Would you change your Ref vote if you could go back time?

[Mark Benson]

lostkiwi said:

Mark Benson said:

The veto is available, but if you're put in an impossible position (as Greece are currently) then a veto is useless.
It's only a power worth having if you can use it without putting yourself in a worse position either politically or financially.

That's why, I believe the Commission is now keen to have us sign article 50 and get on with the process of leaving. We have less to lose from using our veto than other countries. We're also less committed to the EU project and it irks many (including a lot of Germans I've spoken to this week) that we have 'special status' outside the Euro and exempted from some of the rules the rest of the EU is expected to follow.
They want us fully in or fully out and, now we've shown the level of discontent with the EU they see it as the more pragmatic course of action to give up trying to persuade the British people of the benefits and have us wavering on the sidelines and clear the way for a more closely integrated EU.

At least that's how I see it, and how David Cameron saw in in 2014 when he wrote in the Times

"And dealing properly with the concept of 'ever closer union', enshrined in the treaty, to which every EU country now has to sign up. It may appeal to some countries. But it is not right for Britain, and we must ensure we are no longer subject to it."

He then spoke in the Commons as recently as June 2015 of the June European Council and the UK’s reform proposals, saying

"We will put the Common Market back at the heart of our membership, get off the treadmill to ever-closer union, address the issue of migration to Britain from the rest of the EU and protect Britain’s place in the single market for the long term."

And of course if we opt to leave and take on a Norway style membership (the most closely integrated non member) we lose that veto as well.

My point from the very beginning of this debacle was that the result is almost of less importance than the conduct of our politicians afterwards.
We could negotiate ourselves a better deal than Norway but it will require players of incredible skill.

I'm not hopeful.

[anonymous-user]

Mario149 said:

I dunno about NP, but I'm more than happy to admit there are idiots on both sides. Which just add to the reasoning that the question shouldn't have been asked of us to start with.

I agree with you.

There are a lot of confused idiots on both sides, which just adds weight to the case that we should never have been asked to vote on this.

We have to leave a lot of things up to politicians to decide, that is why we have them.

You wouldn't ask the public to vote on complex matters of defence spending or NATO membership for example, so why ask them a potentially even more complex and important question such as EU membership.

[Mark Benson]

NinjaPower said:

Mario149 said:

I dunno about NP, but I'm more than happy to admit there are idiots on both sides. Which just add to the reasoning that the question shouldn't have been asked of us to start with.

I agree with you.

There are a lot of confused idiots on both sides, which just adds weight to the case that we should never have been asked to vote on this.

We have to leave a lot of things up to politicians to decide, that is why we have them.

You wouldn't ask the public to vote on complex matters of defence spending or NATO membership for example, so why ask them a potentially even more complex and important question such as EU membership.

Because politics.

[romeogolf]

I voted leave. I'm very much upset and frustrated with the result, not just because it's not what I had hoped for, but because of the reasons people voted to leave and the lack of a plan now we've voted to leave. The more people tell me the reasons, the more I despair.

I have two friends who voted to leave. Their arguments were based on a perceived lack of control within the EU and the notion we don't get good value for money from our contributions. They felt the EU was illiberal. These are debatable topics and we've had some good chats about it. I can understand these reasons.

On the other hand, I have family members and colleagues who voted to leave based purely on the £350m figure in the belief it would go to the NHS; Who voted to leave because they thought all the immigrants would leave; Who voted to leave because they thought you can't celebrate Christmas without offending people; Who thought by leaving we could get back old-fashioned light-bulbs and curved bananas and so on. These are the horrifying reasons, many of which have legitimised the more public racism and xenophobia which we've seen.

It scares me how easily people have been mislead, and how much they have been mislead. In conversations at work when I've explained "well, actually we only gave £77 million/week after our rebate and benefits... And we won't be sending all the EU-born people who live here home, and actually Turkey is a very long way off joining, and if we want to be in the single market we'll still need to accept free movement..." they're surprised. They genuinely thought that this is what they voted for.

Cornwall, who voted strongly to leave, have already asked the government to confirm they will receive additional funding which will be lost. My partner's sister who is due to start university studying German later this year, has been told that the year in Germany for her second year is very likely to be cancelled as a result (her leave-voting grandparents are surprised). There's been no real forward thinking from many people.

I'm scared because there is no plan. There has been no plan of what we're actually going to do, nothing has been negotiated, there was just a referendum on a huge decision which has far reaching implications, many of which were never discussed in popular media.

The EU is far from perfect, but this wasn't the time to "protest vote" as many have. If we leave, that's final. If we stay, we can decide again to leave in the future after a renegotiation (which, thanks to the vote, appears to be off the table now) but is what many people wanted.

The choice was between the status quo and something new. It makes absolute sense that to make a change should require a more significant margin to win than to maintain the current situation. A difference of less than 5% leaves far too many people on the wrong end of a change they don't want. A number of people who thought they wanted to leave actually didn't. They just wanted a change. Now they're getting a change they didn't really want.

[lostkiwi]

Good post that sums up much of why we are where we are now.
People didn't do the research they should have to enable an informed decision coupled to a massive amount of bullst in the press and utter bks spouted by both sides.

[JoeMarano]

MarshPhantom said:

You may not like the EU, can you not even admit the damage that has been caused by leaving?

It's short term damage and individually I have not noticed any negative change apart from a greater feeling of patriotism which imo is something we need more of as a nation!

Oh and the fact we are now negotiating with India on trade matters which is a much bigger market than the pathetic nazi eu.

[lostkiwi]

JoeMarano said:

MarshPhantom said:

You may not like the EU, can you not even admit the damage that has been caused by leaving?

It's short term damage and individually I have not noticed any negative change apart from a greater feeling of patriotism which imo is something we need more of as a nation!

Oh and the fact we are now negotiating with India on trade matters which is a much bigger market than the pathetic nazi eu.

The true effects won't be felt till Article 50 is invoked.
At the moment nothing has really changed. We are still in the EU and trading under EU rules and agreements. Once the markets see us push the big red button they will either see it as a good thing (unlikely on the basis of whats happened in the markets so far) or really have a loss of confidence in the UK economy for the future.

[Mario149]

Jinx said:

Mario149 said:

I dunno about NP, but I'm more than happy to admit there are idiots on both sides. Which just add to the reasoning that the question shouldn't have been asked of us to start with.

Politicians ask us to put our lives on the line to defend the sovereignty of a country when under external threat - surely asking our opinion when they've given it away isn't too much to want. There are idiots in every profession (including the HoC) so even a parliamentary vote isn't safe for idiocy (for example the un-costed CCA)

I'm all for them canvassing our opinions, but at a certain point, if they think they're ridiculous they should ignore us. Then if we want to vote them out next time we can. But while they're in charge, the decisions should be left to them.

Example: if there was a non-binding referendum called to decide whether we should all receive £1K per month tax free as a sweetener on Labour party manifesto, they were elected, and we all voted a gleeful "yes!", parliament would be well within its rights to not honour if a majority of MPs thought it'd be a very bad idea from a fiscal PoV. Indeed it would actually be remiss of them to honour that referendum if they believed it would do more harm than good.

[P5BNij]

romeogolf said:

I voted leave. I'm very much upset and frustrated with the result, not just because it's not what I had hoped for, but because of the reasons people voted to leave and the lack of a plan now we've voted to leave. The more people tell me the reasons, the more I despair.

I have two friends who voted to leave. Their arguments were based on a perceived lack of control within the EU and the notion we don't get good value for money from our contributions. They felt the EU was illiberal. These are debatable topics and we've had some good chats about it. I can understand these reasons.

On the other hand, I have family members and colleagues who voted to leave based purely on the £350m figure in the belief it would go to the NHS; Who voted to leave because they thought all the immigrants would leave; Who voted to leave because they thought you can't celebrate Christmas without offending people; Who thought by leaving we could get back old-fashioned light-bulbs and curved bananas and so on. These are the horrifying reasons, many of which have legitimised the more public racism and xenophobia which we've seen.

It scares me how easily people have been mislead, and how much they have been mislead. In conversations at work when I've explained "well, actually we only gave £77 million/week after our rebate and benefits... And we won't be sending all the EU-born people who live here home, and actually Turkey is a very long way off joining, and if we want to be in the single market we'll still need to accept free movement..." they're surprised. They genuinely thought that this is what they voted for.

Cornwall, who voted strongly to leave, have already asked the government to confirm they will receive additional funding which will be lost. My partner's sister who is due to start university studying German later this year, has been told that the year in Germany for her second year is very likely to be cancelled as a result (her leave-voting grandparents are surprised). There's been no real forward thinking from many people.

I'm scared because there is no plan. There has been no plan of what we're actually going to do, nothing has been negotiated, there was just a referendum on a huge decision which has far reaching implications, many of which were never discussed in popular media.

The EU is far from perfect, but this wasn't the time to "protest vote" as many have. If we leave, that's final. If we stay, we can decide again to leave in the future after a renegotiation (which, thanks to the vote, appears to be off the table now) but is what many people wanted.

The choice was between the status quo and something new. It makes absolute sense that to make a change should require a more significant margin to win than to maintain the current situation. A difference of less than 5% leaves far too many people on the wrong end of a change they don't want. A number of people who thought they wanted to leave actually didn't. They just wanted a change. Now they're getting a change they didn't really want.

Good post, but the renegotiation you mention was never really on the table, that much is clear now. We had zero movement from Junkers and Co before the vote, and within hours of the outcome the EU juggernaut has shown its true colours.

[Mark Benson]

lostkiwi said:

Good post that sums up much of why we are where we are now.
People didn't do the research they should have to enable an informed decision coupled to a massive amount of bullst in the press and utter bks spouted by both sides.

I honestly think that if the vote had gone the other way a similar number of remain voters would be having the same 'buyers remorse' this week.

Although they probably wouldn't have been pushed to the fore in the same way by the broadly Remain-supporting media.

[romeogolf]

Mark Benson said:

I honestly think that if the vote had gone the other way a similar number of remain voters would be having the same 'buyers remorse' this week.

Although they probably wouldn't have been pushed to the fore in the same way by the broadly Remain-supporting media.

I disagree. If the vote was remain with a similar margin, I have no doubt that people would be saying it's clear that many people were unhappy with the EU and that it was clear some sort of reform is required. It would raise questions as to what people were dissatisfied with and there could be better public discourse on how to improve that.

With a vote just to leave, there is no room for movement. It's very final.

[Mario149]

Mark Benson said:

The veto is available, but if you're put in an impossible position (as Greece are currently) then a veto is useless.
It's only a power worth having if you can use it without putting yourself in a worse position either politically or financially.

That's why, I believe the Commission is now keen to have us sign article 50 and get on with the process of leaving. We have less to lose from using our veto than other countries. We're also less committed to the EU project and it irks many (including a lot of Germans I've spoken to this week) that we have 'special status' outside the Euro and exempted from some of the rules the rest of the EU is expected to follow.
They want us fully in or fully out and, now we've shown the level of discontent with the EU they see it as the more pragmatic course of action to give up trying to persuade the British people of the benefits and have us wavering on the sidelines and clear the way for a more closely integrated EU.

At least that's how I see it, and how David Cameron saw in in 2014 when he wrote in the Times

"And dealing properly with the concept of 'ever closer union', enshrined in the treaty, to which every EU country now has to sign up. It may appeal to some countries. But it is not right for Britain, and we must ensure we are no longer subject to it."

He then spoke in the Commons as recently as June 2015 of the June European Council and the UK’s reform proposals, saying

"We will put the Common Market back at the heart of our membership, get off the treadmill to ever-closer union, address the issue of migration to Britain from the rest of the EU and protect Britain’s place in the single market for the long term."

I see what you're getting at, but let's be clear, as much as I have sympathy for them, Greece's problems stem from their own making. And we are not Greece and we could use our veto. The issue is not whether other countries could be forced to do something they don't want, it's whether we could. And if we think we're man enough to go it alone, I can't see how we couldn't be man enough to stick up for ourselves in the EU. We either have balls, or we don't.

IMO the biggest issue we've had with the EU was actually highlighted by Alistair Campbell on an interview I saw this morning. He's a wker but he makes sense: we've had a right wing / eurosceptic press constantly slating the EU for 25 years or more with very little to balance it out. If you're told something is ste for long enough, you'll eventually believe it. At which point the gov starts pandering to your thoughts to get your vote. So they have to whinge about the EU too, and it's a vicious cycle. It's like immigration, study after study shows it has been massively beneficial for our country as a whole, yet people still think we have a problem. But because our politicians pander to us and don't challenge the narrative with facts pointing out the benefits it has brought us, we still have idiots in towns with almost zero immigration complaining "we're full".

[Mario149]

Mark Benson said:

I honestly think that if the vote had gone the other way a similar number of remain voters would be having the same 'buyers remorse' this week.

Although they probably wouldn't have been pushed to the fore in the same way by the broadly Remain-supporting media.

What would they have remorse about? Nothing the Remain campaign said has turned out to be untrue as far as I can tell. Basically, the markets would have got a bit of a boost, we'd still have a functioning gov and opposition (okay, it's all relative with Corbyn :hehe) and things would have carried on as normal

[Mark Benson]

Mario149 said:

I see what you're getting at, but let's be clear, as much as I have sympathy for them, Greece's problems stem from their own making. And we are not Greece and we could use our veto. The issue is not whether other countries could be forced to do something they don't want, it's whether we could. And if we think we're man enough to go it alone, I can't see how we couldn't be man enough to stick up for ourselves in the EU. We either have balls, or we don't.

I think one of the things that swung me as a wavering voter was that we've had years to reform the EU and promise after promise that things could change, and have been frustrated at every attempt. It's not about 'being man enough', it's about having influence (or in this case, not) commensurate with the contribution we make.
And the EU has shown it's not above ignoring it's own rules when it suits (Greece again).
For me though, the defining point remains the issue of who makes the decisions and how they achieve, and can be unseated from power.

Mario149 said:

IMO the biggest issue we've had with the EU was actually highlighted by Alistair Campbell on an interview I saw this morning. He's a wker but he makes sense: we've had a right wing / eurosceptic press constantly slating the EU for 25 years or more with very little to balance it out. If you're told something is ste for long enough, you'll eventually believe it. At which point the gov starts pandering to your thoughts to get your vote. So they have to whinge about the EU too, and it's a vicious cycle. It's like immigration, study after study shows it has been massively beneficial for our country as a whole, yet people still think we have a problem. But because our politicians pander to us and don't challenge the narrative with facts pointing out the benefits it has brought us, we still have idiots in towns with almost zero immigration complaining "we're full".

During the same time though, we've had the EU funding large numbers of projects and organisations and insisting the EU flag be prominently displayed alongside. That's led to equating EU with an influx of cash, forgetting where the EU's money came from in the first place. At the same time, those self-same organisations become cheerleaders for the EU simply by fact of them being beneficiaries.

Edited by Mark Benson on Tuesday 28th June 15:49

[Mark Benson]

Mario149 said:

Mark Benson said:

I honestly think that if the vote had gone the other way a similar number of remain voters would be having the same 'buyers remorse' this week.

Although they probably wouldn't have been pushed to the fore in the same way by the broadly Remain-supporting media.

What would they have remorse about? Nothing the Remain campaign said has turned out to be untrue as far as I can tell. Basically, the markets would have got a bit of a boost, we'd still have a functioning gov and opposition (okay, it's all relative with Corbyn :hehe) and things would have carried on as normal

I don't think it would be instant, but those who voted remain and found we weren't able to 'reform from within' and those persuaded by the 'if you're not sure, vote remain and we can always leave later' message that remain was the lesser of two evils would be two categories I imagine may feel an amount of resentment further down the line.

[matsoc]

What I can not understand is why a discussion on the referendum outcome has not been made months ago between EU and UK.
The moment the referendum was made possible the two outcomes should have been investigated and discussed.
How can it be that UK gov. wants to wait to use Art.50 while large part of the EU thinks it should be made immediately?

[lostkiwi]

matsoc said:

What I can not understand is why a discussion on the referendum outcome has not been made months ago between EU and UK.
The moment the referendum was made possible the two outcomes should have been investigated and discussed.
How can it be that UK gov. wants to wait to use Art.50 while large part of the EU thinks it should be made immediately?

Quite simple.
If we invoke Article 50 now we have no trade negotiations under way with anyone. The longer its left the more discussions can be taken to ensure we have something in place for our eventual departure. To push the button now is to start the clock ticking with no clear idea of what form of trade we will have irrespective of the EU.
Also pushing the button now will signal to the markets that we are definitely leaving. Article 50 is a trap door. Once its invoked there is no going back.
The markets will react very negatively unless there is some form of plan for post Article 50 being invoked.

If we cannot have an agreement with the two years we will default to WTO agreements (where we have no standing as a single entity as we are an associate of the EU - so thats another thing to renegotiate).
WTO would be the worst option available.

[Mark Benson]

matsoc said:

What I can not understand is why a discussion on the referendum outcome has not been made months ago between EU and UK.
The moment the referendum was made possible the two outcomes should have been investigated and discussed.
How can it be that UK gov. wants to wait to use Art.50 while large part of the EU thinks it should be made immediately?

because both the UK and EU governments couldn't countenance the idea that the plebs might actually misbehave.

[Timmy40]

Mark Benson said:

matsoc said:

What I can not understand is why a discussion on the referendum outcome has not been made months ago between EU and UK.
The moment the referendum was made possible the two outcomes should have been investigated and discussed.
How can it be that UK gov. wants to wait to use Art.50 while large part of the EU thinks it should be made immediately?

because both the UK and EU governments couldn't countenance the idea that the plebs might actually misbehave.

which is precisely what has happened. It's like betting someone £50 they won't burn there house down, only for them to set it on fire and gleefully demand their £50.

[Otispunkmeyer]

romeogolf said:

I voted leave. I'm very much upset and frustrated with the result, not just because it's not what I had hoped for, but because of the reasons people voted to leave and the lack of a plan now we've voted to leave. The more people tell me the reasons, the more I despair.

I have two friends who voted to leave. Their arguments were based on a perceived lack of control within the EU and the notion we don't get good value for money from our contributions. They felt the EU was illiberal. These are debatable topics and we've had some good chats about it. I can understand these reasons.

On the other hand, I have family members and colleagues who voted to leave based purely on the £350m figure in the belief it would go to the NHS; Who voted to leave because they thought all the immigrants would leave; Who voted to leave because they thought you can't celebrate Christmas without offending people; Who thought by leaving we could get back old-fashioned light-bulbs and curved bananas and so on. These are the horrifying reasons, many of which have legitimised the more public racism and xenophobia which we've seen.

It scares me how easily people have been mislead, and how much they have been mislead. In conversations at work when I've explained "well, actually we only gave £77 million/week after our rebate and benefits... And we won't be sending all the EU-born people who live here home, and actually Turkey is a very long way off joining, and if we want to be in the single market we'll still need to accept free movement..." they're surprised. They genuinely thought that this is what they voted for.

Cornwall, who voted strongly to leave, have already asked the government to confirm they will receive additional funding which will be lost. My partner's sister who is due to start university studying German later this year, has been told that the year in Germany for her second year is very likely to be cancelled as a result (her leave-voting grandparents are surprised). There's been no real forward thinking from many people.

I'm scared because there is no plan. There has been no plan of what we're actually going to do, nothing has been negotiated, there was just a referendum on a huge decision which has far reaching implications, many of which were never discussed in popular media.

The EU is far from perfect, but this wasn't the time to "protest vote" as many have. If we leave, that's final. If we stay, we can decide again to leave in the future after a renegotiation (which, thanks to the vote, appears to be off the table now) but is what many people wanted.

The choice was between the status quo and something new. It makes absolute sense that to make a change should require a more significant margin to win than to maintain the current situation. A difference of less than 5% leaves far too many people on the wrong end of a change they don't want. A number of people who thought they wanted to leave actually didn't. They just wanted a change. Now they're getting a change they didn't really want.

Interesting comments. Something for me to mull over. Thanks.