accept some form of a deal which preserves the status quo
AKA Remain.
contemptible
How do you propose he gets a second referendum through when 30 of his MPs and 10 of his shadow cabinet members have said they will oppose it?
AKA Remain
You know as well as I that the only way to maintain the status quo, or at least stay close to it, and honour the referendum is a soft brexit deal. I too would prefer remain but that option was taken off the table 3 years ago no matter what logical gymnastics are exercised to justify it. A new vote is the only possible mechanism for remaining, and there's no majority for it (see above).
How do you propose he gets a second referendum through when 30 of his MPs and 10 of his shadow cabinet members have said they will oppose it?
Nothing can get through Parliament with only one party supporting it. All options that either big party could propose will have rebels that will not support it. The Labour shadow cabinet has lots of (10 is probably a low number) "Brexit at all costs" MPs in it, because anyone talking sense on Brexit (including those proposing options now being, finally, looked at by the Leadership) were chased out.
I too would prefer remain but that option was taken off the table 3 years ago no matter what logical gymnastics are exercised to justify it.
Lots of ways it can be put "back on the table"… but both our main party leaders will do anything to prevent that happening.
but both our main party leaders will do anything to prevent that happening.
And why is that I wonder?
You know as well as I that the only way to maintain the status quo, or at least stay close to it, and honour the referendum is a soft brexit deal
Hang on, you said:
Well this is the problem, there is no way of honouring it
I agree. Remain it is then, the referendum wasn't honourable and isn't worth honouring.
I too would prefer remain but that option was taken off the table 3 years ago no matter what logical gymnastics are exercised to justify it.
That one is starting to wear a bit thin.
And why is that I wonder?
Same reason we are in this mess: pandering to bigots.
And why is that I wonder?
Because one wants to go back to the 70s and the other wants to go back to the 50s.
And they're both arseholes.
I agree. Remain it is then
Well this is the crux isn't it, we can't leave because it's administratively and politically (almost) impossible, and we can't stay because we've promised to leave. The only solution IMO is a norway/EEA style deal, or May's deal with the addition of a customs union (labour unicorns basically). Many will still see this as a betrayal of the brexit decision, but it will placate many too and deflate the explosion of outrage that remain would result in.
Because one wants to go back to the 70s and the other wants to go back to the 50s.
Same reason we are in this mess: pandering to bigots.
Honestly, you lot accuse May and Corbyn of chasing unicorns. The main reason they won't support remain now is that it's politically impossible. Even if they could get it past their parties (they won't), they won't get it past the country. What is it going to take for you to accept this simple reality?
What is it going to take for you to accept
thismy simplerealityfantasy?
That's better.
Many will still see this as a betrayal of the brexit decision, but it will placate many too and deflate the explosion of outrage that remain would result in.
Given the calibre of what we have seen so far outside parliament, I don't think we are dealing with political activists of any great ability.
Is everyone preparing for political and economic armageddon then? Not long to go now....
With May still spinelessly pandering to the ERG/DUP, with the continued tacit support of Corbyn, and the rolling shambles described by those in Brussels, it looks like the hardest of No Deals is the only realistic outcome. Its been looking all but inevitable for a while now.
So we can all wave our little union jacks and sing Land of Hope and Glory as the economy implodes.
Hurray!
Have we done a certain person almost getting run over?
https://twitter.com/snb19692/status/1103234116743499776
The thing is … we most probably will be leaving this month, in the worst possible way … but if you pretend it is inevitable because of the vote in 2016, and not because of the choices made by OUR politicans, you let them of the hook… and they do not deserve that… not one bit.
Even if they could get it past their parties (they won’t), they won’t get it past the country
You know what? They might, if they could summon the courage.
and we can’t stay because we’ve promised to leave
You could start by acknowledging the vote was illegal and thus void,
You know what? They might, if they could summon the courage.
Well now we're back to what would happen if they did. Suppose Corbyn and May both stood on the steps of Downing St and declared that they had agreed for the good of the country to cancel brexit. What then? I would expect a mass walkout from the cabinet and shadow cabinet, splits in both parties, a complete collapse of government with nothing to replace it, the resignations of both May and Corbyn, and a new election in the midst of a political crisis not seen since the civil war. And that's not even considering what would be happening outside of parliament. Is that courage or recklessness?
You could start by acknowledging the vote was illegal and thus void,
It isn't.
Sounds pretty good to me that dazh... perhaps there is an upside to this after all?
The problem with DazH's flight of fancy is whilst all sounds quite laudible on paper, it's a "solution" which pleases precisely no-one. Remain (obviously) doesn't want it, and the contingent of Leave making all the fuss doesn't want it either. If the goal is to please as many people as possible (something something democracy something) then the only viable options are either to crash out or call the whole thing off.
Of course, if the goal is just to please people then it's a bloody stupid goal, but that's a whole other argument.
(Also, on what planet is "do something different" and "maintain the status quo" synonyms?)
What then? I would expect a mass walkout from the cabinet and shadow cabinet, splits in both parties, a complete collapse of government with nothing to replace it, the resignations of both May and Corbyn, and a new election in the midst of a political crisis not seen since the civil war.
Political collapse, break down of the two main parties, a general election, a coalition government… all this could well occur Leave or Remain. All that going on after a no deal Brexit would hardly be preferable to it happening after either a declaration to cancel Brexit, or a delay in leaving linked to a referendum, in my humble opinion.
Looks like Leadsom's been confident in only scheduling the one Brexit debate for next week;s business in the commons. Somehow I think that timetable may be tweaked.
You could start by acknowledging the vote was illegal and thus void
Whatever the status of the referendum, the commons vote on A50 was legit and that's what we're stuck with.
Well now we’re back to what would happen if they did. Suppose Corbyn and May both stood on the steps of Downing St and declared that they had agreed for the good of the country to cancel brexit. What then?
True, it would be political chaos and there would be a lot of angry people, but at least the entire rest of the country would still be able to function come April 1st.
I would take that rather than political chaos on top of chaos everywhere else as well.
that’s what we’re stuck with.
They voted to give the PM the power to trigger A50 without needing further agreement from MPs, and she has the power to recind the notification as well. Should MPs have insisted that parliament have more involvement in the process? Hell yes… but the vote to give PM power to trigger A50 does not mean that we have to let the process complete… that is still the choice of the PM… and parliament needs to put the pressure on… or they are staring at April being a little messy.
If we leave with no Withdrawl Arrangement in place… it is a political choice… the government has the full power to stop it.
Remain (obviously) doesn’t want it, and the contingent of Leave making all the fuss doesn’t want it either.
You forget about the massive amount of people on both sides who are simply sick to the back teeth of it and want it sorting. They will all accept a deal not because they like it, but because it moves the issue on with the minimum of disruption.
We haven't even started.
it moves the issue on with the minimum of disruption.
They're in for a surprise then.
Also if tests showed that 52% of people were cured of cancer by taking a new drug that drug would be on the market very quickly.
And if the drug killed the other 48 on the spot, it might be thought about as a poor outcome.
But then we already established it’s a poorly performing analogy!
You could start by acknowledging the vote was illegal and thus void,
I read something about this the other day, it's down to the ref being advisory, therefore (I think) it didn't need to be official or follow rules & regs, if it had been official, then it would be gone by now due to the rule breaking & we'd all be having a nice cup of tea.
But then we already established it’s a poorly performing analogy!
It ignores cost as well… 4% more effective than placebo might be worth a punt if we're talking aspirin costs… where as Brexit is SUPER expensive (despite being sold as saving us money). And then… let's look at the list of side effects… …
down to the ref being advisory
Indeed. Mefty is right that no one has ruled that the referendum is "legal" or otherwise, but that's because any such law (UK or international) is neatly sidestepped by the referendum being non-binding.
You forget about the massive amount of people on both sides who are simply sick to the back teeth of it and want it sorting. They will all accept a deal not because they like it, but because it moves the issue on with the minimum of disruption.
not true
kelvin
Subscriber
It ignores cost as well… 4% more effective than placebo might be worth a punt if we’re taking aspirin costs… where as Brexit is SUPER expensive (despite being sold as saving us money).
indeed, NICE wouldve shutdown Brexit ina 2nd if it were a drug at the price we are paying for it!!
`<blockquote>I read something about this the other day, it’s down to the ref being advisory, therefore (I think) it didn’t need to be official or follow rules & regs, if it had been official, then it would be gone by now due to the rule breaking & we’d all be having a nice cup of tea.</blockquote>
This is simply not true, it seems to be widely promulgated but a reading of the relevant judgements shows it up to be a gross misinterpretation.
<blockquote>that’s because any such law (UK or international) is neatly sidestepped by the referendum being non-binding.</blockquote>
Ditto
You forget about the massive amount of people on both sides who are simply sick to the back teeth of it and want it sorting.
Ah yes, you're right. I was overlooking the intellectual heavyweights who haven't paid the blindest bit of attention to anything in the preceding three years.
They will all accept a deal not because they like it, but because it moves the issue on with the minimum of disruption.
The "minimum of disruption" is to remain. But you know that don't you, you cheeky wee scamp. Brexit in any form will be a disruption, it's just a matter of severity.
This is simply not true, it seems to be widely promulgated but a reading of the relevant judgements shows it up to be a gross misinterpretation.
Could you provide a link to these relevant judgements that you've read please? I'd like to read them also, heaven forfend that we'd be promulgating misinterpretations.
The judgement is here:
.
Someone made the point on this thread that an MP's enthusiasm for Brexit tends to be inversely proportional to their intelligence.
Just listening to Any Questions on iplayer. Liz Truss is on. Dear god that woman is dense! And you'd be unsurprised to hear; a very enthusiastic Brexiteer.
What really ****s me off is these clowns blithely saying 'oh, everything the EU does happens at the eleventh hour, they'll give us a deal in the end', when theres absolutely zero evidence to assume that to be true, and the consequences being so enormous
You forget about the massive amount of people on both sides who are simply sick to the back teeth of it and want it sorting. They will all accept a deal not because they like it, but because it moves the issue on with the minimum of disruption.
and its especially not true of Labour voters in the North & Midlands
Opposed by 86% or Labour remain & 64% of Labour leave voters in those regions
Dazh I think you may have to re-think your narrative on why you support brexit
One line sums it up I think:
"And, I repeat, the fact that Parliament has maintained control over withdrawal makes it patently inappropriate for the court to intervene."
Refering to torsoinalakes' link
Dazh I think you may have to re-think your narrative on why you support brexit
??
I don't and never have supported brexit. I'm long past thinking it can be stopped though. It's a cluster**** on just about every level for all the reasons that have been repeated on here ad infinitum. But clinging on to this faint hope of it being reversed is daft. And as I've argued, even if it was possible it would have very risky and uncertain results which may not be any better, or even worse. The only hope now is to change the debate and look for real solutions, and to do that we need to break out of this in/out leaver/remainer downward spiral.
Opposed by 86% or Labour remain & 64% of Labour leave voters in those regions
The trouble is we didn't vote in regions did we? We voted in constituencies - therefore if the sample size included a small amount of folk from Boston in the East Midlands region, and large amount from Rushcliffe then you've not got a proportionate sample size to compare a shift.
And Mansfield became a Tory voting constituency in 2017 - where it has been Labour in the EUref, so that would have conveniently shifted out a few more.
I'm not trying to explain away everything, but there are many factors.
And a sample size of 5000!