Could UK U-turn on Referendum Result

Could UK U-turn on Referendum Result

TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED
Author
Discussion

andymadmak

14,489 posts

269 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
Michael Howard saying some interesting stuff about Brexit (hard/soft etc) on R4 this morning:
https://twitter.com/BBCr4today?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoo...


speedyman

1,523 posts

233 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
Seems like there may be a new game in town fron Sarkozy. http://www.itv.com/news/2016-09-27/nicolas-sarkozy...

CaptainSlow

13,179 posts

211 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
speedyman said:
Seems like there may be a new game in town fron Sarkozy. http://www.itv.com/news/2016-09-27/nicolas-sarkozy...
I suspect that's for his own internal benefit rather that anything else.

anonymous-user

53 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
don4l said:
We voted to Leave.

You can tell yourself that we didn't want a "hard Brexit", but you are only fooling yourself.
With all due respect, you're barely capable of speaking for yourself without close supervision; don't pretend to speak for umpteen million other people.

CaptainSlow

13,179 posts

211 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
Greg66 said:
don4l said:
We voted to Leave.

You can tell yourself that we didn't want a "hard Brexit", but you are only fooling yourself.
With all due respect, you're barely capable of speaking for yourself without close supervision; don't pretend to speak for umpteen million other people.
FMOL is a price too far for most Leavers.

Whereas, most Remainers I have spoken to were unhappy with much of the EU and their argument (and also the official Remain argument) was that we can reform the EU from the inside, I wonder how many people that voted Remain have now seen this would have never been possible?

don4l

10,058 posts

175 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
Greg66 said:
don4l said:
We voted to Leave.

You can tell yourself that we didn't want a "hard Brexit", but you are only fooling yourself.
With all due respect, you're barely capable of speaking for yourself without close supervision; don't pretend to speak for umpteen million other people.
With even more respect, I would suggest that you ask yourself "Which one of us is part of the majority?".

I speak for 17M people.

You speak for 16M people.


anonymous-user

53 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
don4l said:
I speak for 17M people.
Do you?

Perhaps you could show the group the little piece of paper by which they appointed you their spokesman.

Words, numbers, finance, physics (in general), tides (in particular), Brexit, t&cs, obligations, reality ... it's getting to be quite a long list now, Donny.

don'tbesilly

13,900 posts

162 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
CaptainSlow said:
Greg66 said:
don4l said:
We voted to Leave.

You can tell yourself that we didn't want a "hard Brexit", but you are only fooling yourself.
With all due respect, you're barely capable of speaking for yourself without close supervision; don't pretend to speak for umpteen million other people.
FMOL is a price too far for most Leavers.

Whereas, most Remainers I have spoken to were unhappy with much of the EU and their argument (and also the official Remain argument) was that we can reform the EU from the inside, I wonder how many people that voted Remain have now seen this would have never been possible?
I wonder how many Remainers are seeing the folly of the oft repeated sentence "The UK has a veto on that", given that the EU are telling the UK to 'do one' on Fallon's talk of a veto on the EU army.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37482942

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/714812/Defe...


No doubt the group hug of 'ever closer union' that the UK has a veto on would have gone the same way!


Stickyfinger

8,429 posts

104 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
don'tbesilly said:
I wonder how many Remainers are seeing the folly of the oft repeated sentence "The UK has a veto on that", given that the EU are telling the UK to 'do one' on Fallon's talk of a veto on the EU army.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37482942

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/714812/Defe...


No doubt the group hug of 'ever closer union' that the UK has a veto on would have gone the same way!
The EU Sovietocrats will not care, the Belgium Army can do the same Job as the British Army............................hahahahaha

craigjm

17,912 posts

199 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
andymadmak said:
Michael Howard saying some interesting stuff about Brexit (hard/soft etc) on R4 this morning:
https://twitter.com/BBCr4today?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoo...
The bit that the papers are picking up on is when he talks about a deal should give us access to the single market without us being part of it. A number of people have said similar things and I struggle with it a bit. What other club, providing benefits for members, does anyone know where someone who isnt paying in can take all of the benefits and not give anything in return while everyone else is paying in and participating fully. One of my local pubs offers 50p off every pint of beer for members but membership costs a specific amount each year. If I went in there and said that I wanted the discount but I didnt want to become a member they would tell me to fk off. If I want access to the 50p off I have to do my sums as to whether I would gain over the cost of the membership fee based on a projected yearly use. If I do then I join. If I dont then I dont join. There is no half way house. Simplistic example, I know but explains my point.

paulrockliffe

15,639 posts

226 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
Your analogy is too simplistic because EU trade is between 28 member states, all trading at different levels with each other, both buying and selling. In your analogy the EU owns everything and sells it to the member states.

loafer123

15,406 posts

214 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
craigjm said:
The bit that the papers are picking up on is when he talks about a deal should give us access to the single market without us being part of it. A number of people have said similar things and I struggle with it a bit. What other club, providing benefits for members, does anyone know where someone who isnt paying in can take all of the benefits and not give anything in return while everyone else is paying in and participating fully. One of my local pubs offers 50p off every pint of beer for members but membership costs a specific amount each year. If I went in there and said that I wanted the discount but I didnt want to become a member they would tell me to fk off. If I want access to the 50p off I have to do my sums as to whether I would gain over the cost of the membership fee based on a projected yearly use. If I do then I join. If I dont then I dont join. There is no half way house. Simplistic example, I know but explains my point.
Our "membership fee" in your scenario is the net balance of duty which would be paid to us given our trade deficit if all parties paid normal WTO rates.

anonymous-user

53 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
andymadmak said:
Michael Howard saying some interesting stuff about Brexit (hard/soft etc) on R4 this morning:
https://twitter.com/BBCr4today?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoo...
The same Michael Howard who said that the EU would be eating out of our hands within a month of the Brexit advisory vote ? He's a clown of the highest order

craigjm

17,912 posts

199 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
paulrockliffe said:
Your analogy is too simplistic because EU trade is between 28 member states, all trading at different levels with each other, both buying and selling. In your analogy the EU owns everything and sells it to the member states.
I know that but how do you persuade 28 countries to pay into a club to do deals with 1 country that is not paying in?

I think the difficulty in answering is we dont know how much trade we do with each individual member state. Do some countries do so little trade with us that they would just say no and dig in the heels for instance

andymadmak

14,489 posts

269 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
Greg66 said:
don4l said:
I speak for 17M people.
Do you?

Perhaps you could show the group the little piece of paper by which they appointed you their spokesman.

Words, numbers, finance, physics (in general), tides (in particular), Brexit, t&cs, obligations, reality ... it's getting to be quite a long list now, Donny.
I suppose the reality is that each of us speaks for ourselves plus the comparatively few people we know well enough to be able to represent accurately.
The Remain argument that "we don't know what Brexit means, and thus some people who voted for Brexit may well get something that they did not want or vote for once the negotiations are completed, or indeed that the consequences of their vote may have become so clear by that time as to make them want to change their minds" appears logical until you replace the word Brexit with Remain and see that the logic remains the same (and just as valid/not valid)
Remain did not mean the status quo. It did not even mean a new normality based around the "concessions" negotiated by Mr Cameron. Most people I think understood that a vote to Remain essentially meant signing up to the European project in toto at some point in the future. OK, so the speed at which the UK was to move to integration might have been (much) slower than other member states, but the general direction of travel for the EU was clear - and we were told repeatedly that this overall direction of travel was NOT up for negotiation.
On balance the people did not want this. Trying to convince them that walking towards the back of the bus in some way negates the fact that the bus is travelling at 30mph in the other direction does not alter the fact that you're going where that bus is going until you decide to get off.
The British people voted to get off, for a myriad of reasons.

Credit where credit is due, Mr Cameron kept his promise and gave us all a vote. He could have been like Brown/Blair and the other shysters over time who broke their own promises on the matter, but he did not. Cynics might say he did it to save the Tory party, and they can believe this if they want to. My own view is that whilst this may have been a contributory factor in his decision, a far larger factor was likely to have been the recognition that a very large number of people of all political persuasions really were demanding a say, and that the frustration of repeatedly being denied their say was creating anger and division, as well as undermining democracy.
He could have made the vote super complex. Contingencies here and there, a threshold, a multi part question, but he didn't because, again, to have done so would have created even more anger and distrust in the country.
That was the beauty of the question on the 23rd June. It wasn't conditional, it was not couched in terms of leave/reform/stay/circumstances, rather it was a simple binary choice.

I have enough respect for people on both sides of the debate to recognise that people of all opinions made their choice on the basis of their best understanding of what was important to them at that time. I don't think that many went about the vote in a flippant way. Opinions are heartfelt on this - which is probably why so many on the Remain side are finding it so hard to accept the result and why they put so much energy into creating artificial constructs that support their view.
The vote was simple, the result is there to see. The Government has been given a task and woe betide it if it shilly shallys on the delivery of that task.
I had hoped that people of all views and from all political parties would contribute to ensuring that UK got the best outcome from the negotiation. There is little sign of that happening yet and that is unfortunate. Indeed those gleefully waving their flags at any suggestion of bad news or challenges ahead should really have a word with themselves.

andymadmak

14,489 posts

269 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
Jimboka said:
andymadmak said:
Michael Howard saying some interesting stuff about Brexit (hard/soft etc) on R4 this morning:
https://twitter.com/BBCr4today?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoo...
The same Michael Howard who said that the EU would be eating out of our hands within a month of the Brexit advisory vote ? He's a clown of the highest order
Source?

confused_buyer

6,610 posts

180 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
craigjm said:
I know that but how do you persuade 28 countries to pay into a club to do deals with 1 country that is not paying in?
It isn't a completely one way street though is it? In return for UK access to the Single Market on some sort of preferential terms the EU gets access to the UK market on equally preferential terms.


craigjm

17,912 posts

199 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
confused_buyer said:
craigjm said:
I know that but how do you persuade 28 countries to pay into a club to do deals with 1 country that is not paying in?
It isn't a completely one way street though is it? In return for UK access to the Single Market on some sort of preferential terms the EU gets access to the UK market on equally preferential terms.
Indeed. I guess it depends on how "difficult" or not the EU want to make it

anonymous-user

53 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
andymadmak said:
Jimboka said:
andymadmak said:
Michael Howard saying some interesting stuff about Brexit (hard/soft etc) on R4 this morning:
https://twitter.com/BBCr4today?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoo...
The same Michael Howard who said that the EU would be eating out of our hands within a month of the Brexit advisory vote ? He's a clown of the highest order
Source?
Many out there. Here's a taster

''If we vote to Leave
Former Tory leader Michael Howard is the most credible Leave figure to have raised the prospect of a second referendum.
He claimed by Britain voting to leave the EU, it could “shake EU leaders out of their complacency” and offer the UK better terms to stay.''

andymadmak

14,489 posts

269 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
Jimboka said:
andymadmak said:
Jimboka said:
andymadmak said:
Michael Howard saying some interesting stuff about Brexit (hard/soft etc) on R4 this morning:
https://twitter.com/BBCr4today?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoo...
The same Michael Howard who said that the EU would be eating out of our hands within a month of the Brexit advisory vote ? He's a clown of the highest order
Source?
Many out there. Here's a taster

''If we vote to Leave
Former Tory leader Michael Howard is the most credible Leave figure to have raised the prospect of a second referendum.
He claimed by Britain voting to leave the EU, it could “shake EU leaders out of their complacency” and offer the UK better terms to stay.''
Do you mean like Mr Sarkozy is talking about in the news just this very week?

Either way, if you listen to the interview Nick Robinson does challenge Howard on this very point, and Howard basically replies "I said it could happen, not that it would happen". He was of course correct, and it may be that if Mr Sarkozy wins in France he will eventually be doubly correct!
TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED