The EU Referendum

[londonblue]

Different argument because it is a different argument? Or different argument because you feel one way about certain people being held accountable for their actions but don't feel that voters who feel the same way about the EU should be doing the same?

No, it's a different argument. Holding EU administrators (for want of a better expression) to account for their actions is one thing. Holding politicians to account for their lies is completely different.

 

[callan]

In fairness to me, my quote above was very much tongue in cheek. When being serious I said all along we would vote to leave.

You would probably have been in a minority on here then.

The confidence in a remain vote being delivered was shared by many, including myself after an abysmal campaign by either side.

Both sides lied, and failed to put forward a coherent vision of what Leave or in fact Remain would actually look like.

Often the best advice given, was to vote with your gut instinct whatever that may be.

Personally I would be against a second referendum, as out could (and should perhaps) be an evolution over time rather than a fixed perspective or option.

 

[superblue24]

So you're suggesting a referendum on every step of the way on our exit from the EU?

No, I'm suggesting there needs to be a democratic mandate for the direction we take.

Suggestions on what form that might take?

Form of mandate or form of direction?

Form of "democratic Mandate" I think you said?

Such as a referendum.

Now I'm confused. So you are saying we need a referendum on our exit from the EU? How would this look? A number of choices on a ballot sheet? I think you overestimate peoples ability or indeed desire to participate in such a vote

 

[londonblue]

You would probably have been in a minority on here then.

The confidence in a remain vote being delivered was shared by many, including myself after an abysmal campaign by either side.

Both sides lied, and failed to put forward a coherent vision of what Leave or in fact Remain would actually look like.

Often the best advice given, was to vote with your gut instinct whatever that may be.

Personally I would be against a second referendum, as out could (and should perhaps) be an evolution over time rather than a fixed perspective or option.

I think you're right. I probably am in a minority. Even when remain was ahead I went out for a curry with some friends and was telling them leave will win. Even the one leaver there that evening thought I was wrong! I haven't gone back to say I told you so just yet!

However, I still think my suggestion of a 2nd referendum in, say, 2 years time when we have completed the majority of the negotiations would be sensible. (But then I would say that wouldn't I?) The issue for me is that people on both sides didn't know what they were voting for or against because no-one could predict what "out" would look like, and what kind of trade deal we could strike with the EU. It was all speculation. Some were prepared to take a risk and others weren't.

Allowing negotiations to take place, and then putting a deal before the electorate and asking them if that is acceptable or not would then allow people to make a more informed decision. I dare say there would be a number of "outers" that will realise that "out" doesn't give them what they hoped it would and may change their vote. But by the same token a number of "remainers" who weren't prepared to take the risk previously might see that "out" isn't as scary as they believed it to be and may change their vote too.

If the vote is still to leave then most of the negotiations will already have been completed and the actual process can be completed pretty quickly, so little time will have been wasted.

The main problem with this suggestion is that at present the EU won't negotiate until we invoke article 50, and this suggestion needs the negotiations to take place before that. However, I don't believe that will really be the case. I'm sure in private people are already talking.

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

Now I'm confused. So you are saying we need a referendum on our exit from the EU? How would this look? A number of choices on a ballot sheet? I think you overestimate peoples ability or indeed desire to participate in such a vote

I've already answered this.

It wasn't settled in a referendum. Hence all the uncertainty about what we are going to do next.

And it's what we should do next that should be asked in the second referendum. May needs to come up her best plan - be it the EEA+ path (Norway) or the go it alone (Canada model) or some hybrid that the EU are actually willing to grant us (so no cherry picking the best of both) - and that plan needs to be put to the vote in a referendum with the choice of that or remain.

 

[callan]

I think you're right. I probably am in a minority. Even when remain was ahead I went out for a curry with some friends and was telling them leave will win. Even the one leaver there that evening thought I was wrong! I haven't gone back to say I told you so just yet!

However, I still think my suggestion of a 2nd referendum in, say, 2 years time when we have completed the majority of the negotiations would be sensible. (But then I would say that wouldn't I?) The issue for me is that people on both sides didn't know what they were voting for or against because no-one could predict what "out" would look like, and what kind of trade deal we could strike with the EU. It was all speculation. Some were prepared to take a risk and others weren't.

Allowing negotiations to take place, and then putting a deal before the electorate and asking them if that is acceptable or not would then allow people to make a more informed decision. I dare say there would be a number of "outers" that will realise that "out" doesn't give them what they hoped it would and may change their vote. But by the same token a number of "remainers" who weren't prepared to take the risk previously might see that "out" isn't as scary as they believed it to be and may change their vote too.

If the vote is still to leave then most of the negotiations will already have been completed and the actual process can be completed pretty quickly, so little time will have been wasted.

The main problem with this suggestion is that at present the EU won't negotiate until we invoke article 50, and this suggestion needs the negotiations to take place before that. However, I don't believe that will really be the case. I'm sure in private people are already talking.

As I said in my previous post out could be an evolution of positions rather than a fixed outcome at any one time.

My personal preference would be soft brexit for the first 5 years, as we re-establish ourselves then graduate to a hardening from there on in.

Remain from my perspective does not need to feature in any future referendum (for me this has already been decided), however I would be happy to see a range of out options put before the people.

 

[londonblue]

As I said in my previous post out could be an evolution of positions rather than a fixed outcome at any one time.

My personal preference would be soft brexit for the first 5 years, as we re-establish ourselves then graduate to a hardening from there on in.

Remain from my perspective does not need to feature in any future referendum (for me this has already been decided), however I would be happy to see a range of out options put before the people.

The problem with that is similar to mine: that it needs article 50 to be invoked first, which means it will be too late. Another problem is that if the answer is no, we don't accept the deal put before us, where to we go from there? We could try to renegotiate but that will be messy. The government will have to refuse to accept a deal they've agreed with the EU, and ask to continue negotiating. Giving a range of options just gets complicated because you're asking the UK and EU negotiating teams to come up with more than one option, which is unlikely. It'll be difficult enough for them to agree one option, let alone a range of options.

You could, however, have a range of options, including a "scrap the whole thing and remain", but that wouldn't really be fair to the "outers" because a remain at that point could be the winner, but with less votes than the all the different "out" options put together, i.e. the out votes may be split.

Either way, I don't think this will happen purely because of the issue around invoking article 50...

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

I don't understand why one person would write this them 3 people would 'like' it.
It is as if they are saying that they like being lied to. The funding of the NHS was the main selling point to leave the EU according to the prominence of that pledge on their campaign literature. How could you 'like' someone saying it's not about the NHS when the campaign was built around the NHS?

I might be wrong, but I think you're moaning about rep. And that is indeed a bigger sin that being a whining ninny who is flabbergasted that more than one person finds it tiresome that you won't accept the outcome of the democratic process.

 

[londonblue]

I might be wrong, but I think you're moaning about rep. And that is indeed a bigger sin that being a whining ninny who is flabbergasted that more than one person finds it tiresome that you won't accept the outcome of the democratic process.

Are you moaning about someone moaning about rep?

(And, no, I'm not moaning about someone moaning about someone moaning about rep. I'm just asking a question!)

 

[callan]

The problem with that is similar to mine: that it needs article 50 to be invoked first, which means it will be too late. Another problem is that if the answer is no, we don't accept the deal put before us, where to we go from there? We could try to renegotiate but that will be messy. The government will have to refuse to accept a deal they've agreed with the EU, and ask to continue negotiating. Giving a range of options just gets complicated because you're asking the UK and EU negotiating teams to come up with more than one option, which is unlikely. It'll be difficult enough for them to agree one option, let alone a range of options.

You could, however, have a range of options, including a "scrap the whole thing and remain", but that wouldn't really be fair to the "outers" because a remain at that point could be the winner, but with less votes than the all the different "out" options put together, i.e. the out votes may be split.

Either way, I don't think this will happen purely because of the issue around invoking article 50...

Not invoking article 50 does buy us time to talk with the EEA / EFTA members...as much as sort out bi lateral trade deals elsewhere.

I take your points on a 2nd referendum, which is why I wouldn't have remain on as an option.
As stated previously this for me has been settled, if there is a referendum... remain does not need to be on there.

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

If secret talks have started with EU or non EU then they would be SECRET!
QED...........hush hush, shhhhhh etc.

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

MK totally misses the point again. The people who spend 68 billion a year in that club get to call the shots.

Have you volunteered your services to Theresa May, as one of her negociating team? You'd quickly put those European foreigners in their place! :smile:

 

[superblue24]

It wasn't settled in a referendum. Hence all the uncertainty about what we are going to do next.

And it's what we should do next that should be asked in the second referendum. May needs to come up her best plan - be it the EEA+ path (Norway) or the go it alone (Canada model) or some hybrid that the EU are actually willing to grant us (so no cherry picking the best of both) - and that plan needs to be put to the vote in a referendum with the choice of that or remain.

OK, but you do realize that's ridiculous, right?

You Remainers were complaining about the intelligence of the folk that voted out, but you now want to furnish them with a complicated ballot paper like that with which to plot out our path out of the EU? How is (for example) a road-sweeper going to make any sense of that kind of document and be in any position to make an informed decision.

I thought governments were voted in to take care of this sort of thing..... no?

Whilst you seem keen to micro manage our exit from the EU, I think most of everyone else is done with referendums now.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Am I the only remain advocate on here who accepts the referendum result for what it was ie a vote to leave?

I happen to think it was a stupid mistake which the country will eventually come to regret but I'm happy to accept the will of the people.

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

A little off topic but there again Johnson is going to represent us in Europe. Perhaps we all need a bit of a laugh and some of this is hilarious! :smile:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ent...national-reaction_uk_57873f6fe4b08078d6e7ece9

 

[londonblue]

Am I the only remain advocate on here who accepts the referendum for what it was ie a vote to leave?

I happen to think it was a stupid mistake which the country will eventually come to regret but I'm happy to accept the will of the people.

No, you're not the only one. If you look at what I've posted I've said there won't be a 2nd vote, and I accept that. I do, however, think a 2nd vote post negotiation would make sense...that's not the same thing as not accepting the outcome.

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

Am I the only remain advocate on here who accepts the referendum for what it was ie a vote to leave?

I happen to think it was a stupid mistake which the country will eventually come to regret but I'm happy to accept the will of the people.

No Barna, I'm with you on this one. Don't like it, think in the long run it will be seen as a foolish decision. As I've already said earlier, now it's done, bring on article 50 asap.

 

[rigsby]

Have you volunteered your services to Theresa May, as one of her negociating team? You'd quickly put those European foreigners in their place! :smile:

I might be getting you muddled up with someone else but aren't you running a business. If so you'll know that if you spend a fortune with a supplier you get looked after. If they start getting cheeky then you have to slap them down.:thumbsup:

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

I might be getting you muddled up with someone else but aren't you running a business. If so you'll know that if you spend a fortune with a supplier you get looked after. If they start getting cheeky then you have to slap them down.:thumbsup:

On reflection perhaps you'd be diplomatically better working with Johnson. The problem I'm having is deciding which end of the pantomime horse you'd be. :smile::winking: Sorry, couldn't resist it!

 

[Gt Yarmouth Shrimper]

Am I the only remain advocate on here who accepts the referendum result for what it was ie a vote to leave?

I happen to think it was a stupid mistake which the country will eventually come to regret but I'm happy to accept the will of the people.

I am completely at ease with the result, I now just want the Brexit side to live up to their promises, three of which they seem to have already broken.