Forum menu
Let's not forget all of our exports that are at sea that don't know if they will be allowed into their destination.
Anyone that still wants this **** up is a weapons grade ****.
all the brexiteers have been bullied off this thread by the righteous indignation of people who think they are the only ones who should be given a say on the matter.
All the brexiters have been shot down on this thread for they said absolutely nothing that made sense.
Norman Lamont(remember him? the guy who almost broke Britain in 1992),had his ass handed to him on a plate by Mark Carney at the treasury select committee yesterday, I think Carney would have expected a former Chancellor to have a grip on financial matters of the country. I'm surprised he kept his cool when answering questions from this ****ing idiot. And that's my view of brexiters, they are ****ing idiots to be treated with utter contempt.
Some good will come of this. Much to the detriment of those who believed in Brexit.
There is an unwritten rule buried deep into the people’s psyche that when they vote, and there is demonstrable result, it is honoured.
Aside from the notion that 48:52 is barely a "demonstrable result,"
At this stage, you cannot argue that the referendum result hasn't been honoured. We've spent almost three years honouring it, at vast expense and considerable damage to the country already. Concluding after three years of trying that it can't be done safely without catastrophic impact to the nation and collateral damage to the rest of the world isn't ignoring the result, no matter how leave might like to spin it otherwise.
I blame teflon Cameron and all the idiots who voted for him. Anyone who voted for him and now wants to remain is a special kind of idiot.
The Tory branch of the independents criticizing May for not standing up to the ERG but lauding DC and his centrist ways are also idiots.
Aside from the notion that 48:52 is barely a “demonstrable result,”
? Of course it's demonstrable. Or are you suggesting they miscounted?
At this stage, you cannot argue that the referendum result hasn’t been honoured.
To the people out there who voted to leave, we clearly haven't left yet, so as far as they're concerned they haven't yet honoured the result. The referendum didn't say 'we will try to leave' it said 'we will leave'. There's nothing ambiguous about this, which is why we now hear cries of 'get on with it'.
I blame teflon Cameron and all the idiots who voted for him. Anyone who voted for him and now wants to remain is a special kind of idiot.
Back at the general election, I had a massive row with someone whereby I basically said this election isnt about parties as per normal, its about stopping the conservatives getting in so they can't old the referendum. I was heartily derided at the time, with a 'no way people would vote to leave anyway' response. If it wasnt so utterly rubbish for the country I'd be feelign pretty smug right now.
? Of course it’s demonstrable. Or are you suggesting they miscounted?
I really don't want to start picking this apart again, it's been done to death. But my point is, it's a statistically insignificant majority.
If you were a scientist testing a product, say a new drug or something, and from a set of 33.5 million samples you found that the drug was effective 52% of the time and placebo 48% of the time, do you think that would be "demonstrable" enough to get to market?
To the people out there who voted to leave, we clearly haven’t left yet, so as far as they’re concerned they haven’t yet honoured the result.
So what?
The referendum didn’t say ‘we will try to leave’ it said ‘we will leave’. There’s nothing ambiguous about this, which is why we now hear cries of ‘get on with it’.
I don't recall the referendum saying either of those things. Cameron said they would honour the result (in the same breath as saying he'd stand by it, which he did, for about three hours after the result came in).
Three years ago this would have been understandable, but anyone crying "just get on with it" at this point in time is simply a shouty idiot. And we've spent far too much time and money pandering to the whims of shouty idiots who have no idea what they want but really really want it a lot.
Of course it’s demonstrable. Or are you suggesting they miscounted?
I think the point is that if it hadn't been passed as an advisory vote then the criteria for changing the status quo would have been defined in advance and 50.1% would not have been the threshold. The fact that naive promises were then made about the "referendum result" has led us to the current situation.
If you were a scientist testing a product...
Obviously by demonstrable I mean being clear on the fact that one side won beyond all doubt. Even if the majority was statistically small, there is no way you can argue that the referendum result was anything other than a win for leave. As for analogies with drug testing, that's entirely irrelevant. That unwritten rule I mentioned which everyone understands doesn't work lilke that, it's a simple binary question of who won and who lost.
Anyway, fear not, nervous remainers, the revolution is on it's way... 😉
https://www.politico.eu/article/brexit-uk-eu-referendum-just-what-britain-needs/
Have we covered how much easier it'll be to die of cancer, Post-Brexit?
Another big positive that I didn't see down the side of a bus
If we live in a world where unwritten rules people think they understand holds more clout than actual written rules people misunderstand then we truly are ****ed.
The referendum showed that we are a country divided. We should be working to heal that divide, not talking about "sides." Because ultimately whatever the outcome we all (well, most of us) still have to live here, we're all on the same "side" of being UK citizens and we're all going to be affected. This "us and them" mentality, both leave vs remain and the UK vs the EU27, is utterly toxic.
Obviously by demonstrable I mean being clear on the fact that one side won beyond all doubt. Even if the majority was statistically small, there is no way you can argue that the referendum result was anything other than a win for leave.
The question was...
Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?
The people of Britain advised the government of the time that there was a tiny majority in favour of leaving the EU.
The Government have tried to leave, they've failed to reach an agreement with all parties.
The act of trying to leave honours the result.
For some reason they didnt describe the (suspected IRA) incendiary devices sent to Waterloo, heathrow and city airport on the bus either
BBC article
, it’s a statistically insignificant majority
I’ve said it before, it is a statistically very highly significant majority. The chances of such a result by chance in a sample size of 33 million is about 1 in 10^22.
It is however not a POLITICALLY significant majority because the likelihood of relatively modest changes in opinion due to circumstances might lead to a swing that would overturn the result. A difference of at least 10% should have been prespecified as politically significant. Any country used to running referendums would have done this.
Any country used to running referendums would have done this.
It's ok, we'll have a chance to do again in a year or so 🙂
How soon before I can put a petition on gov.uk to re-join the EU?
We could have left and joined again by now!
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.
Any country used to running referendums would have done this.
The chances are they wouldn't, instances of a requirement for a super majority are rare, minimum turnout requirement are quite common but they are set relatively low.
Anyway this is an incredibly stale debate, the same points get made again and again and none of them were ever particularly good and have quite clearly been superseded now.
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.
That's not what I meant (and I appreciate I worded it badly). If out of the successful results 52% were on the drug and 48% taking a placebo, it wouldn't.
The chances are they wouldn’t, instances of a requirement for a super majority are rare, minimum turnout requirement are quite common but they are set relatively low.
An advisory vote does not require a supermajority, a mandatory vote (such as an election) does. Seemingly we now have a Schrodinger's Referendum where it's simultaneously both advisory and mandatory depending on whether it suits Leave's agenda or not.
Not to mention if it was mandatory it would have bene declared void by the courts
An advisory vote does not require a supermajority, a mandatory vote (such as an election) does.
Why are you making stuff up?
I thought I'd take a leaf out of Leave's playbook.
Can't say I get the link between a drug trial and a voting system
Of course it’s demonstrable. Or are you suggesting they miscounted?
now you mention it.
Not to mention if it was mandatory it would have bene declared void by the courts
Not convinced this follows either.
Not to mention if it was mandatory it would have bene declared void by the courts
All of which became irrelevant when parliment voted to invoke A50.
@mefty - The high courts decision was that they couldnt do anything about the illegal behaviour because it was advisory, but the judge did state if it had been mandatory it would ahve been voided. All this was reported a few weeks ago.
@taxi25 - could have happily been revoked. But I was just adding another layer of the stupidity of having an adviosry referendum that politicians said they would stick too.
So how do leavers on here propose we "honour the referendum" ? No deal on 29th doesn't stand a hope based on recent parliamentary shenanigans. May's deal is universally unpopular with everyone but her inner circle,. Labour don't have the clout to change anything. So what's the solution to this in the next 23 days?
"I'm sure everything will be fine."
So what’s the solution to this in the next 23 days?
Fire up the Lancaster and teach those continentals a lesson?
So how do leavers on here
There are no leavers, they've all gone or been banned.
propose we “honour the referendum” ?
Well this is the problem, there is no way of honouring it, which is why a lot of people are kicking off and becoming increasingly frustrated at the politicians inability to adhere to a clear and simple instruction. The trouble is the politicians didn't add the caveat 'if it is possible' on their leave promise. They could try ignoring or reversing their promise but they know they'll never be trusted again, which will lead to constitutional and democratic crisis, weak (or no) government, politicial and economic paralysis, and ultimately chaos and violence in the streets when food starts becoming scarce, utilities shut down and no one can drive their cars due to the petrol stations being empty. It'll be like the fuel and iceland volcano crisis combined, multiplied by the winter of discontent. And all because we couldn't accept an unlikely to be invoked semi-permanent backstop insurance policy whilst negotiating a trade deal.
Is that the long way of saying we should Leave with May's Withdrawl Deal Agreement…? Despite it not even outlining what we will replace membership with… and being pretty universally derided by the very people whose vote is being taken as a mandate for it?
So you believe that not leaving the EU will lead to political and economic paralysis?
Our govt is already paralysed by trying to leave the EU, so no change there.
But you're going to have to explain to me how not leaving the EU will cause economic paralysis, as opposed to business just carrying on the same was as it has for, I dunno, the last 30 years?
The drug curing cancer or not is the incorrect analogy. It’s really Drug A cures 48% of patients and Drug B cures 52%, which drug should I take for the highest likelihood of cure. If I’d tested 100 in each trial, I wouldn’t know. If I tested 1000 I might be a little more certain. If I tested 1000000 I would know for certain.
We would say is a 4% difference clinically meaningful? And the answer is a maybe. It’s actually very hard to test drugs that work against each other due to limitations of trial size and the fact that the difference is likely to be small (we go for “non-inferior” or is not worse than). The normal test is against placebo, but that’s not ethical when there is an effective treatment already available.
Enough of my day job...
So you believe that not leaving the EU will lead to political and economic paralysis?
Of course it won't, but it will lead to a lot of unhappy leave voters who will not vote for the tories at next election which is the primary concern of the tory government. They will need a new party to vote for though who would be pushing for leave and (Farage?) but any future referendum would never get voted through based on this disaster. Still, they will get over it.
Those unhappy Leave voters hate what May is suggesting we do… they think she is a traitor denying them all that they were promised their vote would lead to
That’s not what I meant (and I appreciate I worded it badly)
no, your wording was fine.
No, his wording was poor… 52% success rate in a drugs trial is a solid result… not at all comparable to 52:48 spilt in a test of opinion. The while analogy is poor actually.
My mistake. I understood that he (or she) meant 48% were cured by the placebo v 52% cured by the drug.
Ill return to reading only.
Okay… then the meaning was clear… just arguably irrelevant. But I'm the one confusing things here now… sorry. You should post more often @LAT… I should post less.
Are we still pretending that the French strikes are unrelated to Brexit? I'd like to post something about it all… but would like to know if it'll upset the sensitive types…
as opposed to business just carrying on the same was as it has for, I dunno, the last 30 years?
Well I would contend that’s one of the things that lead people to vote as they did. Actually it’s less of an economic problem than a political one. The paralysis will come from a dysfunctional political system where the people will either refuse to take part or worse support fringe parties offering them the earth. Stability in a country is founded on the strength of it’s political institutions, take that strength and stability away whilst fomenting continuing anger and mistrust in the populace and you have a recipe for huge upheaval.
Obviously it’s debatable whether that will be worse or better than Brexit itself. It may even be a good thing if it shakes up the system. More likely it’ll just end up with the same result as we see in other countries which go through some form of revolutionary change. It’ll be corrupted and misdirected by snake oil salesmen and powerful egotists with nefarious intentions.
Or we could just take the boring route, accept some form of a deal which preserves the status quo and carry on as normal. I’m too bloody old for more crises.
It’ll be corrupted and misdirected by snake oil salesmen and powerful egotists with nefarious intentions.
Pretty certain that's already happened.
Downing Street has admitted that talks between cabinet ministers and EU officials have been “difficult” and saw a “robust exchange of views”
Hehe. Don't you just wish you could listen in on these conversations?
Or we could just take the boring route, accept some form of a deal which preserves the status quo and carry on as normal.
That may be a bit optimistic. If you think that cracking on with any kind of Brexit (especially with the ****tards we have running the show at the moment) is going to allow us to carry on as normal, then I'd like something of whatever you are smoking Daz.
Just seen another brit has been sent to negotiate, Geoffrey Cox. The first time that someone who has a clue has been sent. I hope Barnier realises nothing good could come of his visit for Europe.
Barnier said no more progress, another wasted week.
Pretty certain that’s already happened.
It has, but imagine the likes of Johnson, Rees Mogg and Farage being in charge, and Tommy Robinson marching through the streets with 50,000 people behind him.
Or we could just take the boring route
That's a new reason for brexit, "it'll be exciting!"
I will confess that there is a very small part of me that wants the UK to crash out just to see what will happen. Ideally from a vantage point of somewhere like Canada.
It has, but imagine the likes of Johnson, Rees Mogg and Farage being in charge, and Tommy Robinson marching through the streets with 50,000 people behind him.
Sounds great to me.
And what happens when that crowd catches them?
You owe me a new keyboard Cougar! 🙂
Well I would contend that’s one of the things that lead people to vote as they did.
That and the EU being the scapegoat for domestic issues.
Tommy Robinson marching through the streets with 50,000 people behind him.
Frankly that sounds unlikely. I'm looking forward to seeing the size of Farage's proposed march compared with the pro remain march planned for 23rd.
I’m looking forward to seeing the size of Farage’s proposed march compared with the pro remain march planned for 23rd.
Anybody care to predict which will get the most coverage on the BBC news? >:-(
So, here's a surprise, May hasn't been able to come up with anything new, so another vote to be lost on Tuesday.
There's apparently a majority in the commons to stop no deal, but not for anything else.... So we default to no deal.
Scary if you are dependent on medication from outside the UK!
If there is ever a public inquiry, wonder if we'll ever see the costs of all this, to taxpayer & business & how long it will add on to austerity that's doing the real damage to the country?
I see Corbyn is boldly pushing ahead with project Red Unicorn. Any indication he might implement the policy his party settled on at conference? No, thought not.
There’s apparently a majority in the commons to stop no deal, but not for anything else…. So we default to no deal.
Howzat work then? If the HoC vote against leaving without a deal can they then just carry on and do that without another vote? (Yes I know the date is set in law at the moment but we're then in a proper parliamentary paradox).
As I understand it we need a change to the law to either revoke or extend A50.
If the HoC vote against leaving without a deal can they then just carry on and do that without another vote?
Yes. The government can choose not to hold any more votes of its own, on anything, before we leave. And any other votes can just be ignored by them… except a no confidence vote… so we then leave on No Deal this month, even if parliament has voted 95% against that happening. Even in a no confidence vote being lost situation… the timeline for getting a new government in place and new legislation ready and voted on… means we'd be out with no deal before it can be stopped.
There are some very experienced MPs trying to word votes that can change this… but from what I've seen, their plans still rely on the PM acting accordingly… she can always play hardball and ignore them, get us out, and play chicken with parliament. If she is prepared to let us Leave with no deal, no one can stop her now.
You have to admire the stubbornness and intransigence of both party leaders.
You have your little stockpile of any essential drugs you need sorted? Yes?
That seems to be the misconception. There is no such thing as taking No Deal off the table. The only way to avoid that is by choosing another option. If no other option is actively chosen, then No Deal happens by default.
Edit: basically, as kelvin says...
How do we get to Corbyn''s second referendum?
There is no such thing as taking No Deal off the table.
The PM can "take no deal off the table", but parliament can not. Go way way back in this thread and you'll see some of us explaining how the legislation passed was enabling this power grab (and THM claiming no such thing was occurring).
Hehe. Don’t you just wish you could listen in on these conversations?
In a prurient way 'yes'. But at all times I am painfully aware that these people are personally representing me. Ultimately, no matter how good (Cox) or how useless (David, Raab, Barclay etc) they are still going to end up being embarrassed because they are asking for fundamentally stupid things and making themselves into a laughing stock.
How anyone can start any sort of negotiations with Barnier et all without first muttering "sorry about this, but...." is beyond me.
The high courts decision was that they couldnt do anything about the illegal behaviour because it was advisory, but the judge did state if it had been mandatory it would ahve been voided. All this was reported a few weeks ago.
No they didn't, I suggest you read the judgments rather than rely on the interpretation of the barrister who took the case. This is a gross misinterpretation of what was said.
How do we get to Corbyn”s second referendum?
We don't. He's trying to get conservatives on side for his version of brexit now. He has no intention of the Labour party taking any steps towards supporting another vote other than paying it lip service.
contemptible.
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.