The now-enacted will of (some of) the people

[desensitized43]

1 minute ago, villa4europe said:

skimming over the news i thought the first is an outright 2nd referendum on us leaving and the second is a referendum letting the public vote on the wording of the deal

the 2nd one definitely wont happen

the general response on twitter seems to be "respect the will of the people" and its anti democracy, i maintain what we are getting is not what we were sold, the "anti democracy" stuff came 2 years ago during the campaign

Just don't get how it can be anti-democratic to hold another democratic vote. We hold elections every 4 years (sometimes sooner) ffs. People change their minds, new facts come to light, politicians lie.

[snowychap]

6 minutes ago, Awol said:

Saw the constitutional wallah Vernon Bogdanor in TV & he broke it down very well.

Only statute can overturn statute, so if the HoC passed a motion calling for a 2nd referendum that would have to be translated into a bill, go through committee and then be voted on in the HoC to become law, an Act of Parliament. That’s 6-8 months minimum but probably longer if Leavers oppose it in committee to delay process, deciding the question alone would be debated for months. 

To enable that, Art.50 would need extending, but can only go until July maximum when the new E.U. Parliamentary elections take place. They don’t want the UK hanging around and mucking that up even more than the tsunami of continental populist MEPs heading there shortly.

So the timing is a real problem for those chasing a 2nd ref’. 

Far as I can see that leaves only two deliverable options: leave on the 29th as currently established in law, or, permanently revoke Art.50 & repeal EU withdrawal Act, pretend the referendum never happened, & hope the public shrugs it off... lol.

I've seen a number of tweets/posts/blogs that question the idea that the EU Parliamentary elections are such an important timing issue. As with everything about this situation, there's nothing really definitive.

Notwithstanding the comments that Verhofstadt has made about not wanting to import the mess of UK politics and so on, if the EU27 agreed to an extension beyond this period then these comments (from various EU law and politics observers) seem to suggest that it could relatively easily be accomodated.

The bigger difficulty would be getting the agreement of the 27. As I've seen it said quite a bit recently, the likelihood of that is probably proportional to how likely they see the UK being able to come to a hard and fast decision in that extended period.

I think we have a real problem if the stuff this morning about May refusing to speak to Corbyn even when she claims to be reaching out across the House of Commons is true. It's going to mean that Labour backbenchers are going to be reluctant to get involved and interact with her if it hasn't gone through or involved their front bench. I'm not sure that this isn't what she wants, either. It seems in keeping with her lack whole approach. If she is reluctant to be inclusive in her thought processes with other members of her cabinet then she's hardly going to actually want to go over to the opposition benches regardless of what she said last night after the trouncing in the vote.

It looks like what might be much more important that today's no confidence debate and vote (I understand that it might be necessary to get past this so as to move to the next step but what is this going to be like? It'll be opposition people telling us how shit the Tory government is and Tories, a large number of whom have just rebelled in record numbers, telling us that a Tory government is always best for the country) will be what happens in and around the Boles amendment/Bill stuff. Will the House of Commons realises that if it just lets May plough on that there is unlikely to be a way out of the impasse? Will they step up and take over? Is the Boles method the best way of doing that?

[villa4europe]

8 minutes ago, desensitized43 said:

Just don't get how it can be anti-democratic to hold another democratic vote. We hold elections every 4 years (sometimes sooner) ffs. People change their minds, new facts come to light, politicians lie.

i think under the guise of "with what we know now" do you want to leave is a very different question from what it was 2 years ago

[snowychap]

 

[Chindie]

2 minutes ago, snowychap said:

 

Well I never.

[lapal_fan]

Of course one of the problems with another ref is that people don't like getting told they got it wrong, and they become more staunch in their defence. 

I work in Worcs and in my office of 6 women that I know, all of them voted to leave.  Some of the reasons I've heard are "My grandad always told me to buy British because the quality is better".  So when I say "Ok, but our cars were shitty compared to foreign imports and as long as you're happy paying someone at least 8 pound an hour to make the same item of something that is currently being made for 50p a day and you don't think that cost will be passed down to you, then that's fine".

I've also heard "Businesses will be more British and thus we'll be more independent" But in the 80s when we turned into a collar nation and loads of foreign companies invested in the country and generated more jobs, then they'll be inclined to leave to nations where they get more benefits of being in the EU trade Bloc". 

The general response is "oh yea, never though of it that way" or "I'm sure it'll be ok". 

The other thing I hear is "Poor people will get more opportunity because jobs will be created" - More jobs? I mean, every time the gov come out about jobs, it's all good news "Lowest unemployment for 7.3 billion years" - and yet homelessness is a big problem and the divide between rich and poor is getting even bigger.  

The media over the years (as @Chindie alluded to in his excellent post), have sullied the water, have been so obviously opaque to what they put (to be fair, they're trying to sell papers..) that it has turned us (I used us loosely) into a nation of zombies when it comes to actual knowledge of what is going on in the upper echelons of the system we all are part of. 

It's terrifying that we find ourselves in this position.  300 years ago Cameron would have been hung drawn and quartered for national treachery, the bastard(s). 

[snowychap]

 

Just now, Chindie said:

3 minutes ago, snowychap said:

 

Well I never.

Indeed.

[desensitized43]

3 minutes ago, lapal_fan said:

It's terrifying that we find ourselves in this position.  300 years ago Cameron would have been hung drawn and quartered for national treachery, the bastard(s). 

 

I've definitely heard worse ways to reunite the country.

[tonyh29]

16 minutes ago, desensitized43 said:

We hold elections every 4 years

not every 5 years ? 

[tonyh29]

8 minutes ago, lapal_fan said:

Of course one of the problems with another ref is that people don't like getting told they got it wrong, and they become more staunch in their defence

so you're saying that remainers wouldn't change their mind out of nothing more than stubbornness ?

Edited January 16, 2019 by tonyh29

[Seat68]

2 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

so you're saying that remainers wouldn't change their mind out of nothing more than stubbornness ?

"one of" Tony.

[lapal_fan]

The Donald Tusk article on the BBC has a comments section, and it's absolutely poisonous. 

Prepare for Hard Brexit everyone!!! Tusk is a monster who is only doing all this because he wants the crush the UK according to 90% of them. 

[tonyh29]

9 minutes ago, lapal_fan said:

300 years ago Cameron would have been hung drawn and quartered for national treachery, the bastard(s). 

European Union

• Scrap the Human Rights Act and introduce a British bill of rights.
• Have an in/out referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU before the end of 2017.

maybe we should hung and draw the people that voted for the national treachery as well whilst we are at it  ... mind you even if we kill all Tory voters I bet Corbyn will still find a way to come second

[snowychap]

27 minutes ago, snowychap said:

53 minutes ago, Awol said:

To enable that, Art.50 would need extending, but can only go until July maximum when the new E.U. Parliamentary elections take place. They don’t want the UK hanging around and mucking that up even more than the tsunami of continental populist MEPs heading there shortly.

I've seen a number of tweets/posts/blogs that question the idea that the EU Parliamentary elections are such an important timing issue. As with everything about this situation, there's nothing really definitive.

As an example:

The European Parliament election and Brexit delay – not a major headache

Quote

...

to conclude: it would no doubt be an unusual election in the UK in May 2019. But the organisational hurdles in the way of such an election are relatively easy to surmount (and they are nothing in comparison to those a No Deal Brexit throws up), and if the UK is still in the EU on 24th May 2019 then not organising an election there would be unacceptable from a democratic standpoint.

Obviously lots more in the post and also an update which references a further debate.

[Genie]

5 minutes ago, lapal_fan said:

The Donald Tusk article on the BBC has a comments section, and it's absolutely poisonous. 

Prepare for Hard Brexit everyone!!! Tusk is a monster who is only doing all this because he wants the crush the UK according to 90% of them. 

This is the general theme across all social media.

Leavers dominate all the discussion because they shout louder.

EU are bullies

EU hate the UK

EU are making us look like a bunch of idiots

EU are taking the piss out of the UK.

The sensible people can’t be bothered with being shouted at so stay out of it.

[lapal_fan]

3 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

so you're saying that remainers wouldn't change their mind out of nothing more than stubbornness ?

I'd have changed my mind, if I'd have heard a coherent and plausible argument for leaving in 2016.

I'd still change my mind if I was presented anything which resembled a sane argument.  The fact is, is there hasn't been. 

I'm not stupid enough to know I can't be wrong, and I often am and do change my opinions.  After the Ref, I though Corbyn would tear the place down and we'd have scrapped the whole idea - I now think they guy is an incompetent bumber-squat who would do terribly as a PM.  I thought after the ref result, we'd at least show some degree of competency with our negoitating teams, what I saw was David Davis going into negotiations completely unprepared and come out looking like a fat kid being told his favorite bakery has closed. 

The problem, is that the people doing this don't even believe it in.  May wants to stop immigration, that's about it in a nutshell.. and it appears as though she'll do anything to do that, even if it means further damaging the country. 

The whole thing has been a debacle and it honestly astonishes me how people still think it's a good idea.  Those people are an embarrassment.  That's not fair, because some people do have genuine reasons as to why they want out, but the vast majority STILL don't know anything about the subject, but have been somehow made more stubborn.  

I cannot wait until words like "gammon/brexit/the will of the people" etc just **** off out of public vocabulary. 

[Awol]

10 minutes ago, lapal_fan said:

The Donald Tusk article on the BBC has a comments section, and it's absolutely poisonous. 

Prepare for Hard Brexit everyone!!! Tusk is a monster who is only doing all this because he wants the crush the UK according to 90% of them. 

Seen. That’s why I think people pinning all hope on a 2nd referendum aren’t being totally realistic. Of course Remain could win, but that’s far from being a shoe-in and the campaign would raise the level of public rancour even further. 

[tonyh29]

2 minutes ago, Genie said:

Leavers dominate all the discussion because they shout louder.

respectfully , I can't think of any situation where that sentence is true

if i was being generous I might say it's kinda equal across both sides but to suggest Leavers dominate as they shout loudest  ..I just don't see it

of course this is the point where VT's 99% remainers shout me down and disagree with me

 

[Awol]

6 minutes ago, Genie said:

This is the general theme across all social media.

Leavers dominate all the discussion because they shout louder.

Twitter says WTF? 

[lapal_fan]

Just now, Awol said:

Seen. That’s why I think people pinning all hope on a 2nd referendum aren’t being totally realistic. Of course Remain could win, but that’s far from being a shoe-in and the campaign would raise the level of public rancour even further. 

Agree wholeheartedly. 

You might see a small shit for remain, but that would be more dependent on the older people who voted dying, and more young people being engaged.  It would still largely be the same voters, and you cannot pin who has changed their mind (either way). 

It would be just as close and you'd still see half the people absolutely pissed off by the result. 

It was a no win situation, which has been turned into a reality.