Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?

  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
I don't understand what's so difficult about the reasons for a second vote.
We were asked a simple "Yes or No" question on a topic that simply couldn't be answered that way. Thus creating a situation where no one has a mandate for the type of brexit they want.
Think it is a scandal that party politics is the one deciding what kind of relationship the entire country will get.
 
Adisa said:
I don't understand what's so difficult about the reasons for a second vote.
We were asked a simple "Yes or No" question on a topic that simply couldn't be answered that way. Thus creating a situation where no one has a mandate for the type of brexit they want.
Think it is a scandal that party politics is the one deciding what kind of relationship the entire country will get.
Click to expand...
We aren't getting a second referendum. I actually thought Javid was one of the better ones until I read that Sunday Times story.
 
Adisa said:
I don't understand what's so difficult about the reasons for a second vote.
We were asked a simple "Yes or No" question on a topic that simply couldn't be answered that way. Thus creating a situation where no one has a mandate for the type of brexit they want.
Think it is a scandal that party politics is the one deciding what kind of relationship the entire country will get.
Click to expand...
I'm not against a second referendum in principle, but the idea seems to mean different things to different people, particularly in what they think would happen afterwards. I suspect it might be even less suitable for a simple 'yes or no' than the first one. In particular it puzzles me that people think the EU will re-negotiate because we've had another vote.

As you're in favour of a second referendum how would you word one yourself, I'm open to persuasion?
 
Adisa said:
I don't understand what's so difficult about the reasons for a second vote.
We were asked a simple "Yes or No" question on a topic that simply couldn't be answered that way. Thus creating a situation where no one has a mandate for the type of brexit they want.
Think it is a scandal that party politics is the one deciding what kind of relationship the entire country will get.
Click to expand...
This sums it up completely.
 
711 said:
I'm not against a second referendum in principle, but the idea seems to mean different things to different people, particularly in what they think would happen afterwards. I suspect it might be even less suitable for a simple 'yes or no' than the first one. In particular it puzzles me that people think the EU will re-negotiate because we've had another vote.

As you're in favour of a second referendum how would you word one yourself, I'm open to persuasion?
Click to expand...
I'm not necesarily advocating for referendums since I think they're a bad ide used by governments too cowardly to make decisions. But that can has been opened. My own suggestion depends on two outcomes.
If there is no deal
  • A referendum asking the questions again. (Leave, go back and negotiate or remain). Leave means leave without a deal. My guess is, "Go back and negotiate" might not be on the table.
If there is a deal
This for me requires a two-stage referendum. Since we now know what brexit looks like.
  • Leave or Remain. (Stage 1)
  • (Stage 2) Tell EU to shove it and leave without a deal, Take Theresa May's deal or Remain.
Think these events give the government a clear mandate for whatever it wants to do.

Think the preferential system like the one in Northern Ireland could be used as well for three-way referendums.
 
Adisa said:
I'm not necesarily advocating for referendums since I think they're a bad ide used by governments too cowardly to make decisions. But that can has been opened. My own suggestion depends on two outcomes.
If there is no deal
  • A referendum asking the questions again. (Leave, go back and negotiate or remain). Leave means leave without a deal. My guess is, "Go back and negotiate" might not be on the table.
If there is a deal
This for me requires a two-stage referendum. Since we now know what brexit looks like.
  • Leave or Remain. (Stage 1)
  • (Stage 2) Tell EU to shove it and leave without a deal, Take Theresa May's deal or Remain.
Think these events give the government a clear mandate for whatever it wants to do.

Think the preferential system like the one in Northern Ireland could be used as well for three-way referendums.
Click to expand...
Thanks. I can't see 'go back and renegotiate' as an option personally, I just don't see why the EU should change there stance because of a referendum, so that's one choice gone. Also, it would be crazy to have Remain as an option if we didn't know whether the EU would allow remain in the first place, and with what conditions (lose the rebate, have to join the euro etc), so we would have to ask them, and god knows how long we would have to wait for an answer given the number of countries concerned, or what corner we would have painted ourselves into if they said no.

I thought from the start that voting Leave was handing the government the right to negotiate an international treaty, in the way that all international treaties are negotiated, by governments, not parliaments or electorates. Not good, but that's the way it is.
 
711 said:
Thanks. I can't see 'go back and renegotiate' as an option personally, I just don't see why the EU should change there stance because of a referendum, so that's one choice gone. Also, it would be crazy to have Remain as an option if we didn't know whether the EU would allow remain in the first place, and with what conditions (lose the rebate, have to join the euro etc), so we would have to ask them, and god knows how long we would have to wait for an answer given the number of countries concerned, or what corner we would have painted ourselves into if they said no.

I thought from the start that voting Leave was handing the government the right to negotiate an international treaty, in the way that all international treaties are negotiated, by governments, not parliaments or electorates. Not good, but that's the way it is.
Click to expand...
As with so many things, this was never discussed. Can't remember any party putting a single cohesive explanation of our future after we leave. No one is even doing that right now.
You now have cabinet ministers saying the official government position is only a sticking tape and once they've fecked the PM off, they will revisit the agreement.
Your argument would be right if the government knew what they were doing and had a positiion.
On if the EU would allow us remain, that's a tough one. I would assume the overwhelming majority would be in favour but with 27 member states, you never know.
To be honest, do we know what the set rules are if A50 can be revoked, since it's never been done before?
 
Adisa said:
As with so many things, this was never discussed. Can't remember any party putting a single cohesive explanation of our future after we leave. No one is even doing that right now.
You now have cabinet ministers saying the official government position is only a sticking tape and once they've fecked the PM off, they will revisit the agreement.
Your argument would be right if the government knew what they were doing and had a positiion.
On if the EU would allow us remain, that's a tough one. I would assume the overwhelming majority would be in favour but with 27 member states, you never know.
To be honest, do we know what the set rules are if A50 can be revoked, since it's never been done before?
Click to expand...
People have claimed to know both we can and we can't, with the usual certainty one gets from them, but in practice we won't know until it's actually tested, it would depend on what the members think of a particular case at the time, I'd have thought.
 
711 said:
Also, it would be crazy to have Remain as an option if we didn't know whether the EU would allow remain in the first place, and with what conditions (lose the rebate, have to join the euro etc), so we would have to ask them, and god knows how long we would have to wait for an answer given the number of countries concerned, or what corner we would have painted ourselves into if they said no.
Click to expand...

The EU have signaled that up until a certain point they’d accept a u-turn on Brexit. IIRC however it was only if it was a result of another referendum or election though, not just the government deciding.
 
Kentonio said:
The EU have signaled that up until a certain point they’d accept a u-turn on Brexit. IIRC however it was only if it was a result of another referendum or election though, not just the government deciding.
Click to expand...
Have they? Or is the signalling one person's interpretation of what might happen? With most Brexit issues there seems to be a lot of conflicting quotes, from senior figures too, and people pick out the one that matches their own position and claim that's the right one of the many. I suspect we don't actually know. But if I'm wrong, and I often am, have the EU signalled they would accept a return to the status quo, no change, no penalties, no guarantees for the future?
 
711 said:
Have they? Or is the signalling one person's interpretation of what might happen? With most Brexit issues there seems to be a lot of conflicting quotes, from senior figures too, and people pick out the one that matches their own position and claim that's the right one of the many. I suspect we don't actually know. But if I'm wrong, and I often am, have the EU signalled they would accept a return to the status quo, no change, no penalties, no guarantees for the future?
Click to expand...

That seemed to be the message. That they’d accept a reversal as long as it was democratically signaled, without additional conditions. Of course we’ve already lost things like the medical agency which we couldn’t expect to get back, but unless they’ve changed their minds it didn’t look like there would be demands regarding the rebate or the euro or suchlike. It’s in their interests for us to stay too. It did seem like it was time dependent though, if we’re going to do a second referendum it needs to be soon.
 
Kentonio said:
That seemed to be the message. That they’d accept a reversal as long as it was democratically signaled, without additional conditions. Of course we’ve already lost things like the medical agency which we couldn’t expect to get back, but unless they’ve changed their minds it didn’t look like there would be demands regarding the rebate or the euro or suchlike. It’s in their interests for us to stay too. It did seem like it was time dependent though, if we’re going to do a second referendum it needs to be soon.
Click to expand...
Forgive me for being picky, but again is this 'message' one person's view out of many? Where did it come from, can you quote anything? At the moment it's what Barnier says that counts, albeit he won't make any final decisions. I realise there's a lot of sentiment in the EU that they don't want Britain to leave and many people have said so, but there's a strong desire to protect the unity and structure of the EU too, and allowing constituents to hugely threaten them, but without consequences, seems unlikely to me.
 
711 said:
Have they? Or is the signalling one person's interpretation of what might happen? With most Brexit issues there seems to be a lot of conflicting quotes, from senior figures too, and people pick out the one that matches their own position and claim that's the right one of the many. I suspect we don't actually know. But if I'm wrong, and I often am, have the EU signalled they would accept a return to the status quo, no change, no penalties, no guarantees for the future?
Click to expand...
Indeed... I remember the guy who wrote article 50 coming out and saying it was written with the intention it could be revoked at any time... And the time it seemed pretty clear that no matter what the intention it could be challenged in the European courts be ulultimatley a judge would decide how the letter of the law would be applied to the situation (which presumably would ultimately end up being appealed to the highest European courts... There would be. Certain irony if the only way the brexiteers could force a hard brexit would be to rely on the European courts...)
 
711 said:
Forgive me for being picky, but again is this 'message' one person's view out of many? Where did it come from, can you quote anything? At the moment it's what Barnier says that counts, albeit he won't make any final decisions. I realise there's a lot of sentiment in the EU that they don't want Britain to leave and many people have said so, but there's a strong desire to protect the unity and structure of the EU too, and allowing constituents to hugely threaten them, but without consequences, seems unlikely to me.
Click to expand...

It was from top European figures, sorry I can’t do my normal searching and backing up process because I’m on holiday with my gf and just popping on briefly. I’ll try and find you some links when I get back.
 
Jippy said:
We will have, bowing to our Rees-Mogg overlords.
Click to expand...
:drool:

In all seriousness, the Brexiteers have played a blinder here. Kick out May (inevitable) once Brexit happens and if it fails blame it all on her.
If it succeeds take the plaudits.
 
Stanley Road said:
There isn't a single person on the planet that can tell you exactly what leaving the eu looks like, it has never happened, there is no historic data to look back on.
Click to expand...

But it will be very harmful and hugely inconvenient no matter the exact details.

It also stuns me that people want even more power in the hands of the idiots that got us in to this and other debacles.
 
Member 5225 said:
Theresa May will only get 10mins to 'discuss' Brexit with the EU27 :lol:
Sums the EU up really!


https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1...resa-may-salzburg-summit-no-deal-irish-border
Click to expand...

She might have gotten more time if her word actually counted for anything.

Imagine they came to an agreement on anything? Boris would be writing his column before she took off, her own ministers would be telling everyone that it's just very temporary and anything the UK agree on today may be ripped up again tomorrow to do it over again, her parliamentary party would scream bloody murder (no matter what she agreed), and she would explain what she had agreed on was something else than the 27 thought it was by the time she touches down in London.

You can't expect European leaders to waste any more time on this farce.
 
Wibble said:
We call it zero hour contracts.
Click to expand...
We have them too. I was more referring to the picking industry.

ZH contracts have been discussed before and there were good for and against arguments. And when you do get work, is the hourly rate minimum wage at least? Picking fruit isnt. My neighbour has a 16hr pw contract and my mrs 24hrs, they can do more if there is demand and there often is. The money during those hours is pretty good.
 
Stanley Road said:
We have them too. I was more referring to the picking industry.

ZH contracts have been discussed before and there were good for and against arguments. And when you do get work, is the hourly rate minimum wage at least? Picking fruit isnt. My neighbour has a 16hr pw contract and my mrs 24hrs, they can do more if there is demand and there often is. The money during those hours is pretty good.
Click to expand...
Hows the pension?
 
Classical Mechanic said:
I think Eastern European migrants were the biggest contributers to the economy because they were generally young so healthy, had fewer children and often returned to their home nations. I.e. they paid taxes but were not an economic burden on the state through use of public services like hospitals & schools.
Click to expand...

Most EU migrants are like that. Lets face it no one in the right mind would retire in the UK. Hence why there are a million or so British immig erm expats living elsewhere.
 
Stanley Road said:
I would retire in the uk, just never want to work there again, ever.
Click to expand...

I loved the UK but I wouldn't retire there. Its far too cold, wet and expensive for my tastes to do so. The NHS is at its brink too which of course is bad news for anyone whose old and not rich.

Don't take me wrong, I wouldn't retire in Malta either. There's a construction boom that is driving me nuts. However its a great place to raise a family in. The country is safe, there's free child care, free tertiary education etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.