Could UK U-turn on Referendum Result
Discussion
Dog Star said:
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?
ETA: I've said it before elsewhere, but we average a recession every 10-15 years anyway. I was rather hoping we'd have a few more years to get really solid before the next one hit, rather than bring it forward out of our own choice
so to get back on topic.
Yes we can go u-turn on brexit, and I seriously think we will.
>It's looking likely we will have May as PM, who will procrastinate on the A50 trigger.
>With Junker gone, Lajčák will do everything he can to stop Brexit.
>Sarkosy is going to be proposing a change to freedom of movement which will suit us.
>This can be used as a excuse to nullify the Brexit vote as our basic issue with Eastern European Migration will be solved... or potentially.
>World saved, and it seems there is a lot more love for GB in EU than I expected.
well maybe anyhow...
Yes we can go u-turn on brexit, and I seriously think we will.
>It's looking likely we will have May as PM, who will procrastinate on the A50 trigger.
>With Junker gone, Lajčák will do everything he can to stop Brexit.
>Sarkosy is going to be proposing a change to freedom of movement which will suit us.
>This can be used as a excuse to nullify the Brexit vote as our basic issue with Eastern European Migration will be solved... or potentially.
>World saved, and it seems there is a lot more love for GB in EU than I expected.
well maybe anyhow...
Firstly I think this might be of interest - http://richmedia.lse.ac.uk/publiclecturesandevents...
Then, a few points all addressed at ones.
k the bankers!
There are some options from 2018 with MIFID II but we really do need to get a decent deal or lose a massive chunk of GDP/tax.
We were then taken into the EU (EEC) without consent in the 70's (72?), had a referendum based on lies (75?) and at the time it got a clear 2:1 mandate to stay in. Since then as the EEC has changed into the EU the reality that this wasn't economic it's a political experiment has sunk in with some. There has been resentment from the time we joined and that has always been around 50%, a number of those would still have voted remain for pragmatic reasons (hey, I want out but don't want to lose my job/house etc) but IMO the massively increased immigration has just tipped the balance.
Right then, onto a few other points.
1) I think this is a done deal. I don't think there is a way out of leaving. If we don't there will be riots, if we try and draw it out then I can see the rise of UKIP and it done anyway.
2) "Remain for reform" - This was the best of the arguments for remain but was shot down by Junckers just before the election (IMO while correct he should have kept quiet as it would undoubtedly have flipped some people over into "leave"). It is a pipe dream, the goal of the EU has always been a "US of Europe" and we were always trying to interfere with it. The only way we'd get "influence" is by going all into the Eurozone as we'd been pushed further and further out. We always wanted all of the "good stuff" from the EU with none of the "bad" and IMO had the best of a bad deal in the EU as it was.
3) Scotland. They're not leaving any time soon. No chance of them doing anything other than an amicable split from the UK and *then* join the EU. They'd lose all the money from the UK, would need their own currency and as they'd need to join the Eurozone (which will either go full political/fiscal union or break up) be effectively handing over the reins from Westminster to Brussels and would actually have less independence! If they want to leave however we should let them with our blessing.
Finally a post someone elsewhere put up on immigration.
Then, a few points all addressed at ones.
p1stonhead said:
550 out of 650 MP's I think, dont want it so lets see what actually happens.
Except 421 of their constituencies actually voted to leave which is a mandate for them to vote the same way. Plus the Conservative whip will be instructing the backbenchers to vote leave.Timmy40 said:
The LibDems are running on ticket of halting the Brexit. All it takes is a GE resulting in a Lib-Lab-SNP coalition with a pledge to either re-run the referendum or ignore it altogether.
That'll be the same Lib Dems that promised a full IN/OUT referendum on the EU but obviously only if it went their way. Also they want *all* the way in, Eurozone the lot and the Euro is on a knife edge. Greece has had *another* bailout while we've been occupying the news with Brexit, Italy is potentially days away from a banking crisis that could see a domino effect into the rest of the Eurozone and the only cure for the Euro is full political and fiscal union which while popular with the hardcore federalists is going to be a tough sell especially as it means Germany carrying pretty much all of Europe, if they have a referendum I think they'd say no. RizzoTheRat said:
That depends if there'd a GE called before Article 50 is declared. My understanding is once we go for article 50 we're out in 2 years whatever else gests decided, so a future government would have to apply to rejoin the EU, in which case we would be in the grovelling territory and would probably not get a great deal.
Yes, there is no way to stop Article 50. Plus we're not going to get a GE before 2020, you need 2/3rds of the HoC to vote on it and they're just not going to do it. The Labour party right now would be wiped out by UKIP, it would be suicide. Then again they seem absolutely hell bent on wiping out the party so hey ho. 405dogvan said:
To be clear, any company operating in financial services is reliant upon the whole market, reliant upon insurance and investment and credit from other companies - the idea of a company who only 'deals with' UK-based companies and customers is looking for unicorns...
A heady chunk of the UK's GDP comes from the financial sector and a lot of that is down to London's position in that market - which would be completely untenable without 'passporting' into the EU (the ability to trade without boundaries or tariffs there)
Something the EU has been keen to unsettle for a LONG time - they won't give that easily - moving a lot of financial companies to Europe would be something they'd love to see and they know it would cripple us.
This is the sort of thing you need to understand BEFORE you have a vote like this - not figure-out later tho...
Yes, I know we need them due to the amount of our taxes they pay and how much they contribute, the trouble here is that a large portion of the vote leave just didn't care. Seriously they see the masses of money flowing to the "elites" while they live in abject poverty. fA heady chunk of the UK's GDP comes from the financial sector and a lot of that is down to London's position in that market - which would be completely untenable without 'passporting' into the EU (the ability to trade without boundaries or tariffs there)
Something the EU has been keen to unsettle for a LONG time - they won't give that easily - moving a lot of financial companies to Europe would be something they'd love to see and they know it would cripple us.
This is the sort of thing you need to understand BEFORE you have a vote like this - not figure-out later tho...
k the bankers! There are some options from 2018 with MIFID II but we really do need to get a decent deal or lose a massive chunk of GDP/tax.
Fittster said:
What if the winner of next election said we should remain? Would the parties democratic mandate trump the referendum result.
Firstly I think it's going to be too late as we'll already be out. Secondly I don't think it's going to happen because there is more chance of a more liberal/toned down UKIP taking vast swathes of previous Labour seats (akin to the SNP whitewash of Scotland) and Lib Dems might gain a few seats but still not going to get anywhere.Robertj21a said:
So, once and for all times, R I P to democracy ?. Absolutely no way if we want to have any standing in the world.
Totally this. Like it or not the Conservatives mandate was to run a referendum and run with the results. It would be political suicide and there would be blood in the streets if they backed out *or* UKIP would get a majority and we'd be out anyway!marshalla said:
The majority of the voters in their constituencies, not nationally.
421 out of 650 Constituencies voted out.CrutyRammers said:
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.
We were at the very first talks on the EU (EEC) back in the 50's (57?), we said no, the British public will never accept this and waved them good bye and good luck!We were then taken into the EU (EEC) without consent in the 70's (72?), had a referendum based on lies (75?) and at the time it got a clear 2:1 mandate to stay in. Since then as the EEC has changed into the EU the reality that this wasn't economic it's a political experiment has sunk in with some. There has been resentment from the time we joined and that has always been around 50%, a number of those would still have voted remain for pragmatic reasons (hey, I want out but don't want to lose my job/house etc) but IMO the massively increased immigration has just tipped the balance.
Right then, onto a few other points.
1) I think this is a done deal. I don't think there is a way out of leaving. If we don't there will be riots, if we try and draw it out then I can see the rise of UKIP and it done anyway.
2) "Remain for reform" - This was the best of the arguments for remain but was shot down by Junckers just before the election (IMO while correct he should have kept quiet as it would undoubtedly have flipped some people over into "leave"). It is a pipe dream, the goal of the EU has always been a "US of Europe" and we were always trying to interfere with it. The only way we'd get "influence" is by going all into the Eurozone as we'd been pushed further and further out. We always wanted all of the "good stuff" from the EU with none of the "bad" and IMO had the best of a bad deal in the EU as it was.
3) Scotland. They're not leaving any time soon. No chance of them doing anything other than an amicable split from the UK and *then* join the EU. They'd lose all the money from the UK, would need their own currency and as they'd need to join the Eurozone (which will either go full political/fiscal union or break up) be effectively handing over the reins from Westminster to Brussels and would actually have less independence! If they want to leave however we should let them with our blessing.
Finally a post someone elsewhere put up on immigration.
From_Reddit said:
It's shocked a lot of people to realise the extent of discontent in the UK over the immigration situation.
The vote didn't cause xenophobia, but it has given some people confidence to speak honestly for the first time in a decade.
Immigration is an issue for a lot of voters, less so than democracy, but nonetheless most are respectful and honest people who are unhappy.
We should be very explicit here. Newspapers reporting these events are talking about a minority who tend to come from the sub class known as Chavs. They are enjoying a brief moment where they feel they are not at the bottom of the pile.
It's not aimed at just EU migrants, but others too.
It appears that the main groups being focused on are Eastern Europeans and Muslims, both have heavily migrated to the UK at some of the fastest paces in history and completely changed entire towns and cities within a few years.
There is a subtext here. The same people who are shocked by the racism on display today are the same people who gave political consent to 'opening the doors' so to speak, and the same people who pathologically shouted down literally any conversation about immigration as being the preserve of racists and fascists.
We haven't had a debate on immigration ever in the UK, for fear of being called racist. That's how racism becomes mainstream.
At some point, the insults lose effect and people embrace it. Look at how American blacks embrace the N word, and there is now a thug life subculture based around anti authoritarianism.
I benefit from immigration and I think economically it's a good thing, but I can't turn my head and say that there are no social affects.
You go through some neighborhoods and they are full of young Eastern European guys here for work, but they come without social connections so they hang about in groups in parks and outside shops with skin head hair cuts, tracksuits from work, drinking cans of beer. It's intimidating to people and it's just happened within a few years and no consultation.
I also think that evidence is showing that there are cultures that are more resilient to integration than others.
While Eastern European immigration has been mainly based on employment, non EU migration could easily be considered to have failed in many non EU cases.
The decision of Merkel to open the border to refugees and not have a plan to differentiate between them and migrants frankly makes Britains Brexit plan look like a planned military operation.
People here look at the chaos unfolding on the borders, the spike in crime and think how long can we resist before we are forced to share Germany's policy failure.
There are already challenges with Muslim integration in the UK - with admittedly faults and failures on both sides of the debate - but this kind of thing scares ppl.
At the weekend, we were with some friends, an English-Chinese couple, and it turns down they just rejected his dream job in Berlin because they are not confident it's a safe place anymore due to this policy.
I had a meeting with two guys from Cologne last week and naturally we talked Brexit etc, but when I asked about Merkels migrant policy both their heads sunk.
Far right groups are gaining all over Europe and it's most likely due to the lack of consultation and pace of change.
If you deny people a say in how they live, one day there will be push back.
The vote didn't cause xenophobia, but it has given some people confidence to speak honestly for the first time in a decade.
Immigration is an issue for a lot of voters, less so than democracy, but nonetheless most are respectful and honest people who are unhappy.
We should be very explicit here. Newspapers reporting these events are talking about a minority who tend to come from the sub class known as Chavs. They are enjoying a brief moment where they feel they are not at the bottom of the pile.
It's not aimed at just EU migrants, but others too.
It appears that the main groups being focused on are Eastern Europeans and Muslims, both have heavily migrated to the UK at some of the fastest paces in history and completely changed entire towns and cities within a few years.
There is a subtext here. The same people who are shocked by the racism on display today are the same people who gave political consent to 'opening the doors' so to speak, and the same people who pathologically shouted down literally any conversation about immigration as being the preserve of racists and fascists.
We haven't had a debate on immigration ever in the UK, for fear of being called racist. That's how racism becomes mainstream.
At some point, the insults lose effect and people embrace it. Look at how American blacks embrace the N word, and there is now a thug life subculture based around anti authoritarianism.
I benefit from immigration and I think economically it's a good thing, but I can't turn my head and say that there are no social affects.
You go through some neighborhoods and they are full of young Eastern European guys here for work, but they come without social connections so they hang about in groups in parks and outside shops with skin head hair cuts, tracksuits from work, drinking cans of beer. It's intimidating to people and it's just happened within a few years and no consultation.
I also think that evidence is showing that there are cultures that are more resilient to integration than others.
While Eastern European immigration has been mainly based on employment, non EU migration could easily be considered to have failed in many non EU cases.
The decision of Merkel to open the border to refugees and not have a plan to differentiate between them and migrants frankly makes Britains Brexit plan look like a planned military operation.
People here look at the chaos unfolding on the borders, the spike in crime and think how long can we resist before we are forced to share Germany's policy failure.
There are already challenges with Muslim integration in the UK - with admittedly faults and failures on both sides of the debate - but this kind of thing scares ppl.
At the weekend, we were with some friends, an English-Chinese couple, and it turns down they just rejected his dream job in Berlin because they are not confident it's a safe place anymore due to this policy.
I had a meeting with two guys from Cologne last week and naturally we talked Brexit etc, but when I asked about Merkels migrant policy both their heads sunk.
Far right groups are gaining all over Europe and it's most likely due to the lack of consultation and pace of change.
If you deny people a say in how they live, one day there will be push back.
Edited by Fastdruid on Friday 1st July 10:23
Mario149 said:
Jockman said:
Mario149 said:
vonuber said:
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.TX.
Fastdruid said:
p1stonhead said:
550 out of 650 MP's I think, dont want it so lets see what actually happens.
Except 421 of their constituencies actually voted to leave which is a mandate for them to vote the same way. p1stonhead said:
Fastdruid said:
p1stonhead said:
550 out of 650 MP's I think, dont want it so lets see what actually happens.
Except 421 of their constituencies actually voted to leave which is a mandate for them to vote the same way. Fastdruid said:
p1stonhead said:
Fastdruid said:
p1stonhead said:
550 out of 650 MP's I think, dont want it so lets see what actually happens.
Except 421 of their constituencies actually voted to leave which is a mandate for them to vote the same way. vonuber said:
now just imagine for a moment this was the position a couple of years back, would we even have needed a referendum ? incompetents in politics right across the world are the problem. i vote to ban politicians 
Mario149 said:
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 agree . maybe not now or in the near future, but at some point there will just not be enough work for the bottom of the jobs market to go around . if those at the top want to be able to enjoy the fruits of their hard work the nothing to lose brigade at the bottom will need some way of providing a basic standard of living.to be fair it might even save some money,as certain areas due to cost of rent probably cost a shed load more than that at the moment. if those that currently churn out a dozen kids knew they would only have enough money to look after two if they still wanted to have sky tv it might also focus their mind on some proper priorities.
Fastdruid said:
RizzoTheRat said:
That depends if there'd a GE called before Article 50 is declared. My understanding is once we go for article 50 we're out in 2 years whatever else gests decided, so a future government would have to apply to rejoin the EU, in which case we would be in the grovelling territory and would probably not get a great deal.
Yes, there is no way to stop Article 50 Plus we're not going to get a GE before 2020, you need 2/3rds of the HoC to vote on it and they're just not going to do it. The Labour party right now would be wiped out by UKIP, it would be suicide. Then again they seem absolutely hell bent on wiping out the party so hey ho. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201516/...
JNW1 said:
Is that right though? My understanding is that the leaving country has to invoke Article 50 but is able to reverse that decision and remain a member on its existing terms should it decide to do so (see point 10 at the bottom of page 4 in the linked document below). The political ramifications associated with that could obviously be quite profound but as I read it if we think negotiations are likely to result in a poor outcome for Britain we could simply (!) reverse our decision to leave?
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201516/...
Thanks for that link interesting read (read=very brief scan). http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201516/...
From that the Cameron's February concessions are wiped off with the result of referendum. And, as you say, it does state that political ramification are going to be significant.
JNW1 said:
Fastdruid said:
RizzoTheRat said:
That depends if there'd a GE called before Article 50 is declared. My understanding is once we go for article 50 we're out in 2 years whatever else gests decided, so a future government would have to apply to rejoin the EU, in which case we would be in the grovelling territory and would probably not get a great deal.
Yes, there is no way to stop Article 50 Plus we're not going to get a GE before 2020, you need 2/3rds of the HoC to vote on it and they're just not going to do it. The Labour party right now would be wiped out by UKIP, it would be suicide. Then again they seem absolutely hell bent on wiping out the party so hey ho. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201516/...
Dog Star said:
Fastdruid said:
Except 421 of their constituencies actually voted to leave which is a mandate for them to vote the same way.
If you re-ran that vote again I don't think the result would be anything like that. At all.Remember that I have voted UKIP in the past as well.
You can't just re-run until you get the result you want.
crankedup said:
The Government has spoken, numerous times, we are out.
Because nobody has backtracked at all in all of this? I think it all depends on the deal we get. We will probably go out but retain free access to market (paid for) and free movement between certain 'core' Eu countries.or, a speech by May next year will go something like:
"the Uk voted to leave the EU but it has since become clear that the economy has downturned and the impact of Brexit will have serious consequences for us all. Since the UK voted to leave, I have secured (x,y z) reforms. The referendum vote did not produce an overwhelming majority, and given the reforms I have secured together with the economic reality of the consequences of leaving the EU we have experienced, it is very possible that the answer to the referendum would now be different. Moreover, I will not be the prime minister who triggers a serious downturn in the Uk economy. In the interests of the UK, my government will not trigger article 50..."
Inclined to agree, however in the second case it would lead to an interesting general election the next time round. There would still be a massive proportion of the public clamouring for an exit, and that will secure a lot of votes for any party that goes in the aim of getting out of Europe, and potentially a big shift of voters between parties, but with multiple parties dividing the vote.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff