Could UK U-turn on Referendum Result

[Stickyfinger]

Hosenbugler said:

vonuber said:

So if you disagree with something you should not voice your opinion?
If so, why do we bother having an opposition to the government then? Or any debates at all?

All this 'shut up, you're whining, you've lost get over it' just seems as an attempt to close down debate.
All very facist really.

So now those that voted to leave are fascists are they? You are just another bleater who's worried his snout is going to be pushed out the the trough.

Pathetic individual.

Yep, and another one who has low (zero?) car related posts.....

[jjlynn27]

Hosenbugler said:

vonuber said:

So if you disagree with something you should not voice your opinion?
If so, why do we bother having an opposition to the government then? Or any debates at all?

All this 'shut up, you're whining, you've lost get over it' just seems as an attempt to close down debate.
All very facist really.

So now those that voted to leave are fascists are they? You are just another bleater who's worried his snout is going to be pushed out the the trough.

Pathetic individual.

If you get your ridiculous rage about everything under control, you'll read what he said. He didn't say people who voted leave are fascist as that would be stupid. What he said is that constant 'shut up, don't post here if you don't agree with things and trying to close debate is fascist. Perhaps strong word, I'd call it pathetic, since this is forum and nobody is forced to read things.
You try to be deliberately insulting in order to cover your ever so obvious lack of anything substantial to add. You forgot to add your 'Risible'.

'snout'

[Jockman]

I voted 'out' but I see some good convincing arguments from some clever people who voted to remain.

The UK will now steer a path that technically removes us from the EU in name, but makes compromises in certain areas for the good of the nation as a whole.

I would have accepted a remain vote so it would be silly not to accept the compromises.

Keep the good ideas coming - it's how we all learn - but be mindful of switching people off by constant repetition.

[jjlynn27]

hidetheelephants said:

What part of the EEA's FOM being conditional and subject to unilateral controls do you not understand? Is it that complicated?

It would be simpler if you explain more. If it's North's Licht option it was discussed before. As I understand, 'Norway' option doesn't include controls. Happy to be corrected.

[Sway]

SidewaysSi said:

bmw535i said:

Jimboka said:

'Brexit means Brexit'
Slight problem, nobody knows what Brexit will be.
.

It isn't a problem at all - everybody knows we just have to wait and see. There is no alternative but to do just that.

That doesn't stop some staunch remain voters insisting on the "fact" that there is a catastrophic mess apparently unfolding around us.

Elysium, ajd et al simply repeat what they've already said in a vain attempt for their small voices to be heard against the overwhelming tide of acceptance that increases daily.

You only have to listen to all the statements from May and the rest to understand there is not going to be a u-turn or second referendum

Of course not. But it won't be anything other than Brexit light. Then the "hardcore" Brexiteers (who I think are probably in the minority anyway) will be spitting blood...

And the Remainers will still be disappointed.

The 'hardcore Brexiters' have been campaigning for years, and the majority agree with the Norths...

As such, it's not Brexit lite. It's the first step that most agree with. Including me.

EEA/EFTA does provide increased control over FoM. It also maintains single market access whilst enabling unilateral trade deals. As such, it's the perfect approach to steadily reducing the reliance on the EU market that's been driven by Treaty for the last 30 years.

It may be 5 years, or 10, or 20, before we've sufficiently broken the reliance on the single market and are confident enough to pull away from EEA (I wouldn't support leaving EFTA at any point, it's exactly the sort of institution that the EU should have been, and the EU have zero influence over it). That's fine by me.

I wasn't voting for the next decade. We'll be fine during it, perhaps a bit up, perhaps a bit down compared to if the vote had been Remain. Beyond that though, I can only see positive outcomes compared to if we'd stayed.

[Hosenbugler]

jjlynn27 said:

Hosenbugler said:

vonuber said:

So if you disagree with something you should not voice your opinion?
If so, why do we bother having an opposition to the government then? Or any debates at all?

All this 'shut up, you're whining, you've lost get over it' just seems as an attempt to close down debate.
All very facist really.

So now those that voted to leave are fascists are they? You are just another bleater who's worried his snout is going to be pushed out the the trough.

Pathetic individual.

If you get your ridiculous rage about everything under control, you'll read what he said. He didn't say people who voted leave are fascist as that would be stupid. What he said is that constant 'shut up, don't post here if you don't agree with things and trying to close debate is fascist. Perhaps strong word, I'd call it pathetic, since this is forum and nobody is forced to read things.
You try to be deliberately insulting in order to cover your ever so obvious lack of anything substantial to add. You forgot to add your 'Risible'.

'snout'

Reamainers with any class accepted the result and went forward with their lives.
This thread is full of those begging to be wound up. Huge targets of schadenfreude. Pathetic bleating, whining , hand wringing by oh so superior losers. Truly, truly pathetic. Still, carry on, you are good for a laugh, or pity even.

[hidetheelephants]

jjlynn27 said:

hidetheelephants said:

What part of the EEA's FOM being conditional and subject to unilateral controls do you not understand? Is it that complicated?

It would be simpler if you explain more. If it's North's Licht option it was discussed before. As I understand, 'Norway' option doesn't include controls. Happy to be corrected.

It's not an option, it's in the EEA rules, specifically article 112 and 113;

EEA agreement said:

If serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties of a sectorial or regional nature liable to persist are arising, a Contracting Party may unilaterally take appropriate measures under the conditions and procedures laid down in Article 113.

Not a sinecure as (re)joining the EEA requires the consent of the members and there will be horse trading needed to get that. North does venture the idea that as we are are technically still in the EEA we don't need to join but he doesn't put much store in it.

[SidewaysSi]

PRTVR said:

SidewaysSi said:

PRTVR said:

Jimboka said:

'Brexit means Brexit'
Slight problem, nobody knows what Brexit will be.
Seems to be heading for freedom of movement in exchange for access to the single market.The FOM part is great for the young Brits & those who like the option of moving to EU etc .
But not what most Brexit voters wanted & A lot worse for Remainers than the new deal which Cameron negotiated .

I keep hearing FOM is great for young Brits but how many actually go to universities abroad ? I was talking to a few the other day who were struggling with English let alone a foreign language, it could have just been me as they appeared to understand each other.

Well let's not bother then. We know English and the rest of the world will just have to learn our language. I love Little Britain I do.

That is also why I don't think May or anyone else can or will go for "full Brexit " as it will be daft to do so and it is not what the people voted for.

So we will actually be in a similar position re. Laws and immigration but will less power on the world stage. Love it.

Edited by SidewaysSi on Friday 22 July 07:53

Oh dear some people get angry quickly... .. what I was referring to was I do not think our education system is preparing our young ones to take advantage of the opportunities available, less power on the world stage? We are a nuclear power, the 5 largest economy, a permanent member of the UN security council, not quite little Britain, the voice via the EU is always diluted due to the very nature of having so many different members with different outlooks and requirements.

Who is getting angry? The nuclear power, 5th largest economy blah blah stuff is as it is today. If, as some people want, we exit the SM etc then quite frankly a lot of that would be in the past. For instance, our economy is hugely driven by the City and London, so clipping its wings would be short sighted. The anti London feeling on some parts of PH is really quite sad but having lived in various parts of the UK throughout my life is probably unsurprising.

I don't think our education system is strong enough but kids having the appetite for European languages and wanting to take advantage of what Europe has to offer is only a good thing. And yes, I did study abroad when I was at university.

Time will tell but I don't really think we will have full Brexit. Which will be interesting to say the least..

Edited by SidewaysSi on Friday 22 July 09:05

[jonnyb]

May has the stated aim of reuniting the country. I fail to see how she can do that while going for full Brexit.

[Jockman]

jonnyb said:

May has the stated aim of reuniting the country. I fail to see how she can do that while going for full Brexit.

As nobody can define brexit, it would be impossible to go for a full one anyway. Or a partial one for that matter.

[jjlynn27]

hidetheelephants said:

jjlynn27 said:

hidetheelephants said:

What part of the EEA's FOM being conditional and subject to unilateral controls do you not understand? Is it that complicated?

It would be simpler if you explain more. If it's North's Licht option it was discussed before. As I understand, 'Norway' option doesn't include controls. Happy to be corrected.

It's not an option, it's in the EEA rules, specifically article 112 and 113;

EEA agreement said:

If serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties of a sectorial or regional nature liable to persist are arising, a Contracting Party may unilaterally take appropriate measures under the conditions and procedures laid down in Article 113.

Not a sinecure as (re)joining the EEA requires the consent of the members and there will be horse trading needed to get that. North does venture the idea that as we are are technically still in the EEA we don't need to join but he doesn't put much store in it.

Ok, thanks, the second part of 112 goes on to say;

art112 said:

Such safeguard measures shall be restricted with regard to their scope and duration to
what is strictly necessary in order to remedy the situation. Priority shall be given to such
measures as will least disturb the functioning of this Agreement.

IANAL but I read that as non-permanent measure.

art113 said:

...
3. The Contracting Party concerned may not take safeguard measures until one month
has elapsed after the date of notification under paragraph 1, unless the consultation
procedure under paragraph 2 has been concluded before the expiration of the stated
time-limit. When exceptional circumstances requiring immediate action exclude prior
examination, the Contracting Party concerned may apply forthwith the protective
measures strictly necessary to remedy the situation.
...

Still doesn't read as permanent solution. If it was, it would be used by Norway. From what I've read, only Lich has permanent quote in place, but as mentioned before, it was specifically designed with their size in mind (37k).

[hidetheelephants]

Sway said:

SidewaysSi said:

bmw535i said:

Jimboka said:

'Brexit means Brexit'
Slight problem, nobody knows what Brexit will be.
.

It isn't a problem at all - everybody knows we just have to wait and see. There is no alternative but to do just that.

That doesn't stop some staunch remain voters insisting on the "fact" that there is a catastrophic mess apparently unfolding around us.

Elysium, ajd et al simply repeat what they've already said in a vain attempt for their small voices to be heard against the overwhelming tide of acceptance that increases daily.

You only have to listen to all the statements from May and the rest to understand there is not going to be a u-turn or second referendum

Of course not. But it won't be anything other than Brexit light. Then the "hardcore" Brexiteers (who I think are probably in the minority anyway) will be spitting blood...

And the Remainers will still be disappointed.

The 'hardcore Brexiters' have been campaigning for years, and the majority agree with the Norths...

As such, it's not Brexit lite. It's the first step that most agree with. Including me.

EEA/EFTA does provide increased control over FoM. It also maintains single market access whilst enabling unilateral trade deals. As such, it's the perfect approach to steadily reducing the reliance on the EU market that's been driven by Treaty for the last 30 years.

It may be 5 years, or 10, or 20, before we've sufficiently broken the reliance on the single market and are confident enough to pull away from EEA (I wouldn't support leaving EFTA at any point, it's exactly the sort of institution that the EU should have been, and the EU have zero influence over it). That's fine by me.

I wasn't voting for the next decade. We'll be fine during it, perhaps a bit up, perhaps a bit down compared to if the vote had been Remain. Beyond that though, I can only see positive outcomes compared to if we'd stayed.

What he said, rather more eloquently than I can manage at this time of the morning.

[jjlynn27]

Jockman said:

As nobody can define brexit, it would be impossible to go for a full one anyway. Or a partial one for that matter.

My take on it too. It's going to be interesting to see how things unfold and how much control anyone has over the eventual chosen way forward, whatever that might be.

[jonnyb]

jjlynn27 said:

Jockman said:

As nobody can define brexit, it would be impossible to go for a full one anyway. Or a partial one for that matter.

My take on it too. It's going to be interesting to see how things unfold and how much control anyone has over the eventual chosen way forward, whatever that might be.

Interesting times indeed!

[FiF]

hidetheelephants said:

Sway said:

SidewaysSi said:

bmw535i said:

Jimboka said:

'Brexit means Brexit'
Slight problem, nobody knows what Brexit will be.
.

It isn't a problem at all - everybody knows we just have to wait and see. There is no alternative but to do just that.

That doesn't stop some staunch remain voters insisting on the "fact" that there is a catastrophic mess apparently unfolding around us.

Elysium, ajd et al simply repeat what they've already said in a vain attempt for their small voices to be heard against the overwhelming tide of acceptance that increases daily.

You only have to listen to all the statements from May and the rest to understand there is not going to be a u-turn or second referendum

Of course not. But it won't be anything other than Brexit light. Then the "hardcore" Brexiteers (who I think are probably in the minority anyway) will be spitting blood...

And the Remainers will still be disappointed.

The 'hardcore Brexiters' have been campaigning for years, and the majority agree with the Norths...

As such, it's not Brexit lite. It's the first step that most agree with. Including me.

EEA/EFTA does provide increased control over FoM. It also maintains single market access whilst enabling unilateral trade deals. As such, it's the perfect approach to steadily reducing the reliance on the EU market that's been driven by Treaty for the last 30 years.

It may be 5 years, or 10, or 20, before we've sufficiently broken the reliance on the single market and are confident enough to pull away from EEA (I wouldn't support leaving EFTA at any point, it's exactly the sort of institution that the EU should have been, and the EU have zero influence over it). That's fine by me.

I wasn't voting for the next decade. We'll be fine during it, perhaps a bit up, perhaps a bit down compared to if the vote had been Remain. Beyond that though, I can only see positive outcomes compared to if we'd stayed.

What he said, rather more eloquently than I can manage at this time of the morning.

Yep, it was a good post by Sway there.

One thing that I'd missed and North And raised it just now, is that Germany is suggesting that right at the beginning, before any serious Art50 negotiations, we agree an extension to the two year rule. This is something that North proposed some time ago. On the one hand I have slightly mixed feelings about that as it could reduce the impetus to make progress. On the other hand it does deal with the problems of elections in other nations interfering with discussions. Yet back on the first hand gets us into our next GE, which just opens up the debate about, referendum advisory, parliamentary approval, u turn if you want to etc

Problem currently afflicting the debate, including this thread at times, is that the opposing factions are just repeating their positions, without hesitation, deviation but plenty of repetition. Tempers get frayed, some like myself largely, say stuff this for a game of soldiers, walk away and get on with other stuff.

[Jockman]

jonnyb said:

jjlynn27 said:

Jockman said:

As nobody can define brexit, it would be impossible to go for a full one anyway. Or a partial one for that matter.

My take on it too. It's going to be interesting to see how things unfold and how much control anyone has over the eventual chosen way forward, whatever that might be.

Interesting times indeed!

Yup. Whenever a country hits a 'reset' button, lots of things get thrown in the air (look at Turkey!).

The skill will be in taking advantage of opportunities as they emerge and limiting any damage in other areas.

[///ajd]

PRTVR said:

Jimboka said:

'Brexit means Brexit'
Slight problem, nobody knows what Brexit will be.
Seems to be heading for freedom of movement in exchange for access to the single market.The FOM part is great for the young Brits & those who like the option of moving to EU etc .
But not what most Brexit voters wanted & A lot worse for Remainers than the new deal which Cameron negotiated .

I keep hearing FOM is great for young Brits but how many actually go to universities abroad ? I was talking to a few the other day who were struggling with English let alone a foreign language, it could have just been me as they appeared to understand each other.

Quite alot actually. I did it back in the 90s, completed some of my engineering degree in a Parisian Grand Ecole under Erasmus.

It is more common now, and the international links of many good unis are impressive.

You should stop putting down the UKs next generation. I'm sure they'll run rings around some of the old farts on here

[Pan Pan Pan]

PRTVR said:

Jimboka said:

'Brexit means Brexit'
Slight problem, nobody knows what Brexit will be.
Seems to be heading for freedom of movement in exchange for access to the single market.The FOM part is great for the young Brits & those who like the option of moving to EU etc .
But not what most Brexit voters wanted & A lot worse for Remainers than the new deal which Cameron negotiated .

I keep hearing FOM is great for young Brits but how many actually go to universities abroad ? I was talking to a few the other day who were struggling with English let alone a foreign language, it could have just been me as they appeared to understand each other.

No one is complaining about immigration, what people are concerned about is uncontrolled immigration.
As the UK is now officially the most densely populated country in the EU, having recently overtaken Holland for that dubious title. How do people think that adding the equivalent of a town the size of Swindon (from the EU alone) to the UK`s population level every year, is going to make it easier for those already here? How is it going to make it easier to get a school / university place, a job, a home, decent health care, transport etc, when each person already in the UK, must compete with an extra three hundred and thirty thousand people coming here every year looking for the exactly the same things?
No one can blame those coming here from the EU, and from the rest of the world for doing so, but one only has to look at the colossal size and population of Europe, and the rest of the world to realize that the UK simply cannot cope with the numbers of people who want to come here. Trying to put thousands into one, simply does not go.
People from all over the world are drawn to the UK amongst other countries, in the same way that survivors from a sinking ship would be drawn to a lifeboat, which is fine until the lifeboat gets swamped by far more than it can reasonably cope with, and even that is when the weather is fair and calm (what happens when a storm comes up, is that it would make matters far worse) either way, the end result is that the lifeboat sinks under the weight of far too many people than it can reasonably cope with, so that instead of having the maximum reasonable number of survivors, ALL will drown.
Not ideal, but it is far better if numbers into the lifeboat are controlled, so that at least some are able to survive, Tough for the ones who do not, but that is the way the real world works, and always has.
I can understand basic instinct of those who want to help, and let everyone who wants to, come into the UK, and other similar countries do so, but doing this will ultimately lead to the sinking of the countr/ies in question.
Looking at the numbers in the rest of the world, and taking just the tiny fraction of those who want to leave where they are, and come to Europe, the UK, Australia, the US etc(strange though, that not many seem to want to migrate to vast Russia, Wonder why??) and it is plain that small, some already overcrowded western countries will not be able to cope with very much more un controlled immigration.
Some have pointed out that the entire population of the world could fit on the Isle of Wight, but what would living conditions and prospects for them be like if they did? The western countries with the best lifestyles are usually those with low population densities. This in nothing to do with colour, race, religion, persecution, background, wars, famines etc etc, but just huge numbers trying to go where there are already huge numbers, transfers of huge numbers, which ultimately just does not, and will not work.

[Pan Pan Pan]

///ajd said:

PRTVR said:

Jimboka said:

'Brexit means Brexit'
Slight problem, nobody knows what Brexit will be.
Seems to be heading for freedom of movement in exchange for access to the single market.The FOM part is great for the young Brits & those who like the option of moving to EU etc .
But not what most Brexit voters wanted & A lot worse for Remainers than the new deal which Cameron negotiated .

I keep hearing FOM is great for young Brits but how many actually go to universities abroad ? I was talking to a few the other day who were struggling with English let alone a foreign language, it could have just been me as they appeared to understand each other.

Quite alot actually. I did it back in the 90s, completed some of my engineering degree in a Parisian Grand Ecole under Erasmus.

It is more common now, and the international links of many good unis are impressive.

You should stop putting down the UKs next generation. I'm sure they'll run rings around some of the old farts on here

One has to ask why so many in the EU are crossing many other EU countries to reach the UK.
Could it be there is no work, or prospects for them in their own EU countries? If they are coming to the UK in their hundreds of thousands every year as they are now doing, looking for education, jobs, a home, health care, better life prospects etc, why would the young of the UK want to go where the hundreds of thousands of EU nationals coming to the UK have just escaped from?
A friends son, who is a brilliant engineer worked for Airbus Industrie, in France, but the moment there were any slight problems, him, and his UK colleagues got the chop, in favour of less talented locals. and all this was long before Brexit was even heard of. Unlike the UK, other countries tend to look after their own first.

[///ajd]

hidetheelephants said:

jjlynn27 said:

hidetheelephants said:

What part of the EEA's FOM being conditional and subject to unilateral controls do you not understand? Is it that complicated?

It would be simpler if you explain more. If it's North's Licht option it was discussed before. As I understand, 'Norway' option doesn't include controls. Happy to be corrected.

It's not an option, it's in the EEA rules, specifically article 112 and 113;

EEA agreement said:

If serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties of a sectorial or regional nature liable to persist are arising, a Contracting Party may unilaterally take appropriate measures under the conditions and procedures laid down in Article 113.

Not a sinecure as (re)joining the EEA requires the consent of the members and there will be horse trading needed to get that. North does venture the idea that as we are are technically still in the EEA we don't need to join but he doesn't put much store in it.

Art 112 and 113 won't apply just because "you don't like foreigners". Any cheeky application would be stamped on by the EU - and North should realise that. He does actually, so its not helpful to given false hope to those not smart enough to see it.

Licht option - with a pop of 35k - will hardly apply to the UK. Otherwise Switzerland would be doing it already - and they can't.

Such flawed dreams - dream on!