stage.
Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, right? So if we dont get the deal we want, if we arent satisfied with the outcome of the next round, we can tear up everything that came before? So the significance of this is principally the statement of intent? Which to be fair is still a big deal, as we have a better idea of where we are heading. A pointless Brexit that leaves us largely in the same situation as we were in before but with less influence is better than a damaging Brexit that pushes business out of the UK and increases the cost of living.
Still, this has surely got more twists and turns to go yet. Let's see what happens in the next stage.
This is hilarious. There is no way you're leaving now, and it's fecking great.
Of course you can tear up everything that came before phase 2. But bear in mind these are prerequisite for any deal, so it's not really a statement of intent, it's really the first chapter of a negotiation.
Going to be amusing watching them self-congratulate for jumping the hurdle and then the fall out as the backlash begins.
so true. You just know there’s going to be people in the party unhappy with this that are gong to sabotage it.I just checked the DM website and if this is confirmation that we are heading for a soft Brexit that means we wont be able to make any separate trade deals and will still have to adhere to all Brussels regulation, they dont seem to have worked it out yet.
What's happened?
Trade negotiations will be simple.
The EU will ask, do you want the norway deal or not?
And we either say yes, or crash out on WTO rules, hard border with Ireland, complete destruction of the financial sector and 35% tariffs on the 40% of food we import and all.
That's the point when the mail gets it.
Ominous silence coming from the mega euro sceptics like IDS, Bill Cash, Redwood. I think i hear knives being sharpened. Only Farage has commented so far and he is mega-negative about the deal
There will be no WTO. In the absence of agreements the UK will remain in alignment with the CU. I read that as no deal = no Brexit as Jeremy Hunt alluded to last week.
If that's right then May will have done well and shut out the nutter end of the party. Farage and co won't be happy but in the event of remainers and soft leavers vs hard leavers they are very much in the minority.
If that's right then May will have done well and shut out the nutter end of the party. Farage and co won't be happy but in the event of remainers and soft leavers vs hard leavers they are very much in the minority.