Brexit Referendum Superthread

J Mysterio

I'm still just flabbergasted by the whole thing. The implications of it all are just endless and mostly negative.

Polo_Mint

sink wrote: »

They were under a legal obligation to be balanced (BBC and CH4 anyway not sure about the others), they could not be more hostile to one side than the other.

Looking at the front of the papers tomorrow, all of the papers are headlining the shit hitting the fan in the UK.

None are mentioning any positives.

Same with all the news channels ive seen over the past 2 days.

You are left now with Leave Campaign backtracking, fights within the main parties, Remain campaign looking for a re-run, and all of the media saying the UK is fucked.

And all this followed by the EU telling the UK to GTFO

mansize

Benn has been sacked from the shadow cabinet. Corbyn's days are numbered

Enzokk

I think the BBC and the rest feel betrayed. They were sure the result would be for remain. Now that it has not turned out how they expected it they are suddenly not that big into providing as much balance as before. Their stories seem to be about the leave campaigners and their "promises", the meltdown of both political parties and then showing those that voted leave in a good light. There seems to be little blame on the people that voted out though, only soft questions on why they voted leave.

long range shooter

embraer170 wrote: »

Again, I never said tanyone legitimate had suggested the CTA would end.

However, they are already taking a step back from the promised strict stance on immigration:

Even the Leave campaign knows that the only way they will negotiate a decent deal with the is if the free movement of people is allowed. Norway was repeatedly listed as a model by the Leave campaign. What the people weren't told is that:

1) Norway's and the UK's contribution to the EU bare both 0.22-0.23% of their GDP.
2) As percentage of total population, there are more Poles in Norway than in the UK.

All this without the Norway having any say in EU decision making.

What they didnt tell you is that Norway was to become a member of the EU,papers was actually nearly signed,but some German chancellor decided that if Norway was to become a member,EU wanted full control of Norways oil and gas and fisheries,thats why Norway voted no,and went for EEC instead,cause they didnt have choice.
Yes the price was high,but atleast Norway have control over their oil and gas and their fisheries..

And yes there was a lot of polish in Norway,but more and more are going back,cause many dont get the benfits and work they used to get anymore,cause Norway have a new goverment with stricter rules for immigrants and foreign workers.

pablomakaveli

Interesting. Lib Dems are pledging to ignore the result.

Bit of a gamble on their part but they've little to lose in doing so. If the conservative leadership crisis results in an early election being called they could pick upvotes of remain voters and leavers who are having regrets. If theres no election but it all goes to **** they can at least say they put the offer out there.

Might actually be a smart move on their part.

youreadthat

It's not like Irish referendums, this isn't legally binding and if you haven't noticed, the vote was close and there's no celebration anywhere. Given how much the elite in Britain are influenced by money and big business, don't be surprised if article 50 is never touched. Look already, fishy things are happening and it all looks like a game of chess is going in behind the scenes. Also remember that vote leave are just a loose group of MP's and other personalities, many of which hate each other. They are not a government and can't make policy.

laugh

youreadthat wrote: »

It's not like Irish referendums, this isn't legally binding and if you haven't noticed, the vote was close and there's no celebration anywhere. Given how much the elite in Britain are influenced by money and big business, don't be surprised if article 50 is never touched. Look already, fishy things are happening and it all looks like a game of chess is going in behind the scenes. Also remember that vote leave are just a loose group of MP's and other personalities, many of which hate each other. They are not a government and can't make policy.

You know states can't function without money and it's areas that voted remain that subsidise the rest?

swampgas

Polo_Mint wrote: »

Looking at the front of the papers tomorrow, all of the papers are headlining the shit hitting the fan in the UK.

None are mentioning any positives.

Hmmm ... Looking at this, there are some papers still in favour - the Sunday Express, the Sunday People, the Sunday Mirror.

And many of the others are focusing on Tory in-fighting rather than analysing the result.

Francie Barrett

Polo_Mint wrote: »

Looking at the front of the papers tomorrow, all of the papers are headlining the shit hitting the fan in the UK.

Most of the tabloids are firmly pro-Brexit.

swampgas

youreadthat wrote: »

It's not like Irish referendums, this isn't legally binding and if you haven't noticed, the vote was close and there's no celebration anywhere. Given how much the elite in Britain are influenced by money and big business, don't be surprised if article 50 is never touched. Look already, fishy things are happening and it all looks like a game of chess is going in behind the scenes. Also remember that vote leave are just a loose group of MP's and other personalities, many of which hate each other. They are not a government and can't make policy.

Legally binding? How may of the people who voted out will accept a technicality like that? They've been lead up the garden path by Farage and Boris and will be incandescent if they have their "freedom" denied them by the same people that whipped them up into a fervour of xenophic nationalism.

Not that they won't try - but I can see it getting even uglier if they try to pull a stunt like that.

mansize

The Sunday Express is so Little Englander its unfunny.

Does Activating Article 50 give the UK Cancer???

embraer170

long range shooter wrote: »

What they didnt tell you is that Norway was to become a member of the EU,papers was actually nearly signed,but some German chancellor decided that if Norway was to become a member,EU wanted full control of Norways oil and gas and fisheries,thats why Norway voted no,and went for EEC instead,cause they didnt have choice.
Yes the price was high,but atleast Norway have control over their oil and gas and their fisheries..

That's all nice but how does it change the fact that part of the UK Leave campaign used the Norway model as an example of a way forward. That model would leave the UK paying as much as now to the EU, the continued arrival of the bad bad immigrants, and all this without any formal say into decision making and rule making that ends up affecting the UK.

Francie Barrett

Half the Labour shadow cabinet are going to resign. Corbyn remains defiant. This is pretty awful for the Labour party.

Wanderer78

Francie Barrett wrote:

Half the Labour shadow cabinet are going to resign. Corbyn remains defiant. This is pretty awful for the Labour party.

Doesn't look good at all. This will get very messy

Bob24

pablomakaveli wrote: »

Interesting. Lib Dems are pledging to ignore the result.

Bit of a gamble on their part but they've little to lose in doing so. If the conservative leadership crisis results in an early election being called they could pick upvotes of remain voters and leavers who are having regrets. If theres no election but it all goes to **** they can at least say they put the offer out there.

Might actually be a smart move on their part.

It would probably give them a short term boost in terms of voters who are not happy with the referendum results, but at the same time they will have people asking them if the word democrats in Liberal Democrats means the same as democratic in Democratic People's Republic of Korea. I don't think it would end well for them.

embraer170

long range shooter wrote: »

And yes there was a lot of polish in Norway,but more and more are going back,cause many dont get the benfits and work they used to get anymore,cause Norway have a new goverment with stricter rules for immigrants and foreign workers.

Norway's statistics office does not agree with you.

Polish in Norway in 2016:


Polish in Norway in 2015:


For more data: https://www.ssb.no/en/befolkning/statistikker/innvbef/aar/2016-03-03

Meanwhile the overall percentage of EU/EEA immigrants in Norway as a % of the total population increased from 6.6% to 6.9%.

Nody

swampgas wrote: »

Interesting ... but even if that were to happen, the rest of the EU might simply refuse to play ball. I can't imagine the EU will give the UK the time for the scenario you describe to play out. They seem to want a quick exit for the UK, and to hell with the consequences if the UK isn't ready.

The problem is EU can't kick out a member and article 50 has to be invoked by the country; hence UK can in theory remain within EU forever.

Bob24

Nody wrote: »

The problem is EU can't kick out a member and article 50 has to be invoked by the country; hence UK can in theory remain within EU forever.

I think there will be very strong pressure both from the EU and from within the UK to invoke article 50 though (or for the UK to quickly change its mind about Brexit and officially announce it, which seems impossible).

Uncertainty is not good for anyone, UK included.

swampgas

Nody wrote: »

The problem is EU can't kick out a member and article 50 has to be invoked by the country; hence UK can in theory remain within EU forever.

True enough. However if the contagion starts to spread, I think something will have to give. Article 50 is vague enough that the EU could (if pushed) interpret it as already being invoked. That would be the nuclear option though.

embraer170

Nody wrote: »

The problem is EU can't kick out a member and article 50 has to be invoked by the country; hence UK can in theory remain within EU forever.

The UK may be able to but will continue paying and get listened to less and less in negotiations, particularly within the Council and Parliament. The Commissioner has already resigned and if he is replaced, you can be damn sure the UK won't be getting a portfolio like Financial Services again. The big question is the UK's upcoming Council Presidency and how that will be managed.

If my wife tells me she wants a divorce, I am unlikely to have a happy dinner with her and our friends the next day.

Nody

Bob24 wrote: »

I think they will be very strong brassiere both from the EU and for within the UK to invoke article 50 though (or quickly change its mind about Brexit and officially announce it, which seems impossible).

True from EU side but the president also clearly stated that until they leave all EU rules applies; this means they will keep their veto powers etc. (i.e. EU can't do a whole lot to push the matter except harsh words).

swampgas

Bob24 wrote: »

I think they will be very strong brassiere both from the EU and for within the UK to invoke article 50 though (or quickly change its mind about Brexit and officially announce it, which seems impossible).

Uncertainty is not good for anyone, UK included.

Did auto-correct make a boob of your post?

Bob24

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Doesn't look good at all. This will get very messy

As I keep saying labour needs to implode and to be rebuilt as two separate forces: a pro EU/globalisation left and an anti EU/globalisation left. Otherwise they will lose many voters to UKIP and have too many internal contradictions to be manageable.

Bob24

swampgas wrote: »

Did auto-correct make a boob of your post?

pretty much ;-)

embraer170

swampgas wrote: »

True enough. However if the contagion starts to spread, I think something will have to give. Article 50 is vague enough that the EU could (if pushed) interpret it as already being invoked. That would be the nuclear option though.

Depends who you want to believe. Some European law professors have said it's certainly vague enough to be interpreted in different ways.

However, a Council spokesperson came out and said the notification is a formal process:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-36631518

CMOTDibbler

Thinking about this for the last couple of days, it's a bit like a death in the family. What struck me on the day of the vote was that the latest polls were showing a slight advantage towards remain, which I had a feeling may well swing the vote the other way. Leave voters galvanised, remain voters complacently not voting (the weather may have been a factor as well).

The second thing that struck me was how badly served the British people were by their elected representatives. Lies were in full flight and fear and scaremongering the order of the day. Little wonder that the leave voters have been so incoherent about their reasons for voting the way they did. I can't honestly blame them.

Finally, the slogans about 'taking back our country' and sovereignty struck me as being particularly hollow. How much control of their country does the man on the Clapham omnibus really have and how much of it has been taken from him by the EU? Precious little I suspect. They still have a government that can raise or lower taxes, spend in some areas and not in others and redistribute wealth as they see fit. In reality, the people who gain the most control from this vote are the very politicians who were wishy-washy on the campaign. Now they can repeal any of those pesky laws that Brussels imposed on them to suit their own agendas.

Bob24

embraer170 wrote: »

Depends who you want to believe. Some European law professors have said it's certainly vague enough to be interpreted in different ways.

However, a Council spokesperson came out and said the notification is a formal process:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-36631518

I think if it comes to a point where the 27 remainers feel threatened and their interests are fully aligned, only opposed to the interest of one leaver, those 27 will do whatever they feel they have to do to get their way.

We're not there yet though, and as mentioned by swampgas that would be the nuclear option if the UK is really taking the piss.

whatever_

Suryavarman wrote: »

whatever_ wrote: »

I didn't disagree with this. I said that both the Brexit campaign and the Conservative government are pro-Immigration. Which is of course, true.

It clearly isn't true.

Name one politician in the current Conservative Government who wants to stop immigration into the UK ? No ? An easier question then: name one Conservative MP who wants to stop immigration into the UK. No, you can't, can you, because there aren't any.

swampgas

embraer170 wrote: »

Depends who you want to believe. Some European law professors have said it's certainly vague enough to be interpreted in different ways.

However, a Council spokesperson came out and said the notification is a formal process:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-36631518

Thanks for the link.

However how long can the British government put off invoking article 50 without the EU and/or the leave voters getting cranky? 6 months? A year? Years?

The UK comes across as rudderless since Cameron's resignation - he has abdicated responsibility for the result of a referendum that he was instrumental in creating. His failure is complete.