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

Yes, there is warranty but do you go for a warranty claim just because the warranty is there and where nothing is wrong with the product/services?

Irrelevant to the point, point being that government can't pass pr amend laws no matter what they appear to promise, or indeed revoke rights from half the electorate, the government can suggest the changes to parliament, who then vote on whether they pass or not.

Yup but only 60 or 70% unless you're very pregnant and then you get 100%. In private clinics you often pay over the odds and that isn't reimbursed either.

thm,

Why is it undemocratic to ask the people/parliament after the negotiations have been concluded without interference, are you really sure about this(now you know the reality)?

Strikes me that if public opinion is massively against the agreement post negotiations, then it's undemocratic to actually go ahead with it.

Democracy should be able to stand up to being questioned, to simply say in 2019, right we had a vote 3 years ago about this, we must follow it through regardless of consequences, is undemocratic in itself.

Being allowed to change your mind, i would think, is a fundamental tenet of democracy.

RichPenny - Member

But do you think the other side will let others walk all over them?

Whatever happens, a solution which doesn't sit in the middle ground means we're in for decades of a divided society. To me, the middle ground looks like freedom of movement and the common market will remain.

cchris2lou - Member
And you get your money back.

mattyfez - Member
Irrelevant to the point, point being that government can't pass pr amend laws no matter what they appear to promise, or indeed revoke rights from half the electorate, the government can suggest the changes to parliament, who then vote on whether they pass or not.

Nobody is restricting anyone to travel with passport so that's a non issue.

I disagree.

The government's position was clear on how it would treat the result. Very clear. To repeat

This is your decision. [b]The Government will implement what you decide[/b].

They [s]wasted[/s] spent a lot of money on sending us all that document lets not forget.

The Remainers laid out their case, and the Brexshiteers did they same. The latter won the debate. Yes it was a crap debate and yes the Brexshiteers lied through their teeth, but more fool the voters who believed them - they are the losers in the end.

We also knew the base case scenario and voted on that basis. It is disingenuous to argue the opposite now just because we (the minority) don't like the result.

Democracy did stand up to be questioned. The people spoke and now the government is standing by its [b]explicit [/b]promise.

It takes some gall to argue against that (or an SNP membership card perhaps 😉 )

chewkw - Member

But do you think the other side will let others walk all over them?

It somewhat depends on whether they can actually deliver anything.

They promised the moon on a stick, now it turns out the best they can offer is a mouldy old turd.

Will the Brexiting public be happy with a turd? What do you think?

I'm expecting to need a visa to get into GB post Brexit. If I don't what will have changed?

slowoldman - Member

Nobody is restricting anyone to travel with passport so that's a non issue.

I think you misunderstand freedom of movement with respect to the Brexit argument.

I just disagree with that.

oldnpastit - Member
It somewhat depends on whether they can actually deliver anything.

They promised the moon on a stick, now it turns out the best they can offer is a mouldy old turd.

Will the Brexiting public be happy with a turd? What do you think?

We have been on middle ground for so long we do not even know what ground we are on.

Full in would be with Euro and moving towards federal Europe.
Middle ground is somewhere between where we were, towards to Norway model and toward the Swiss.
Full out would be same terms as we deal with non European countries currently.

Norway looks closest to the middle to me.

Disagree all you like, just because they said they will implement a50, or anything else for that matter, if it's contrary to a law, it's illegal and they can't.

The only way to get around that is through parliamentary decision. Not sure why that's such a difficult concept to grasp.

I perfectly understand that is part of EU agreement to have freedom of movement without having to wave your passport around like visa etc. i.e. part of the "rule of the club".

It's not really related to passports. It's about having common rights and responsibilities across a number of countries.

Disagree all you like, just because they said they will implement a50, or anything else for that matter, if it's contrary to a law, it's illegal and they can't.

That is not what I am disagreeing about. The issue or royal perogative v passing a new Act is a different (albeit related) issue

The only way to get around that is through parliamentary decision. Not sure why that's such a difficult concept to grasp.

Decision? The Government needs to pass a new Act. TM should stop farting around. The gov has a majority. It should present the Act, get it passed and trigger A50. There is nothing difficult to grasp in this either.

wood and trees....

RichPenny - Member
Norway looks closest to the middle to me.

It's not really related to passports. It's about having common rights and responsibilities across a number of countries.

It's a poor democracy that refuses to factor in public opinion and crack on regardless.

richpenny - the Norway option requires fee movement of people so is not going to happen as ending free movement of people ( no matter how much it benefits us) is a red line for the outies

the only options are stay in as we are or leave completely. No halfway house is possible without the outies crying foul!

Decision? The Government needs to pass a new Act. TM should stop farting around.

The government doesn't pass the act, the clue is in the name, act of parliament..the government put it before parliament to decide. Lol!

Indeed. The public spoke. Accept it. Move on.

Joe, you are merely arguing against the democratic process and/or advocating a constant requirement for public approval depending on the strength and direction of the wind. Understandable given the daily feed of the same ideas from yS folk, but still not right.

seosamh77 - Member
It's a poor democracy that refuses to factor in public opinion and crack on regardless.

THM, the public was hoping for something that is clearly impossible and not going to happen. Accept it and move on 🙂

the only options are stay in as we are or leave completely. No halfway house is possible without the outies crying foul!

They can cry foul all they like - the only sensible money is on a compromise

Agreed matty - hence my words. Present the Act (and since they have a majority and it was an explicit election pledge) get it passed etc.....

some of the public believed the lies that the outies put out there - that we could have our cake and eat it. Now those lies are exposed for what they are and the fact all we have is a busted flush to play is obvious then public opinion is clearly changing

They voted to leave - what they were hoping to achieve is up to them.

Doesnt change anything.

yS presented a whole book of lies not just five of them. None of you guys were suggesting that this should disqualify the result if it was YES. There was even an argument repeated that it doesnt matter if we are worse off, the desire to be FRREEEEEE was more important.

We lost, get over it. Move on or at least go and watch celebrity masterchef.

chewkw - Member
seosamh77 - Member
It's a poor democracy that refuses to factor in public opinion and crack on regardless.
What accurate measure do you have for public opinion?

Put it this way, in 2019 if the polls are say 65% against and the government doesn't take it back to the people, then we don't live in a democracy.

Aye your argument will be that the polls have been wrong recently, but they've not been that wrong. If you factor in margin of error.

You're right that the vote doesn't change anything. Apart from the hole it's blowing in the economy right now. Though of course that's more to do with the govt's cluelessness than the vote per se.

he only sensible money is on a compromise

You have a certain way or writing that always manages to explicitly state anyone who disagrees is not sensible or an idiot or some such

TBH I think none of us have a clue what is going to happen as we have no idea what our elected leaders will ask for and we have said we wont be in the customs union, wont accept free movement and they have said its all or nothing on the four pillars.

Perhaps you could paint us a picture of this "sensible option" no one so far is espousing?

teamhurtmore - Member
Indeed. The public spoke. Accept it. Move on.

Joe, you are merely arguing against the democratic process and/or advocating a constant requirement for public approval depending on the strength and direction of the wind. Understandable given the daily feed of the same ideas from yS folk, but still not right.

Not arguing constant. Only on issues of this importance, particularly when the justification for it comes from the peoples opinion. What the people think should be taken into account throughout the whole process. Not just once, when the wind was (very weakly) blowing in a certain direction.

richpenny - the Norway option requires fee movement of people so is not going to happen as ending free movement of people ( no matter how much it benefits us) is a red line for the outies

I don't think it is a red line, since no vote was had on that issue. May has stated it is, but she's a politician walking a tightrope. I do understand your desire for in/out to be clear cut. I just don't think either is possible.

They voted to leave - what they were hoping to achieve is up to them.

Doesnt change anything.

The only democratic method is to have another vote when the deal is done and see if the people want that. Parliament could pass a binding ref on that?

I agree we lost but the remainers are no more going to stop than the leavers would with such a narrow margin
Giving up is odd advice.

I also know it is very hard and painful to know that things are not going the way the remainders want.

You're nothing if not an optimist, but actually I think they are starting to drift in the right direction. The desperation of the brexmaniacs is starting to surface.

In other news, Farage as ambassador to the court of Trump sounds excellent. The Trumpsters would love him, everyone else would realise that we were taking the mickey, it would keep him busy elsewhere and (now this is important) it would allow him to leave Europe whether Britain does or not. Wins all round.

Now if we could just change the locks while he's out...

The public spoke.

TBH I think none of us have a clue what is going to happen as we have no idea what our elected leaders will ask for and we have said we wont be in the customs union, wont accept free movement and they have said its all or nothing on the four pillars.

Isn't that standard negotiating practice though?

seosamh77 - Member
well the polls are there, and currently showing 56%. If that was to continue to grow, it'd be well within the margin of error.

Put it this way, in 2016 if the polls are say 65% against and the government doesn't take it back to the people, they we don't live in a democracy.

Aye you argument will be that the polls have been wrong recently, but they've not been that wrong. If you factor in margin of error.

Remember the Polls in Merica that completely wiped Trump chance off? (don't response about Trump coz there is another Trump thread)

You're right that the vote doesn't change anything.

No I'm not - i wasnt saying that. The vote changes everything. What people were hoping for doesnt. Different point altogether

What the people think should be taken into account throughout the whole process.

? The people have asked to leave the EU. They didn't ask to leave the EU under condition XYZ. They knew that was a matter of negotiation and who would be involved in that negotiation.

Not just once, when the wind was blowing in a certain direction.

Dont tell wee nippy that - that's exactly what she is hoping for!

mattyfez - Member

The public spoke.

The public say a lot of things, don't they.

Ok here we go

January - Mar - good snow, we can remain and go skiing.
April - Jun - lets leave
June -July - back for early continental holidays
Aug - leave the French alone
Seop - late holidays with the French back at school
Oct - Dec - back out again

Simple, but we can vote each time, just to make sure

teamhurtmore - Member
The people have asked to leave the EU. They didn't ask to leave the EU under condition XYZ. They knew that was a matter of negotiation and who would be involved in that negotiation.

Technically, they didn't know who would be involved in the negotiation. It was ment to be Cameron leading it.

There's grounds for another ref, all your refusal tells us is that you've now positioned yourself to take advantage of that. Again, your opinions come from your own self interest, imo.

The public say a lot of things, don't they.

yes and lots of it is crap - but in the ballot box, it all counts crap or not.

teamhurtmore - Member
Ok here we go

January - Mar - good snow, we can remain and go skiing.
April - Jun - lets leave
June -July - back for early continental holidays
Aug - leave the French alone
Seop - late holidays with the French back at school
Oct - Dec - back out again

Simple, but we can vote each time, just to make sure

You may have a point if opinion was continually swaying back and forth, but it isn't, it peaked once.

I'm arguing if opinion if convincingly against over the next couple of years, there's justification for another vote.

Which is interesting in itself, as in that scenario, the government that goes ahead with it is committing suicide.

I also find it interesting that ardent "democrats" are scared of another vote.

I think most people including remainers would agree with the vote if..

A) there was a more decisive majority, at least 60% as an arbitrary figure.
B) there was a coherent well thought out plan to move forward.
C) the instigators had some integrity and hadn't scuttled off like children who'd just thrown a firework into a bonfire.
D) if the instigators had been at all truthfull about the nonsense suggestions they were pedaling.

As it stands, the whole thing looks like what it is, a complete stitch up of the not so bright by a few particularly nasty politicians.

And now the not so bright are unsurprisingly too proud to reconsider their position in light of newer more reliable information.

Agreed Joe, look at wee nippy ignoring her members and avoiding another vote because her flawed narrative is even more exposed now. Democracy hey, who needs it?

matty - there was no threshold set not a minimum participation level. We cant re-write the rules juts because we got a result we dont like.

There is a plan to the extent that you can have one at this stage - admittedly its flawed but hey ho

The main instigators are on the bridge - that is what is worrying me more than anything.

D- true, but as the Scots told us, the desire to be FREE trumps everything even if we are worse off - remember that idea?

Guess an alternative conclusion we could come to is that your refusal to call for another euro ref is that you think it would probably lead to another Scottish ref. And you're scared of that, you do protest too much...