Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

Strazdas

eagle eye wrote: »

The only way you get a second referendum is if the government are unhappy with the result. Remember Lisbon here? We got a second referendum but we never got a third.

You cannot "unratify" an EU treaty after it has been ratified. It can only be ratified once.

Governments are perfectly entitled to be unhappy with a referendum result, they are the ones who decide to hold them and the public have no say. In the case of the Brexit one, Farage and UKIP didn't even want a referendum and never called for one. It was purely down to Cameron.

Zubeneschamali

How many abortion referendums did we have? 6?

And Governments didn't want to touch that one with a barge pole.

fash

Strazdas wrote: »

You cannot "unratify" an EU treaty after it has been ratified. It can only be ratified once.


Governments are perfectly entitled to be unhappy with a referendum result, they are the ones who decide to hold them and the public have no say. In the case of the Brexit one, Farage and UKIP didn't even want a referendum and never called for one. It was purely down to Cameron.

Another issue is that governments are privy to information that the general public are not and have access to understanding of complex matters that the public do not have and are not willing to acquire.
An example is the Mercosur deal which is actually extraordinarily limited in the access given to South American beef to the European market. Yet pointing that out strongly would embarrass the Mercosur negotiators:

https://www.politico.eu/article/mercosur-europe-trade-deal-commission-scrambles-to-defend/
That is even on matters which the public could potentially understand - as seen in previous EU treaty referendums in Ireland, people vote "no" for lots of silly reasons (I'm sure some vote yes for silly reasons too - which merely reinforces the point).

ILoveYourVibes

When is the new pm to be decided it can't be too long?

Then they break for summer no?

Walter Bishop

July 22nd I believe, then the summer break starts the 24th. This gave rise to some rumours of 'Boris will be PM for one day before losing an immediate vote of confidence'.

Peregrinus

eagle eye wrote: »

The only way you get a second referendum is if the government are unhappy with the result. Remember Lisbon here? We got a second referendum but we never got a third.

Well, of course not. Governments should only ever hold referendums seeking approval for policies which they wish to implement (and which they know how to implement). The current sh!tshow in the UK demonstrates and underlines the importance of that.

If you want a referendum on a policy not supported by the current government, you need to start by lobbying the political parties to get one of them to adopt the policy, or start a party of your own. Then support that party and try to help it win a majority in an election. Then you'll get your referendum.

Joe_ Public

The basis for another referendum seems fairly clear cut to me anyway, as just very well explained by Sam Gyimah on the Sophy Ridge programme. As things stand, the UK leaves without a deal on 31 October for which i've never heard anybody say they voted for back in 2016, not one single person. It is quite possibly the most undemocratic option available of all those talked about, despite all the blathering about betrayal and will of the people by the hard leavers side. The other option is to revoke for which there is no democratic mandate either.

So, in those imperfect circumstances, a second referendum doesn't just seem worth considering, but a fairly logical choice. Nobody has to pretend it's the ideal way out, but by definition, there can be nothing undemocratic about putting a vote to the people. The hard brexiteers will be getting a chance to vote for their preferred option of a no deal for the first time. How can they complain about that?

Tikki Wang Wang

Raab on Sophie Ridge now. He’s as hopeless as ever. “Can do spirit” will get them through ! You’d have to despair....

Professor Moriarty

Joe_ Public wrote: »

The basis for another referendum seems fairly clear cut to me anyway, as just very well explained by Sam Gyimah on the Sophy Ridge programme. As things stand, the UK leaves without a deal on 31 October for which i've never heard anybody say they voted for back in 2016, not one single person. It is quite possibly the most undemocratic option available of all those talked about, despite all the blathering about betrayal and will of the people by the hard leavers side. The other option is to revoke for which there is no democratic mandate either.

So, in those imperfect circumstances, a second referendum doesn't just seem worth considering, but a fairly logical choice. Nobody has to pretend it's the ideal way out, but by definition, there can be nothing undemocratic about putting a vote to the people. The hard brexiteers will be getting a chance to vote for their preferred option of a no deal for the first time. How can they complain about that?

There are many cogent and coherent arguments against this fallacy. A second referendum would be undemocratic. We need to take back control. The EU are bullies. The will of the people. A No Deal will free us from regulations that kill entrepreneurship. Unicorns for everyone. Rinse and repeat ad nauseam.

Joe_ Public

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

There are many cogent and coherent arguments against this fallacy. A second referendum would be undemocratic. We need to take back control. The EU are bullies. The will of the people. A No Deal will free us from regulations that kill entrepreneurship. Unicorns for everyone. Rinse and repeat ad nauseam.

And has to be said the oddsmakers dont lend it much traction either, think it was around 7/1 last time i checked for a second referendum to be held before end of year. Seems a little big to me, compared with the low odds for no deal at least. Problem is, we can all see the path to no deal, but the one to second ref is not so easy to foresee. Its procedurally quite tricky. Other than it being tabbed on to another attempt to pass the WAB, i'm not at all certain how we'd get there.

Professor Moriarty

Joe_ Public wrote: »

And has to be said the oddsmakers dont lend it much traction either, think it was around 7/1 last time i checked for a second referendum to be held before end of year. Seems a little big to me, compared with the low odds for no deal at least. Problem is, we can all see the path to no deal, but the one to second ref is not so easy to foresee. Its procedurally quite tricky. Other than it being tabbed on to another attempt to pass the WAB, i'm not at all certain how we'd get there.

A GE would be a second referendum's only chance. If all the 'Remain' parties were to campaign with it in their manifesto then it could possibly get through parliament after the GE. But Corbyn's dreadful leadership will scupper that too.

10000maniacs

Joe_ Public wrote: »

And has to be said the oddsmakers dont lend it much traction either, think it was around 7/1 last time i checked for a second referendum to be held before end of year. Seems a little big to me, compared with the low odds for no deal at least. Problem is, we can all see the path to no deal, but the one to second ref is not so easy to foresee. Its procedurally quite tricky. Other than it being tabbed on to another attempt to pass the WAB, i'm not at all certain how we'd get there.

Yes, the drop in Sterling recently reflects that. It at its lowest point against the Dollar in 3 years.

Enzokk

Some interesting stories and tweets this morning. Firstly, remember how Sajid Javid said he wanted a more compassionate Home Office? Seems like he was telling lies like Amber Rudd before him and like May as well.

Secret plan to use charities to help deport rough sleepers

The Home Office has drawn up a secret programme using homelessness charities to acquire sensitive personal data that could result in the deportation of non-UK rough sleepers, the Observer can reveal.

A chain of emails from senior Home Office officials from December 2018 to May 2019 also shows that the clandestine programme ignores European privacy laws by passing rough sleepers’ sensitive personal information directly to the Home Office without their consent.

The scheme, which is still in a trial phase, is seen by charities and campaigners as the latest manifestation of the Home Office’s much maligned “hostile environment” policy. A previous plan to deport EU rough sleepers was defeated 18 months ago when the high court deemed it unlawful and discriminatory.

Then Stephen Kinnock thinks the best way to get a second referendum is to vote for the WAB. He is obviously not the sharpest bulb in the box.

Stephen Kinnock: Corbyn should order MPs to back May’s Brexit deal

A prominent Labour MP today calls on Jeremy Corbyn to order his MPs to back the legislation required to implement Theresa May’s withdrawal agreement on Brexit – in order to avoid a “catastrophic” no-deal departure from the European Union.

In a move that further exposes bitter divisions between Labour MPs over Brexit, Stephen Kinnock says supporting the withdrawal agreement bill (WAB) is now the only realistic way out of the impasse for those who want to leave with a deal, while offering hope to those supporting another referendum.

Talk about a wolf in sheep's clothing. He is one of those Labour MPs that has been angling for the UK to leave the EU, now trying to tell you that the way to get a second referendum is to leave the institution you want a second referendum on.

Finally, a depressing story if I am honest. It's a piece about the voters who will be deciding the next PM.

https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1147466437214253056

The quote from that tweet is from this article.

Well what did we have two world wars for? Fun?’ Leaving the EU is the only issue for Tory leadership voters

“As postwar children we had nothing, we only had what we worked for. You struggle and you get things,” she says, beginning a story all too familiar to anyone who has seen The Four Yorkshiremen comedy sketch, which is itself 52 years old. “When you see what’s happening now, all these youths, with their hats, and their sweatshirts, with Stussy on it. I had one come to my house to fix the boiler. He looked at my house and said, ‘You’re lucky.’ I said, ‘Luck had nothing to do with it.’ It’s all there for you to grab, but you have to grab it. I said, ‘Look at your trainers, they must be worth a hundred pounds.’ We were lucky just to have a pair of shoes.”

When asked what any this has to do with the European Union, she replies with real indignation. “Everything. Everything! It’s got everything to do with the EU. We have gone without too much, to now be piled into a big melting pot with everybody else. We want our identity. It’s what our forefathers worked for. The UK. England. It’s ours. We don’t want to be told, by them, what to do and what not to do, and paying a hell of a lot of money to do it. Everything is about them telling us, and our independence going. It’s like an elderly couple, coming to the point at which they are asked, ‘Do you want help?’ And they say ‘no’. We want our independence. And they’ll slave on. They want their independence. It is an instinct.”

Seems to me that the elder voters are upset the young generation had it so well, and now they want them to share the misery they think they had. Of all the reasons to vote for Brexit, this seems right up there with the most misguided.

trellheim

Seems to me that the elder voters are upset the young generation had it so well, and now they want them to share the misery they think they had. Of all the reasons to vote for Brexit, this seems right up there with the most misguided

We've been discussing this here for 3 and a half years now, since the referendum was first mooted .... theres a ton of misguided reasons !

But one thing it does illustrate clearly is that reason has left the argument, and it is now emotional ; If anyone can see a way out of this then I'm here to listen.

The Commons rises on 25 July until 3 September; a new PM will be in the chair who has vowed to exit on 31 October in all circumstances. We can nearly conclude already that the UK has wasted its extension.

No new proposals have been offered that have any chance of working and the commons did not vote to take no-deal off the table recently.

dr.fuzzenstein

It's always been emotional, sense and reason has nothing to do with Brexit.
It's either delusion or inability to grasp reality.
Which is why you can search through the entirety of the internet since 2015 and you will find not a single intelligent, rational, logical and well thought out argument in favour of Brexit which clearly lays out the benefits.

Stop moaning ffs

Piece in the SBP today outlining how and why Johnson will screw over the DUP and dump Northen Ireland in order to get brexit delivered.
I’ve long thought so too, it would make sense for him to do so.
Worth a read if you can find it.

lawred2

Enzokk wrote: »

Some interesting stories and tweets this morning. Firstly, remember how Sajid Javid said he wanted a more compassionate Home Office? Seems like he was telling lies like Amber Rudd before him and like May as well.

Secret plan to use charities to help deport rough sleepers



Then Stephen Kinnock thinks the best way to get a second referendum is to vote for the WAB. He is obviously not the sharpest bulb in the box.

Stephen Kinnock: Corbyn should order MPs to back May’s Brexit deal



Talk about a wolf in sheep's clothing. He is one of those Labour MPs that has been angling for the UK to leave the EU, now trying to tell you that the way to get a second referendum is to leave the institution you want a second referendum on.

Finally, a depressing story if I am honest. It's a piece about the voters who will be deciding the next PM.

https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1147466437214253056

The quote from that tweet is from this article.

Well what did we have two world wars for? Fun?’ Leaving the EU is the only issue for Tory leadership voters



Seems to me that the elder voters are upset the young generation had it so well, and now they want them to share the misery they think they had. Of all the reasons to vote for Brexit, this seems right up there with the most misguided.

Misguided? Spiteful and vindictive come to mind

trellheim

Piece in the SBP today outlining how and why Johnson will screw over the DUP and dump Northen Ireland in order to get brexit delivered.

The numbers in the House do not allow for it ! Without the DUP they can not win a vote of confidence ; thats a big bet that money will keep them onside or the fear of a Corbyn administration, when you are a single issue party like the DUP

This assumes of course that Corbyn will call a no-confidence vote immediately a PM is elected because if he does not he has to wait till the house comes back from the break . Since the DUP wont know what level of shenanigans the new PM will get up to they will support the PM until later

I suspect a no-confidence then will come in late september/early October as the DUP will be hung out to dry at that stage if that is what is going to happen and that means 14 days to a dissolution and GE call - you then need to factor in Labour not wanting to take up the reins and bringing the whole show down at the worst possible moment , with the only way out of no-deal being a revoke a50 ?


eeek is all I can say to that its playing with fireworks in a closed hand

Strazdas

Peregrinus wrote: »

Well, of course not. Governments should only ever hold referendums seeking approval for policies which they wish to implement (and which they know how to implement). The current sh!tshow in the UK demonstrates and underlines the importance of that.

If you want a referendum on a policy not supported by the current government, you need to start by lobbying the political parties to get one of them to adopt the policy, or start a party of your own. Then support that party and try to help it win a majority in an election. Then you'll get your referendum.

It's nearly unheard of in fact for a country to hold a referendum in a "you decide for us what we should do" manner. Referendums are supposed to merely ratify or hold up government legislation.

Brexit was a disaster waiting to happen in the way it set the people against the wishes of the Parliament

Nody

trellheim wrote: »

The numbers in the House do not allow for it ! Without the DUP they can not win a vote of confidence ; thats a big bet that money will keep them onside or the fear of a Corbyn administration, when you are a single issue party like the DUP

It depends on two things; a) how many Tories are willing to go against their new PMs direction and b) how many Labour brexiteers are willing to go against Labour's whip. He may very well be planning/hoping that he can get enough Labour Brexiteers oven (DUP only have 10 seats after all) to get the deal through (what ever deal he thinks he'll be able to get back from the land of Unicorns that is).

This assumes of course that Corbyn will call a no-confidence vote immediately a PM is elected because if he does not he has to wait till the house comes back from the break . Since the DUP wont know what level of shenanigans the new PM will get up to they will support the PM until later

Corbyn will ho and ha about it and threaten this and that while talking about social justice and do feck all as always; nothing to see here.

I suspect a no-confidence then will come in late september/early October as the DUP will be hung out to dry at that stage if that is what is going to happen and that means 14 days to a dissolution and GE call - you then need to factor in Labour not wanting to take up the reins and bringing the whole show down at the worst possible moment , with the only way out of no-deal being a revoke a50 ?

See above; if he can swoon enough Labour brexiteers over with a threat of cancelling Brexit if it fails...

I still stand by my earlier prediction; crash out brexit by accident due to incompetence rather than intent. Nothing that these clowns have shown me gives me any reason to back away from that prediction nor do I think they got the personal integrity to cancel Brexit when they see they can't get their new deal through hoping for EU to throw them a miracle.

trellheim

One thing to remember is that by having the UK government take no action , the Brexiteers will achieve their aim, as 31 October they are out if nothing else happens

(it is always harder to get action taken than do nothing)

Therefore

1. A huge set of interests - the Brexiteers - win by stymying any deal or extension
2. In order for anything different to happen, the PM must either get a deal, revoke A50 or request an A50 extension
3. All three of those options are as unlikely (to me) as anything else thats been bandied about for any number of reasons we've talked about them all here.
4. therefore Hard Brexit is by far the most likely option - someone prove me wrong !

Professor Moriarty

trellheim wrote: »

One thing to remember is that by having the UK government take no action , the Brexiteers will achieve their aim, as 31 October they are out if nothing else happens

(it is always harder to get action taken than do nothing)

Therefore

1. A huge set of interests - the Brexiteers - win by stymying any deal or extension
2. In order for anything different to happen, the PM must either get a deal, revoke A50 or request an A50 extension
3. All three of those options are as unlikely (to me) as anything else thats been bandied about for any number of reasons we've talked about them all here.
4. therefore Hard Brexit is by far the most likely option - someone prove me wrong !

Parliament blocks No Deal or, failing that, brings down the government with a vote of no confidence. It's probable that the numbers are there for either option.

Strazdas

trellheim wrote: »

One thing to remember is that by having the UK government take no action , the Brexiteers will achieve their aim, as 31 October they are out if nothing else happens

(it is always harder to get action taken than do nothing)

Therefore

1. A huge set of interests - the Brexiteers - win by stymying any deal or extension
2. In order for anything different to happen, the PM must either get a deal, revoke A50 or request an A50 extension
3. All three of those options are as unlikely (to me) as anything else thats been bandied about for any number of reasons we've talked about them all here.
4. therefore Hard Brexit is by far the most likely option - someone prove me wrong !

There was a columnist on the Sky papers last night discussing how Johnson might simply try and deliberately run down the clock to October 31 and No Deal, but he thinks Remain MPs will be very alert to this and do everything to thwart him.

Enzokk

Enzokk wrote: »

Finally, a depressing story if I am honest. It's a piece about the voters who will be deciding the next PM.

https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1147466437214253056

The quote from that tweet is from this article.

Well what did we have two world wars for? Fun?’ Leaving the EU is the only issue for Tory leadership voters



Seems to me that the elder voters are upset the young generation had it so well, and now they want them to share the misery they think they had. Of all the reasons to vote for Brexit, this seems right up there with the most misguided.

Strange comments when you consider that many of the "baby boomer" generation have actually had the best of all worlds when it comes to living through a period of growth that will never be repeated and many have acquired property and pensions that will be denied to future generations.

cml387

If this doesn't prove that the UK has lost its mind nothing will.

The Three Choirs Festival,a celebration of music held in August this year in Gloucester, is facing calls for a boycott.
Why? Because they intend to include Beethoven's Ninth symphony in the programme.

Brexiteers are up in arms that this is also the anthem of the European union and therefore must be banned.

Source

(Pedantic point: it was music originally composed by Friedrich Schiller which Beethoven,in modern parlance, "sampled" in his choral symphony No. 9).

Joe_ Public

Nody wrote: »

It depends on two things; a) how many Tories are willing to go against their new PMs direction and b) how many Labour brexiteers are willing to go against Labour's whip. He may very well be planning/hoping that he can get enough Labour Brexiteers oven (DUP only have 10 seats after all) to get the deal through (what ever deal he thinks he'll be able to get back from the land of Unicorns that is).

Corbyn will ho and ha about it and threaten this and that while talking about social justice and do feck all as always; nothing to see here.

See above; if he can swoon enough Labour brexiteers over with a threat of cancelling Brexit if it fails...

I still stand by my earlier prediction; crash out brexit by accident due to incompetence rather than intent. Nothing that these clowns have shown me gives me any reason to back away from that prediction nor do I think they got the personal integrity to cancel Brexit when they see they can't get their new deal through hoping for EU to throw them a miracle.

The one thing i would be certain of - and i'm not certain of a whole lot - is that there are far more potential Tory rebels on a no deal brexit than there are Labour ones. Far more. Right now, i think we can name at least 20 Tory MPs who would never brook a no deal exit on any terms and there are likely many more on top of that. As things stand, i cant name one single hard brexiteer on the Labour side, though some think Corbyn himself is among their number. The so-called gang of Labour 26 who wrote the letter are not necessarily hard brexiteers and i fancy for some of them it is just an insurance policy to show their leave voters they are fighting for them in the secure knowledge that no deal will never happen.


If Parliament cant actually block no deal, as much as the will is there to do so, then any no deal seeking PM will be brought down, as mentioned above. I dont have any doubts about that at all.

First Up

Joe_ Public wrote:

If Parliament cant actually block no deal, as much as the will is there to do so, then any no deal seeking PM will be brought down, as mentioned above. I dont have any doubts about that at all.

So what? They still crash out, with all the fallout that will bring.

What happens in the weird world of Tory and UK politics is a minor side show.

Sam Russell

Deleted User wrote: »

Strange comments when you consider that many of the "baby boomer" generation have actually had the best of all worlds when it comes to living through a period of growth that will never be repeated and many have acquired property and pensions that will be denied to future generations.

Indeed. Baby boomers (born between 1945 and 1955) were born into the NHS from its inception so get very good health service from birth. They escaped National Service, and suffered very little rationing. There was no real war either. They also lived through a period of plenty such the MacMillan could declare 'You have never had it so good!' in the 1959 GE.

The real troubles started as the loss of Empire and the poor performance of the economy began to bite in the 1960s and 1970s. This is what drove the decision to join the EEC (later the EU). Britain attempted to continue its position in in the word as if the sun continued to not set on its empire when it clearly had.

It is the dream of a return to those heady days of their youth and the 'never had it so good' promise of a long forgotten GE that they are looking for - a dream long gone to those sunny uplands where unicorns graze contentedly.

It is normal for old ones to regret the youth for their youth when they have long lost theirs. However, they should not be allowed to poison the well.

Joe_ Public

First Up wrote: »

So what? They still crash out, with all the fallout that will bring.

What happens in the weird world of Tory and UK politics is a minor side show.

The so what is that there will be a GE to follow and a likely extension granted to facilitate it. Of course, the EU doesnt have to oblige if or when it is requested, but i think thats highly unlikely. Of course, goes without saying i could be wrong. Just an opinion.

reslfj

Deleted User wrote: »

... many have acquired property and pensions that will be denied to future generations.

Remember the older people will move into care and eventually die and their properties will come on the market where they must be sold.
The younger generations total financial ability and willingness to pay will in the end determine the prices.

Most countries in Europe have "baby boomer" generations retiring now and again when the kids of the original "baby boomers" retire in/after 2030 (births around 1962-68).
This combined with later small generations when women got into the educational system and birth control effectively allowed births to be postponed by many years (and for some forever)

Financially it will effect a 'pay as you go' state pension system when fewer 18-65 years old can provide services and pay taxes and the above 65 are/will be many more collecting pension and needing physical support and help.

Note however it isn't just money, money can be borrowed, taxed, or .... It's to a high degree the workforce that will be needed to work within the care, the NHS and other similar places ....

The Danish pork industry - Brexit or even no Brexit - is e.g. much more worried for its workforce in its UK factories than for the high tariffs and NTBs on imported pork, meant to be sliced into breakfast ham and bacon.

The UK is - quite apart from the trade economics of Brexit - being especially stupid, crazy or having it 'ill thought trough' - you name it - to incentivize any person working in the care and health sectors to leave the UK in the next 10-15 years - or more.

And you can likely use the same 'stupidity' words on trying to get other people now working in the UK to leave.

Leaving is what will happen when large parts of the press, too many politicians and more than a few ordinary people use foul and offensive language on and to these hardworking people.

There are or will soon be full employment in Eastern Europe and many governments will love to have their citizens coming back.

The real problem with EU's FoM is in the countries where the migrating people come from. For the Baltic countries, parts of Romania and Bulgarie and Poland migration out of the countries is a large problem. Poland has now a very large number of people originating in Ukraine and Belarus filling vacant jobs.

The countries receiving skilled and hard working migrants benefits on tther hand enormously in higher GDP, higher taxes ...

Lars