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

attempts to deny the wishes of the majority of voters.

my conscience is clear on this one because I don't believe brexit is the wish of the majority of voters.

it was a very tight result, demographically the electorate is going pro-Remain every day due to the generation gap, a lot of people voted to get more money for the NHS (they were duped) and a bunch of people voted leave as a Cameron/austerity/Tory protest vote thinking remain had a shoe-in. And there's not even a consensus on what leave means anyway, there's a huge spectrum on that.

mike - you were not alone in pointing out Jambas errors to him. We disagreed throughout the debate on core issues. What you are missing/ignoring are the lies, double standards, patronising and self denial that have replaced this. Some examples:

#lieabouttheoppo1: In contrast to what was claimed above, Jambas regularly stated that he would be worse off in the ST, but that this was a price worth paying for his vision of a wider greater good.

#doublestandards1: The same arguments were use regularly in the Indy debate, indeed used as a badger of honour. Those who focused on the obvious, negative economic consequences were regularly attacked for being narrow minded and unable to see the wider issues 😉

#doublestandards2: Some of the more aggressive Gnats attack the government for being ill-prepared on key issues now and yet were perfectly happy to accept, indeed defend and lie about, the lack of basic preparation on FUNDAMENTAL issues such as the currency. Pah, details, plenty of time to transition to a sone kind of conpromise....8O

#patronisingteacher1: our side have the moral high ground. We voted for the greater good. They (spit) voted for narrow self interest and in the case of the ministers to line their own pockets and crap on the poor 😯 Little attempt to understand why they really voted and why THEY won and WE lost

#patronisingteacher2: this issue is too complex and important to be left to the great unwashed. They don't understand (unlike us), they were lied to, they were duped, hey are just thick racists and will be dead soon anyway - often argued by people who are happy to post their own lack of understanding of the issues involved (see yesterday) 😉

#sillytags1: #mikefacts, #mikeliar etc great stop reading labels aren't they?!?

Happy Sunday - wonder who is on Marr?

for the record ^^ that doesn't mean ignore the referendum result, of course not, what happened happened. it's acknowledged, it has been acted upon, but it's 100% legitimate to question it and suggest checking again now the implications are becoming clear.

#sillytags1: #mikefacts, #mikeliar etc great stop reading labels aren't they?!?

Agreed - and that is happening as we speak

[url= https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/sep/23/mrs-may-falsehoods-and-fantasies-designed-only-to-keep-her-party-together ]Will Hutton article [/url]

Seems to deflate the Florence fantasies effectively. I look forward to being told why he is wrong...

haha chaps maybe we should all take a day off from this thread.

In the same way Will happily articulates why the 52% were wrong #doubkestandards^2

True Matt 😉 but it's addifictive and much more fun than reality 😉

But we must all, it’s said, get behind Brexit to respect the will of the 52%. No, we don’t. First, the 52% had no idea they were voting for stagnation, little or no let-up in immigration, less control, and decline. Second, democracy is about debate, deliberation and ongoing accountability and voting, not genuflecting for all time before one snapshot of opinion on one day in June 2016 whatever happens subsequently. That’s why democracies govern themselves with parliaments, capable of reversing mistakes and throwing out those that make them.

On one issue the Brexiters are right. Britain now has to choose what country it wants to be. One only loyal to the union flag, attempting to intensify the Thatcherite programme that has so weakened not just the economy and public services but the cohesion of the country? Or one that wants to build a 21st-century economy and society, actively deploying government, with loyalties to both the British and EU flags, around values that, as Mrs May acknowledged in Florence, we share with Europe?

Yes - read your quote.

Lines 2-4.

I'll repeat, what he is saying matches the polling and the research done at the time. It's not new.
People voted Out for numerous reasons which are not consistent, coherent or anything to do with the EU. That is actually factual and been shown by a lot of work. For all the people who voted leave to get shot of DC or the Tories that wasn't a clever move, for those that wanted less foreign people from outside the EU that ain't going to be delivered. We can go on about being all nice and caring that they scribbled one box but there is 0 chance of them getting what they actually wanted.
He also doesn't seem happy articulating it, more sad and disappointed.

the bit you seemed to miss was about democracy though.

No it doesn't. Read lines 2-4

He lies that the 52 voted for stagnation and decline. Research at the time and evidence since falsifies this argument. It also ignores our lamentable record on productivity etc while a member and our decline in market share of trade with EU while a member. It's fancy words designed to obscure the truth while relying on false causation. [b]Any scientists around or is this just a faith based argument?[/b]

As we saw yesterday people are arguing to ignore the vote on inconsistency grounds and arguing falsely about things that have nothing to do with the EU (e.g. ECHR)

#doubletandards^infinity

The democracy BS ignores the practical needs to have EU law enshrined in our statute books on day one of Brexshit. Research supports that this needs extraordinary powers for government. You conveniently seem to miss this. Plenty of resesach available

He lies that the 52 voted for stagnation and decline.

First, the 52%[b] had no idea[/b] they were voting for stagnation,

Lies and false causations again. You are getting good at this

Cakes and unicorns #patronisingremoan1

So did he say they voted for stagnation and decline or not?
Again THM you get yourself lost in the argument and forget the bigger issues here.

The democracy BS ignores the practical needs to have EU law enshrined in our statute books on day one of Brexshit. Research supports that this needs extraordinary powers for government. You conveniently seem to miss this. Plenty of resesach available

In an election called tomorrow they would probably be out. Think the population would back a remain based government or coalition?

THM, can you find a single person who has consistently (since before the vote) argued for leaving single market etc with a 2y implementation? If you can it will be a vanishingly rare proportion of the 17 million.

No mike - worse than that. He argues that they [s]were to stupid to realise that[/s] didn't know (patronising the poor things) that they were voting for something that isn't happening as a result of Brexshit. Confused, you should be. That the whole point

His ability to manipulate words and facts is awesome. He should be a journo...

2 completely different issues. The first being it's going to be a screw up, writing is on the wall, massive failure to deliver anything close to a clean break

What did you say about arguments, details and bigger pictures?

Hmmm. I don’t like suggestions of loyalty to any flag - other than during the 6 Nations of course where no union flag has any place, European or Jack.

Talking to leavers round my way, there is definitely a mix of feelings about what they want, which does make things difficult.

The changing minds / demographics thing is real - which is why properly constructed referendums have a 2/3 threshold, not to make it difficult but to ensure no one can argue on a great departure type question that if we held it again the majority would be the other way.

The 51.9:48.1 nature of the result probably means that the most consistent action is to leave but to maintain most of the rights, privileges, obligations and institutions we had previously. Anything else will lead to a divided and weak in the long term country. (And I’m thinking of jobs and economy here, weak in other ways worries me less, though it would be equally true)

However 15 months down the line, instead of developing a consensus position that the majority of the 52 and 48 can accept (compromise on even) all the rhetoric has been divisive.
Enemies of the people is obviously divisive, but instructing people to respect democracy is actually equally divisive. Because as we all know democracy thrives on respectful diversity and dissent, not authoritarian uniformity.

Of all the espoused views the one possibly cane closest to being sustainable was Thornberry on a Women’s Hour priorto the election promising to leave in s way that respected the wishes of the 48 - a rounding error away from half those who voted.

Perhaps THM and others in here are right to argue that the 52 should be respected. Actually I’ll go further he and they are right. But beyond “leave the EU” we don’t know what that means.

And equally the 48 must be respected, otherwise we might as well consign Britain to history. Britain has a somewhat checkered past, but over recent decades has reinvented itself as a bastion of free speech, respectful dissent, acceptance of law over power and upholding of human rights. Dismissing the 48, actively telling them you lost get over it, demonising those who ask the courts to examine the actions of those in power, runs counter to that.

And the 3rd party that must be respected in this sorry tale is democracy itself - both in the vote of 2016 and in the fact that opinions change and no vote is forever.

Without change, without dissent, without rebuilding after a vote (any vote, but particularly a divisive bipolar vote), without that democracy dies.

Apparently Farage is going to form a new party to save us from the #brexitbetrayal

Johnsons now got enough MPs to trigger a challenge, but still too chicken

Brexit still the most likely outcome [b]but[/b] the Brexies are set for disappointment either way, partly because what it meant was never properly defined among the BS of the ref campaign

The Tories have trashed their reputation, at home & on the world stage, a lights been shone on how backward the DUP are - association tarnishing Tories further.

Added bonus Brexishambles has made the most leftwing labour leader in a generation look like the sensible option

Every cloud and all that

yup @igm - I suspect an implementation that reflected the closeness of the result would be palatable to most.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-41376138

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn is being pressed to commit to remaining in the European single market and customs union after the UK leaves the EU.
More than 40 senior Labour figures, including 30 MPs, have signed an open letter published in the Observer.
They say the party must offer a clear alternative to the Conservatives' "destructive Brexit".
The first full day of the Labour party conference will begin in Brighton later.

Apparently Farage is going to form a new party to save us from the #brexitbetrayal

Good, bring it on, let's have them out in the open. I would prefer UKIP/whatever had their own representation rather than the reverse takeover of other parties, which I think amplifies their influence.

Like the Greens and LDs, UKIP were hobbled by the FPTP system. If we want to talk about failures of democracy that's the place to start.

"Fear of UKIP is worse than UKIP". I hope.

Matt - sadly I think it might have been 15 months ago. Not sure that it would be easy to find an acceptable compromise now - too much rhetoric driving people apart.
I could see this one running for s decade or two like an open site on society.

Predictably and regrettably, yes. There is no painless way forwards from where we are now.

Possibly Cameron could have calmed things down by staying in office for a while and attempting some deft expectation management. But that's conjecture.

Open sore not open site. Damn you iPhone

Farage and a new party (UKIP-II, you know when you’ve been kippered?) sounds good actually. It could free the Tories of some of their more objectionable types and maybe cause a domino efffect in party make up and leaning.

We realised.

I hadn’t.

Interesting analysis from the donald trump thread, but brexit in a nutshell.

I feel like we're in a car being driven off a cliff. We took a wrong turn a few miles back at a T-junction, but in fairness we did have a show of hands to choose the direction then and this was the choice. Now of the people in the car, most can see there's a cliff ahead and want to turn around, but a few pig headed idiots are refusing because we had our chance at the T-junction, and if we turn around now what was the point of that vote. So instead, let's just speed up, find out how bad it is once we do fall off as soon as we can now.

His ability to manipulate words and facts is awesome

His line

First, the 52% had no idea they were voting for stagnation,

He lies that the 52 voted for stagnation and decline.

OH the irony

Apparently you really are just here to ninfan this thread.

What has happened to Jeremy Corbyn that he won't answer my questions

Andrew Marr - this morning !

Nice and clear on Brexshit and pay caps. How do you like your mud?

Brexit still the most likely outcome but the Brexies are set for disappointment either way, partly because what it meant was never properly defined among the BS of the ref campaign

Are you assuming that all brexit voters wanted a hard version ( to the extent that this exists) ? In fact can you point to where it was defined universally as such?

I have a proposal.

Can we have a day, doesn’t have to be today, of reflection, introspection and trying to define common ground?

Because while people may well have been twisting words, I have come to the conclusion that we can work that out for ourselves.

So go on:
- without reference to others (though I will allow, like I can stop you, references to specific instances where our politicians are saying things that reflect your views provided it is not the substance of your argument)
- what do you think is a possible solution to bring 2/3 or more of the population along with you?
- do you have much hope for it?

Note - bullying a part of the population that doesn’t agree with you into submission is not bringing them along with you. I’m looking for an element of free will

Ninfan, Chewkw, Jamba et al, you are welcome - how are you going to convince me?

Try it. See where you get to.

[ edit - delete ]

I was interested to know what people thought about certain substantive points highlighted by public, media, and politicans responding to May's speech, but it seems pointless trying to do that here while THM is in full on derail mode..

Common ground: we want to have the greatest ability to engage widely with EU and ROW in a mutually beneficial manner.

IMO the best (but still imperfect) means to achieve these ends is the current situation. Unfortunately this was a minority view and we are now moving to an alternative arrangement.

Current off the shelf solutions are at best partial substitutes. Our interests are served better through negotiations of a conprehensive, bespoke FTA with the EA. This will be a time consuming process extending even beyond the transition period currently proposed

Will it work? Yes it has to. The alternative means we are all losers. Will it be easy? No it will be extremely challenging

Err that's it

- what do you think is a possible solution to bring 2/3 or more of the population along with you?

IN essence its a battle between IMHO a 19 th century UK at the centre as a vibrant world power and the modern view where the empire has gone and we need partners to be strong and we need to cooperate with nations not dominate them. This is at the crux of the issue and its clearly very divisive

The other third sit between the two views with no real way of working out how good it is in the EU or how bad it will be to leave. Essentially whatever we do there will be a lot if unhappy subjects.

- do you have much hope for it?

Common ground: we want to have the greatest ability to engage widely with EU and ROW in a mutually beneficial manner.

Yeah, but we don't have a common view of what makes something beneficial.

Kelvin you conveniently miss the fact that this thread is being derailed by persistant abuse of facts in order to object to a democratic process and attempts to suppress the voices of the very small minority of STW forumites who voted leave or who want to get on with it.

Yeah, but we don't have a common view of what makes something beneficial

No we don't so we went back to the familiar, popular solution of let's have a vote on it.

I am in a very small minority of favouring full FOM and the other 3 freedoms. But there are more people who don't view that as being beneficial. They win, [s]we all[/s] I lose. That's how it works.

I guess I should play as I suggested it.

Probably no surprises but...

I don’t think anyone voted to be poorer so I think access to the single market, by which I mean truly in fettered access,is probably good.
Freedom of movement of labour is probably good for the jobs market, reduces the tax burden on individuals (EU migrants tend to put relatively more into the economy than the take out compared both the indigenous population and other migrants) so I’d look to keep that.
I would like to keep our seat at the table on standards, regulations etc but I don’t think that is achievable unless we stay in the EU and I doubt I could get my 2/3 hurdle on that.
Grants and subsidies become a national issue. inherently dislike them though they have their place occasionally - I’d prefer to see people paying what things cost but it’s not always possible.
I do have sympathy with he view the right to travel in the EU is to work, look for work, to be educated and to live with one's family - not to turn up an expect to be looked after.
So 4 Freedoms but properly implemented like they were always meant to be.

How would I get that through?
Let’s talk about the club subs, Boris’s £350m (I know), as an investment that pays off X times and creates money for our country, our citizens and even our health service.
Let’s talk about how immigrants from the EU pay more tax than average but use the health service less - they help fund the NHS in average.
Actually everyone likes immigrants. How often have you heard “not those immigrants, they’re excellent, it’s the other immigrants we need to do something about”? I have - frequently. So let’s keep on showcasing what they do for us - not what we’ll lose if they go but what they do for us today.
And let’s talk about how we accept that in gaining the absolute right (is there such a thing) to set our own laws, standards, regulations, we accept that we relinquish the right to set our trading partners laws, standards, regulations. But we may have to comply with them if we wish to trade.

Do I think it will work? No idea. But we’d be a better place if we tried and failed than if we just bitterly argued. And I’m pointing fingers both ways there.

I am in a very small minority of favouring full FOM and the other 3 freedoms. But there are more people who don't view that as being beneficial. They win, we all I lose.

THM - you don’t know that yet. Lots of people pontificated, but no one asked people. It’s time to start doing something positive. Build bridges.

Len on Peston re access and membership

"I want access. Words are important"

Well said Len

Yes they did. Wa asked [b]everyone [/b]above the voting age. It was on whether we wanted to remain members of the EU. This requires acceptance of the four freedoms. The majority of voters said thnsk you, but no thank you. We cannot pretend otherwise.

Access doesn’t preclude membership, nor require it.

Words are important - but also slippery on occasion.

Martin Amis: Brexit 'a denial of British decline'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-41348509/martin-amis-brexit-a-denial-of-british-decline

A very valid POV I think.

I agree [ igm about bridge building] as we do need to be "one nation" but i see no way of achieving this as I think the people doing this are RW elitist nut jobs and they will think we are traitors, of the country and democracy, if it does not get delivered.

Even THM is just " well we have to accept it and get on" which he is doing for business reasons more than political ones ; he wants to make sure the money still comes in as we all have priorities in life.

Twice in two posts THM. Chill.

Yes they did. Wa asked everyone above the voting age. It was on whether we wanted to remain members of the EU. This requires acceptance of the four freedoms. The majority of voters said thnsk you, but no thank you. We cannot pretend otherwise.

Being member of the EU requires acceptance of the 4 Freedoms, but not being an EU member does not require their rejection.

Not all buses are red 😉

Now I will try to take my own advice and stop arguing.

IGM correct membership of and access to are different things. Peston was struggling with this, Len tried to help him out. But (as here,) Peston didn't seem keen to listen to why the distinction is important.

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”

Beware words. Dangerous things.

me> Yeah, but we don't have a common view of what makes something beneficial

t> No we don't so we went back to the familiar, popular solution of let's have a vote on it.

We did, and that took one option off the table. Unfortunately it was the best option, but ho hum.

Now - how do we rank the remaining options?

Existing versions incomplete and unsatisfactory - 2/10

We need a bespoke, comprehensive agreement tailored to our unique situation and relationship 10/10

Let's get..... 😉

Oh yes - a red, white and blue Brexit. Good that's sorted!!

Really - meaningless blether aside - how can we proceed? Voting "leave" meant different things to different groups of people, many of which are mutually exclusive. Which of those sets of wishes - not to mention the wishes of the 48% - should be put first?

there was a great video on access vs membership from on e of the Parliamentary committees, can't find it!

example ...

access: airlines can fly to EU airports from outside EU, but not within the EU. second rank on landing slots because the best go to members.
membership: airlines can fly within the EU and members get preferential access to landing slots regardless of nationality.

Give it 6 months and the prospect of Borris and JRM I reckon the easy sell for 2/3 majority is the least leave, pay to play option. 2nd Fav would be a tail between the legs hasty retreat when the Communist party is in charge 😉

Through negotiation

But it's going pretty slowly right now. Too slowly

Through negotiation

From a negotiating textbook - "if you don't know what you want, you're unlikely to get it". Seems to sum up our situation.

Voting "leave" meant different things to different groups of people, many of which are mutually exclusive.

yes. in this sense, remain is homogenous, leave is splintered, so remain, of several options in the table rather than 2, clearly won.

The current position of both major political parties suggests that remain is far from homogenous. Remain on the sides, remain and become more closely integrated with the project, and in the case of some Scots remain and be part of the folly that is the € as crazy as that is!!

The only thing remain did was lose (just) and with an open goal beckoning

Well, "remain" was homogeneous in the sense that it was clear what the landscape post-referendum would be, because it wouldn't change from pre-referendum, so remain voters knew precisely what they were voting for, whereas some leave voters ticked the box for "no irish or darkies" while others wanted an end to red tape. Now nobody knows what, if anything, they will get.

Remain is full membership as we have now. Seems very clear to me. "Remain on the sides" is leave, just moderated.

Not sure about that open goal THM

Busy now but might post later

Gonna clean the bathroom. At least something I do today will have a benefit!

Now nobody knows what, if anything, they will get.

True. The great unknown.....

We had all better ge.....

Taking of which need an hour of writing a report and then a ride

A bientot

The only reasonable "solution" I can see is one where reasonable politicians across the board argue clearly and forcefully that the EU has been a force for good and that our membership of it has been and will continue to be hugely beneficial to the country.

If they hadn't used it as a whipping boy for their own failings for decades, this would be easier...

Even if that were to happen they're up against Farage (funded by Banks), a formidable team who know the devil has the best tunes and how to sing them, oh and backed by the red tops immersive bleating. (And Lee Hurst it seems).

reasonable politicians

There are plenty of reasonable politicians. But they're not the ones with the ruthless streak to fight their way to the top of the Darwinian scrap pile.

But remember, it's important that the tories stay in power and promote their long term economic plan which is working, otherwise we might lose our AAA credit rating and that would be... a... disaster. Oh

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41369239

There are plenty of reasonable politicians who agree with the view I stated but are too scared to utter it in public for fear of the press.

Wa asked [b]everyone[/b] above the voting age.

Kelvin you conveniently miss the fact that this thread is being derailed by persistant abuse of facts in order to object to a democratic process and attempts to suppress the voices of the very small minority of STW forumites who voted leave or who want to get on with it.

The only reasonable "solution" I can see is one where reasonable politicians across the board argue clearly and forcefully that the EU has been a force for good and that our membership of it has been and will continue to be hugely beneficial to the country

We had that chance and blew it.

How may brexit politicians are also out there but scared to speak out in case they are castigated as racists? HM leader of the oppo?

I see that the runners and riders are already briefing against each other over who can be the 'most' Brexit, ahead of the Tory conference

Shamelessly courting all the senile, bitter old racists who will decide who gets to follow Theresa.

Is it any wonder this whole thing is such an almighty cluster-**** when that's the gallery that they all have to exclusivly play too

Ouch, tough result for Merkel

4 terms is impressive but sad to see the far right doing so well

Oh dear. That's going to be tricky. Some transition deal while new partners are arranged 😉

Macron the new Merkel then....

It's all rather messy isn't it. Makes me quite uncomfortable really - and that before US and NK

Presumably that makes Merkel more inclined to show what a bad thing leaving the EU would be.

I don't think it ranks very highly in their considerations. It's not like there was going to be "now I've won handsomely let's all roll over and give May anything she asks for".

Agreed. But it may now be “I’ve got to show those AfD supporters why leaving is bad”.

Probably marginal either way, but we just became less important, more of a political football.

Marginal for Brexshit imo

At least we know who to have proper talks with

Not a pretty sight for Europe

At our end, labour supressing Brexshit debate and the Tories tearing themselves apart over it. Ugly stuff

Not surprised that Labour and Tories are tearing themselves apart.

There is a fundamental underlying reason, I think, why Brexit, no matter what deal we get, will be unsuccessful.

Musing and considering over the now not inconsiderable time since the referendum, I’m edging towards a view on why the vote went the way it did.
And why remain didn’t miss an open goal - though arguably both sides did.

The conclusion? Well first beware of generalisations to follow, but it wasn’t about race or nationalism (except perhaps in a very distant and fairly inoffensive way), it wasn't about the economy, nor taking back control. It wasn’t even about our relationship with Europe.

Look at the geographic voting patterns. Scotland, NI, London, Bristol, Liverpool, York - all voted remain, what do they have in common? Very little. Except they all have a strong identity, sense of self. And confidence in that. It’s not even the same sense of identity, but it is highly recognisable.

Conversely the strongest leave votes come from areas that used to have a strong sense of identity and lost it. Mining communities for example.

Look at sociodemographics. Those in education or middle class jobs vote remain. Occupations where one can say “I am a...”.

So it’s not external, not about our relationship with Europe at all, but our relationship with ourselves. And you can’t change that by leaving Europe.

Turning to the present, the lack of confidence that created the leave vote is evident everywhere. From our rudderless government and negotiation, to our papers shouting about traitors and saboteurs, seeing conspiracy everywhere. Even the “we had a vote, we do not need to talk about it anymore” stance is typical of someone under confident clinging to certainty.

And of course, vague statements that suggest the UK striding across the globe are just the thing to appeal to a collective Walter Mitty syndrome.

And the problem is, even if the EU do turn round and offer free unicorns, it won’t address the lack of a strong identity for millions of people in the UK.

Of course I could be wrong.