[Closed] EU Referendum - are you in or out?

So to the shouty leavers can you all write down (or draw if you cant) what brexit means to you. This is the problem and why it needs parliamentary debate. Is it all or nothing, do we want freedom of movement, if we will end up paying the same but having no access is it worth it? If we can't get away from freedom of movement is that acceptable?
This is what needs to be debated and even among the leave mp's I doubt they could agree. Remember all those tory revolts over eu votes on the past?

chewkw is sometimes funny sometimes a bit odd. He is however as far as I can see ( and I must confess I often skip his contributions) not malicious or deliberately baiting of folk like others on here.

Sorry if this has already been covered (I'm only up to page 308), but given it's such a huge decision, the effects of which could last for 100 years or more, why is calling a second referendum such a bad idea?

It's not unfair in the slightest: those who voted to leave can do so again. It might be the same result, but at least we'd be sure...

Best of 7?

why is calling a second referendum such a bad idea?

I'm pretty sure that most who voted to leave want exactly that. Out of the EU completely along with all its agreements and obligations.

I am also sure that most who voted leave simply do not understand the implications

There are no details. It's frankly naive to think that we can lay all our conditions out, have a nice cosy agreement and vote and then trott off to negotiate. We have made a (bad) decision and we have to let our representatives get on with minimising the damage.

what i woulk like to see is the Leave campaign leaders like Gove , IDS etc dragged in front of parliament and made to explain their pledges .

I am also sure that most who voted leave simply do not understand the implications

Few people understand the issue in a GE but we don't stop them having their say. It's bloody patronising to say sorry you don't understand the basics so we are going to ignore you. Ok this might be sensible with yS but even then you have to allow them to exercise their democratic right however barking mad it is.

I don't know many leavers. Most who did, were the next generation up in my family (mid 60s). Almost without exception they have no interest in politics, and feel they were completely carried away by the romance of a dream sold by Boris and Co of getting 'their' country back.

Also, almost without exception, they feel that what they bought into was mostly political posturing, by people who have since disappeared, and if they had their chance again wouldn't vote the same way...

I was pretty incensed by

Your class system is still very strong

I don't want his apology as it would be meaningless. And I hope he learns some humility.

Comparison with a GE doesn't stand up. The decision can be reversed after 5 years. If we leave the EU we are out for good.

I'm pretty sure that most who voted to leave want exactly that. Out of the EU completely along with all its agreements and obligations.

given that its hard to argue all those who voted leave wanted to be fully out when not all of the levers now want that.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-boris-idUKKCN0ZC13W

Boris saying we will keep access after the vote- feel free to check for before as well- its Boris though he has said every position possible on Europe at some point 😉

It's bloody patronising to say sorry you don't understand the basics so we are going to ignore you

I still tend to agree with you and the only legitimate way to NOT do this is to have another vote where they vote stay or we present the deal and ask the people to accept it.
We cannot just pretend it never happened nor can we pretend it was good informed decision nor that we dont know what it means nor that we dont know many leavers have changed their minds since the date.

People may have been hoodwinked by some false pledges on the side of a bus that they know know to be lies and this may be reflected in any new vote.

Ahh... dear old Boris, the bastion of integrity 😳

WHy the leave campaign insisted they would have access to the market post leave and some are still insisting on this

because we import more than we export, so for cars for example our exports may get hit with a tarrif, but so will the people importing to this country - if needed we could surely use this tarrif imbalance to compensate our exporters.

Therefore it is in the interests of many of the companies int he EU to go back to tarrif free trade.

I don't know many leavers. Most who did, were the next generation up in my family (mid 60s).

I've met several young leavers and their reasons were based on their own research, and there are many valid reasons to want to leave the EU - Corbyn until recently used to iterate them for example.

ninfan - Member
The question there is whether something makes the EU treaties different from other treaties, which do fall under the prerogative

Clearly this court found that there was

The Supreme Court may well agree, or not.

Not as simple as that though, is it? This is not just a treaty.

When the treaty was signed, EU laws were adopted into domestic UK law. May has admitted that this is the position, as she proposed 'freezing' law at the point of declaring A50, then working out what we were going to do later, what would stay, what would go.

RP can't be used to overturn domestic law is what the judges are saying, and thats quite correct.

Undoubtedly. Because the leave campaign didn't use any facts, because then they may have lost.

because we import more than we export, so for cars for example our exports may get hit with a tarrif, but so will the people importing to this country

but even cars we export require components and raw materials to be imported here first , so there is no way it is that simple

its also the case that we import more than we export to the EU as a whole, to individual countries in the EU it is completely different and they have to agree to the deal we broker

"WHy the leave campaign insisted they would have access to the market post leave and some are still insisting on this"

Because it's true. EU nations trade with non EU nations all the time. Or do you think China's in the EU?

Nor did remain, and they lost.

I've met several young leavers and their reasons were based on their own research, and there are many valid reasons to want to leave the EU

Why would leavers be against a second referendum? If they value the will of the people so much, then all we'd be doing is getting an up-to-date version of that. They'd have to accept the result.

China is not in the EU , so they pay tarifs or have agreed a trade deal . They dont have access to the single market .

"its also the case that we import more than we export to the EU as a whole, to individual countries in the EU it is completely different and they have to agree to the deal we broker"

Yup, there's sure to be an impasse over loads of issues. The chances of successfully leaving via the Article 50 mechanism are pretty much zero AFAICT. Hard to see any reason why every single EU nation would agree to a great deal to help us leave promptly.

Because it's true. EU nations trade with non EU nations all the time. Or do you think China's in the EU?

Being in the market and trading with the market are not the same thing. It would have helped had you bothered to read the link and understand it.
Clearly no one thinks china is in the EU though some folk seem confused about the difference between trading with and being in a single market with.

The import export deficit is just an abuse of stats

45 % of our trade * and 4 %* of the EU trade is what we are discussing

given this its pretty clear who needs it . Its a deliberately distorted presentation of the facts

* approx there is much arguing over the exact figure but the difference is orders of magnitude

Why would leavers be against a second referendum? If they value the will of the people so much, then all we'd be doing is getting an up-to-date version of that. They'd have to accept the result.

"China is not in the EU , so they pay tarifs or have agreed a trade deal . They dont have access to the single market ."

They're not *in* the single market but they can still sell to EU nations. What do you think access means? Are you seriously claiming that if you pay tarrifs you don't have access to a country? So the UK has no access to the the Argentinian Market because we have to collect tarrifs from them?

Time and time again the EU have made it 100% clear. NO tariff free access to the single market without free movement of people and a contribution to the EU budget.

Why deluded leavers are still claiming that tariff free trade is possible with the EU without free movement of people and contributing to the EU budget.

Several examples on this thread of people with this delusion. ITS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN

""Alice laughed: "There's no use trying," she said; "one can't believe impossible things."
"I daresay you haven't had much practice," said the Queen. "When I was younger, I always did it for half an hour a day. Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast."

sorry , meant they dont have FREE access to single market .

We knew it was irreversible and I agree with TJ 😯 Everyone knew what the base case was. So we can't just pretend that didn't happen,

yS produced a whole book of BS rather than just the five core lies of the Brexhsiteers. Would we have said to the Scots, sorry you should have know that yS were lying through their teeth so to pretext you from your very silly decision we are going to ignore it?

Of course not.

[quote=cchris2lou ]what i woulk like to see is the Leave campaign leaders like Gove , IDS etc dragged in front of [s]parliament[/s] an executioner and made to explain their pledges .

Fixed

[quote=teamhurtmore ]I agree with TJ

quoting for those who might not otherwise see it 😉

😉

😆

What do you think access means?

We have access to the EU market china have access to the EU market

Its the same word but it does not mean the same thing

Fallacy of equivocation though in this case i think its you being deliberately obtuse as they never meant access like china when they said as the article i linked to conclusively showed.

the ability, right, or permission to approach, enter, speak with, or use; admittance:

they have the ability we have the right , they argued for the right not the ability. they are still arguing for it.

I dont really understand what the point is you rare trying to make.

I am also sure that most who voted leave simply do not understand the implications

As I tried to explain to some Spanish friends, it's all very embracing.

There is a wonderful irony that mini THM and the editor of The Economist on QT have made that by ensuring that the UK Parliament has taken back control the road to Brexshit has been made far muddier!!

javeed making a clown of himself on QT. This is a technical legal issue, it's not an assault on democracy

[quote=teamhurtmore ]javeed making a clown of himself on QT. This is a technical legal issue, it's not an assault on democracy

+1 - was thinking of posting something very similar

I reckon the audience member talking about parliamentary democracy just now is probably the most intelligent person in the room.

I want to know what has been promised to Nissan.

I've met several young leavers and their reasons were based on their own research, and there are many valid reasons to want to leave the EU - Corbyn until recently used to iterate them for example.

I have no reason to doubt you and they could just vote Leave again. Their single vote is worth as much second time around as the first: another vote isn't devaluing that.

I just don't see why it shouldn't be considered prudent for such a massive decision to have a second vote, especially when the vote was so close, and with such a large percentage of the electorate not voting. I'd probably be saying the same if it was marginal the other way...

I almost feel embarrassed to be a remainer given the excuses that are being bandied about - we didn't k ow this, we didn't know that, others are stupid they didn't know anything etc. FFS, we had months of debate

The whole debate is embarrassing - at least the editor of The Economist is talking sense - poor lady having to deal with the ignorant shouter!

it's not an assault on democracy

Not liking the decision, like brexit, does not make it undemocratic

Any bets on which party bald headed bloke supports?

edit: no I don't mean Javid