Brexit Referendum Superthread

A Dub in Glasgo

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Indeed... and the request only makes sense if actioned before last thursday!

I agree, I was going to sign it last night when I was on the rum and pepsi max but decided against it

Inquitus

Bit cynical wrote: »

What? The Conservatives said in advance of the last election that should they win, they would hold a referendum on the subject of EU membership. They won the election and the promised referendum was held.

37% of voters voted Tory.

A Dub in Glasgo

Bit cynical wrote: »

What? The Conservatives said in advance of the last election that should they win, they would hold a referendum on the subject of EU membership. They won the election and the promised referendum was held.

They won 37% of the vote, imagine the rage if leave won 37% and then proceeded to leave!

ancapailldorcha

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

They won 37% of the vote, imagine the rage if leave won 37% and then proceeded to leave!

Ironically, this is exactly what FPTP is for, binary choices.

Bob24

Inquitus wrote: »

37% of voters voted Tory.

Reality distortion field here ... if in the UK or Irish voting system you expect a party to gather 50% of the votes to have a mandate, it will virtually never happen - this is why we have coalitions.

Billy86

Inquitus wrote: »

37% of voters voted Tory.

Which had them into government as the 'senior' party - so they won the election.

I'm not happy about the result at all, but it was announced far, far in advance and it was voted for democratically. If the populace decided not to educate themselves enough on the matter before voting, that's their own tough sh*t. No do overs, no turning back, they've made their bed and now they can sleep in it. That's how democracy works - there's a reason it's often referred to as "the least worst system we have, rather than the 'best'" and it is quite possible we are about to see why.

BoJack Horseman

Inquitus wrote: »

37% of voters voted Tory.

There should be a petition then to re-run the 2015 GE....

except then the dastardly tories would top 400 seats!

Tigerandahalf

Billy86 wrote: »

None of that answers how leaving the EU will change the UK's power to dictate their own corporate tax rates, though?

It also doesn't answer how the banks debts will suddenly disappear and/or how the people making the decisions in those banks' outlooks on the ordinary working folk will change?

It does bring up another question though, why do you feel the UK economy will prosper but the EU economy will collapse? I mean we're in a period of uncertainty right now so I'm not dismissing it, just asking what is the reasoning behind it?

And also how will leaving the EU change issues like minimum hour contracts or an individual's capacity to buy their own home?

Some of what I am saying refers more to the wider Europe than just the UK.

As regards corporate tax it is very clear that the power brokers in Europe want a federal Euro state with corporate tax controlled centrally. Eventually the UK would be pulled into these I have no doubt.
It is well known that Ire are very worried about this and with the UK gone we have even less support in decisions being made.
Colm Mc Carthy has a piece in the Indo re this.

Long term there will have to be some sort of global deal to stop companies avoiding paying a fair share of tax.

There is no guarantee that either economy will prosper but at least if the UK have full control over their own matters they will be able to take more decisive action to sort out their problems rather than having to wait on whether they are breaking some law or other from Europe.

Inquitus

Billy86 wrote: »

Which had them into government as the 'senior' party - so they won the election.

I'm not happy about the result at all, but it was announced far, far in advance and it was voted for democratically. If the populace decided not to educate themselves enough on the matter before voting, that's their own tough sh*t. No do overs, no turning back, they've made their bed and now they can sleep in it. That's how democracy works - there's a reason it's often referred to as "the least worst system we have, rather than the 'best'" and it is quite possible we are about to see why.

I disagree, they elected their MP's in 2015, the vast majority of whom wish to remain in the EU, the referendum was a foolhardy and selfish gamble by David Cameron. Representative democracy is about allowing your elected officials to make the tough, complex decisions, not having a crapshoot of a referendum, as they have had in this case!

Sam Russell

Bob24 wrote: »

Reality distortion field here ... if in the UK or Irish voting system you expect a party to gather 50% of the votes to have a mandate, it will virtually never happen - this is why we have coalitions.

Last time the government got a popular vote of 50% was in 1959 ('You never had it so good' election). All other elections since had less than 50%. I think Margaret Thatcher never go more than 43% in any election. I think the Labour victory in 1945 was a popular majority, and I think there was a Tory victory in 1932 that was as well.

In general, elections in Britain are not decided by popular vote - three in the last 100 years.

Tigerandahalf

Inquitus wrote: »

I disagree, they elected their MP's in 2015, the vast majority of whom wish to remain in the EU, the referendum was a foolhardy and selfish gamble by David Cameron. Representative democracy is about allowing your elected officials to make the tough, complex decisions, not having a crapshoot of a referendum, as they have had in this case!

I think he had no choice but to call one. The only thing saving them was that Labour was pro Europe. That took away a lot of the protest vote. If Labour had been anti Europe in the last election you could have had a very different result.

4068ac1elhodqr

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The petition to re-run the referendum is now approaching 3.5 million signatures.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

Which includes 39,000 from the Vatican City (a tiny city state, with total population of just 800). Along with Tunisia, Iceland and the Cayman Islands.
Sounds legit.

The poor folks down in Gibraltar may feel the pain more than most, they've probably sent in around 500,000 signatures already.

Mr. Farage

The petition is being ripped to pieces on social media. Some people have voted more than a dozen times and a fair amount of the sigs are coming from outside of the UK. Still it's funny watching people thinking it will make a difference. Bless.

embraer170

long range shooter wrote: »

Thats probably why the Uk went out of EU,and wants to renegotiate a new agreement,similar to Norway,but with better terms.
Switzerland also have a similar agreement,but different terms.
And UK is not part of schengen,like Norway is,i think they are more exposed to bad immigrants,but atleast they have a saying in it,with their own laws.

Why are you in a position to assume they can negotiate an agreement with "better terms"? The Norwegian/Swiss deals, both which include the free movement of people and very significant contributions to the EU budget, have set the benchmark for the best case scenario for the UK.

Remember that this (best case scenario) means that the UK would have to:
- pay as much as today towards the EU budget;
- not receive benefits such as structural funds (increasing the net budgetary contribution);
- accept the continue free movement of people;
- have no say in the EU legislative process including on matters that affect the UK.

That is exactly the Norwegian deal that some people want to use as a the model for the UK. Of course, the UK will be "free"...

Bit cynical

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

There should be a petition then to re-run the 2015 GE....

except then the dastardly tories would top 400 seats!

There should be a rerun of the 2015 general election because clearly the Brits don't understand the issues and deserve another chance. Then there should be a referendum to decide whether or not to hold a referendum. Then the results of both referendums should be ignored because the Brits aren't capable of making decisions the way I would like.

A Dub in Glasgo

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

I think he had no choice but to call one. The only thing saving them was that Labour was pro Europe. That took away a lot of the protest vote. If Labour had been anti Europe in the last election you could have had a very different result.

Of course he had a choice, he chose to shore up Tory support by sucking up to the UKIP sort

embraer170

long range shooter wrote: »

According to SSB the number is 97500 Poles in Norway.In Ireland its 122000

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

I am not sure what your point it? A few posts earlier you told us that the number of Polish immigrants in Norway is decreasing. The facts show the opposite - the numbers are increasing.

The fact remains that as a % of the total population, there are more Polish immigrants in Norway than in the UK.

Again, is this the "model" suggested by some parts of the Leave campaign?

Mr. Farage

Can we re-run the football match today? Please

embraer170

Scotland welcome to join EU, Merkel ally says
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0ZC0QT

long range shooter

Inquitus wrote: »

These were people who were happy enough living under their previous regimes, who have now had their homes taken over by ISIS and all that goes with it and as such have no option but flee or die.

This whole migrant crisis is absolutely the consequence of the West's, led by the US, utterly failed foreign policy in the middle east over the last 2 decades.

Ah i see,so there was no terrorist before isis,is that what your saying.
And there was no dictators running their country either before isis?
There was no refugees before isis?there was no islamist before isis?
Please tell me something i dont know

Polo_Mint

Mr. Farage wrote: »

Can we re-run the football match today? Please

So whats the plan when the Multinationals pull out of the UK.

long range shooter

embraer170 wrote: »

I am not sure what your point it? A few posts earlier you told us that the number of Polish immigrants in Norway is decreasing. The facts show the opposite - the numbers are increasing.

The fact remains that as a % of the total population, there are more Polish immigrants in Norway than in the UK.

Again, is this the "model" suggested by some parts of the Leave campaign?

It is decreasing,Norway used to have 1500000 poles,no its 97500 left.
what does that tell you.
And yes since Norway have a population same as Ireland,offcourse its more in percentage than the UK.
Ireland have nore in percentage too,but not in total.
Whats your point really?

briany

topmanamillion wrote: »

Democratically elected politicians are elected for that very reason i.e to represent the mandate from their people & make decisions on their behalf.
There was zero mandate from the British electorate for an EU referendum (UKIP got one seat from last year's general election!)
The EU referendum was expectedly hijacked by head the balls raving about foreigners and putting money into the NHS. 2 days after the result these claims have been admitted to be horse manure from the very people who said them.
That's poor leadership by Cameron to allow such a situation to develop all because he could not put down dissent in his own party and instead decided to take one hell of a gamble which has back fired spectacularly.

Obviously Britain's politicians feel that deciding on Britain's membership of the EU is a decision of such importance that it should be put directly to the people. Don't forget that its status in relation to the EU has been put to a referendum once before, although it was the precursor, the EEC, then.

So, the decision to leave the EU is being lamented as a great day for under-education of the masses in political matters. The problem with this argument is that you can basically level it at every other referendum result as well if it didn't go the way you want - the Scottish/Welsh devolution ones, the Scottish independence one, the gay marriage referendum in Ireland. Whenever you hold a referendum you're basically appealing to the common person, whether the result is pleasing to you or not. On the one hand it's 'mob rule' and on the other it's 'a great day for democracy'. In the case of the EU referendum, the latest one, people have had more access to education on the matter than ever before, and if staying in the EU is so clearly the better choice and if the lies of the Leave people were so transparent and egregious, the Remain campaigners should have had no problem in convincing voters that this was so.

There obviously was a mandate for a referendum considering there were over 17 million voters who went to the ballot in order to affect a massive political change in ticking the 'leave' box. Were there no mandate, no desire among the people for a referendum, had it been something just thrown out there to quell the UKIP wing nuts, the referendum that did happen should have been a landslide in favour of remaining, but it wasn't.

long range shooter

embraer170 wrote: »

Why are you in a position to assume they can negotiate an agreement with "better terms"? The Norwegian/Swiss deals, both which include the free movement of people and very significant contributions to the EU budget, have set the benchmark for the best case scenario for the UK.

Remember that this (best case scenario) means that the UK would have to:
- pay as much as today towards the EU budget;
- not receive benefits such as structural funds (increasing the net budgetary contribution);
- accept the continue free movement of people;
- have no say in the EU legislative process including on matters that affect the UK.

That is exactly the Norwegian deal that some people want to use as a the model for the UK. Of course, the UK will be "free"...

Norway pays same as UK in EEC,cause they can affford it,so can UK.
Benefiits Norway dont need,neither does Uk
Free movement of people you will have no matter what,accept that Norway is gone stricter on immigration and foreign workers now,cause they can.,and so can UK now,without EU.
Norway have a saying in their own country,what.more do you need.

embraer170

long range shooter wrote: »

It is decreasing,Norway used to have 1500000 poles,no its 97500 left.
what does that tell you.
And yes since Norway have a population same as Ireland,offcourse its more in percentage than the UK.
Ireland have nore in percentage too,but not in total.
Whats your point really?

Stop making up things. The number of Polish immigrants in Norway has been constantly increasing:

2016 - 95,000 / https://www.ssb.no/en/befolkning/statistikker/innvbef/aar/2016-03-03

2015 - 91,000 / https://www.ssb.no/en/befolkning/statistikker/innvbef/aar/2015-03-04

2013 - 77,000 / https://www.ssb.no/en/befolkning/statistikker/innvbef/aar/2013-04-25

2010 - 52,000 / https://www.ssb.no/a/english/kortnavn/innvbef_en/arkiv/tab-2010-04-29-04-en.html

At no point were there 150,000 Polish immigrants in Norway.

--

As for the point, the Norwegian model used by some parts of the Leave campaign would not cut immigration. That's a plain lie.

CMOTDibbler

long range shooter wrote: »

It is decreasing,Norway used to have 1500000 poles,no its 97500 left.
what does that tell you.
And yes since Norway have a population same as Ireland,offcourse its more in percentage than the UK.
Ireland have nore in percentage too,but not in total.
Whats your point really?

If you put down that rifle and typed with your fingers instead, we might be able to understand you. :pac:

Jimmy Garlic

Mr. Farage wrote: »

Can we re-run the football match today? Please

I didn't like the result. I am a graduate and I demand that the game be played again.

embraer170

long range shooter wrote: »

Norway pays same as UK in EEC,cause they can affford it,so can UK.

SO maybe the Leave campaign should have told people the UK will still be paying the same towards the EU.

Benefiits Norway dont need,neither does Uk

Of course, no one needs money for infrastructure and other projects.

Free movement of people you will have no matter what,accept that Norway is gone stricter on immigration and foreign workers now,cause they can.,and so can UK now,without EU.

Norway can't have gone that much stricter if the number of EU/EEA (not to mention other) immigrants is increasing.

Norway have a saying in their own country,what.more do you need.

If you get a Norway/Switzerland, you will still have to comply with a large body of community law... but you won't have any influence in the development of that law.

Bob24

Mr. Farage wrote: »

Can we re-run the football match today? Please

If you can get 500000 people to sign an online petition (or sign it yourself 500000 times), I don't see how the UEFA could refuse.

long range shooter

embraer170 wrote: »

Stop making up things. The number of Polish immigrants in Norway has been constantly increasing:

2016 - 95,000 / https://www.ssb.no/en/befolkning/statistikker/innvbef/aar/2016-03-03

2015 - 91,000 / https://www.ssb.no/en/befolkning/statistikker/innvbef/aar/2015-03-04

2013 - 77,000 / https://www.ssb.no/en/befolkning/statistikker/innvbef/aar/2013-04-25

2010 - 52,000 / https://www.ssb.no/a/english/kortnavn/innvbef_en/arkiv/tab-2010-04-29-04-en.html

At no point were there 150,000 Polish immigrants in Norway.

--

As for the point, the Norwegian model used by some parts of the Leave campaign would not cut immigration. That's a plain lie.

Thats not what i asked you,why have this any meaning at all to brexit what poles Norway have?
besides Norway had 120000 poles in Norway in 2006 and now its 97500,get over it,and the most unemployed immigrant group in Norway is now poles.