Could UK U-turn on Referendum Result (Vol 2)
Discussion
Ghibli said:
I will be honest and say that I haven't listened to the R4 interview yet.
IMO the article 50 part is a red herring and he has bolted early. It makes no difference unless he is saying we should have another ref because art 50 is revocable or we should have another ref because it is not.
Either way neither make sense not knowing whether it can be revoked, unless Farage hasn't mentioned art 50.
Farage was not talking about the legalities or otherwise of revoking A50 this morning. That point was raised by a bunch of senior lawyers from (if I heard correctly) Matrix Chambers? IMO the article 50 part is a red herring and he has bolted early. It makes no difference unless he is saying we should have another ref because art 50 is revocable or we should have another ref because it is not.
Either way neither make sense not knowing whether it can be revoked, unless Farage hasn't mentioned art 50.
Farage position is that he does not want REF2, but he recognises that it could be a possibility, he also recognises that it MIGHT be the only way to silence the most vocal Remainers and Whiners (his words, not mine) and he is flagging up to Brexit supporters that they should prepare for this eventuality. It's not confusing in the slightest.
Greg66 said:
Noting quite as satisfying as working in base 12 (with halves) and base 20 at the same time.
I also welcome big white £5 notes the size of table napkins, three television channels plus closedown and the national anthem at midnight, Harold Wilson, Watneys Party 7, Paul Masson's Californian Carafes instead of that filthy French muck, spam, eggs, chips, more spam, a return to tinned food, power cuts, Tomorrow's World when it really was tomorrow's world, proper dog turds that were left where they fell and went white in the sun, rationing, Glenn Miller, Sir Edmund Hilary on the roof of the world, silicon chips talked about in wonderment, Star Trek not Star Wars, Grandstand, World of Sport, Frank Bough, Dickie Davies, and westerns on a Sunday afternoon.
It will be glorious.
Will there also be Wrestling on ITV? Count me in!I also welcome big white £5 notes the size of table napkins, three television channels plus closedown and the national anthem at midnight, Harold Wilson, Watneys Party 7, Paul Masson's Californian Carafes instead of that filthy French muck, spam, eggs, chips, more spam, a return to tinned food, power cuts, Tomorrow's World when it really was tomorrow's world, proper dog turds that were left where they fell and went white in the sun, rationing, Glenn Miller, Sir Edmund Hilary on the roof of the world, silicon chips talked about in wonderment, Star Trek not Star Wars, Grandstand, World of Sport, Frank Bough, Dickie Davies, and westerns on a Sunday afternoon.
It will be glorious.
Ghibli said:
andymadmak said:
Are we good at making quick trade deals? That's news to me, especially as we haven't been able to negotiate our own trade deals for rather a long time (due to EU membership)
I think the negotiations with the EU are a special case, wouldn't you agree? As such it's not sensible to compare those negotiations with others that we may have elsewhere.
Andrea leadsom is on record saying that we will be able to complete trade deals in 18months.I think the negotiations with the EU are a special case, wouldn't you agree? As such it's not sensible to compare those negotiations with others that we may have elsewhere.
It was part of the official leave campaign.
Greg66 said:
andymadmak said:
Be under no illusions though, the Ref2 strategy has but one aim - to over turn the result of the first.
D'ya think? 
Instead it's a clear way to fundamentally undermine the UK position in the negotiations. Why would the EU negotiate in good faith if it knows that by playing hardball it can trigger a REF2 designed to secure continued UK membership of the EU ?
Thus to win a Remain outcome all the EU has to do in theory is to offer the s
ttiest deal imaginable and officially confirm that A50 can be revoked with no loss of current UK privileges.The trouble with this approach is twofold in my opinion:
1. It's by far from clear that the UK would change it's mind, not withstanding a WTO or s
tty EU deal outcome2. It's a gamble by the EU, because in offering a s
tty deal that risks getting rejected the UK would (if REf2 did not overturn REF1) exit on WTO - which would be bad for the EU too! Jockman said:
sidicks said:
We there also be Wrestling on ITV? Count me in!
Fat old men in mankinis? Get a grip of yourself Sid. 
Didn't we do well!
Ghibli said:
I will be honest and say that I haven't listened to the R4 interview yet.
I also listened to the R4 interview and it wasn't so much about revoking A50 but more along the lines that he expected there would be a deal which will be unacceptable to Parliament and it will be voted down with the result that we leave on WTO terms.He expects a bad deal from Barnier and has mentioned previously that a "trade in goods" deal was no problem but the EU would hold out on services and thus the UK at a severe disadvantage on the deal. That could be why we've had Hammond over in Germany this week, perhaps Farage got wind of that meeting.
His basis for Ref#2 wasn't that he wanted one but felt that the second time around it would be a higher Leave vote which might just influence UK politicians. He could be right, the EU have moved rapidly towards things which were denied in 2016 and there's no doubt that the murder of Jo Cox caused some to be uncomfortable in being associated with the Leave campaign. Neither of those things will be present the second time around. (although we will probably have a red bus
)Personally I don't have that feeling and a 2nd Referendum would firstly make the UK look very weak in being unable to follow through or negotiate for it's people and secondly it would fulfill the prediction made by many that the EU would offer a lousy deal to force the UK to vote again. I actually think he's hedging his bets, if that comes about he'll bounce up and say "told you so".
Again a personal view but the UK cannot return to pre 2016 status. Our voice has been irrevocably marginalised and a veto is useless. If we voted to remain we should enter completely, the Euro, Schengen, fiscal & political union, the whole 9 yards. That is the only way in which we could possibly hope to reform the EU and that should be the Remain campaign platform.
Greg66 said:
Oh yes, and we will even have Morcombe & Wise on the BBC where they were funny, and Brucie doing the Generation Game on a Saturday evening.
Didn't we do well!
I never really liked Morecambe & Wise or Brucie, but more Not the Nine o' clock news and Monty Python will be good.Didn't we do well!
Ghibli said:
I assume remain will be saying that we will be staying in the EU and things will remain as they already are. I am curious as to what leave will be offering. Obviously the bespoke trade deal with the EU will be off the cards along with extra for the NHS. Will it be based on special trade deals with the rest of the world and sovereignty?
This is a good question, and one that I think we can really debate sensibly if we try! I'll start with a quick and dirty response if I may: For Team Remain to win, I think they have to offer a vision for a future EU that is different to what people believe will be the case currently. Saying that things will stay as they are is neither credible nor accurate. People know that because that, if anything, the past 18 months has shown that not only does the EU not want to change, but if anything key elements within it are still ardent supporters of the "ever closer union" mantra.
I was on the fence in REF1 until quite later on, but to get me to shift to Remain I would have to be confident that the inexorable creep towards an EU superstate was going to stop, and that some loosening of structures was likely to be possible so that Southern Europe can have a chance to recover. There are other things I would want to see changed too, such as a fundamental revision of the CAP, a change to FOM rules, and a decentralisation of power. Is any of that possible? I don't know, but without clear commitments to those things combined with a reasonable expectation that they would be pursued diligently by HMG and with a reasonable expectation of success then i would not be switching sides .
Of course, as an alternative Remain could go down the ProjectFear2 route. PF2 would rely on building on the uncertainties brought forward during the past 18 months. For this to be successful though, PF2 would have to acknowledge that PF1 was also, at least in part, rather riddled with lies, exaggerations and inaccuracies. As another poster has already pointed out, PF2 combined with a s
tty trade deal on offer could actually make the voters MORE inclined to say "stuff it" to the EU. I certainly would. The temptation to go with PF2 for the Remain camp will be strong. It would be interesting to see if Team Remain could maintain unity on this. For Team Brexit to win, they would need to be able answer clearly many of the points raised by Remain regarding future trade, the costs of WTO and it's likely effects on the man in the street. Right now, there are a number of good news stories that support Brexit - manufacturing levels at record highs, low and falling unemployment. Even inflation is not horrible... and right now the Team with their economic credibility largely still intact is Brexit, because most of the predictions from PF1 (real or perceived by voters) have failed to materialise.
Brexits problem is that it is not the policy of a credible political party (UKIP does not count) nor is it really supported by the current Government. As such Brexit has neither the resources to prepare the information likely to be required, nor does it have any authority to be able to say "if we win this is what we will do as a Government"
As per the first time, Brexit starts with one big advantage - (not Farage) the inherent cynicism and common sense of the British public. Rightly or wrongly, the balance of that opinion right now sits on the side of Brexit. For Brexit therefore to win it just has to allay fears, stay calm, not indulge in PF2 of its own. Avoid the bear traps and generally let Remain froth itself to exhausted failure.
More when I have time..
Edited cos I wrote Remain when I should have written Brexit at a key point
Edited by andymadmak on Friday 12th January 10:48
b2hbm said:
Ghibli said:
I will be honest and say that I haven't listened to the R4 interview yet.
I also listened to the R4 interview and it wasn't so much about revoking A50 but more along the lines that he expected there would be a deal which will be unacceptable to Parliament and it will be voted down with the result that we leave on WTO terms.He expects a bad deal from Barnier and has mentioned previously that a "trade in goods" deal was no problem but the EU would hold out on services and thus the UK at a severe disadvantage on the deal. That could be why we've had Hammond over in Germany this week, perhaps Farage got wind of that meeting.
Am I getting this right?
Ghibli said:
It would depend on any trade deals that we get. Apparently we are good at making good quick trade deals. Just not with the EU but the rest of the world will be like putty in our hands.
They'll be watching our strong performance with the EU but knowing that we're keeping our best cards hidden until we're negotiating with the ROW of course.andymadmak said:
Ghibli said:
Ultimately his quest is to have a deal that doesn't include financial services because he knows it's a bad deal.
Am I getting this right?
Who is "he"? If you mean Barnier then possibly yes. If you mean Farage then no. Am I getting this right?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff