Could UK U-turn on Referendum Result
Discussion
thinkofaname said:
I think a second vote, be it another referendum or a general election with clear manifesto commitments about what the UK will accept in negotiations, will be necessary, because that question has not been put to the people. There really was no plan.
And I think that by the time of that second vote (could easily be six months or a year away), there may be a significant number of Leavers who have changed their minds, especially if some kind of real concessions have been extracted from a spooked EU. I could see a party winning an election on a platform that includes suspending the process of leaving the EU. A "suspension" that could become permanent.
You could say we're in a good position now. That referendum result in the UK's back pocket is a very credible bargaining chip.
My bet: the UK will not leave the EU.
There's some deluded people on here. Nobody is going to bargain with anything. We're leaving the EU.And I think that by the time of that second vote (could easily be six months or a year away), there may be a significant number of Leavers who have changed their minds, especially if some kind of real concessions have been extracted from a spooked EU. I could see a party winning an election on a platform that includes suspending the process of leaving the EU. A "suspension" that could become permanent.
You could say we're in a good position now. That referendum result in the UK's back pocket is a very credible bargaining chip.
My bet: the UK will not leave the EU.
Edited by thinkofaname on Saturday 25th June 20:07
This was a protest vote that I suspect many of those voting did not think would ever actually go the way it did. You stupid tossers. Did Boris or Farage expect this? No. Are they prepared for it? No.
It is clear to anybody with experience of both that there is exponentially more wealth and economic activity in England than there is in Scotland, and Scotland is a country with huge social expectations but no way of paying the bill. It's interest in being an EU member is based on the belief that they will receive the handouts they need to balance their budget. It is not imho viable as an independent country. Another referendum? I doubt it. They need to know whether the EU even want them as a member. There is a limit to how many small countries the Germans can fund or want to fund. It would be sensible to know what terms the UK are going to receive and how that goes. The SNP are not on the roll they were on. People are Referendummed out. There is a very real sense that we had that issue and we settled it and we don't want it again so soon. But it could happen and on the right day with the right conditions the SNP might win it. The prospect of how things might go then is frankly scary. One thing is for sure - I won't be staying.
Northern Ireland is a footnote here and a historical anachronism. Their desire to remain part of the UK is very simply an economic one. If the economics change they will join the Republic. Either way it is now an issue for democratic decision and I pray will remain that way.
I voted Remain. My first reaction when I saw how things were going in the early hours of Friday was to think, this is a fking disaster. God knows there are many things wrong with the EU. I have listed them on here myself. But the UK with its economy on a knife edge, limited gold reserves and febrile internal political situation is in no condition to embark on this kind of adventure. We attract immigrants because our benefits system is too generous, but it is politically unacceptable to challenge this. Most of the immigrants who are a problem are those who do not accept the basic precepts of British society, do not think they have to, and have no intention of working. Most hotels in Glasgow are however staffed by Poles, Hungarians, Czechs and Slovenians, because their Scottish equivalents are a bunch of workshy slobs who resent providing a service and don't want the jobs. A significant proportion of the Scottish economy is entirely dependent on Eastern European labour, and without it won't work. Most of the bureaucracy we are complaining about does not come from Brussels but from the British Civil Service, and no one has ever got close to challenging them. We will only succeed if we are competitive and a large number of us are not even trying to be competitive. Are we even capable of dealing with these problems? We are deeply interconnected with Europe and all this is now at risk. To remain in a reformed EU was always the best solution.
Taking an optimistic view, this result may cause the EU to take stock and try to deal with its problems. It may realise that it cannot continue to expand recklessly, it has to become more democratically accountable, it cannot admit migrants in an uncontrolled way, it must control its finances, it cannot allow the Med countries to become employment black spots. It may end the idiotic political gravy train in Brussels Strasbourg and Luxembourg. It needs leadership and that must come from Germany, who cannot continue in the selfish manner they currently do. You can argue that in a sense we have never been full members of the EU. The UK joined the EEC. The EU was foisted on us without our consent. The UK has never subscribed to a full political union, and that issue was bound to come to a head at some point. It was not in the Euro and it was not in Schengen. The new relationship which now has to be forged could actually be a more honest and better statement of where we really were, may well involve us contributing to the EU, could well involve an acceptable level of movement of labour, and an acceptance of most if not all EU Directives and regulation. But it has to happen fast before the whole economy goes down the pan.
All the Dads Army buffers who think that we are going back to the good old days are going to be severely disappointed. They will be lucky if there is not a sterling crisis and a recession. Why did Cam go so quickly, when he knew the importance of stability? Because he knows how close we are to disaster. We are entering a new era of instability where England is a far weaker entity than it has been in the last 300 years, and anything might happen. At this moment we need political leadership and we don't have it. One other thing the Europeans are right about is timing. This needs to be sorted out fast. We don't have until four years come October. Someone needs to get a plan together right now.
Well done Alf Bloody Garnett you half witted prick. I hope that you are not planning to draw your pension any time soon.
It is clear to anybody with experience of both that there is exponentially more wealth and economic activity in England than there is in Scotland, and Scotland is a country with huge social expectations but no way of paying the bill. It's interest in being an EU member is based on the belief that they will receive the handouts they need to balance their budget. It is not imho viable as an independent country. Another referendum? I doubt it. They need to know whether the EU even want them as a member. There is a limit to how many small countries the Germans can fund or want to fund. It would be sensible to know what terms the UK are going to receive and how that goes. The SNP are not on the roll they were on. People are Referendummed out. There is a very real sense that we had that issue and we settled it and we don't want it again so soon. But it could happen and on the right day with the right conditions the SNP might win it. The prospect of how things might go then is frankly scary. One thing is for sure - I won't be staying.
Northern Ireland is a footnote here and a historical anachronism. Their desire to remain part of the UK is very simply an economic one. If the economics change they will join the Republic. Either way it is now an issue for democratic decision and I pray will remain that way.
I voted Remain. My first reaction when I saw how things were going in the early hours of Friday was to think, this is a fking disaster. God knows there are many things wrong with the EU. I have listed them on here myself. But the UK with its economy on a knife edge, limited gold reserves and febrile internal political situation is in no condition to embark on this kind of adventure. We attract immigrants because our benefits system is too generous, but it is politically unacceptable to challenge this. Most of the immigrants who are a problem are those who do not accept the basic precepts of British society, do not think they have to, and have no intention of working. Most hotels in Glasgow are however staffed by Poles, Hungarians, Czechs and Slovenians, because their Scottish equivalents are a bunch of workshy slobs who resent providing a service and don't want the jobs. A significant proportion of the Scottish economy is entirely dependent on Eastern European labour, and without it won't work. Most of the bureaucracy we are complaining about does not come from Brussels but from the British Civil Service, and no one has ever got close to challenging them. We will only succeed if we are competitive and a large number of us are not even trying to be competitive. Are we even capable of dealing with these problems? We are deeply interconnected with Europe and all this is now at risk. To remain in a reformed EU was always the best solution.
Taking an optimistic view, this result may cause the EU to take stock and try to deal with its problems. It may realise that it cannot continue to expand recklessly, it has to become more democratically accountable, it cannot admit migrants in an uncontrolled way, it must control its finances, it cannot allow the Med countries to become employment black spots. It may end the idiotic political gravy train in Brussels Strasbourg and Luxembourg. It needs leadership and that must come from Germany, who cannot continue in the selfish manner they currently do. You can argue that in a sense we have never been full members of the EU. The UK joined the EEC. The EU was foisted on us without our consent. The UK has never subscribed to a full political union, and that issue was bound to come to a head at some point. It was not in the Euro and it was not in Schengen. The new relationship which now has to be forged could actually be a more honest and better statement of where we really were, may well involve us contributing to the EU, could well involve an acceptable level of movement of labour, and an acceptance of most if not all EU Directives and regulation. But it has to happen fast before the whole economy goes down the pan.
All the Dads Army buffers who think that we are going back to the good old days are going to be severely disappointed. They will be lucky if there is not a sterling crisis and a recession. Why did Cam go so quickly, when he knew the importance of stability? Because he knows how close we are to disaster. We are entering a new era of instability where England is a far weaker entity than it has been in the last 300 years, and anything might happen. At this moment we need political leadership and we don't have it. One other thing the Europeans are right about is timing. This needs to be sorted out fast. We don't have until four years come October. Someone needs to get a plan together right now.
Well done Alf Bloody Garnett you half witted prick. I hope that you are not planning to draw your pension any time soon.
ks anyway.Robertj21a said:
There's some deluded people on here. Nobody is going to bargain with anything. We're leaving the EU.
The EU didn't believe we were serious in leaving, it took them (and Cameron) by something of a shock. Would the EU, let the UK (a net contributor) walk away without at least finding out if there is any way forward.Leaving isn't in motion until the article 50 is triggered.
I am a remainer and gutted with the result. I don't think we should have had a referendum the first place. But I can't see any justification for a second referendum. The question asked was very clear, do you want to remain or leave. The answer had been given and now parliament had an obligation to put that into effect.
beanoir said:
Ok, so I have a gut feel that things won't be quite as straight cut as perhaps we may all think. I may be completely wrong, and likely so but thought it could be an interesting debate all the same.
The UK has the right under Article 50 (of the Lisbon Treaty) to initiate it's departure from the EU. Once that has been invoked, my understanding is it's kind of a point of no return. A period of negotiation will be at least 2 years.
David Cameron has stated he won't invoke the UK's rights under Article 50, so it won't happen until at least October. Cameron has resigned and so replacements are jostling for position for PM job, likely candidate being Boris.
Boris in his speech earlier, made a few hints at "no rush" to invoke Article 50 either, and made lots of hints at positive relationship with Europe and EU etc etc.
A referendum is not a legally binding directive, it's just a public opinion, I say 'just' but what I mean is that the Govt. has no legal obligation to follow that opinion. So they could choose to ignore the referendum, although this would normally be considered political suicide and wouldn't happen...under normal circumstances.
Now, if you look at the demographics of the voting population in this referendum, I suspect that it could be construed not to be particularly suicidal for Boris to decide not to follow the opinion of the vote to leave, and in fact may maintain what he considers to be the majority of Conservative supporters and also win more from the remain camp - winning him and the Tories a healthy majority of the voting population.
I wouldn't bet my house on this, but I reckon we could see some political worming out of the idea of leaving the EU and doing a deal with Brussels instead - I don't think Boris actually intended leaving the EU at all.
Madness?
I don't think it's madness at all, some of his political freinds have been on record saying he has never been an "outer" and he was clearly trying to move his position in the press conference he gave if only in his tone, CMD has given everyone time to breath by walking out that morning. The UK has the right under Article 50 (of the Lisbon Treaty) to initiate it's departure from the EU. Once that has been invoked, my understanding is it's kind of a point of no return. A period of negotiation will be at least 2 years.
David Cameron has stated he won't invoke the UK's rights under Article 50, so it won't happen until at least October. Cameron has resigned and so replacements are jostling for position for PM job, likely candidate being Boris.
Boris in his speech earlier, made a few hints at "no rush" to invoke Article 50 either, and made lots of hints at positive relationship with Europe and EU etc etc.
A referendum is not a legally binding directive, it's just a public opinion, I say 'just' but what I mean is that the Govt. has no legal obligation to follow that opinion. So they could choose to ignore the referendum, although this would normally be considered political suicide and wouldn't happen...under normal circumstances.
Now, if you look at the demographics of the voting population in this referendum, I suspect that it could be construed not to be particularly suicidal for Boris to decide not to follow the opinion of the vote to leave, and in fact may maintain what he considers to be the majority of Conservative supporters and also win more from the remain camp - winning him and the Tories a healthy majority of the voting population.
I wouldn't bet my house on this, but I reckon we could see some political worming out of the idea of leaving the EU and doing a deal with Brussels instead - I don't think Boris actually intended leaving the EU at all.
Madness?
So lets see what happens, I don't think it's over yet but we shall see.
Amateurish said:
I am a remainer and gutted with the result. I don't think we should have had a referendum the first place. But I can't see any justification for a second referendum. The question asked was very clear, do you want to remain or leave. The answer had been given and now parliament had an obligation to put that into effect.
Thank you for understanding what democracy means. I'm less convinced that the politicians do.Einion Yrth said:
Thank you for understanding what democracy means. I'm less convinced that the politicians do.
I understand the cynicism but if and when Johnson is PM I can't see how he could avoid leaving the EU. His mandate to effect our departure will be so absolute especially since he will not have fought and won a general election as party leader. He will be PM because he has promised to leave.Amateurish said:
I am a remainer and gutted with the result. I don't think we should have had a referendum the first place. But I can't see any justification for a second referendum. The question asked was very clear, do you want to remain or leave. The answer had been given and now parliament had an obligation to put that into effect.
if you voted for the conservatives in the general election then this was always part of the manifesto.I think Cameron not invoking Article 50, as he said he would, stinks.
Portillo said aaaaggges before the referendum that you'd be daft to vote remain purely on the basis that there was zero chance a leave result would directly move to leaving the EU. I sincerely hope he was wrong regardless of whether he meant it.
Out should mean out. I can only hope Juncker's ego has a way of kicking us out if we don't get on and initiate it ourselves.
Portillo said aaaaggges before the referendum that you'd be daft to vote remain purely on the basis that there was zero chance a leave result would directly move to leaving the EU. I sincerely hope he was wrong regardless of whether he meant it.
Out should mean out. I can only hope Juncker's ego has a way of kicking us out if we don't get on and initiate it ourselves.
cardigankid said:
This was a protest vote that I suspect many of those voting did not think would ever actually go the way it did. You stupid tossers. Did Boris or Farage expect this? No. Are they prepared for it? No.
It is clear to anybody with experience of both that there is exponentially more wealth and economic activity in England than there is in Scotland, and Scotland is a country with huge social expectations but no way of paying the bill. It's interest in being an EU member is based on the belief that they will receive the handouts they need to balance their budget. It is not imho viable as an independent country. Another referendum? I doubt it. They need to know whether the EU even want them as a member. There is a limit to how many small countries the Germans can fund or want to fund. It would be sensible to know what terms the UK are going to receive and how that goes. The SNP are not on the roll they were on. People are Referendummed out. There is a very real sense that we had that issue and we settled it and we don't want it again so soon. But it could happen and on the right day with the right conditions the SNP might win it. The prospect of how things might go then is frankly scary. One thing is for sure - I won't be staying.
Northern Ireland is a footnote here and a historical anachronism. Their desire to remain part of the UK is very simply an economic one. If the economics change they will join the Republic. Either way it is now an issue for democratic decision and I pray will remain that way.
I voted Remain. My first reaction when I saw how things were going in the early hours of Friday was to think, this is a fking disaster. God knows there are many things wrong with the EU. I have listed them on here myself. But the UK with its economy on a knife edge, limited gold reserves and febrile internal political situation is in no condition to embark on this kind of adventure. We attract immigrants because our benefits system is too generous, but it is politically unacceptable to challenge this. Most of the immigrants who are a problem are those who do not accept the basic precepts of British society, do not think they have to, and have no intention of working. Most hotels in Glasgow are however staffed by Poles, Hungarians, Czechs and Slovenians, because their Scottish equivalents are a bunch of workshy slobs who resent providing a service and don't want the jobs. A significant proportion of the Scottish economy is entirely dependent on Eastern European labour, and without it won't work. Most of the bureaucracy we are complaining about does not come from Brussels but from the British Civil Service, and no one has ever got close to challenging them. We will only succeed if we are competitive and a large number of us are not even trying to be competitive. Are we even capable of dealing with these problems? We are deeply interconnected with Europe and all this is now at risk. To remain in a reformed EU was always the best solution.
Taking an optimistic view, this result may cause the EU to take stock and try to deal with its problems. It may realise that it cannot continue to expand recklessly, it has to become more democratically accountable, it cannot admit migrants in an uncontrolled way, it must control its finances, it cannot allow the Med countries to become employment black spots. It may end the idiotic political gravy train in Brussels Strasbourg and Luxembourg. It needs leadership and that must come from Germany, who cannot continue in the selfish manner they currently do. You can argue that in a sense we have never been full members of the EU. The UK joined the EEC. The EU was foisted on us without our consent. The UK has never subscribed to a full political union, and that issue was bound to come to a head at some point. It was not in the Euro and it was not in Schengen. The new relationship which now has to be forged could actually be a more honest and better statement of where we really were, may well involve us contributing to the EU, could well involve an acceptable level of movement of labour, and an acceptance of most if not all EU Directives and regulation. But it has to happen fast before the whole economy goes down the pan.
All the Dads Army buffers who think that we are going back to the good old days are going to be severely disappointed. They will be lucky if there is not a sterling crisis and a recession. Why did Cam go so quickly, when he knew the importance of stability? Because he knows how close we are to disaster. We are entering a new era of instability where England is a far weaker entity than it has been in the last 300 years, and anything might happen. At this moment we need political leadership and we don't have it. One other thing the Europeans are right about is timing. This needs to be sorted out fast. We don't have until four years come October. Someone needs to get a plan together right now.
Well done Alf Bloody Garnett you half witted prick. I hope that you are not planning to draw your pension any time soon.
I like what you say. I agree with much of what you say. However, a valid referendum was held so that everyone entitled to vote would have an equal say on how we should progress. Just because many don't like the result is no reason to go back on a referendum that met all the legal criteria. It is clear to anybody with experience of both that there is exponentially more wealth and economic activity in England than there is in Scotland, and Scotland is a country with huge social expectations but no way of paying the bill. It's interest in being an EU member is based on the belief that they will receive the handouts they need to balance their budget. It is not imho viable as an independent country. Another referendum? I doubt it. They need to know whether the EU even want them as a member. There is a limit to how many small countries the Germans can fund or want to fund. It would be sensible to know what terms the UK are going to receive and how that goes. The SNP are not on the roll they were on. People are Referendummed out. There is a very real sense that we had that issue and we settled it and we don't want it again so soon. But it could happen and on the right day with the right conditions the SNP might win it. The prospect of how things might go then is frankly scary. One thing is for sure - I won't be staying.
Northern Ireland is a footnote here and a historical anachronism. Their desire to remain part of the UK is very simply an economic one. If the economics change they will join the Republic. Either way it is now an issue for democratic decision and I pray will remain that way.
I voted Remain. My first reaction when I saw how things were going in the early hours of Friday was to think, this is a fking disaster. God knows there are many things wrong with the EU. I have listed them on here myself. But the UK with its economy on a knife edge, limited gold reserves and febrile internal political situation is in no condition to embark on this kind of adventure. We attract immigrants because our benefits system is too generous, but it is politically unacceptable to challenge this. Most of the immigrants who are a problem are those who do not accept the basic precepts of British society, do not think they have to, and have no intention of working. Most hotels in Glasgow are however staffed by Poles, Hungarians, Czechs and Slovenians, because their Scottish equivalents are a bunch of workshy slobs who resent providing a service and don't want the jobs. A significant proportion of the Scottish economy is entirely dependent on Eastern European labour, and without it won't work. Most of the bureaucracy we are complaining about does not come from Brussels but from the British Civil Service, and no one has ever got close to challenging them. We will only succeed if we are competitive and a large number of us are not even trying to be competitive. Are we even capable of dealing with these problems? We are deeply interconnected with Europe and all this is now at risk. To remain in a reformed EU was always the best solution.
Taking an optimistic view, this result may cause the EU to take stock and try to deal with its problems. It may realise that it cannot continue to expand recklessly, it has to become more democratically accountable, it cannot admit migrants in an uncontrolled way, it must control its finances, it cannot allow the Med countries to become employment black spots. It may end the idiotic political gravy train in Brussels Strasbourg and Luxembourg. It needs leadership and that must come from Germany, who cannot continue in the selfish manner they currently do. You can argue that in a sense we have never been full members of the EU. The UK joined the EEC. The EU was foisted on us without our consent. The UK has never subscribed to a full political union, and that issue was bound to come to a head at some point. It was not in the Euro and it was not in Schengen. The new relationship which now has to be forged could actually be a more honest and better statement of where we really were, may well involve us contributing to the EU, could well involve an acceptable level of movement of labour, and an acceptance of most if not all EU Directives and regulation. But it has to happen fast before the whole economy goes down the pan.
All the Dads Army buffers who think that we are going back to the good old days are going to be severely disappointed. They will be lucky if there is not a sterling crisis and a recession. Why did Cam go so quickly, when he knew the importance of stability? Because he knows how close we are to disaster. We are entering a new era of instability where England is a far weaker entity than it has been in the last 300 years, and anything might happen. At this moment we need political leadership and we don't have it. One other thing the Europeans are right about is timing. This needs to be sorted out fast. We don't have until four years come October. Someone needs to get a plan together right now.
Well done Alf Bloody Garnett you half witted prick. I hope that you are not planning to draw your pension any time soon.
One thought on the viability of an independent Scotland; it would be a fairly easy place for a lot of financial institutions to relocate a chunk of their London based business to give them the necessary foothold in the EU for passporting. Even a relatively small percentage of London's financial business would have a huge impact on Scotland's economy.
Robertj21a said:
thinkofaname said:
I think a second vote, be it another referendum or a general election with clear manifesto commitments about what the UK will accept in negotiations, will be necessary, because that question has not been put to the people. There really was no plan.
And I think that by the time of that second vote (could easily be six months or a year away), there may be a significant number of Leavers who have changed their minds, especially if some kind of real concessions have been extracted from a spooked EU. I could see a party winning an election on a platform that includes suspending the process of leaving the EU. A "suspension" that could become permanent.
You could say we're in a good position now. That referendum result in the UK's back pocket is a very credible bargaining chip.
My bet: the UK will not leave the EU.
There's some deluded people on here. Nobody is going to bargain with anything. We're leaving the EU.And I think that by the time of that second vote (could easily be six months or a year away), there may be a significant number of Leavers who have changed their minds, especially if some kind of real concessions have been extracted from a spooked EU. I could see a party winning an election on a platform that includes suspending the process of leaving the EU. A "suspension" that could become permanent.
You could say we're in a good position now. That referendum result in the UK's back pocket is a very credible bargaining chip.
My bet: the UK will not leave the EU.
Edited by thinkofaname on Saturday 25th June 20:07
The only way I would be happy to remain in the EU would be if it were to confine itself to presiding over trading matters, cut back on almost all of the legislative stuff, and forget about further integration and any ideas about a United States of Europe.
Do any of the people of EU member countries, as opposed to the politicians, actually want closer integration and the inevitable loss of their country's individuality? I would be surprised if they do.
Robertj21a said:
cardigankid said:
This was a protest vote that I suspect many of those voting did not think would ever actually go the way it did. You stupid tossers. Did Boris or Farage expect this? No. Are they prepared for it? No.
It is clear to anybody with experience of both that there is exponentially more wealth and economic activity in England than there is in Scotland, and Scotland is a country with huge social expectations but no way of paying the bill. It's interest in being an EU member is based on the belief that they will receive the handouts they need to balance their budget. It is not imho viable as an independent country. Another referendum? I doubt it. They need to know whether the EU even want them as a member. There is a limit to how many small countries the Germans can fund or want to fund. It would be sensible to know what terms the UK are going to receive and how that goes. The SNP are not on the roll they were on. People are Referendummed out. There is a very real sense that we had that issue and we settled it and we don't want it again so soon. But it could happen and on the right day with the right conditions the SNP might win it. The prospect of how things might go then is frankly scary. One thing is for sure - I won't be staying.
Northern Ireland is a footnote here and a historical anachronism. Their desire to remain part of the UK is very simply an economic one. If the economics change they will join the Republic. Either way it is now an issue for democratic decision and I pray will remain that way.
I voted Remain. My first reaction when I saw how things were going in the early hours of Friday was to think, this is a fking disaster. God knows there are many things wrong with the EU. I have listed them on here myself. But the UK with its economy on a knife edge, limited gold reserves and febrile internal political situation is in no condition to embark on this kind of adventure. We attract immigrants because our benefits system is too generous, but it is politically unacceptable to challenge this. Most of the immigrants who are a problem are those who do not accept the basic precepts of British society, do not think they have to, and have no intention of working. Most hotels in Glasgow are however staffed by Poles, Hungarians, Czechs and Slovenians, because their Scottish equivalents are a bunch of workshy slobs who resent providing a service and don't want the jobs. A significant proportion of the Scottish economy is entirely dependent on Eastern European labour, and without it won't work. Most of the bureaucracy we are complaining about does not come from Brussels but from the British Civil Service, and no one has ever got close to challenging them. We will only succeed if we are competitive and a large number of us are not even trying to be competitive. Are we even capable of dealing with these problems? We are deeply interconnected with Europe and all this is now at risk. To remain in a reformed EU was always the best solution.
Taking an optimistic view, this result may cause the EU to take stock and try to deal with its problems. It may realise that it cannot continue to expand recklessly, it has to become more democratically accountable, it cannot admit migrants in an uncontrolled way, it must control its finances, it cannot allow the Med countries to become employment black spots. It may end the idiotic political gravy train in Brussels Strasbourg and Luxembourg. It needs leadership and that must come from Germany, who cannot continue in the selfish manner they currently do. You can argue that in a sense we have never been full members of the EU. The UK joined the EEC. The EU was foisted on us without our consent. The UK has never subscribed to a full political union, and that issue was bound to come to a head at some point. It was not in the Euro and it was not in Schengen. The new relationship which now has to be forged could actually be a more honest and better statement of where we really were, may well involve us contributing to the EU, could well involve an acceptable level of movement of labour, and an acceptance of most if not all EU Directives and regulation. But it has to happen fast before the whole economy goes down the pan.
All the Dads Army buffers who think that we are going back to the good old days are going to be severely disappointed. They will be lucky if there is not a sterling crisis and a recession. Why did Cam go so quickly, when he knew the importance of stability? Because he knows how close we are to disaster. We are entering a new era of instability where England is a far weaker entity than it has been in the last 300 years, and anything might happen. At this moment we need political leadership and we don't have it. One other thing the Europeans are right about is timing. This needs to be sorted out fast. We don't have until four years come October. Someone needs to get a plan together right now.
Well done Alf Bloody Garnett you half witted prick. I hope that you are not planning to draw your pension any time soon.
I like what you say. I agree with much of what you say. However, a valid referendum was held so that everyone entitled to vote would have an equal say on how we should progress. Just because many don't like the result is no reason to go back on a referendum that met all the legal criteria. It is clear to anybody with experience of both that there is exponentially more wealth and economic activity in England than there is in Scotland, and Scotland is a country with huge social expectations but no way of paying the bill. It's interest in being an EU member is based on the belief that they will receive the handouts they need to balance their budget. It is not imho viable as an independent country. Another referendum? I doubt it. They need to know whether the EU even want them as a member. There is a limit to how many small countries the Germans can fund or want to fund. It would be sensible to know what terms the UK are going to receive and how that goes. The SNP are not on the roll they were on. People are Referendummed out. There is a very real sense that we had that issue and we settled it and we don't want it again so soon. But it could happen and on the right day with the right conditions the SNP might win it. The prospect of how things might go then is frankly scary. One thing is for sure - I won't be staying.
Northern Ireland is a footnote here and a historical anachronism. Their desire to remain part of the UK is very simply an economic one. If the economics change they will join the Republic. Either way it is now an issue for democratic decision and I pray will remain that way.
I voted Remain. My first reaction when I saw how things were going in the early hours of Friday was to think, this is a fking disaster. God knows there are many things wrong with the EU. I have listed them on here myself. But the UK with its economy on a knife edge, limited gold reserves and febrile internal political situation is in no condition to embark on this kind of adventure. We attract immigrants because our benefits system is too generous, but it is politically unacceptable to challenge this. Most of the immigrants who are a problem are those who do not accept the basic precepts of British society, do not think they have to, and have no intention of working. Most hotels in Glasgow are however staffed by Poles, Hungarians, Czechs and Slovenians, because their Scottish equivalents are a bunch of workshy slobs who resent providing a service and don't want the jobs. A significant proportion of the Scottish economy is entirely dependent on Eastern European labour, and without it won't work. Most of the bureaucracy we are complaining about does not come from Brussels but from the British Civil Service, and no one has ever got close to challenging them. We will only succeed if we are competitive and a large number of us are not even trying to be competitive. Are we even capable of dealing with these problems? We are deeply interconnected with Europe and all this is now at risk. To remain in a reformed EU was always the best solution.
Taking an optimistic view, this result may cause the EU to take stock and try to deal with its problems. It may realise that it cannot continue to expand recklessly, it has to become more democratically accountable, it cannot admit migrants in an uncontrolled way, it must control its finances, it cannot allow the Med countries to become employment black spots. It may end the idiotic political gravy train in Brussels Strasbourg and Luxembourg. It needs leadership and that must come from Germany, who cannot continue in the selfish manner they currently do. You can argue that in a sense we have never been full members of the EU. The UK joined the EEC. The EU was foisted on us without our consent. The UK has never subscribed to a full political union, and that issue was bound to come to a head at some point. It was not in the Euro and it was not in Schengen. The new relationship which now has to be forged could actually be a more honest and better statement of where we really were, may well involve us contributing to the EU, could well involve an acceptable level of movement of labour, and an acceptance of most if not all EU Directives and regulation. But it has to happen fast before the whole economy goes down the pan.
All the Dads Army buffers who think that we are going back to the good old days are going to be severely disappointed. They will be lucky if there is not a sterling crisis and a recession. Why did Cam go so quickly, when he knew the importance of stability? Because he knows how close we are to disaster. We are entering a new era of instability where England is a far weaker entity than it has been in the last 300 years, and anything might happen. At this moment we need political leadership and we don't have it. One other thing the Europeans are right about is timing. This needs to be sorted out fast. We don't have until four years come October. Someone needs to get a plan together right now.
Well done Alf Bloody Garnett you half witted prick. I hope that you are not planning to draw your pension any time soon.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff