Bit old now but, re Euro
"dantsw13
Member
It is for new joiners, no?"
It is- but there's no mechanism to force adoption, so essentially it's mandatory to say you'll do it, but not to actually do it. If you had to put any real effort into it you could easily fail to meet one of the accession requirements and make it so you're not just failing to do so, but actually not allowed to adopt the euro.
No dazh,
The reality is that more democracy (due to pressure from the people) is not a denial of democracy.
A majority of people want a second vote. Polls indicate that Remain would win.
I think we all know that polls can be wrong, but on the basis that the majority appear to want a vote, and that the differences between remain and leave are well outside the error bars, exactly whose rights are you arguing for.
Stuff is not just traded via EU agreements, it actually gets shipped to us via the EU physically.
My business procures large amounts of IT kit and pretty much all of it comes via Rotterdam, despite the fact that it is manufactured in the far east by US companies.
I can't see how that is significantly different for bike bits or any other mass produced stuff to be honest?
Advisory is what the referendum was (and why no supermajority or percentage of the electorate was defined to win as would be the case with a binding one).
This is just made up, one thing makes a referendum legally binding, an act of parliament coming into force if the result goes a particular way - nothing else - the AV referendum was done on this basis as, the 1979 Scottish Devolution referendum seems to have been as well (I guess the Welsh one may have been too). A formal supermajority has never been required in any referendum in the UK, although you could argue that the 1979 Scottish referendum effectively had a hybrid one, but the split required was dependent upon turnout.
EDIT: 1979 Weslh referendum was done on the same basis.
But still this is all just distraction and diversion while we try and avoid the real issues.
May's deal Yes or No
If No what next.
Options open
Leave No Deal
Ask for Long extension tied to political change
Extension to consult the people
Revoke
Pick One
binners
"The demented **"
Back in the 80's they had " Ditch the **" badges referring to Thatcher.
It was called out as inapprporite then and it still is now.
At least you're not calling for her to be hanged though which I suppose is some progress.
Taiwanese, USA and UK made stuff?
We discussed this years ago. You've had nearly three years to inform yourself.
Interesting article here about how a ‘democratic’ process can quite easily produce a result that is anything other than democratic. This is what we have now and my concern is that the indicative vote process could end up delivering something really daft that nobody wants – ie we are no better off.
How a Strange Massachusetts Election Helps Explain Britain’s Brexit Chaos
Posted 12 minutes ago
Enjoyed reading that and it does indeed have lots of parallels to this brexit problem.
I think most people (unless it suits them not to) agree the original Ref was deeply flawed - it was Remain / Leave, nice and easy, but in reality it allowed EVERYONE who wanted a different relationship with the EU to pool their votes. (even forgetting about Unicorns for now).
If there had been a second question around "what deal do you want after Brexit" then the same thing that happened in Massachusetts would happened here, there would probably 4 questions: No deal for the loonies and Hedge Fund Managers, Jobs First for Hard-Left, Banking and Finance First for the Right and 'best for most' which of course is in reality the deal we have now or 'remain' - we'd leave with the first question and remain with the second because Remainers were, and are united in what they want.
It is- but there’s no mechanism to force adoption, so essentially it’s mandatory to say you’ll do it, but not to actually do it.
That'sthe sort of wriggle room that the backstop requires 😉
The referendum was to seek a mandate for a specific action that cannot easily be reversed. It is very different to a general election,
So that implies that having a third vote is undemocratic? That's a leap.
though you will be aware that the last general election also gave an overwhelming majority to parties committed to leaving the EU.
Oh, please keep it honest.
There was a large amount of tactical voting. I myself voted labour - a party "committed to leave" as you say - because I live in a tightly contested Labour / Tory constituency. It was, and still is, a Labour seat but there's only a handful of votes in it. I didn't vote in favour of Labour, rather I voted against the Tories, a vote for any other party would have been a wasted vote. If it were the best chance of ousting May I'd have given serious consideration to holding my nose and voting for UKIP.
The notion that loads people voted for leave parties so must have been in favour of leave is just propaganda.
I don’t recall seeing Cameron’s name on the ballot paper.
I don't recall seeing your other claims on the ballot paper either. What's your point?
one thing makes a referendum legally binding, an act of parliament coming into force if the result goes a particular way – nothing else
Not quite.
You're correct about the supermajority thing, far as I'm aware that's just made up based on other countries' systems. But in the UK nothing makes a referendum a legally binding one, there is no mechanism at all in English law for such a thing.
An act of parliament can enter the outcome of a referendum into statute (or some of it, or something else entirely) sure, but that doesn't magically mean that the referendum legally binding, it was still advisory.
Northwind - the way I read recent discussions is no agreement on accession to E.U. unless you are in a position of convergence. Has anybody been allowed to join without Euro membership in recent times?
Given the choice of two shit sandwiches, I voted for the one with less shit in it. Doesn't mean I want to eat it.
But you ticked the box that said "do you want a sandwich," why do you hate democracy?
The notion that loads people voted for leave parties so must have been in favour of leave is just propaganda.
But it does means that people who voted for the two main parties knew that Brexit was going to be implemented if their party was elected.
But it does means that people who voted for the two main parties knew that Brexit was going to be implemented if their party was elected.
#Speculation, many of us knew the situation we were heading to and wanted rid of the tories.
Just have a binding referendum, in or out, status quo is we”re leaving needs to be a super majority to change to remain… 45 vs 55% enough to convince?
But we are currently in, surely a super majority would be required to leave not remain.
But it does means that people who voted for the two main parties knew that Brexit was going to be implemented if their party was elected.
bobbins,
I, like millions of others voted for labour in the hope that their contructive ambiguity meant they were biding their time to stop the madness of brexit before it chucked us all off a cliff
manifesto pledges get dropped all tthe time the Tory manifesto also promised a death tax & a amigrant cap
no ones up in arms about 'democracy' because they have been ignored, its just the reality of politics
But it does means that people who voted for the two main parties knew that Brexit was going to be implemented if their party was elected.
Perhaps, but it was very much the lesser of two evils at the time. The alternative would have been to vote for a pro-remain candidate who in my constituency would've got about 12 votes.
The Tories gaining a load of seats in the GE would'be been a catastrophe - if they can spin the receiving of a kicking at the polling booths into "loads of people voted for pro-leave parties" then just imagine what would have happened if it had been a huge Tory victory.
An act of parliament can enter the outcome of a referendum into statute (or some of it, or something else entirely) sure, but that doesn’t magically mean that the referendum legally binding, it was still advisory.
No you can have post-legislative referendums which all the ones listed were, if they had been passed, the act of parliament would have automatically come into force.
And supermajorities are actually pretty rare throughout the world, minimum turnouts are common.
Most people will have voted AGAINST Corbyn or may rather than because a party was pro Brexit.
The Tories gaining a load of seats in the GE would’be been a catastrophe
I wholeheartedly agree but because May had read and believed all the guff about how hopeless Corbyn was on the STW thread (other media outlets are available) she thought that landslide Tory victory was in her grasp. A Tory victory,landslide or otherwise is always a bad thing.
Most people will have voted AGAINST Corbyn or may rather than because a party was pro Brexit.
In every UK general election more people have voted against the winners than for them.And then people wonder why governments are unpopular.
You can add me to the list of not wanting brexit but still voting labour in the last election..
Would be interesting if the petition gained over 18m signatures.... Parliament wouldn't have a choice other than seriously considering to revoke A50...
Sign it...!
Mefty - the scots referendum was binding
You should have used the AV vote as your example… it had legislation ready to go… and could have been in place ready for the next general election… whereas Scottish Independence could still have faltered after the referendum, once politicians had to get an actual settlement nailed down.
So that implies that having a third vote is undemocratic? That’s a leap.
Please feel free to point out where I said that.
Oh, please keep it honest.
I am. I stated a fact. Please refrain from accusations of lying unless you have evidence I have done so.
don’t recall seeing your other claims on the ballot paper either. What’s your point?
Fairly obviously, that the vote to leave would be delivered by the UK government and was not contingent on Cameron being prime minister. But you know that already.
You can add me to the list of not wanting brexit but still voting labour in the last election..
Me too. But then, I'm not complaining about them trying to do what they said they would do.
You should have used the AV vote as your example…
You mean that dead duck that Cameron managed to foist onto that great statesman Clegg in exchange for selling out on tuition fees and backing savage welfare cuts? Libdems had waited a lifetime for a chance at electoral reform and look what they got.Sweet FA.
But then, I’m not complaining about them trying to do what they said they would do.
and?? The rest of us ar engaging in the democratic process. It's as if people have very short memories as to how this works.
In case you have not noticed many MP's are having issues with what was in the manifesto from their parties too.
If you want Brexit that is up to you, many of us don't we will fight on until we can't that day has not come yet.
Sweet FA.
Yes, AV was a shit offering roundly rejected by the voters. But it was a binding referendum on a option ready to be implemented and fully documented. While being "binding", the Scottish referendum could still have resulted in the public stating their choice, but politicans reaching stalemate when seeking to deliver it.
As for manifestos … most of what was in both main party manifestos is still just wishful thinking, or has been actively rejected. Much of it will be long forgotten when the next general election manifestos are written up (especially if both parties have new leaders).
and?? The rest of us ar engaging in the democratic process. It’s as if people have very short memories as to how this works.
If you define engagement as "squabbling on a putatively cycling forum about ways to rescind democratic outcomes we don't like" then well done. Have a biscuit.
If you want Brexit that is up to you, many of us don’t we will fight on until we can’t that day has not come yet.
I suppose your barb may have been more effective had been aimed at anything I've ever said or believed. Is it any wonder that political discourse is so divisive given you'd rather attack a straw man than engage with people who aren't in total agreement with you?
I think mike is in the bargaining stage not sure if Cougar's still in denial.dazh and ransos clearly in acceptance 😉
If you define engagement as “squabbling on a putatively cycling forum about ways to rescind democratic outcomes we don’t like” then well done. Have a biscuit.
You must just be trolling now, yes?
If we have another referendum, or when we have the next general election, then people will espose what they want to happen, and incourage people to vote, in pubs and on forums. They shouldn't feel bound to vote for the Conservatives, and against EU membership… and nor should they give in to people who want them to shut up.
You must just be trolling now, yes?
I realize that trying to jolt people here out of their groupthink is a waste of time. Somewhere, there's a parallel thread for the no-deal brexiteers but I doubt you or they'll ever see that you're two sides of the same coin.
Fairly obviously, that the vote to leave would be delivered by the UK government and was not contingent on Cameron being prime minister. But you know that already.
Ah, I see where you going with that now. You've misunderstood my point.
Cameron said that he would honour the result and see it through. I'm not saying that because he stood down he takes the promise to see it through with him, rather that it was an example how how much water him promising anything actually held. If it's ok for him to welch on that promise and walk away, why is the other promise held as immutable?
Politicians change their minds and break promises all the time. Why is this one special? Spoiler, it isn't.
Politicians change their minds and break promises all the time. Why is this one special? Spoiler, it isn’t.
Yeah, you're right. Let's make Scotland independent right now.
You don't address a democratic deficit by ignoring the result of our most important democratic decision.
Let’s make Scotland independent right now.
And Yorkshire.
You don’t address a democratic deficit by ignoring the result of our most important democratic decision.
How about by holding a vote on the outcome of the process vote 1 triggered? Seems fairly reasonable to most people who now see quite how badly its going.
If the only reason for carrying on with brexit is to pay lip service to a notion of what some people think is absolute democracy then it should be canned right now.
We are still at the point where over 1000days in where nobody has managed to present a coherent plan to deliver any kind of brexit that does not damage the UK. Id like to see the analysis of the speeches made in Parliament as to who talked about policy and solutions vs mandate and will of the people.
Well Im on the email list for both University College Hospital & St Marks NHS Trust
between them they serve millions of people
Theyve both sent out emails saying that due to brexit shortages & stockpiling staff have to be very careful not to oversubscribe antibiotics as some stocks are nearly out
as a research lab weve struggled to get certain antibiotics for weeks now
If you think that opposing the 3 year old, out of date referendum thats caused this is a bad thing then fine, but I do not agree with you
ways to rescind democratic outcomes we don’t like”
You keep saying this. We keep telling you it's not true. And yet you keep saying it. Why?
No-one is trying to rescind anything. Aside from the fact that there's nothing to rescind, the referendum was three years ago, papping on about it like it was yesterday isn't helpful to either side any more. That ship hasn't just sailed, it's currently floating around Antarctica trying to establish whether the Earth is flat or not.
In 2016 we had a poll to ascertain whether the general public wished to leave the EU or remain in it. Wild and contradictory promises were made from all corners of the campaigns but in truth no-one on the planet knew what shape "leaving the EU" would look like back then.
The government then chose to act on this information by starting the process to leave (honouring / respecting the referendum). We prematurely ejaculated Article 50, and (eventually, when we couldn't find any other distractions) started the process of thrashing out what would be acceptable to both parliament and the EU27.
Three years on, we now know what the deal looks like. It's there in black and white, you can read it and everything. Is it what people expected? Is it what they wanted? Does it live up to the promises made three years ago? We have no idea.
Is it not then right and just to ask that question? This isn't "rescinding," disrespecting or ignoring the previous referendum, that result is what has got us to this point; it isn't "asking the same question until we get the result we want" because it's a different question; and it's a public vote so it'd require a really special twist of pseudo-logic to declare it undemocratic.
And to be clear - personally I don't want another referendum. I just can't quite believe the gordian knots some people are increasingly tying themselves into in order to attempt to justify not having one.
How about by holding a vote on the outcome of the process vote 1 triggered? Seems fairly reasonable to most people who now see quite how badly its going
Because that would be subject to exactly the same misinformation, manipulation and anger the first vote delivered.
Cougar - Traitor
Just saying like 🙂
Arguably finding democratic means to “rescind democratic outcomes we don’t like” is exactly what good quality democracy should be.
Let’s do it. 🙂
We discussed this years ago. You’ve had nearly three years to inform yourself
That hasn't stopped you repeating everything else daily as it? And getting nowhere.
Sorry I missed the brief.
I imported my own bike from the USA without it touching any EU agreement.
Because that would be subject to exactly the same misinformation, manipulation and anger the first vote delivered.
Or not... Many of the leave lies are out there already. What's that car companies won't dare leave, we will have gold plated trade deals, there is nothing to show from the last 3 years.
Or not… Many of the leave lies are out there already. What’s that car companies won’t dare leave, we will have gold plated trade deals, there is nothing to show from the last 3 years
Agencies would find nice new angles I'm sure.
In other news... notice how Boris has been keeping a low profile.
So what has he been doing at this time of national crisis that he helped dump us in?
Like the self-serving shyster he is, he’s been busy preparing his leadership bid
That’s just what we need now. Confirmation that during this entire shitstorm, all they care about is the Tory party. They literally couldn’t give a toss about any of us! When Boris said ‘**** business!’ he could just as easily apply that sentiment to everything and everybody
The latest Johnathan Pie piece sums it up perfectly. Very very sweary but absolutely on the money....
@rone so we shouldn't ask the question again and just rubber stamp a bad deal? That leaves parliament to revoke as the simple answer to the people not being able to decide.
And to be clear – personally I don’t want another referendum. I just can’t quite believe the gordian knots some people are increasingly tying themselves into in order to attempt to justify not having one.
This is the opposite of reality: the gymnastics are all from those who are trying to justify remaining. I realise that the vote to leave is an inconvenient truth, but truth it is.
I can well imagine the reaction here if Remain had won narrowly, and Leavers were muttering darkly about advisory referendums and changing opinions. You'd be telling them to accept democracy and the result.
You may well believe that this issue is so important that the ends justify any means necessary. So be honest about it.
I imported my own bike from the USA without it touching any EU agreement.
Well done. If you repeated that now, would the Brexit process have made it more or less expensive for you? How about a year from now? Remember… we're looking for ways Brexit is and will be making something better for people in the UK. Yes… still asking that question, sorry.
Arguably finding democratic means to “rescind democratic outcomes we don’t like” is exactly what good quality democracy should be.
Let’s do it. 🙂
So what would you do if Leave won again? Ask a third time?
the gymnastics are all from those who are trying to justify remaining
No gymnastics required for me. Leaving is a stupid idea, especially in the way we're attempting it. For many many reasons for remaining, no good reasons that I can see for leaving - well, maybe half a reason.
Remaining now would be justified because a) we've shown how hard it is to get a deal and b) we've totally ****ed up the chance we had.
So what would you do if Leave won again? Ask a third time?
Start applying for jobs out of the UK.
But anyway we know some can't work out why we can't just implement exactly what was promised and written on the bus. Off we go again let's get this one sorted out please, the true will of people is being shown and will be on the streets come Saturday.
So what would you do if Leave won again?
"Leave" won't be on the ballot. It would be May's deal, no deal or remain, IF it ended up a three-way. Given that the vote would have been on something very specific that can be discussed then you would have to respect the result. No matter how brainless. But the problem here is that you'd be giving a huge amount of power to people who have no experience of governing a country and very little understanding of the issues and how the fallout would affect the country.
Actually, never mind, we are already in that situation!
“Leave” won’t be on the ballot. It would be May’s deal, no deal or remain,
<\blockquote>
Exactly this time it would be a referendum on something tangible.
Tom Watson on LBC pushing hard for a Referendum on the WA. He's joining tomorrow's march.
To me the key justification for a second referendum and the point that nullifies the third / fourth etc argument is timing.
It has taken years from the referendum to this reach point where we are due to leave, in this time much has changed, we are more informed and people that were not old enough to vote then are now.
If we have a second referendum this fact of timing is almost completely removed, vote leave and we leave almost immediately, no argument for a third vote because yet more people will come of age as that wont be true. We have also gained about as much information as we realistically can though I agree lies and mis-information will exist it wont be to the same extent.
Nobody of sane mind could possibly argue that a second vote is undemocratic, it is purely the opinion of those that have 'won' that feel they may 'lose'.
If we do have a second referendum and the vote is leave / the deal then thats that, by even the smallest margin and it is implemented almost immediately, argument over, if the vote is remain I admit this will cause some degree of unrest and unhappines from leave voters but I see no other way out of this mess other than a public forum and there just isnt time for that.
Some of you are vastly overpaid for the jobs you do if you've got this much time to argue....
Go and do stove work....
So what would you do if Leave won again? Ask a third time?
If a new referendum resulted in the Withdrawal Agreement being accepted, we'd Leave and enter the transition period. Would there then need to be another referendum on what we're transitioning to? There might have to be one, if the politicians arrive at another impasse. Would there be one to rejoin the EU? I very much doubt it, but if the support for it was there… why not?
I imported my own bike from the USA without it touching any EU agreement.
Wrong, Rone, the person who sent you your bike from the US was able to do so because of the conditions negotiated with the EU:
http://trade.ec.europa.eu/tradehelp/
Some of you are vastly overpaid for the jobs you do if you’ve got this much time to argue….
Some of us are not measured by time 😉
But back OT
European Council President Mr Tusk said that until 12 April, "anything is possible" including a much longer delay or cancelling Brexit altogether.
Speaking in Brussels on Friday, he said he was "really happy" the 27 EU leaders had reached a unanimous decision to extend the two-year Article 50 process, under which the UK was due to leave the EU next Friday.
"It means that until 12 April, anything is possible: A deal, a long extension if the United Kingdom decided to rethink its strategy, or revoking Article 50, which is a prerogative of the UK government.
"The fate of Brexit is in the hands of our British friends. As the EU, we are prepared for the worst, but hope for the best. As you know, hope dies last."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47672136
He does have a fantastic sense of timing doesn't he, left everyone guessing and trying to work out what deal May had actually achieved on the extension and then dropping the big hint that basically get rid of May and we can talk properly 😉 And we can stay, nice to have those options laid out again isn't it.
the person who sent you your bike from the US was able to do so because of the conditions negotiated with the EU
Are you sure?
Tusk is awesome....
I think May is wrong but at the same time I still admire her tenacity to stick with a clear line that she fundamentally believes and that may not be her first choice. In a world where people so quickly resign and disappear off to a life of high paid talks and fat lunches it feels rare to have someone with conviction and a straightforward point of view. She clearly strongly believes that the only way forward is to implement the result of the referendum even though I had the impression that the referendum wasn't in any way binding
In contrast I haven't the slightest idea what Magic Grandad really wants out of this and that is a lot of the problem. With some real form of opposition we might not be here
She clearly strongly believes that the only way forward is to implement the result of the referendum even though I had the impression that the referendum wasn’t in any way binding
Clearly, that explains her utter reluctance to speak to anybody else about it!! She knows she is right be that a message from god or just a feeling she is on the right path. With all the questions raised she has never once thought maybe I'm not doing this right 🙂
the gymnastics are all from those who are trying to justify remaining. I realise that the vote to leave is an inconvenient truth, but truth it is.
Feel free to highlight what's inaccurate about anything I just said.
I can well imagine the reaction here if Remain had won narrowly, and Leavers were muttering darkly about advisory referendums and changing opinions. You’d be telling them to accept democracy and the result.
We discussed this on like page 2, and no, I wouldn't. I wouldn't support another referendum (because I don't support one now and didn't support the previous one) but that had happened if I genuinely believed that the mood of the country had changed then I'd accept that. I sure as shit wouldn't be demanding that democracy stops because I got the result I wanted three years ago, that's just wrong-headed.
You may well believe that this issue is so important that the ends justify any means necessary. So be honest about it.
Lets not confuse "what I want" with what we're able to do and the facts around that. I'm not talking about opinions here, mine or anyone else's.
What I want is for Theresa May to stand up in parliament, go "the entire thing is a cluster**** so we're calling it off," withdraw A50 then slope off to the Clarence with Farage for a pint of Snecklifter and a spot of horatio in the toilets. But I appreciate the likelihood of that happening is somewhere between "aliens landing" and "zombie invasion."
But I appreciate the likelihood of that happening is somewhere between “aliens landing” and “zombie invasion.”
That's good though as none of that is a video that I would want to see, even by accident
You know what's crazy
I don't even think this is peak Brexit...
https://twitter.com/SunApology/status/1109148637962162177?s=19
So what would you do if Leave won again? Ask a third time?
Well technically you mean fourth of course, but passing that by, if leave won a significant victory say 60%+ then I’d probably be considering my options emigration-wise. There ought to be somewhere that would have me that wouldn’t be about to go through the problems that will start if we leave. I have to think of my family you understand.
If it was another half and half vote like 2016, then probably stay and try and work on getting something better for Britain and it’s inhabitants than leaving.
Incidentally I think I said way back on this thread (late 2016ish) that leaving would be ok if we maintained the four freedoms. Subsidies for deprived areas and farmers (who had bothered generally voted out) could be sacrificed even though I would probably prefer not to.
So until the Brexies started acting like idiots I was willing to compromise. Not so much now, given their appalling behaviour.
I can well imagine the reaction here if Remain had won narrowly, and Leavers were muttering darkly about advisory referendums and changing opinions.
Of course, that's exactly what Farage said. It would be unfinished business. Well, guess what? It is unfinished business, just not the way round he imagined.
If there was another referendum it would have to be binding.
If Leave won, I would start applying for jobs in other countries and try to talk my wife into considering emigrating.
It would be a bigger wrench for my wife and kids than me, but I wouldn’t want to live in such a ridiculous country. I barely do now.
The Leavers would be welcome to it.
Tusk is awesome….
He is and most of the rest of the EU are managing to find the whole act to be some excellent tragi-comedy.
I've just noticed that on the BBC Brexit flowchart, "Cancel Brexit" is now an ending option, how long has that been there for? As it certainly wasn't there on the first couple of iterations.
So Anna Soubry is on channel 4 news explaining what many suspected - that the Maybots promise of indicative votes is just a con and doesn’t actually refer to WA, but later negotiations of a future trade agreements
Smoke and mirrors
She’s actually sticking to her guns in giving Parliament no meaningful input, and carrying on in the bunker, listening to no-one
What a surprise. She’s no longer even acting like a dictator, she’s acting like a monarch
"Winston Churchill's spoon on my Cadillac, which I asked you to touch". Euphemism shirley?
Well at least they are getting in early so first thing tomorrow one of her loyal more loyal colleagues will be getting asked what the plan is.
The real bit is if the deal is defeated I'm not sure it will be her making the decisions.