Brexit

[DrPatrickBarry]

We should therefore split the remain vote:
a) remain just as it is today
b) remain with national governments having about as much control as the devolved welsh assembly has today.
c) remain with compulsory conscription to the proposed EU army.
d) ,,,

Do nations not get a say in the direction the EU takes?
I might be wrong, but I seem to remember the UK parliment debating the Nice Treaty as part of the ratification process, and I am pretty certain my own country had a referendum on it.

So if the Bundestag ends up with the same power as the devolved welsh assembly, it will be because they voted for it, oh look a pretty pink unicorn.

[Muddy Retriever]

I am pretty certain my own country had a referendum on it.

Ours didn't !

In fact the only time one was promised on a treaty the Government of the day reneged on that promise.

In France and Holland they had a referendum and then simply ignored the result. In the words of Jean-Claude Juncker - "If it's a Yes, we will say 'on we go', and if it's a No we will say 'we continue’,”

Bigfella is absolutely spot on with his comments. The EU has changed beyond all recognition since the UK's 1975 referendum. It will continue to do so until its aim of a European super state is achieved.

[anthonykay]

Bigfella is absolutely spot on with his comments. The EU has changed beyond all recognition since the UK's 1975 referendum.

This is true. Indeed, some of the Leave campaigners during the 2016 referendum were saying that they were happy to be part of the Common Market (as the EEC was often referred to in the 1970's), but they didn't like the political union that had developed since the Treaty of Maastricht. For these Leavers, the logical form of Brexit is to leave the EU but remain in the Single Market: the "Norway" option.

[Muddy Retriever]

This is true. Indeed, some of the Leave campaigners during the 2016 referendum were saying that they were happy to be part of the Common Market (as the EEC was often referred to in the 1970's), but they didn't like the political union that had developed since the Treaty of Maastricht. For these Leavers, the logical form of Brexit is to leave the EU but remain in the Single Market: the "Norway" option.

The problem with that is the Norway option doesn't recreate the UK's position as it was in the Common Market of the 1970's. Now we would remain in the Single Market and be subject to all sorts of EU rules and regulations (without any say on them). In the 1970's there was no Single Market. The Common Market was a much looser trade association.

[Wheeze]

The Heathens said

"The referendum question was fundamentally flawed. To have democratic legitimacy, the question must allow voters to make an informed decision and as nobody knew what 'Leave' looked like, it's clear that this isn't the case.

Events since the referendum have shown that it's quite clearly not a binary question (no reasonable person can argue against that, given the current impasse) so there's a need to go back to the people to agree on what 'Leave' looks like and to then vote whether they want to leave under those conditions or remain in the EU. "

You are conflating the timelines here. Of course voters made an informed choice because there was lots of information for both leave and remain choices. What could not be provided was information about the Withdrawal Agreement because those negotiations could NOT start until an EU state announced its decision to withdraw. You cant wind future events back into a decision at a point in time. So, of course, the Referendum was legitimate.

[Witton Park]

The Heathens said

"The referendum question was fundamentally flawed. To have democratic legitimacy, the question must allow voters to make an informed decision and as nobody knew what 'Leave' looked like, it's clear that this isn't the case.

Events since the referendum have shown that it's quite clearly not a binary question (no reasonable person can argue against that, given the current impasse) so there's a need to go back to the people to agree on what 'Leave' looks like and to then vote whether they want to leave under those conditions or remain in the EU. "

You are conflating the timelines here. Of course voters made an informed choice because there was lots of information for both leave and remain choices. What could not be provided was information about the Withdrawal Agreement because those negotiations could NOT start until an EU state announced its decision to withdraw. You cant wind future events back into a decision at a point in time. So, of course, the Referendum was legitimate.

Yes but The Heathens was speaking like a true Loser

Had it been 52% Remain, I doubt he'd be questioning the democratic legitimacy

[shaunaneto]

I’d wait until you’ve actually won before declaring a winner and a loser.

And then only with a nod to the fact it never really ends. A period of ascendency is the best anyone can do. You don’t really have all that long to deliver sunlit uplands before the trajectory shifts.

[bigfella]

But voting Conservative or Labour (or wasting your vote) is never a binary decision, you don't really know what you are going to get as neither party delivers on their declared (vote wining) policies.

[bigfella]

Is it the Cameron debacle all over with May going to Brussels to ask for a better deal?

[Witton Park]

Is it the Cameron debacle all over with May going to Brussels to ask for a better deal?

We'll see.
Noticed Verhofstadt this morning has said that the backstop is the insurance of no hard border in NI and insurance needs to be 100%, but of course they do not want to use the backstop.


If we leave without the Withdrawal Agreement, then the insurance policy is void - non-existant.


If we sign the Withdrawal Agreement, then if he is genuine in his claim that the EU doesn't want to use the backstop they can see a way that we can work without using it.

That would be a combination of trusted trader, self declaration, mutual recognition, random and intelligence led checks away from the border.

So why not remove it, in say 3 years, as the Malthouse option now set out? View it as a warranty rather than an insurance.

Surely that would work? If we cannot reach agreement, then it must be better to have a managed move to WTO over a period of years rather than in 8 weeks.