Brexit Referendum Superthread

A Dub in Glasgo

Bob24 wrote: »

I am sure he did ... Just find it neither helpful nor funny (he must have found it a shame that Wales is still in, it ruined his joke on Brexit number 2 and he had to revert to pretending he didn't know the difference between England and the U.K.).

At his level, he should know the difference however the amount of folk in Ireland that equate England with the UK is unreal

Enzokk

I see the talk of a second referendum is heating up. What if they decide to vote leave again? A third referendum? Or if they vote remain 52-48, I guess precedent would dictate a third referendum. All the while the markets are falling all over Europe and in the UK itself. This anger against the EU has been stoked by politicians for the own shortcomings for a while now and they are surprised people voted to leave the EU? Not enough hospitals built, blame the EU immigrants. Not enough schools built, blame the EU immigrants. Not enough houses built, blame the EU immigrants. Not enough HSE funding to support the growing needs, blame the EU immigrants.

Seeing that the stock prices of EU countries have been declining all over Europe and Italy has to shore up its own banks because of this crisis is the appetite there in the EU to offer the UK anything special anymore? Even if they decide to disregard the people and stay in the EU?

A Dub in Glasgo

Enzokk wrote: »

I see the talk of a second referendum is heating up.

Where did you see this?

Bob24

Bob24 wrote: »

I am sure he did ... Just find it neither helpful nor funny (he must have found it a shame that Wales is still in, it ruined his joke on Brexit number 2 and he had to revert to pretending he didn't know the difference between England and the U.K.).

It's really awful to have to explain a joke, so perhaps think it through a few more times especially considering if the second 'correction' was part of the package.

Bob24

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Where did you see this?

There is the petition and talks about it all over the media. Cameron clearly said it was out of the question, but then this is the man who said he would stay and trigger article 50 immediately in case of a leave vote, and is now leaving the mess for someone else to manage.

Bob24

Deleted User wrote: »

It's really awful to have to explain a joke, so perhaps think it through a few more times especially considering if the second 'correction' was part of the package.

Oh, I get what he is trying to do, just don't find it funny (especially since as I mentioned Wales which did vote the same as England and the majority of the UK is still part of the competition). And even if you find if funny, is that his role to joke about this stuff and promote division in a European country?

Enzokk

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Where did you see this?

Jeremy Hunt has called for a vote on the terms that are offered to the UK in the informal settlement talks. This is a second In or Out vote that is poorly disguised.

Link here from the Independent

If the EU refuses to have informal talks I don't know what the options are though. Seems to me they should have found out about this information before they started the debate about the vote. It would have been easier if they coyuld go to the UK public and state that immigration isn't going to end if we want to trade with the EU. If they still decided to leave then so be it.

Bit cynical

Bob24 wrote: »

I am sure he did ... Just find it neither helpful nor funny (he must have found it a shame that Wales is still in, it ruined his joke on Brexit number 2 and he had to revert to pretending he didn't know the difference between England and the U.K.).

A lot of people don't understand Tusk's sense of humour and mistakenly think him an idiot. For example a lot of people took him at face value when he said

"‘Why is it so dangerous? Because no one can foresee what the long-term consequences would be. As a historian I fear that Brexit could be the beginning of the destruction of not only the EU but also of western civilisation in its entirety!"

Great character altogether.

Bob24

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

At his level, he should know the difference however the amount of folk in Ireland that equate England with the UK is unreal

True, and actually for many continental Europeans the words English and British are pretty much interchangeable in spoken language. You will also easily find people who think Ireland is part of the UK.

To be fair, the UK and Ireland don't make things easy for outsiders to understand.

For the euro they see: England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Republic of Ireland.

If they watch the Olympics they will see the UK (including Northern Ireland) and Ireland (i.e. the Republic of Ireland).

If they watch the Rugby they will see England, Wales, Scotland, and Ireland (this time including Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland).


I'll forgive them for being confused :-D

K-9

Enzokk wrote: »

Jeremy Hunt has called for a vote on the terms that are offered to the UK in the informal settlement talks. This is a second In or Out vote that is poorly disguised.

Link here from the Independent

If the EU refuses to have informal talks I don't know what the options are though. Seems to me they should have found out about this information before they started the debate about the vote. It would have been easier if they coyuld go to the UK public and state that immigration isn't going to end if we want to trade with the EU. If they still decided to leave then so be it.

Is it a second vote really though?

Farage will probably oppose any vote like that as any ties with the EU he'll be against.

Alun

What he actually said was "... western political civilization in it's entirety!"

Given the potential for far right groups to flourish and come to power on the back of all this, maybe he's not far off the truth there.

embraer170

Enzokk wrote: »

Jeremy Hunt has called for a vote on the terms that are offered to the UK in the informal settlement talks. This is a second In or Out vote that is poorly disguised.

Link here from the Independent

If the EU refuses to have informal talks I don't know what the options are though. Seems to me they should have found out about this information before they started the debate about the vote. It would have been easier if they coyuld go to the UK public and state that immigration isn't going to end if we want to trade with the EU. If they still decided to leave then so be it.

There has been one very consistent message from Member States (including Germany), the Council, the Commission and the Parliament: no informal negotiations until Article 50.

embraer170

embraer170 wrote: »

There has been one very consistent message from Member States (including Germany), the Council, the Commission and the Parliament: no informal negotiations until Article 50.

It makes zero sense for the EU to do any negotiating until the invocation.

Enzokk

K-9 wrote: »

Is it a second vote really though?

Farage will probably oppose any vote like that as any ties with the EU he'll be against.

Not just Farage but probably Jeremy Corbyn as well.:)

In the article he does say,

“We’ve had nine general elections since we joined the EU and this is such a big thing that I think the terms under which we leave the EU also need to be put to the British people.”

, I see that as giving the people a choice whether they accept the terms. But it seems like its not feasible to me, what if they still want to leave but not accept the terms? What if they want to return to the EU but article 50 has been triggered already? Waffling from another politician that has said being Health Secretary will be his last job in politics, but wants to run for the leadership now.

A Dub in Glasgo

Bob24 wrote: »

True, and actually for many continental Europeans the words English and British are pretty much interchangeable in spoken language. You will also easily find people who think Ireland is part of the UK.

To be fair, the British and Ireland don't make thinks easy to understand.

For the euro they see: England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Republic of Ireland.

If they watch the Olympics they will see the UK and Ireland (i.e. the Republic of Ireland).

If they watch the Rugby they will see England, Wales, Scotland, and the Island of Ireland (North and Republic).


I'll forgive them for being confused :-D

and the Eurovision they see Ireland (Republic) and UK

Enzokk

embraer170 wrote: »

There has been one very consistent message from Member States (including Germany), the Council, the Commission and the Parliament: no informal negotiations until Article 50.

Deleted User wrote: »

It makes zero sense for the EU to do any negotiating until the invocation.

I agree, it will give them an out if they don't like the terms. My guess is the Member States know any terms will not be in favour of the UK so will tie up any loopholes to reverse their decision.

A Dub in Glasgo

Enzokk wrote: »

What if they want to return to the EU but article 50 has been triggered already?

This document suggests a decision to withdraw your resignation from the EU can still happen before the date agreed during negotiations. It does say it would be politically difficult to do so though

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201516/ldselect/ldeucom/138/138.pdf

See paragraphs 10 - 17

K-9

Alun wrote: »

What he actually said was "... western political civilization in it's entirety!"

Given the potential for far right groups to flourish and come to power on the back of all this, maybe he's not far off the truth there.

It does seem hyperbolic but when you think about it...

Bob24

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

This document suggests a decision to withdraw your resignation from the EU can still happen before the date agreed during negotiations. It does say it would be politically difficult to do so though

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201516/ldselect/ldeucom/138/138.pdf

See paragraphs 10 - 17

It would put the UK and the EU in a very awkward position though. Technically it makes sense to allow a member state to withdraw their request if negotiations are going nowhere, but after having gone through the whole process of putting everyone's grievances on the table and gone through painful negotiations, politically it would be impossible to pretend that it never happened.

whatstherush

Some lightheartedness for a minute
https://twitter.com/MarinaHyde/status/747720601385771010

Bob24

whatstherush wrote: »

Some lightheartedness for a minute

The famous Junker hug of death :-)

swampgas

Farage has made a speech in Brussels where he insults everyone there and does his best to burn as many bridges as possible.
In the end the other MEPs turned their backs on him and booed when he finished.

It's a deliberate ploy to antagonise the rest of the EU as much as possible, and it may even work.

Link

K-9

swampgas wrote: »

Farage has made a speech in Brussels where he insults everyone there and does his best to burn as many bridges as possible.
In the end the other MEPs turned their backs on him and booed when he finished.

It's a deliberate ploy to antagonise the rest of the EU as much as possible, and it may even work.

Link

So no change there then!

circadian

I don't know if this has been mentioned yet but NI and Scotland could technically stay in the UK and EU much like Denmark and Greenland. Parts of the UK are already outside the EU anyway.

This of course would mean no border with the north, increased border controls with the north and Scotland to wales and England. Between Scotland and England this would happen with an independent vote anyway. They could also inherit the right to retain the sterling which may balance the economy.

circadian

circadian wrote: »

I don't know if this has been mentioned yet but NI and Scotland could technically stay in the UK and EU much like Denmark and Greenland. Parts of the UK are already outside the EU anyway.

That would appear to directly contradict the advice of the European Commission prior to the 2013 Referendum of Scottish Independence, when it said that a seceding Scotland would be required to apply for membership of the EU like any new Member State.

And it makes sense. An independent Scotland would need to converge and stabilise on its own account; it cannot expect to be parachuted into the EU on the back of tax transfers from London, with no Central Bank and a very limited devolved parliament.

It should have to prove it is a viable state before it accedes to EU membership. Which is why independence will probably never happen.

Harika

circadian wrote: »

I don't know if this has been mentioned yet but NI and Scotland could technically stay in the UK and EU much like Denmark and Greenland. Parts of the UK are already outside the EU anyway.

This of course would mean no border with the north, increased border controls with the north and Scotland to wales and England. Between Scotland and England this would happen with an independent vote anyway. They could also inherit the right to retain the sterling which may balance the economy.

Interesting, for this you will need a very able prime minister and don't get your hopes up that this white knight will suddenly arise.

Tigerandahalf

How can Scotland or N Ire stay in the EU? They are part of the UK. Both receive huge amounts of money from England towards their annual budgets.

Has Sturgeon and others communicated to their electorate how that void is going to be filled.

It seems Junckner and the EU are taking a tough line. Well time is on the UK's side. The longer the impasse the more damage the uncertainty will do for the EU.

There may well be no invoking of Article 50 until after a general election in the UK.

smjm

'Ireland in 'worst position' in Europe after Brexit'
http://www.rte.ie/news/2016/0628/798605-cabinet-politics-brexit/

The Brexit negotiations and outcome really will decide if Ireland is an equal partner in the EU!

K-9

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

That would appear to directly contradict the advice of the European Commission prior to the 2013 Referendum of Scottish Independence, when it said that a seceding Scotland would be required to apply for membership of the EU like any new Member State.

And it makes sense. An independent Scotland would need to converge and stabilise on its own account; it cannot expect to be parachuted into the EU on the back of tax transfers from London, with no Central Bank and a very limited devolved parliament.

It should have to prove it is a viable state before it accedes to EU membership. Which is why independence will probably never happen.

Scottish Independence is back on the agenda again.

And as we've seen with Brexit logic and economic sense often matter little in referendums. You'd think people would have learned that by now.

Independence has the momentum and emotion now, and everything since the last vote just reinforces the differences between Scotland and the rest of GB. Dismissing Scotland just makes independence surer!

LiamoSail

swampgas wrote: »

Farage has made a speech in Brussels where he insults everyone there and does his best to burn as many bridges as possible.
In the end the other MEPs turned their backs on him and booed when he finished.

It's a deliberate ploy to antagonise the rest of the EU as much as possible, and it may even work.

Link

That really is disgraceful. It says it all about England really that this is the man who's party represents them in Europe. The ignorance of the Farage, like that of the majority of Englanders, never ceases to amaze. I hope Europe really makes an example of them