Could UK U-turn on Referendum Result
Discussion
Jimbeaux said:
kiethton said:
Digga said:
DMN said:
DMN said:
Seems some brexiters are having second thoughts now the damage has been done (video near the top):
https://twitter.com/SimonNRicketts
Another regretfull brexiter:https://twitter.com/SimonNRicketts
http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/24/man-who-voted-for-le...
Anyway, the uncertainty, that's a done deal, you can't wind the clock back on that one. Classic case of buyers remorse; plenty here on PH know about that through the car trade.
People who are calling for a second referendum appear not to understand how a democracy works,understandable as they wish to remain in the un Democratic EU,
Talk of a percentage that has to be passed is madness, we would never elect a government, 1.2 million more people voted to leave than remain, if people do not like it they need to change it at the ballot box, vote for a dictatorship and there will be nothing to worry about.
ATG said:
Vyse said:
Does anyone know if the EU can invoke article 50? What legal clauses do they have that can allow this to happen?
They can't and they've just reiterated that only the UK government can do so. what's this b
ks about UK benefits being so generous? they are lower than most european countries
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/britains-bene...
ks about UK benefits being so generous? they are lower than most european countries http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/britains-bene...
The Spruce goose said:
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.Einion Yrth said:
PRTVR said:
vote for a dictatorship and there will be nothing to worry about.
The Germans did that in 1933.It didn't end well.
Terminator X said:
EU is dead in the water though, only a matter of time before other countries leave. We will leave imho.
TX.
Yes...and no.TX.
The EU in its current form is f
ked, quite honestly. I think it will continue in some, much reduced, guise though. This whole debacle has come about for one reason - that being that the EU has evolved into a huge, undemocratic, wasteful, massively expensive monster which no one wanted. It reaches far too far into the lives of its citizens. It has never listened to anything it is told by the people it claims to rule - especially the ones paying the bills. It is a 'club' of states who are, in many cases, so different to each other that it could never reasonably work. The UK, Sweden or Germany are so utterly and completely different in culture and economic performance, especially the latter, from the likes of Romania, for instance, that the notion of them sharing a common legal system and currency is laughable, quite frankly. Look at Greece, it's an economic basket case.
The EU needs to return to be being a trading agreement between like-minded countries with comparable economies if it wants to survive. It cannot continue as a political entity and if it tries to it will implode.
If it doesn't change radically then it's royally screwed. It's second largest contributor and one of the most advanced, cultured and stable countries in history, the place which gave birth to modern democracy, has just shown it two fingers. If the EU cannot see the significance of that, or fails to act on it and blindly refuses any meaningful change then it's arrogance will be its suicide.
AJL308 said:
Yes...and no.
The EU in its current form is fked, quite honestly. I think it will continue in some, much reduced, guise though.
This whole debacle has come about for one reason - that being that the EU has evolved into a huge, undemocratic, wasteful, massively expensive monster which no one wanted. It reaches far too far into the lives of its citizens. It has never listened to anything it is told by the people it claims to rule - especially the ones paying the bills. It is a 'club' of states who are, in many cases, so different to each other that it could never reasonably work. The UK, Sweden or Germany are so utterly and completely different in culture and economic performance, especially the latter, from the likes of Romania, for instance, that the notion of them sharing a common legal system and currency is laughable, quite frankly. Look at Greece, it's an economic basket case.
The EU needs to return to be being a trading agreement between like-minded countries with comparable economies if it wants to survive. It cannot continue as a political entity and if it tries to it will implode.
If it doesn't change radically then it's royally screwed. It's second largest contributor and one of the most advanced, cultured and stable countries in history, the place which gave birth to modern democracy, has just shown it two fingers. If the EU cannot see the significance of that, or fails to act on it and blindly refuses any meaningful change then it's arrogance will be its suicide.
The EU in its current form is f
ked, quite honestly. I think it will continue in some, much reduced, guise though. This whole debacle has come about for one reason - that being that the EU has evolved into a huge, undemocratic, wasteful, massively expensive monster which no one wanted. It reaches far too far into the lives of its citizens. It has never listened to anything it is told by the people it claims to rule - especially the ones paying the bills. It is a 'club' of states who are, in many cases, so different to each other that it could never reasonably work. The UK, Sweden or Germany are so utterly and completely different in culture and economic performance, especially the latter, from the likes of Romania, for instance, that the notion of them sharing a common legal system and currency is laughable, quite frankly. Look at Greece, it's an economic basket case.
The EU needs to return to be being a trading agreement between like-minded countries with comparable economies if it wants to survive. It cannot continue as a political entity and if it tries to it will implode.
If it doesn't change radically then it's royally screwed. It's second largest contributor and one of the most advanced, cultured and stable countries in history, the place which gave birth to modern democracy, has just shown it two fingers. If the EU cannot see the significance of that, or fails to act on it and blindly refuses any meaningful change then it's arrogance will be its suicide.
the 2nd largest contributor has left - Germany / France will need to fill that void... lots of angey european, in fact there will be a lot of them wanting out. The EU as it is is dead in the water. We need a different europe - we could exist and cooperate but not to the extent that was expected with the union. Proper elected board with an accountability. Control of immigrants and a keen eye on expendature.
OllyMo said:
I wouldn't be surprised. I think that was Boris' plan all along. Leave vote, become leader, do some negotiating and keep us in.
Other option is to call a GE and campaign on the mandate of keeping us in the EU, and arguing that a mandate from winning a GE would supersede the referendum result. That could happen from any side, Red or Blue.
I think his game plan was to lose like loveable Bpris and smooth his way to number 10 as the man to stand up to the EU.Other option is to call a GE and campaign on the mandate of keeping us in the EU, and arguing that a mandate from winning a GE would supersede the referendum result. That could happen from any side, Red or Blue.
Of course that game plan has now been destroyed.
Vyse said:
But its just broken down 100m along the line.
No it hasn't. Don said:
Absolutely no chance whatsoever. That simple. No matter what anyone wanted, that train has left the station...
The result was 52 / 48.
Almost half the people wanted to stay, slightly over half the people wanted to leave. Noise afterwards is inevitable. This does not invalidate the result. If you asked the population a second time I still have no idea which way it would go. Too close to call still. You could only guarantee a result by changing the rules. Is that democracy? When the majority don't get their way?
No. We're going to have to live with this. I doubt there's any appetite in Westminster to run this one again. They'll be licking their wounds until the next election...
An interesting take on this question;
If Boris Johnson looked downbeat yesterday, that is because he realises that he has lost.
Perhaps many Brexiters do not realise it yet, but they have actually lost, and it is all down to one man: David Cameron.
With one fell swoop yesterday at 9:15 am, Cameron effectively annulled the referendum result, and simultaneously destroyed the political careers of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and leading Brexiters who cost him so much anguish, not to mention his premiership.
How?
Throughout the campaign, Cameron had repeatedly said that a vote for leave would lead to triggering Article 50 straight away. Whether implicitly or explicitly, the image was clear: he would be giving that notice under Article 50 the morning after a vote to leave. Whether that was scaremongering or not is a bit moot now but, in the midst of the sentimental nautical references of his speech yesterday, he quietly abandoned that position and handed the responsibility over to his successor.
And as the day wore on, the enormity of that step started to sink in: the markets, Sterling, Scotland, the Irish border, the Gibraltar border, the frontier at Calais, the need to continue compliance with all EU regulations for a free market, re-issuing passports, Brits abroad, EU citizens in Britain, the mountain of legistlation to be torn up and rewritten ... the list grew and grew.
The referendum result is not binding. It is advisory. Parliament is not bound to commit itself in that same direction.
The Conservative party election that Cameron triggered will now have one question looming over it: will you, if elected as party leader, trigger the notice under Article 50?
Who will want to have the responsibility of all those ramifications and consequences on his/her head and shoulders?
Boris Johnson knew this yesterday, when he emerged subdued from his home and was even more subdued at the press conference. He has been out-maneouvered and check-mated.
If he runs for leadership of the party, and then fails to follow through on triggering Article 50, then he is finished. If he does not run and effectively abandons the field, then he is finished. If he runs, wins and pulls the UK out of the EU, then it will all be over - Scotland will break away, there will be upheaval in Ireland, a recession ... broken trade agreements. Then he is also finished. Boris Johnson knows all of this. When he acts like the dumb blond it is just that: an act.
The Brexit leaders now have a result that they cannot use. For them, leadership of the Tory party has become a poison chalice.
When Boris Johnson said there was no need to trigger Article 50 straight away, what he really meant to say was "never". When Michael Gove went on and on about "informal negotiations" ... why? why not the formal ones straight away? ... he also meant not triggering the formal departure. They both know what a formal demarche would mean: an irreversible step that neither of them is prepared to take.
All that remains is for someone to have the guts to stand up and say that Brexit is unachievable in reality without an enormous amount of pain and destruction, that cannot be borne. And David Cameron has put the onus of making that statement on the heads of the people who led the Brexit campaign.
If Boris Johnson looked downbeat yesterday, that is because he realises that he has lost.
Perhaps many Brexiters do not realise it yet, but they have actually lost, and it is all down to one man: David Cameron.
With one fell swoop yesterday at 9:15 am, Cameron effectively annulled the referendum result, and simultaneously destroyed the political careers of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and leading Brexiters who cost him so much anguish, not to mention his premiership.
How?
Throughout the campaign, Cameron had repeatedly said that a vote for leave would lead to triggering Article 50 straight away. Whether implicitly or explicitly, the image was clear: he would be giving that notice under Article 50 the morning after a vote to leave. Whether that was scaremongering or not is a bit moot now but, in the midst of the sentimental nautical references of his speech yesterday, he quietly abandoned that position and handed the responsibility over to his successor.
And as the day wore on, the enormity of that step started to sink in: the markets, Sterling, Scotland, the Irish border, the Gibraltar border, the frontier at Calais, the need to continue compliance with all EU regulations for a free market, re-issuing passports, Brits abroad, EU citizens in Britain, the mountain of legistlation to be torn up and rewritten ... the list grew and grew.
The referendum result is not binding. It is advisory. Parliament is not bound to commit itself in that same direction.
The Conservative party election that Cameron triggered will now have one question looming over it: will you, if elected as party leader, trigger the notice under Article 50?
Who will want to have the responsibility of all those ramifications and consequences on his/her head and shoulders?
Boris Johnson knew this yesterday, when he emerged subdued from his home and was even more subdued at the press conference. He has been out-maneouvered and check-mated.
If he runs for leadership of the party, and then fails to follow through on triggering Article 50, then he is finished. If he does not run and effectively abandons the field, then he is finished. If he runs, wins and pulls the UK out of the EU, then it will all be over - Scotland will break away, there will be upheaval in Ireland, a recession ... broken trade agreements. Then he is also finished. Boris Johnson knows all of this. When he acts like the dumb blond it is just that: an act.
The Brexit leaders now have a result that they cannot use. For them, leadership of the Tory party has become a poison chalice.
When Boris Johnson said there was no need to trigger Article 50 straight away, what he really meant to say was "never". When Michael Gove went on and on about "informal negotiations" ... why? why not the formal ones straight away? ... he also meant not triggering the formal departure. They both know what a formal demarche would mean: an irreversible step that neither of them is prepared to take.
All that remains is for someone to have the guts to stand up and say that Brexit is unachievable in reality without an enormous amount of pain and destruction, that cannot be borne. And David Cameron has put the onus of making that statement on the heads of the people who led the Brexit campaign.
p1stonhead said:
An interesting take on this question;
If Boris Johnson looked downbeat yesterday, that is because he realises that he has lost.
Perhaps many Brexiters do not realise it yet, but they have actually lost, and it is all down to one man: David Cameron.
With one fell swoop yesterday at 9:15 am, Cameron effectively annulled the referendum result, and simultaneously destroyed the political careers of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and leading Brexiters who cost him so much anguish, not to mention his premiership.
How?
Throughout the campaign, Cameron had repeatedly said that a vote for leave would lead to triggering Article 50 straight away. Whether implicitly or explicitly, the image was clear: he would be giving that notice under Article 50 the morning after a vote to leave. Whether that was scaremongering or not is a bit moot now but, in the midst of the sentimental nautical references of his speech yesterday, he quietly abandoned that position and handed the responsibility over to his successor.
And as the day wore on, the enormity of that step started to sink in: the markets, Sterling, Scotland, the Irish border, the Gibraltar border, the frontier at Calais, the need to continue compliance with all EU regulations for a free market, re-issuing passports, Brits abroad, EU citizens in Britain, the mountain of legistlation to be torn up and rewritten ... the list grew and grew.
The referendum result is not binding. It is advisory. Parliament is not bound to commit itself in that same direction.
The Conservative party election that Cameron triggered will now have one question looming over it: will you, if elected as party leader, trigger the notice under Article 50?
Who will want to have the responsibility of all those ramifications and consequences on his/her head and shoulders?
Boris Johnson knew this yesterday, when he emerged subdued from his home and was even more subdued at the press conference. He has been out-maneouvered and check-mated.
If he runs for leadership of the party, and then fails to follow through on triggering Article 50, then he is finished. If he does not run and effectively abandons the field, then he is finished. If he runs, wins and pulls the UK out of the EU, then it will all be over - Scotland will break away, there will be upheaval in Ireland, a recession ... broken trade agreements. Then he is also finished. Boris Johnson knows all of this. When he acts like the dumb blond it is just that: an act.
The Brexit leaders now have a result that they cannot use. For them, leadership of the Tory party has become a poison chalice.
When Boris Johnson said there was no need to trigger Article 50 straight away, what he really meant to say was "never". When Michael Gove went on and on about "informal negotiations" ... why? why not the formal ones straight away? ... he also meant not triggering the formal departure. They both know what a formal demarche would mean: an irreversible step that neither of them is prepared to take.
All that remains is for someone to have the guts to stand up and say that Brexit is unachievable in reality without an enormous amount of pain and destruction, that cannot be borne. And David Cameron has put the onus of making that statement on the heads of the people who led the Brexit campaign.
Interesting.If Boris Johnson looked downbeat yesterday, that is because he realises that he has lost.
Perhaps many Brexiters do not realise it yet, but they have actually lost, and it is all down to one man: David Cameron.
With one fell swoop yesterday at 9:15 am, Cameron effectively annulled the referendum result, and simultaneously destroyed the political careers of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and leading Brexiters who cost him so much anguish, not to mention his premiership.
How?
Throughout the campaign, Cameron had repeatedly said that a vote for leave would lead to triggering Article 50 straight away. Whether implicitly or explicitly, the image was clear: he would be giving that notice under Article 50 the morning after a vote to leave. Whether that was scaremongering or not is a bit moot now but, in the midst of the sentimental nautical references of his speech yesterday, he quietly abandoned that position and handed the responsibility over to his successor.
And as the day wore on, the enormity of that step started to sink in: the markets, Sterling, Scotland, the Irish border, the Gibraltar border, the frontier at Calais, the need to continue compliance with all EU regulations for a free market, re-issuing passports, Brits abroad, EU citizens in Britain, the mountain of legistlation to be torn up and rewritten ... the list grew and grew.
The referendum result is not binding. It is advisory. Parliament is not bound to commit itself in that same direction.
The Conservative party election that Cameron triggered will now have one question looming over it: will you, if elected as party leader, trigger the notice under Article 50?
Who will want to have the responsibility of all those ramifications and consequences on his/her head and shoulders?
Boris Johnson knew this yesterday, when he emerged subdued from his home and was even more subdued at the press conference. He has been out-maneouvered and check-mated.
If he runs for leadership of the party, and then fails to follow through on triggering Article 50, then he is finished. If he does not run and effectively abandons the field, then he is finished. If he runs, wins and pulls the UK out of the EU, then it will all be over - Scotland will break away, there will be upheaval in Ireland, a recession ... broken trade agreements. Then he is also finished. Boris Johnson knows all of this. When he acts like the dumb blond it is just that: an act.
The Brexit leaders now have a result that they cannot use. For them, leadership of the Tory party has become a poison chalice.
When Boris Johnson said there was no need to trigger Article 50 straight away, what he really meant to say was "never". When Michael Gove went on and on about "informal negotiations" ... why? why not the formal ones straight away? ... he also meant not triggering the formal departure. They both know what a formal demarche would mean: an irreversible step that neither of them is prepared to take.
All that remains is for someone to have the guts to stand up and say that Brexit is unachievable in reality without an enormous amount of pain and destruction, that cannot be borne. And David Cameron has put the onus of making that statement on the heads of the people who led the Brexit campaign.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff