Could UK U-turn on Referendum Result (Vol 2)

[anonymous-user]

///ajd said:

I think that's not impossible. As the details of the "deal" become clearer, there is a good chance there will be a case made to say it falls so far short of what was promised that a) there has been a tangible shift in public opinion and hence b) there should be a rethink.

It is not unreasonable to expect the brexit outcome to be subject to some scrutiny and accountability - and if its poo, then it should rightly be flushed down the toilet.

That's why so many hardcore brexiteers are so afraid of the outcome being subject to further democracy - they know their victory was snatched on the back of some flimsy lies that are unlikely to work in the same way today.

Its already been established that the end process to the negotiations includes a vote in Parliament. Which part of that don't you understand?

[PurpleMoonlight]

jsf said:

The current tactics of Labour and the Lib Dems is to try and scupper the repeal bill and tie it up in legislative process via amendments.

The reason the Lib Dems are going to do that is they want to scupper Brexit full stop.

The reason Labour are going to do this is to use the process to force another general election later this year.

What is right for the country wont enter into this, its going to be pure politics, if May cant hold her party together through this we will effectively have a vote of no confidence which will either force a change of leader, or a general election, or both.

Could the Government call their bluff?

If the repeal bill fails we can still leave the EU but with huge holes in the UK legislation? Would that grind the UK to a halt?

[Deptford Draylons]

///ajd said:

Deptford Draylons said:

PurpleMoonlight said:

Deptford Draylons said:

Yep, but not to overturn Brexit. That is what many really want to happen, even if they have a hard time admitting it.

They can't do that because A50 has been triggered.

They can only make the legislative process in the UK difficult. We will be out in 2 years even if our laws are not ready unless the rEU agree to postpone.

I'd love to believe Remainer MP's now think there is no turning back, but with the EU signaling A50 can be withdrawn and that everyone can just pretend there was no vote, I suspect many would grab onto that very quickly. Yes they all talk about having left and the people have spoke etc, but I have zero trust in their backbone which would collapse in a fraction of a second.

I think that's not impossible. As the details of the "deal" become clearer, there is a good chance there will be a case made to say it falls so far short of what was promised that a) there has been a tangible shift in public opinion and hence b) there should be a rethink.

It is not unreasonable to expect the brexit outcome to be subject to some scrutiny and accountability - and if its poo, then it should rightly be flushed down the toilet.

That's why so many hardcore brexiteers are so afraid of the outcome being subject to further democracy - they know their victory was snatched on the back of some flimsy lies that are unlikely to work in the same way today.

Nope. You want to see another vote at the end of negotiations , doing so and then saying will re-vote again after a narrow win, will further encourage the EU to offer a worse deal in the hope of swinging it for what they want, which may or may not work.
I'm all for you fighting for another vote. In fact I encourage you to start a specific single policy party of getting us back in the EU, a kinda reverse Ukip if you like. Given the LibDems put everything on Brexit and saw their vote share go down, I'm not sure you'd succeed or even have the willingness to spend 25 years fight for what you want. I'm more than willing to say there should be an automatic referendum after the same 40 year period of the last one. How about that ?

[wc98]

davey68 said:

Senior chap at Merrill Lynch saying today that the Eurozone is doomed. His theory is that it cannot continue with the current state and the southern countries including Italy will likely want out and Germany will not agree to subsidise such countries indefinitely. Think he spent some time in the IMF too. Interesting comments.

note the remoaner tag team led by ajd failed to respond to this,despite responding to every other recent comment . there is only one group deluding themselves in this debate, and it ain't the people that voted leave.

[///ajd]

jsf said:

///ajd said:

I think that's not impossible. As the details of the "deal" become clearer, there is a good chance there will be a case made to say it falls so far short of what was promised that a) there has been a tangible shift in public opinion and hence b) there should be a rethink.

It is not unreasonable to expect the brexit outcome to be subject to some scrutiny and accountability - and if its poo, then it should rightly be flushed down the toilet.

That's why so many hardcore brexiteers are so afraid of the outcome being subject to further democracy - they know their victory was snatched on the back of some flimsy lies that are unlikely to work in the same way today.

Its already been established that the end process to the negotiations includes a vote in Parliament. Which part of that don't you understand?

Its not that clear what the choice will be however.

Some hope it will only be a choice between

a) the best deal they can get
b) no deal

but on the basis we'll leave no matter what.

There has been not discussion so far about voting on whether to brexit or not - that has not been tabled as far as I can see unless I've missed some pretty big news.

I don't think parliament could alone vote to overturn brexit.

I think there could be a vote of no confidence in the brexit outcome - i.e. it not being in the best interests of the nation or matching the promised outcome, and hence some push to subject the outcome to a general election or other democratic process.

As someone who is sure that the brexit outcome will fall far short of the brexit promises, I think this is not only a playsible outcome, but also quite justifiable.

Remember we were told the Germans would roll over the day after the election and be begging for a trade deal to sell cars. Pretty important lie that if it means our promised trade nirvana doesn't turn up.

[wc98]

///ajd said:

There has been not discussion so far about voting on whether to brexit or not - that has not been tabled as far as I can see unless I've missed some pretty big news.

you certainly did miss some big news. we had a referendum on it and decided to brexit.

[///ajd]

wc98 said:

davey68 said:

Senior chap at Merrill Lynch saying today that the Eurozone is doomed. His theory is that it cannot continue with the current state and the southern countries including Italy will likely want out and Germany will not agree to subsidise such countries indefinitely. Think he spent some time in the IMF too. Interesting comments.

note the remoaner tag team led by ajd failed to respond to this,despite responding to every other recent comment . there is only one group deluding themselves in this debate, and it ain't the people that voted leave.

I saw that. Senior chap? Who?

Sure the EUzone will continue to be a fiscal challenge for many.

I don't really see it as an order of magnitude worse than our own woes in 2008 - woes we still carry a trillion plus debt for, we aren't out of the woods.

We also need the EU to do well - we helped bail Eire as it was in our interests to do so. The idea we will turn our back on Europe is nonsense.

Remoaner? I'll resist the temptation to throw an insult back, ponder on the fact that it is not difficult who are able to debate intelligently.

[///ajd]

wc98 said:

///ajd said:

There has been not discussion so far about voting on whether to brexit or not - that has not been tabled as far as I can see unless I've missed some pretty big news.

you certainly did miss some big news. we had a referendum on it and decided to brexit.

Try and see the comment in the context of jsf's comment. Did you really not follow it, or did you think you comment would look 'clever'?

Either way, poor you!

[skahigh]

///ajd said:

wc98 said:

davey68 said:

Senior chap at Merrill Lynch saying today that the Eurozone is doomed. His theory is that it cannot continue with the current state and the southern countries including Italy will likely want out and Germany will not agree to subsidise such countries indefinitely. Think he spent some time in the IMF too. Interesting comments.

note the remoaner tag team led by ajd failed to respond to this,despite responding to every other recent comment . there is only one group deluding themselves in this debate, and it ain't the people that voted leave.

I saw that. Senior chap? Who?

Sure the EUzone will continue to be a fiscal challenge for many.

I don't really see it as an order of magnitude worse than our own woes in 2008 - woes we still carry a trillion plus debt for, we aren't out of the woods.

We also need the EU to do well - we helped bail Eire as it was in our interests to do so. The idea we will turn our back on Europe is nonsense.

Remoaner? I'll resist the temptation to throw an insult back, ponder on the fact that it is not difficult who are able to debate intelligently.

It's a brexit news source but contains direct quotes.

http://www.westmonster.com/eurozone-is-doomed-to-c...

[Troubleatmill]

Former Head of US Currency Reserve believes it will fail too.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/769288/Gold-Euro-...

[anonymous-user]

///ajd said:

jsf said:

///ajd said:

I think that's not impossible. As the details of the "deal" become clearer, there is a good chance there will be a case made to say it falls so far short of what was promised that a) there has been a tangible shift in public opinion and hence b) there should be a rethink.

It is not unreasonable to expect the brexit outcome to be subject to some scrutiny and accountability - and if its poo, then it should rightly be flushed down the toilet.

That's why so many hardcore brexiteers are so afraid of the outcome being subject to further democracy - they know their victory was snatched on the back of some flimsy lies that are unlikely to work in the same way today.

Its already been established that the end process to the negotiations includes a vote in Parliament. Which part of that don't you understand?

Its not that clear what the choice will be however.

Some hope it will only be a choice between

a) the best deal they can get
b) no deal

but on the basis we'll leave no matter what.

There has been not discussion so far about voting on whether to brexit or not - that has not been tabled as far as I can see unless I've missed some pretty big news.

I don't think parliament could alone vote to overturn brexit.

I think there could be a vote of no confidence in the brexit outcome - i.e. it not being in the best interests of the nation or matching the promised outcome, and hence some push to subject the outcome to a general election or other democratic process.

As someone who is sure that the brexit outcome will fall far short of the brexit promises, I think this is not only a playsible outcome, but also quite justifiable.

Remember we were told the Germans would roll over the day after the election and be begging for a trade deal to sell cars. Pretty important lie that if it means our promised trade nirvana doesn't turn up.

We are leaving ///ajd, understand that. Both major parties acknowledge that.

The only vote that will be offered will be accept the negotiated deal or reject it. If the deal is rejected we leave without a deal.

That is what will happen.

Even if we vote for the deal, the EU parliament could reject it, then we leave with no deal.

With regards to the repeal bill, it will pass, but instead of being a quick process it will go through the ping pong process of the Lords and Commons, so there will be a huge amount of time wasted purely to play politics

[JagLover]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Could the Government call their bluff?

If the repeal bill fails we can still leave the EU but with huge holes in the UK legislation? Would that grind the UK to a halt?

A very interesting question.

As far as I can see Article 50 is external to UK law. Only a unanimous vote by the council of ministers and ourselves can extend the process. Without that we simply leave once the two years are up deal or no deal.

The fact we may have no legislation passed to prepare is a domestic issue.

[anonymous-user]

///ajd said:

wc98 said:

davey68 said:

Senior chap at Merrill Lynch saying today that the Eurozone is doomed. His theory is that it cannot continue with the current state and the southern countries including Italy will likely want out and Germany will not agree to subsidise such countries indefinitely. Think he spent some time in the IMF too. Interesting comments.

note the remoaner tag team led by ajd failed to respond to this,despite responding to every other recent comment . there is only one group deluding themselves in this debate, and it ain't the people that voted leave.

I saw that. Senior chap? Who?

Sure the EUzone will continue to be a fiscal challenge for many.

I don't really see it as an order of magnitude worse than our own woes in 2008 - woes we still carry a trillion plus debt for, we aren't out of the woods.

We also need the EU to do well - we helped bail Eire as it was in our interests to do so. The idea we will turn our back on Europe is nonsense.

Remoaner? I'll resist the temptation to throw an insult back, ponder on the fact that it is not difficult who are able to debate intelligently.

Have you had your head in a bucket the last few years? The consensus amongst all the political economists who work with the FED, BOE, EU and give general government advice are all saying the same thing, its just a matter of time before the Euro either blows up or reforms occur that provides a true hard currency with fiscal transfers that will split the Eurozone in two. The view amongst these people is the politicians cant do what is required to achieve the latter, so its going to go bang.

They are just waiting for the trigger point, they think the most likely scenario is the Italian elections, which if it goes as expected will cause a bank run, which will end the Euro and could potentially end the EU.

I've posted this before, but based on your reply you haven't watched it. get your head round this. Watch from the start if you want more input, but from this point to get the views more pertinent to this. https://youtu.be/xFuVatBUsEg?t=33m3s

[///ajd]

jsf said:

Have you had your head in a bucket the last few years? The consensus amongst all the political economists who work with the FED, BOE, EU and give general government advice are all saying the same thing, its just a matter of time before the Euro either blows up or reforms occur that provides a true hard currency with fiscal transfers that will split the Eurozone in two. The view amongst these people is the politicians cant do what is required to achieve the latter, so its going to go bang.

They are just waiting for the trigger point, they think the most likely scenario is the Italian elections, which if it goes as expected will cause a bank run, which will end the Euro and could potentially end the EU.

I've posted this before, but based on your reply you haven't watched it. get your head round this. Watch from the start if you want more input, but from this point to get the views more pertinent to this. https://youtu.be/xFuVatBUsEg?t=33m3s

Head in bucket eh?

Charming.

I don't rule out a two tier Eurozone, that is quite possible, but I don't see a Euro armageddon that is much worse that what happened in the UK in 2008. Life will go on - look how many countries have gone bankrupt in the last few hundred years - including the UK. There will be solutions. Look at Eire - that was totally screwed not too many years ago.

All this scaremongering about the EU is exaggerated and not a reason to crap our panties and leave the EU like scared wussies.

A vote to chose either no deal or that rubbish dregs that Davis will roll over for is no choice for a great country like the UK. What low expectations. We deserve much more ambitious outcomes than a brexit based on bungled diplomacy (go whistle) and already debunked myths (Germans need to sell cars, row of the summer over trade deals)......

And stop blaming remainers for pointing out how crap it is.

It is down to brexiteers to show it is not, and show magnificent progress with getting the right deal with the EU.

They are failing on daily basis to do so, and achieving the opposite - its the ststorm that was predicted.

I fear the long term damage is already in train.

Edited by ///ajd on Saturday 15th July 19:46

[///ajd]

skahigh said:

It's a brexit news source but contains direct quotes.

http://www.westmonster.com/eurozone-is-doomed-to-c...

Ha ha - seriously? That's the link?

Crikey - brexiteers are desperate for news to prop up their fears!

[Troubleatmill]

///ajd said:

but I don't see a Euro armageddon that is much worse that what happened in the UK in 2008

Given a choice between siding with you - or what almost every economist of note is saying.... it isn't quite the tough call I thought it might be.

[Tuna]

PurpleMoonlight said:

If the repeal bill fails we can still leave the EU but with huge holes in the UK legislation? Would that grind the UK to a halt?

It may be just my view of the world, but on the whole the job of legislation isn't to 'permit' something to happen, it's to prevent things from getting out of control.

This seems to be a common attitude towards the EU amongst die hard remainers - that without it we wouldn't be able to trade, or without legislation we wouldn't be able to be friends with our neighbours, or tie our own bootlaces. I find the view that the legislature are single handedly holding back the great unwashed, racist, incompetent, criminal public rather a negative mindset. It's odd to believe that our own politicians are universally incapable, yet the smart people in Brussels have a visionary masterplan that's bound to succeed. There must be a term for it - like 'appeal to authority'.. perhaps faith in the faceless?

[anonymous-user]

You didn't watch the video did you ///ajd.

[Dr Jekyll]

Tuna said:

It may be just my view of the world, but on the whole the job of legislation isn't to 'permit' something to happen, it's to prevent things from getting out of control.

+1

Governments can't stop international trade even if they want to.

[///ajd]

jsf said:

You didn't watch the video did you ///ajd.

You mean the one you posted from April, where the US guy postulates about a Le Pen win in France and how even a referendum called by her on the Euro would cause a run on the banks? How is that panning out?

I would agree there are considerable risks in the EU, but I also think they can be navigated, and I suspect they will be.

We were doing not too badly up to 2015 to try and recover from 2008 - we were NOT out of the woods - our debt was still massive, but the deficit was being tackled and our economy was turning a corner slowly into the kind of growth that would see us slowly crawl into a better place. That is all potentially on the bonfire of brexit now, and we are in more trouble that Italy frankly - there's the real joke here. You are 'worried' about Italy - look at what brexit is doing to the UK. Car industry investment lowest since records began. This is yet to filter through and be felt structurally of course but by then - if not checked - the damage will be done.