What if we decide the voters weren't informed enough after this vote, have another?
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
Maybe the answer is civil unrest? Not something I would generally, at all, advocate, but very occasionally it has worked. It resulted in the Poll Tax being changed.
Any other occasions where civil unrest has been effective? Can't be many. The French used to riot all the time in the 60s & 70s, did it get them anywhere?
It had some effect in rights for African Americans.
Any other occasions where civil unrest has been effective? Can't be many. The French used to riot all the time in the 60s & 70s, did it get them anywhere?
It had some effect in rights for African Americans.
I've (and many others) replied to this 'what if' in the last few pages... In the post you quoted I even state you can make it final if you want to. It's a weak excuse not to give people a chance to change their mind imo...
EU may offer British PM a UK-wide customs union
The EU will offer British Prime Theresa May a UK-wide customs union as a way around the Irish backstop issue, but it will have to be negotiated beyond the Withdrawal Agreement as a separate treaty, RTÉ News understands.
The Withdrawal Agreement will contain a specific commitment to a UK-wide customs arrangement by way of a legal article, but that commitment will say that a formal EU-UK customs union will require a separate agreement.
However, the EU, and the Irish Government still insist that a Northern Ireland-specific backstop remains in place, even if a separate UK-wide customs arrangement is negotiated.
London has long sought a UK-wide customs arrangement as a way to avoid customs checks on both the Irish land border and along the Irish Sea.
Re-worked elements of the draft Withdrawal Treaty have been seen by RTÉ News.
They appear to be in conflict with the Mrs May’s demand that the Withdrawal Agreement contain a UK-wide customs backstop that is "legally-binding" and temporary, and her position that a Northern Ireland-specific backstop remains "unacceptable".
It is not clear that London will be content with a legal "commitment" to arrange a UK-wide customs backstop if it has to be negotiated as a stand-alone agreement that sits outside the Withdrawal Agreement.
Yesterday in the House of Commons, Mrs May outlined four steps that the UK was demanding in order for an agreement to be reached, including "the commitment to a temporary UK-EU joint customs territory legally binding, so the Northern Ireland only proposal is no longer needed."
RTÉ News understands that the promise of a UK-wide customs backstop will feature prominently near the top of a re-drafted Withdrawal Agreement, and that previous references to Northern Ireland being part of the EU's "customs territory" will be dropped.
Northern Ireland will be referred to in more oblique terms further down the text, according to a draft.
However, the text will say that in the event of the Northern-Ireland specific backstop coming into effect, a separate annexe will set out how that would work.
That annexe will refer to the EU's Union Customs Code (UCC) applying in Northern Ireland, according to a draft text.
These drafts could change further when negotiations resume.
Customs remains the most sensitive issue in the negotiations, with the UK regarding any customs differential between Northern Ireland and the UK as unacceptable, and tantamount to having a customs border along the Irish Sea.
The European Commission has been attempting to "de-dramatise" the issue, by suggesting customs checks on goods between Britain and Northern Ireland could be electronically pre-cleared away from ports, and through the use of scanning and barcode technology.
While the EU has shifted its position to accommodating a UK-wide customs arrangement, it seems certain it will not be agreed and finalised within the Withdrawal treaty.
Officials say such an agreement would be highly complex, and would take some time to negotiate.
"That's complicated," one EU source told RTÉ News. "It's much more complicated than it sounds.
"The first point is the legal basis. You can't do it under Article 50. That's always been our stance. The second point is the practical aspects. It's very complicated to work out all the details in a short period of time. These things need to be negotiated properly."
The EU will want to know which part of the Union Customs Code acquis (body of law) the UK is willing to swallow in order to be part of such a customs union.
In particular, it would have to be decided whether or not the UK will seek to negotiate, sign and implement its own trade deals, or whether it will still avail of free trade agreements (FTAs) the EU currently has with third countries.
The EU will also need to know whether, as it continues to negotiate its own trade deals around the world, it is doing so on behalf of 27 or 28 countries.
The other problem is that the only off-the-shelf arrangement the EU operates, aside from its own, is a customs union with Turkey.
The EU-Turkey customs union does not absolve Ankara of having to carry out checks for regulatory compliance.
Furthermore, Turkey must abide by EU-third country trade agreements, but not in a reciprocal way.
In the case of the EU-Canada trade deal (CETA), Turkey has to allow Canadian goods into its market on the same terms as they enter the EU, but Turkish goods are not given the same privileged access to the Canadian market.
"The EU-Turkey Customs Union has lots of issues," says the source. "Those are bound to be raised. But it's very difficult right now under the pressure of time, in the current context of the [Withdrawal Agreement] negotiations."
The other problem is regulatory compliance.
In order to avoid checks for industrial goods, live animals and food products on the Irish border, there would have to be alignment of the EU's single market rules.
However, a UK-wide backstop does not address that issue, implying that some kinds of checks would be required between GB and Northern Ireland.
EU officials were taken aback by Mrs May's very public new red lines, as there was an expectation that any new ideas would have been presented in private by the British negotiating team, who had been operating with their EU counterparts in highly secretive conditions in the run up to the last summit.
EU sources say member states will want to see firm details of the proposal Theresa May outlined in the House of Commons.
It is expected that the British negotiating team, lead by Mrs May's Europe advisor Olly Robbins, will return to Brussels shortly to details of the new UK demands.
The Withdrawal Agreement will contain a specific commitment to a UK-wide customs arrangement by way of a legal article, but that commitment will say that a formal EU-UK customs union will require a separate agreement.
However, the EU, and the Irish Government still insist that a Northern Ireland-specific backstop remains in place, even if a separate UK-wide customs arrangement is negotiated.
London has long sought a UK-wide customs arrangement as a way to avoid customs checks on both the Irish land border and along the Irish Sea.
Re-worked elements of the draft Withdrawal Treaty have been seen by RTÉ News.
They appear to be in conflict with the Mrs May’s demand that the Withdrawal Agreement contain a UK-wide customs backstop that is "legally-binding" and temporary, and her position that a Northern Ireland-specific backstop remains "unacceptable".
It is not clear that London will be content with a legal "commitment" to arrange a UK-wide customs backstop if it has to be negotiated as a stand-alone agreement that sits outside the Withdrawal Agreement.
Yesterday in the House of Commons, Mrs May outlined four steps that the UK was demanding in order for an agreement to be reached, including "the commitment to a temporary UK-EU joint customs territory legally binding, so the Northern Ireland only proposal is no longer needed."
RTÉ News understands that the promise of a UK-wide customs backstop will feature prominently near the top of a re-drafted Withdrawal Agreement, and that previous references to Northern Ireland being part of the EU's "customs territory" will be dropped.
Northern Ireland will be referred to in more oblique terms further down the text, according to a draft.
However, the text will say that in the event of the Northern-Ireland specific backstop coming into effect, a separate annexe will set out how that would work.
That annexe will refer to the EU's Union Customs Code (UCC) applying in Northern Ireland, according to a draft text.
These drafts could change further when negotiations resume.
Customs remains the most sensitive issue in the negotiations, with the UK regarding any customs differential between Northern Ireland and the UK as unacceptable, and tantamount to having a customs border along the Irish Sea.
The European Commission has been attempting to "de-dramatise" the issue, by suggesting customs checks on goods between Britain and Northern Ireland could be electronically pre-cleared away from ports, and through the use of scanning and barcode technology.
While the EU has shifted its position to accommodating a UK-wide customs arrangement, it seems certain it will not be agreed and finalised within the Withdrawal treaty.
Officials say such an agreement would be highly complex, and would take some time to negotiate.
"That's complicated," one EU source told RTÉ News. "It's much more complicated than it sounds.
"The first point is the legal basis. You can't do it under Article 50. That's always been our stance. The second point is the practical aspects. It's very complicated to work out all the details in a short period of time. These things need to be negotiated properly."
The EU will want to know which part of the Union Customs Code acquis (body of law) the UK is willing to swallow in order to be part of such a customs union.
In particular, it would have to be decided whether or not the UK will seek to negotiate, sign and implement its own trade deals, or whether it will still avail of free trade agreements (FTAs) the EU currently has with third countries.
The EU will also need to know whether, as it continues to negotiate its own trade deals around the world, it is doing so on behalf of 27 or 28 countries.
The other problem is that the only off-the-shelf arrangement the EU operates, aside from its own, is a customs union with Turkey.
The EU-Turkey customs union does not absolve Ankara of having to carry out checks for regulatory compliance.
Furthermore, Turkey must abide by EU-third country trade agreements, but not in a reciprocal way.
In the case of the EU-Canada trade deal (CETA), Turkey has to allow Canadian goods into its market on the same terms as they enter the EU, but Turkish goods are not given the same privileged access to the Canadian market.
"The EU-Turkey Customs Union has lots of issues," says the source. "Those are bound to be raised. But it's very difficult right now under the pressure of time, in the current context of the [Withdrawal Agreement] negotiations."
The other problem is regulatory compliance.
In order to avoid checks for industrial goods, live animals and food products on the Irish border, there would have to be alignment of the EU's single market rules.
However, a UK-wide backstop does not address that issue, implying that some kinds of checks would be required between GB and Northern Ireland.
EU officials were taken aback by Mrs May's very public new red lines, as there was an expectation that any new ideas would have been presented in private by the British negotiating team, who had been operating with their EU counterparts in highly secretive conditions in the run up to the last summit.
EU sources say member states will want to see firm details of the proposal Theresa May outlined in the House of Commons.
It is expected that the British negotiating team, lead by Mrs May's Europe advisor Olly Robbins, will return to Brussels shortly to details of the new UK demands.
sounds like the labour policy eh
Don't exaggerate too much.
Your lot used a love a good old riot back then, didn't you?
No, you have May 68 that could be likened to a sort of riot by the students but that's it. The 60s have seen big manifestations too but nothing comparable to riots.
Because the public doesn't understand basic economics or the complexities of nearly any issue discussed as part of a general election. There's very little difference between the Tories usual GE campaigns and the type of nonsense proclaimed by Leave.
There's a huge difference between a domestic general election and a more generational vote on a strategic partnership with the EU. For one thing the EU will not tolerate a continued back and forth vote on this and they said as much during the first vote, the consequences are too large for the other members and the general markets.
Let’s agree on “reckless”. Cameron may be nice and genuine but, inadvertently or not, he has done more damage to this country than any PM in living memory. You simply don’t take such gambles when you are in that position of responsibility.
Singapore has just signed a trade deal with the EU...
If this was set before the first referendum I would agree 100 percent. Its also remainers that seem to be setting these new wishful rules in place for a second referendum which I'm not comfortable with.
It just seems letting voters change their mind is a convenient argument when the result didn't go as planned. That line of thought was also brought up about changing how the president is elected after Trump won out.
The mistake is already made, going back and rerunning it because its been decided that leave voters are uneducated just doesn't sit right with me and I'm saying this as a man who will get fecked in the ass when Brexit happens.
A least Trump will be gone by 2025 at the latest. The UK can't just go back into the EU. We're about to jump off a cliff and the question is, do we really have to?
All that doesn't matter tho does it? Leave voters get to vote again too don't they? 'The will of the people' is not being usurped is it? It's being confirmed...
You're just making sure, like people normally do...
Are you sure your want to delete this?
Sign this to indicate consent...
Declare after me.....
Etc etc...
To me it smells like fear for the most part when Leave voters state that the referendum is final and people shouldn't get another chance.
Unfortunately a lot of remain voters or people that didn't take part go along with it and after a point start parroting it without actually taking a step back and thinking about it.
Imo of course, but I'm yet to have anyone explain to me convincingly why its problematic other than something about protecting democracy and 'the will of the people'*... I'm all ears.
Protecting democracy by denying a confirmation vote and the will of 51% of the the people that bothered to vote...
Last edited:
Dyson is one of the biggest frauds going.
My living memory includes Thatcher, and Cameron doesn't begin to compare in those stakes.
That's a march, you are not calling this weekend march a riot.
Of course not, but perhaps it should have been.
Even more shocking, Farage actually turned up.
Not long now Nigel, you'll soon be out of a job.
Exactly right - utterly pointless to say a deal is 95% complete if the 5% not completed is the core issue that if not resolved will make a deal impossible.
Exactly.
Those disinfectants that claim to kill 99.9% of bacteria omit to mention that it's the 0.1% that they don't kill which we need to worry about.
"Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed" - sounds familiar
If the 0.1% includes a bacteria that will potentially kill the entire UK then you might think that the fact the 99.9% killed is fairly irrelevant?
There is no deal without a NI backstop. It's as simple as that.
Is it a Red White And Blue backstop though?
I've no idea what it is but they need to agree something.
Correct.
Theresa May's Brexit will make people worse off, damning poll reveals
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/pol...-worse-off-damning-poll-reveals-a3970186.html
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/pol...-worse-off-damning-poll-reveals-a3970186.html
Tusk sticking the foot in and confirming it was May who proposed the extension. Awkward
While appreciate the analogy, the reason disinfectants claim to kill 99.9% of bacteria is because it cannot be proven that they kill 100% of bacteria and therefore cannot advertise as such, so 99.9% is the closest they can get while being factually correct, in all likelihood they probably do kill 100% of bacteria. Sorry to disappoint!
As long as you're using the word 'probably' it's best not to try and correct them... Imo.
I think Brexit may end up being as bad as Thatcher's class warfare and social destruction. Although I think the later was in the end what fueled a crucial part of the leave vote.
No doubt there are going to be terrible consequences and I don't want to argue about it or take the thread off topic but to my mind Cameron unwittingly offered a bad referendum on what had been the Tories manifesto. Thatcher on the other hand knowingly and at times spitefully ruined whole industries and supporting ones, communities and their futures using the Police as her own army setting them against the British people they were meant to serve damaging the relationship for generations. I know which PM was the worst.
I’d agree that the leave vote was in many ways a legacy of Thatcher - most tangibly, the abandonment of the old industrial areas but also the us vs them culture war that she fostered. In terms of relative damage, it’s too early to say for sure although Brexit certainly has the potential to be more long-lasting in its effects.
For me, the worst part is that the Brexit mess does not even have the fig leag excuse of being the implementation of a misguided ideology. Instead, it was a born to rule dilettante who needlessly plunged the country into acute crisis and then ran away. If you swapped the names for David and Samantha, then Fitzgerald summed it up -
“They were careless people, Tom and Daisy- they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made.”
That makes me think of something that was written on the insert of Radiohead's No Surprises single (I think)... I can't find the exact paragraph, but it was about how people like to assume that there is someone steering the ship, someone always in control. But there isn't.
Brexit seems like a prime example.