Brexit discussion thread VII (Please read OP before posting)

VinLieger

RobMc59 wrote: »

If there is a 2nd referendum and the UK remains,it would help to heal rifts if the UK changed to the euro-it would show commitment.

That would if anything exacerbate their own internal issues as for many brexiteers it would prove their worst fears confirmed and simply harden their stances

Zubeneschamali

Skelet0n wrote: »

The leave people would be able to go to screaming treason for the next 10 years.

Yes, but that'll just be Farage and insignificant backbenchers wittering on as they did for 20 years before Cameron gave them airtime.



The UK Govt will do nothing but Brexit for the next 10 years if they leave. Every election, every news bulletin, every PMQs.

Leonard Hofstadter

They'll never vote for that though.

It's definitely in Ireland's interest that they switched to it, and if they were forced to use the Euro upon re-joining, it would make it even more difficult for them to try and leave again.

I'm not sure it's in the UK's interest to use the Euro, though. No question it's in their best interest to stay in the EU (or in the absence of that, as closely aligned to the EU economy as possible - customs union and single market and so on), but on the subject of currency, I'm not so sure really.

BobbyBobberson

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Yes, but that'll just be Farage and insignificant backbenchers wittering on as they did for 20 years before Cameron gave them airtime.



The UK Govt will do nothing but Brexit for the next 10 years if they leave. Every election, every news bulletin, every PMQs.

I have to disagree on this. Lets say a 2nd referendum occurred do people honestly think that would be the end of it all?

There would 17.4 million royally pissed off people, there is over a 100 MPs who are part of or strongly support the ERG and that is before we even mention the media. These people are not all going to change their minds.

Cryptopagan

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Yes, but that'll just be Farage and insignificant backbenchers wittering on as they did for 20 years before Cameron gave them airtime.

They were a problem for the Tory leadership long before Cameron. Eurosceptics were a thorn in John Major’s side. He was lavished with praise when he spoke out against Brexit last year, but he’s one of a succession of Tory leaders who just didn’t know how to address this rift in the party.

10000maniacs

Leroy42 wrote: »

They really don't need a 2nd Ref. They could leave either with TM's deal or with the Labour style deal (ie even closer union).

I understand that it is not what we want or even in the economic interests of the UK but that is what they voted for.

The ref simply stated do you want to leave the EU. Once the UK is no longer a member of the EU the electorate have had their votes met. Anybody arguing for a particular type of Brexit is simply making it up.

What the HoC needs to do, and should have done long before now, is to get to some sort of consensus about waht leave means and how they will vote.

At this stage the only option should be an open debate in the HoC followed by a series of votes to come down to a single option.

Voters have no longer any say in what happens, they gave that power to the HoC, and thus need to live with whatever the elected reps decide once it meets the minimum (ie Leave the EU) mandate of the ref.

Labours proposal is a non starter. They want most the benefits of being in the EU without being in. It is not going to fly with any of the EU27. Its unicorn territory.

robinph

BobbyBobberson wrote: »

I have to disagree on this. Lets say a 2nd referendum occurred do people honestly think that would be the end of it all?

There would 17.4 million royally pissed off people, there is over a 100 MPs who are part of or strongly support the ERG and that is before we even mention the media. These people are not all going to change their minds.

I don't think there are 17.4 million people who care that much about leaving. They of course find plenty of very shouty ones to speak to in the news and repeat lines such as "leave means leave" and "why don't they just get on with it" etc. Majority of those 17.4 million just put a tick in a box and thought nothing more of it until afterwards, much the same as the majority of those who put a tick in the other box to signify that nothing should change.

Most voters on either side don't know what any of it means. Still.

Some have taken on the story that food might not be on the shelves or they might lose their jobs and are getting a bit angry about that, some others are seeing those stories as fear mongering and people not having enough faith in "Great" Britain.

I think people getting annoyed about having another vote are just not wanting the responsibility as it then comes back to "why can't the MP's just do what we told them and leave". Except that misses the point that the MP's were too stupid to ask a sensible question in the first place.

joe40

BobbyBobberson wrote: »

I have to disagree on this. Lets say a 2nd referendum occurred do people honestly think that would be the end of it all?

There would 17.4 million royally pissed off people, there is over a 100 MPs who are part of or strongly support the ERG and that is before we even mention the media. These people are not all going to change their minds.

A lot of that 17.4 million were fed a pack of lies during the campaign, that have been well and truly exposed (eg Irish border will be no problem) So I would say a significant number would like a second chance in the light of all that is now known.

No doubt it would be divisive but if a second referendum opts for remain then that is the new democratic will of the people.
Let them shout and rant all they want but if I was British I would be happy with a second vote on such a momentous decision.

BobbyBobberson

robinph wrote: »

I don't think there are 17.4 million people who care that much about leaving. They of course find plenty of very shouty ones to speak to in the news and repeat lines such as "leave means leave" and "why don't they just get on with it" etc. Majority of those 17.4 million just put a tick in a box and thought nothing more of it until afterwards, much the same as the majority of those who put a tick in the other box to signify that nothing should change.

Most voters on either side don't know what any of it means. Still.

Some have taken on the story that food might not be on the shelves or they might lose their jobs and are getting a bit angry about that, some others are seeing those stories as fear mongering and people not having enough faith in "Great" Britain.

I think people getting annoyed about having another vote are just not wanting the responsibility as it then comes back to "why can't the MP's just do what we told them and leave". Except that misses the point that the MP's were too stupid to ask a sensible question in the first place.

Fair enough, I have family in UK that fit your description about just ticking a box.

What do you reckon would be the outcome regarding the MPs? 1/3 of the government are ERG.

RobMc59

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

That's a bad idea. The country is already woefully split by the EU referendum. Adding the Euro to that would be politically disastrous.

The UK isn't committed and never really was. Changing that will take many years.

Yes,I'm probably running before I can walk!:)

robinph

joe40 wrote: »

Let them shout and rant all they want but if I was British I would be happy with a second vote on such a momentous decision.

It needs someone high profile enough to be pointing out that there is nothing undemocratic about having another vote to make sure it is what the people actually want. Unfortunately there isn't anyone to do that as nobody is listening to the Lib Dems, and the SNP are Scottish so they don't count either.

Shame there isn't an opposition party that could do it.

gmisk

robinph wrote: »

It needs someone high profile enough to be pointing out that there is nothing undemocratic about having another vote to make sure it is what the people actually want. Unfortunately there isn't anyone to do that as nobody is listening to the Lib Dems, and the SNP are Scottish so they don't count either.

Shame there isn't an opposition party that could do it.

Isnt that about the only thing the new independent group have in common? (I know they arent a fully fledged party but still).

Akrasia

BobbyBobberson wrote: »

I have to disagree on this. Lets say a 2nd referendum occurred do people honestly think that would be the end of it all?

There would 17.4 million royally pissed off people, there is over a 100 MPs who are part of or strongly support the ERG and that is before we even mention the media. These people are not all going to change their minds.

So you think a democratic vote is less democratic than pandering to the ERG a secretive cadre of ultra right wing MPs who get funding from undisclosed sources, and who are trying to manipulate the democratically elected government but won't even disclose who their members are.

There are lots of MPs loyal to the ERG who campaign to be elected under a Conservative ticket and who refuse to disclose that they are secretly loyal to the ERG.

Akrasia

robinph wrote: »

It needs someone high profile enough to be pointing out that there is nothing undemocratic about having another vote to make sure it is what the people actually want. Unfortunately there isn't anyone to do that as nobody is listening to the Lib Dems, and the SNP are Scottish so they don't count either.

Shame there isn't an opposition party that could do it.

Allister Campbell is doing his best, but he's tainted by his association with Blair and the Iraq war

joe40

Sterling taking a nice wee bounce this morning, which is very welcome for my own personal circumstance.

We've been here before though..

Kermit.de.frog

Looks like today May will announce she is taking "no deal" off the table.

From a Brexiter view point that is catastrophic. It's the only remotest leverage UK had.

No more incentive for EU to give on anything now. Great for us.

Dyr

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Looks like today May will announce she is taking "no deal" off the table.

From a Brexiter view point that is catastrophic. It's the only remotest leverage UK had.

No more incentive for EU to give on anything now. Great for us.

They just have to wait 5 minutes for her to change her mind.

Flip
Flop
Flip

BobbyBobberson

Akrasia wrote: »

So you think a democratic vote is less democratic than pandering to the ERG a secretive cadre of ultra right wing MPs who get funding from undisclosed sources, and who are trying to manipulate the democratically elected government but won't even disclose who their members are.

There are lots of MPs loyal to the ERG who campaign to be elected under a Conservative ticket and who refuse to disclose that they are secretly loyal to the ERG.

No, at no point did I say that and I am not sure how you came to that conclusion. I was simply making the point that I cannot see Brexit going away with a large amount supporting it. I am not doubting that ERG are dodgy.

BobbyBobberson

joe40 wrote: »

Sterling taking a nice wee bounce this morning, which is very welcome for my own personal circumstance.

We've been here before though..

Same, delighted to see it go up.

54and56

Skelet0n wrote: »

If you think cancelling it would be the last you’d hear of it then you’re severely mistaken. The leave people would be able to go to screaming treason for the next 10 years.

Farage and his nascent Brexit Party are counting on it. Achieving Brexit puts him more or less out of business with the exception of back slapping interviews, probably a book or two ("How I won Brexit" if he hasn't already written it followed 10 years later by "How they messed up Brexit") and some pint willing cigar smoking after dinner speaking whereas a soft Brexit or no Brexit at all will re-invigorate his brand and provide a vehicle for him to keep spewing his skewed right wing mantra for years to come.

lawred2

joe40 wrote: »

A lot of that 17.4 million were fed a pack of lies during the campaign, that have been well and truly exposed (eg Irish border will be no problem) So I would say a significant number would like a second chance in the light of all that is now known.

No doubt it would be divisive but if a second referendum opts for remain then that is the new democratic will of the people.
Let them shout and rant all they want but if I was British I would be happy with a second vote on such a momentous decision.

They'll just be fed another pack of lies. These people would have had to change their media habits in the meanwhile. Which they won't have.

LuckyLloyd

joe40 wrote: »

Sterling taking a nice wee bounce this morning, which is very welcome for my own personal circumstance.

We've been here before though..

BobbyBobberson wrote: »

Same, delighted to see it go up.

Indicates what we've known for a while: if Brexit is cancelled or deferred, Sterling will rise. If No Deal occurs, Sterling will plummet. These rises are on the back of a belief that an extension at the very least is now a likely outcome.

keane2097

Farage and his Brexit party won't win a raffle.

robinph

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Looks like today May will announce she is taking "no deal" off the table.

From a Brexiter view point that is catastrophic. It's the only remotest leverage UK had.

No more incentive for EU to give on anything now. Great for us.

I don't see how it was ever any kind of leverage for the UK, other than for the ongoing negotiations with themselves. Yes a no deal would have not been good for the EU, but it's just 100% delusional for the UK to have ever thought that it could be used as a threat against the EU.

No deal would be bad, but the far far worse option for the EU would be to agree to the demands of the ERG and DUP and for the EU to sign their own death warrant. No deal was the toughest option that the UK had to use, but the prospect of the disintegration of the EU was the nightmare the EU are trying to avoid.

The UK never had the hand they thought they did.

Seth Brundle

The Lancet have released a report on their view of Brexit from a health perspective. It is interesting to note (contrary to what the various pro-Brexit posters may claim or feel) that the Lancet see no positive benefit to Brexit in terms of health...

As a March 29 deadline for leaving the EU approaches, the future of the UK seems more uncertain than ever. Negotiations between the UK and EU have reached an impasse. Prime Minister Theresa May faces defeat on her deal in the UK Parliament. And Tory Party infighting is worsening over her hard-line “Brexit means Brexit” stance. The opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn is also struggling to keep his party united, with claims of institutionalised anti-Semitism and rebellion against what seems to be his left-wing pro-Brexit position. Confusion has been amplified with disillusioned Members of Parliament from both Left and Right resigning to form a new centrist faction, the Independent Group. The UK crashing out of the EU in a No-Deal Brexit seems an increasingly tangible reality. As farce and chaos pervade every aspect of UK politics, what does this mean for health?

In a Health Policy paper, Martin McKee and colleagues lay out outcomes for health services and the NHS in four possible Brexit scenarios: No-Deal Brexit; a Withdrawal Agreement; the Northern Ireland Protocol's backstop; and a Political Declaration on the Future Relationship. There is no good news for the NHS—or for health. In all scenarios, depletion of the NHS workforce is inevitable, care for UK nationals living in the EU is uncertain, and access to medicines, vaccines, and devices hangs in the balance. With a No-Deal Brexit scenario, the UK will be free to establish its own trade agreements with non-EU countries, but such negotiations are in early stages, and there is no foreseeable plan for provisions to bridge any temporary gap.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(19)30443-X/fulltext?rss=yes


Coincidentally, Reuters also report that Brexit will have huge negative effect on the NHS...

A British exit from the EU without a deal would have “an immediate and drastic” impact on availability of medicines and vaccines as well as affecting health system funding and staffing, experts warned on Monday.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-brexit-health-nhs-idUSKCN1QE2OV?utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_content=5c7519e64b73850001dc030d&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter

LuckyLloyd

The extent of EU control in this process is staggering. The UK's actions since 2015 are a textbook lesson in how not to organise and prosecute a major negotiation.

gmisk

Seth Brundle wrote: »

The Lancet have released a report on their view of Brexit from a health perspective. It is interesting to note (contrary to what the various pro-Brexit posters may claim or feel) that the Lancet see no positive benefit to Brexit in terms of health...



https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(19)30443-X/fulltext?rss=yes


Coincidentally, Reuters also report that Brexit will have huge negative effect on the NHS...

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-brexit-health-nhs-idUSKCN1QE2OV?utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_content=5c7519e64b73850001dc030d&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter

But er 350m a week to the NHS....the bus told me!


A huge amount of the damage has already been done even if there is a second referendum and they decide to stay, I have a friend who works for the european drug agency and they have all moved to Amsterdam.

road_high

So No Deal is coming off the table?
So surely a delayis inevitable then if there’s No deal agreed by end March now?

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Looks like today May will announce she is taking "no deal" off the table.

From a Brexiter view point that is catastrophic. It's the only remotest leverage UK had.

No more incentive for EU to give on anything now. Great for us.

I just can't fathom how she'll be able to do this, unless she's going to announce a referendum?

Since no deal is the default position either (i) HoC agrees to her deal (ii) another referendum (iii) look for an extension (but this doesn't take no-deal off the table in reality, it just kicks the can... so this is probably what she'll do given her history) or (iv) just cancel Brexit.

ToBeFrank123

BobbyBobberson wrote: »

I have to disagree on this. Lets say a 2nd referendum occurred do people honestly think that would be the end of it all?

There would 17.4 million royally pissed off people, there is over a 100 MPs who are part of or strongly support the ERG and that is before we even mention the media. These people are not all going to change their minds.

It wouldn't be the end of it. A few years from now a future Conservative leader could conceivably call another referendum to please another disaffected faction of the party and to stop the party splitting in two.

The price of Conservative "unity" is often high to the rest of the UK.

There would have to be an agreement that whatever the result, there would be no other referendum for at least 25 years. This would silence some at least and stop them looking for a new one.

But as you say, a new referendum would not settle the argument.