Second Referendum
#41
When you say "The UK is a basket case", I hope Europeans realise it's not The People, but The People that The People elected!

eg Boris f***ing Johnson, who I read this morning was 'Favourite to be the next PM'. No wonder the whole World is laughing at us with self-serving cretins like that anywhere near Parliament. He would have had his head chopped off in days gone by, and I'd have paid to do it.
Reply
#42
(03-31-2019, 08:28 AM)Pickle Rick Wrote: I think you are right but May didn't have the backing of her party for that  (or fully for anything). MPs acting as individuals as they see best may make them feel they are doing the right thing but they have just made parliament a joke incapable of moving forward. Not a fan of May but she is dealing with a bunch of divas many of whom have deliberately tried to stop the referendum result being achieved. Those against leave have sided with the EU in the negotiations in effect and strengthened their hand in trying to force a tough deal - a united response by people and parliament after the referendum may have resulted in a better deal. That's obviously impossible given the nature of the opposing views but the division in the UK is the weakness that is being exploited and will continue to be exploited by the EU and there is no good solution now. What question would a second referendum be and if we stayed in the EU how long before it kicks off again? Better to break up now than stay in a bitter marriage and deal with the custody battles as they arise. Or better the break up had not happened in the first place but it did and that wasn't just down to UKIP and Cameron but also EU economic failings and unwillingness to reform.  No side cones out of this looking good.
This is a top post. I normally steer clear of the politics board but, like Pandora's Box, I thought I'd have a look.

To me, the Leave movement (for a few reasons), was gathering momentum as the main parties both became ridiculously removed from real people.  Everyone could see UKIP were going to take a lot of votes at the prior election but no one knew who from?  Cameron called the referendum and ensured UKIP didn't take his share. Labour (IMO) were too arrogant to take any notice of the threat from UKIP, and accordingly lost. 
Despite him having already said this would be his last term, Cameron decided he wasn't prepared to roll his sleeves up and see his decision through. This, I believe,  is unforgivable.
As soon as the result was realised, Article 50 should have been triggered with the clear statement that after 2 years we would leave under WTO terms. Then the pressure to get a better deal would be on both Parliament and the EU but would have at least, removed much of the uncertainty faced by business.
The MPs that have stubbornly refused to accept the result could have focused on standing firm to get the best deal possible.
The EU would then not have wasted 18 months haggling over the divorce bill (which surely should come much later in the negotiation?), and would be under pressure from French and German industries to strike a deal. They would even perhaps realise they should have been a little less hasty to dismiss the UK's previous requests for a better relationship.
The referendum split family loyalties and moved many to vote for the first time. A second referendum would neither change anyone's mind, nor solve anything. It would simply move the problem back down the line. An Election, likewise.
Reply
#43
I love posts like this with a passing reference to WTO terms as if they are the most natural thing going. Nobody on the planet uses these and there is good reason why. Without googling can you tell me any of these WTO terms?
Reply
#44
(04-03-2019, 08:17 PM)Tom Joad Wrote:
(03-31-2019, 08:28 AM)Pickle Rick Wrote: I think you are right but May didn't have the backing of her party for that  (or fully for anything). MPs acting as individuals as they see best may make them feel they are doing the right thing but they have just made parliament a joke incapable of moving forward. Not a fan of May but she is dealing with a bunch of divas many of whom have deliberately tried to stop the referendum result being achieved. Those against leave have sided with the EU in the negotiations in effect and strengthened their hand in trying to force a tough deal - a united response by people and parliament after the referendum may have resulted in a better deal. That's obviously impossible given the nature of the opposing views but the division in the UK is the weakness that is being exploited and will continue to be exploited by the EU and there is no good solution now. What question would a second referendum be and if we stayed in the EU how long before it kicks off again? Better to break up now than stay in a bitter marriage and deal with the custody battles as they arise. Or better the break up had not happened in the first place but it did and that wasn't just down to UKIP and Cameron but also EU economic failings and unwillingness to reform.  No side cones out of this looking good.
This is a top post. I normally steer clear of the politics board but, like Pandora's Box, I thought I'd have a look.

To me, the Leave movement (for a few reasons), was gathering momentum as the main parties both became ridiculously removed from real people.  Everyone could see UKIP were going to take a lot of votes at the prior election but no one knew who from?  Cameron called the referendum and ensured UKIP didn't take his share. Labour (IMO) were too arrogant to take any notice of the threat from UKIP, and accordingly lost. 
Despite him having already said this would be his last term, Cameron decided he wasn't prepared to roll his sleeves up and see his decision through. This, I believe,  is unforgivable.
As soon as the result was realised, Article 50 should have been triggered with the clear statement that after 2 years we would leave under WTO terms. Then the pressure to get a better deal would be on both Parliament and the EU but would have at least, removed much of the uncertainty faced by business.
The MPs that have stubbornly refused to accept the result could have focused on standing firm to get the best deal possible.
The EU would then not have wasted 18 months haggling over the divorce bill (which surely should come much later in the negotiation?), and would be under pressure from French and German industries to strike a deal. They would even perhaps realise they should have been a little less hasty to dismiss the UK's previous requests for a better relationship.
The referendum split family loyalties and moved many to vote for the first time. A second referendum would neither change anyone's mind, nor solve anything. It would simply move the problem back down the line. An Election, likewise.

Leaving without a deal is the stupidest thing this country will have done since Suez, and triggering Article 50 before we were ready to is why we're in this mess in the first place.

Has nobody been paying attention to anything over the last 3 years or something? We'd lose access to and from various services to the EU, EEA and other trade agreements made through them overnight which our economy relies on, our customs clearing will be crippled by checks and limitations to haulage licenses and we'd lose leverage to not only the EU but every other country if we default to WTO as we'd employ zero tariffs meaning no country would even be incentivised to sign a trade agreement as they'd not gain much and we'd gain a lot. There's a reason countries don't like using WTO rules when trading.

And by the way, the German and French industries don't care, the French industrial bodies along with their government have been pursuing a hard line since day one and the German trade bodies have stood behind their governments. That was a lie, stop repeating it.
Reply
#45
I was saying that by then triggering article 50, there is a deadline. This is something that has been ignored by politicians of all parties, both remain and leave, and The EU who have taken advantage of this infighting to reinforce their position.
Anything other than a deadline simply kicks the problem down the road. Sadly, the country is so divided that neither an election nor a new referendum will solve a problem that we urgently  need to address.
Business, from my experience, wants the uncertainy gone so it can get on. 
This was my point.
Reply
#46
(04-04-2019, 07:41 AM)Tom Joad Wrote: I was saying that by then triggering article 50, there is a deadline. This is something that has been ignored by politicians of all parties, both remain and leave, and The EU who have taken advantage of this infighting to reinforce their position.
Anything other than a deadline simply kicks the problem down the road. Sadly, the country is so divided that neither an election nor a new referendum will solve a problem that we urgently  need to address.
Business, from my experience, wants the uncertainy gone so it can get on. 
This was my point.

But certainty that we are prepared and going to drive over a cliff on a certain date achieves what in reality? It’s just macho posturing that the likes of Mark Francois enjoy.
Reply
#47
(04-04-2019, 07:41 AM)Tom Joad Wrote: I was saying that by then triggering article 50, there is a deadline. This is something that has been ignored by politicians of all parties, both remain and leave, and The EU who have taken advantage of this infighting to reinforce their position.
Anything other than a deadline simply kicks the problem down the road. Sadly, the country is so divided that neither an election nor a new referendum will solve a problem that we urgently  need to address.
Business, from my experience, wants the uncertainy gone so it can get on. 
This was my point.

The issue around certainty has been caused by activating Article 50 before we were ready to do so, triggering it 6 months earlier wouldn't have helped with that. The EU stopped negotiating with us well before the deadline was met, this has been purely internal.

And no deal does not provide certainty as it puts us in a state of limbo where anything can change in an instant.
Reply
#48
(04-04-2019, 08:47 AM)Borin\ Baggie Wrote:
(04-04-2019, 07:41 AM)Tom Joad Wrote: I was saying that by then triggering article 50, there is a deadline. This is something that has been ignored by politicians of all parties, both remain and leave, and The EU who have taken advantage of this infighting to reinforce their position.
Anything other than a deadline simply kicks the problem down the road. Sadly, the country is so divided that neither an election nor a new referendum will solve a problem that we urgently  need to address.
Business, from my experience, wants the uncertainy gone so it can get on. 
This was my point.

The issue around certainty has been caused by activating Article 50 before we were ready to do so, triggering it 6 months earlier wouldn't have helped with that. The EU stopped negotiating with us well before the deadline was met, this has been purely internal.

And no deal does not provide certainty as it puts us in a state of limbo where anything can change in an instant.

I would argue that without a serious deadline, Parliament would/will never be ready to move on. I have never advocated No Deal as the answer, but as the threat/ incentive for both the UK and EU to work together to find something preferable. As it is the infighting, the refusals to work towards a solution, the politicians seeking personal gain, have led to the EU being able to stonewall the bowling. Or to use an analogy. The fuel light is on, I've got around 60 miles to get petrol. Do I think about it and buy it where it is most advantageous either price or location wise?  Or do I just drive on until I'm running on fumes and then make a decision?
Again, to the point of the thread, I cannot see how another referendum will solve anything as those in favour of each point will no doubt not accept the result. Also, a general election at this time will confuse things further. At some point very soon we need to move on.
As an aside, there will be serious long term implications from this fiasco. I would guess we'll see a huge change in traditional voting patterns, hopefully a fairer means of representation,  and I'm hoping, no more populist referendums.
Reply
#49
(04-04-2019, 04:48 PM)Tom Joad Wrote:
(04-04-2019, 08:47 AM)Borin\ Baggie Wrote:
(04-04-2019, 07:41 AM)Tom Joad Wrote: I was saying that by then triggering article 50, there is a deadline. This is something that has been ignored by politicians of all parties, both remain and leave, and The EU who have taken advantage of this infighting to reinforce their position.
Anything other than a deadline simply kicks the problem down the road. Sadly, the country is so divided that neither an election nor a new referendum will solve a problem that we urgently  need to address.
Business, from my experience, wants the uncertainy gone so it can get on. 
This was my point.

The issue around certainty has been caused by activating Article 50 before we were ready to do so, triggering it 6 months earlier wouldn't have helped with that. The EU stopped negotiating with us well before the deadline was met, this has been purely internal.

And no deal does not provide certainty as it puts us in a state of limbo where anything can change in an instant.

I would argue that without a serious deadline, Parliament would/will never be ready to move on. I have never advocated No Deal as the answer, but as the threat/ incentive for both the UK and EU to work together to find something preferable. As it is the infighting, the refusals to work towards a solution, the politicians seeking personal gain, have led to the EU being able to stonewall the bowling. Or to use an analogy. The fuel light is on, I've got around 60 miles to get petrol. Do I think about it and buy it where it is most advantageous either price or location wise?  Or do I just drive on until I'm running on fumes and then make a decision?
Again, to the point of the thread, I cannot see how another referendum will solve anything as those in favour of each point will no doubt not accept the result. Also, a general election at this time will confuse things further. At some point very soon we need to move on.
As an aside, there will be serious long term implications from this fiasco. I would guess we'll see a huge change in traditional voting patterns, hopefully a fairer means of representation,  and I'm hoping, no more populist referendums.

I actually agree with much of what you've said here, but just can't get past the fact that the referendum 'result' is totally utterly corrupt. Both morally & financially.

I also think driving the country off a cliff in the name of 'the will of the people' will be far more divisive than another democratic vote.
Reply
#50
(04-03-2019, 09:03 PM)baggy1 Wrote: I love posts like this with a passing reference to WTO terms as if they are the most natural thing going. Nobody on the planet uses these and there is good reason why. Without googling can you tell me any of these WTO terms?

I am always somewhat amused that some brexiteers seem very keen on WTO terms.

These are the rules of international trade set by the WTO not crucially parliament. How on earth is this taking back control.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)