Could UK U-turn on Referendum Result

Could UK U-turn on Referendum Result

TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED
Author
Discussion

marshalla

15,902 posts

200 months

Thursday 30th June 2016
quotequote all
All that jazz said:
You seem to be forgetting that they are only in the positions they're in because we voted them there to ensure what the majority of voters want, happens.
The majority of the voters in their constituencies, not nationally.

Mario149

7,750 posts

177 months

Thursday 30th June 2016
quotequote all
thinkofaname said:
But the holding of such a referendum would never be supported by a major party. The Tories didn't hold this one because they thought it would be a bit of a laugh. It was because there were persistent demands for it, which Cameron caved into. You may argue he shouldn't have, but is was real political pressure that brought it about.
Let's not delude ourselves that the ref was about us. It was about getting the Tories elected and stopping the UKIP. If it hadn't been necessary for that, it wouldn't have happened. Cameron pulled a blinder, he managed to unite the Tories for the election AND get them elected using taxpayers money to pay for it.

And you could well imagine something like a £1K referendum happening, it's hardly a pipe dream. A citizens wage is being trialled in the Netherlands. I wouldn't put it past labour to come up with something like that in a few years if they thought it would secure them an election.


All that jazz

7,632 posts

145 months

Thursday 30th June 2016
quotequote all
jjlynn27 said:
Re-read mashalla's post, and it really doesn't. At all.
There is no need to re-read it. See the link posted. You are wrong.

Mario149

7,750 posts

177 months

Thursday 30th June 2016
quotequote all
tarnished said:
If the PM said he would go with the result, then yes, of course. Obviously, it's not likely the PM would pose that in a referendum though and this absolutely isn't the same.
And yet he didn't and resigned. If there was any mandate it ended with him. It is utter madness to assume a non-binding ref result should de facto mean an action. Extreme example, if russia suddenly kicked off WW3, we wouldn't be fannying around trying to leave the EU

marshalla

15,902 posts

200 months

Thursday 30th June 2016
quotequote all
All that jazz said:
There is no need to re-read it. See the link posted. You are wrong.
As are you. Following on from your link :
http://www.parliament.uk/about/mps-and-lords/membe...

How MPs are elected said:
The UK is divided into 650 areas called constituencies. During an election everyone eligible to cast a vote in a constituency selects one candidate to be their MP. The candidate who gets the most votes becomes the MP for that area until the next election.
MPs represent constituents and should act on their behalf, or in line with promises and policy declared during the election. Having been elected, they are free to act as the representative of their constituents without having to refer decisions back to those constituents. They would be unwise to ignore their constituents' views, or the views of the population as a whole, if they hope to be elected ever again, but are under no obligation to pay heed to anything that is merely advisory.

Edited by marshalla on Thursday 30th June 23:04

All that jazz

7,632 posts

145 months

Thursday 30th June 2016
quotequote all
marshalla said:
All that jazz said:
There is no need to re-read it. See the link posted. You are wrong.
As are you. Following on from your link :
http://www.parliament.uk/about/mps-and-lords/membe...

How MPs are elected said:
The UK is divided into 650 areas called constituencies. During an election everyone eligible to cast a vote in a constituency selects one candidate to be their MP. The candidate who gets the most votes becomes the MP for that area until the next election.
MPs represent constituents and should act on their behalf, or in line with promises and policy declared during the election.
You are arguing over semantics. The only relevant part is :

"The UK public elects Members of Parliament (MPs) to represent their interests and concerns". Nowhere does it state that they are elected to ignore what the voters want and push through their own self-serving agendas in Parliament. rolleyes

marshalla

15,902 posts

200 months

Thursday 30th June 2016
quotequote all
All that jazz said:
You are arguing over semantics.
Yes, I am. The meaning matters.


jjlynn27

7,935 posts

108 months

Thursday 30th June 2016
quotequote all
All that jazz said:
jjlynn27 said:
Re-read mashalla's post, and it really doesn't. At all.
There is no need to re-read it. See the link posted. You are wrong.
I don't think I'am. Read next sentence after the part in bold.

covmutley

3,012 posts

189 months

Thursday 30th June 2016
quotequote all
Think I just heard the tory mp on news night right- it is not certain that the UK will brexit if we cannot get the right deal.

All that jazz

7,632 posts

145 months

Thursday 30th June 2016
quotequote all
covmutley said:
Think I just heard the tory mp on news night right- it is not certain that the UK will brexit if we cannot get the right deal.
And so it begins..

vonuber

17,868 posts

164 months

Thursday 30th June 2016
quotequote all
All that jazz said:
And so it begins..
Yes.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/30/slov...

thinkofaname

280 posts

132 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
Mario149 said:
Let's not delude ourselves that the ref was about us. It was about getting the Tories elected and stopping the UKIP. If it hadn't been necessary for that, it wouldn't have happened.
That's what I mean. I'm not UKIP and I guess neither are you, but they, and the eurosceptics in the Conservative party, are part of "us" as a whole, and they were enough of them to twist Cameron's arm into granting them their referendum.
The point is that the EU referendum demands had a certain amount of political legitimacy about them. Whatever we think of Labour, they are a bit more serious than "let's hand out £1,000 to everybody."

CrutyRammers

13,735 posts

197 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
vonuber said:
thinkofaname said:
But the holding of such a referendum would never be supported by a major party. The Tories didn't hold this one because they thought it would be a bit of a laugh. It was because there were persistent demands for it, which Cameron caved into. You may argue he shouldn't have, but is was real political pressure that brought it about.
Really? I don't recall their being persistent demands, happy to be proved wrong.
People keep coming up with stupid imagined referenda questions, forgetting that someone has to propose them. And that someone is the government who would have to implement them. So no-one's going to offer free money for everyone, what benefit would it be to them?

In this case, there have been persistent demands, for the last 15 years at least. Polls have consistently shown that around 50% of the population was dissatisfied with EU membership, the rise of the UKIP vote in elections of MEPs have been another symptom of this. Further, each of the main parties have promised a referendum on the issue in their manifestos, all have had the opportunity, and all failed to give one, until now. It was high time for it.

Mario149

7,750 posts

177 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
thinkofaname said:
Mario149 said:
Let's not delude ourselves that the ref was about us. It was about getting the Tories elected and stopping the UKIP. If it hadn't been necessary for that, it wouldn't have happened.
That's what I mean. I'm not UKIP and I guess neither are you, but they, and the eurosceptics in the Conservative party, are part of "us" as a whole, and they were enough of them to twist Cameron's arm into granting them their referendum.
The point is that the EU referendum demands had a certain amount of political legitimacy about them. Whatever we think of Labour, they are a bit more serious than "let's hand out £1,000 to everybody."
I happen to think that £1K, or some sort of citizen wage may not be that bad an idea, so I wouldn't begrudge Labour for wanting to try it locally somewhere and then have a ref on it if it looks like it worked. But that's another thread.

I think the key thing here is what was the primary motive of putting the EU ref in the manifesto. I maintain that its primary function was not to give the people a choice, but to fix an internal Tory issue. Added to that, you don't call a referendum unless you're damn sure of the result, so it's never a "real" choice anyway. Polling was at 60%-ish for remain when this whole thing was set in motion. In referendum terms it's a landslide. DC never in his grimmest nightmares thought he'd lose this one when he set the wheels in motion, and anyone with half a brain on the other side would have thought they were just going to fight the good fight on behalf of the underdogs and raise EU issues/awareness.

Mario149

7,750 posts

177 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
vonuber said:
All that jazz said:
And so it begins..
Yes.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/30/slov...
Seems like there might be a breakout of common sense, well everywhere but the UK it seems. All it requires is for a senior Tory MP to strap on on a pair, talk common sense and just say that whatever Britain may want in theory, the reality is its just not feasible in practice.

Jockman

17,912 posts

159 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
Mario149 said:
vonuber said:
All that jazz said:
And so it begins..
Yes.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/30/slov...
Seems like there might be a breakout of common sense, well everywhere but the UK it seems. All it requires is for a senior Tory MP to strap on on a pair, talk common sense and just say that whatever Britain may want in theory, the reality is its just not feasible in practice.
Are you guys actually saying Boris was right when he stated you vote NO because it's the only way they will listen to you?

Dog Star

16,079 posts

167 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
Mario149 said:
vonuber said:
All that jazz said:
And so it begins..
Yes.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/30/slov...
Seems like there might be a breakout of common sense, well everywhere but the UK it seems. All it requires is for a senior Tory MP to strap on on a pair, talk common sense and just say that whatever Britain may want in theory, the reality is its just not feasible in practice.
Absolutely.

There is no way that anyone is going to convince me in any way that this is not utter economic suicide for this country - it's fking bonkers. I'm a raving Thatcherite Tory (I have a framed photo of her on my office wall) but I'll tell you what - I'd vote Labour (hell, I'd vote Corbyn) if it got us out of this mess.

We'll be in penury for decades. Most PHers I get the impression live in the SE - when that financial sector moves out (which it will) what's going to happen to the jobs markets? Your sky-rocketing house prices you all love so much?

I'm very much a euro-sceptic but the damage that will be done to us will perhaps never be recovered.

If this Slovakian chappie can give us some decent reforms that el-ttto Junkner wouldn't then I see no wrong in that.

This whole pathetic demonstration from the Tories has seriously dented my beliefs in them - the only one who seems to have done the right thing is CMD.

All that jazz

7,632 posts

145 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
All that jazz said:
covmutley said:
Think I just heard the tory mp on news night right- it is not certain that the UK will brexit if we cannot get the right deal.
And so it begins..
Just for clarity as there seems to be some confusion, my comment was referring to the obvious plan to swiftly sweep Brexit under the nearest rug and pretend it never happened. There will be no A50 and no exit.

Mario149

7,750 posts

177 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
Jockman said:
Mario149 said:
vonuber said:
All that jazz said:
And so it begins..
Yes.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/30/slov...
Seems like there might be a breakout of common sense, well everywhere but the UK it seems. All it requires is for a senior Tory MP to strap on on a pair, talk common sense and just say that whatever Britain may want in theory, the reality is its just not feasible in practice.
Are you guys actually saying Boris was right when he stated you vote NO because it's the only way they will listen to you?
I don't know, but he could be right. I don't think we should have gone through all this to start with, but since we now have to, I'd like to hold out hope that we may be able to come out of it with something to show for our troubles whereby the EU reforms such that politically we feel we can stay, and importantly, that a decent majority of the population (rather than half or so) are happy to stay. Judging by the "Would you change your Ref vote if you could go back time?" thread poll results and the small swing to Remain we've seen, the situation we find ourselves in now is that possibly less than half the country are happy with the result in the cold light of day, and if things start going more tits up, that's going to drop even further. That's not going to be a nice country to live in.

Dog Star

16,079 posts

167 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
Mario149 said:
...if things start going more tits up, that's going to drop even further. That's not going to be a nice country to live in.
Just wait til the job losses start rolling in - even the most frothing Brexiter is going to have to admit there'll be job losses.

How many do we reckon? Couple of million? Five million? Ten?

TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED