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

[choffer]

 

Edited May 31, 2016 by blandy
swearing removed

[blandy]

 

2 hours ago, Awol said:

If Vote Leave wins then Cameron will be put out the door with the cat on the night of 24th. He'd be finished on the spot politically, no question.

But as a reason to vote out that's as poor reasoning as voting in due to fear of a right wing Tory Government. 

Even if you believe that come the actual Brexit in 2018/19 the Tories would want to shred workers rights, social protections etc. you could vote in a government in 2020 to restore them all.

It smacks of a lack of confidence in winning the argument and convincing the electorate to support the programme you want to implement. 

I don't agree with your conclusion, here. I do believe the Tories would want to shred workers rights, social protections etc. but I was unable to vote them out last time. I am able, if I so choose to have a vote that actually counts, in this referendum to vote "against" Tory out people. I'm not trying to convince an electorate or win an argument. I would be trying to prevent tories making my working conditions worse.

They (the outers) want to rip up red tape, they say - i.e. they want to get rid of environmental protection, workers rights, consumer protection, social measures and such like. Some of them want to privatise the NHS. These all seem like really bad things to do. Why would I vote for any of that?

And they talk about European rules affecting small businesses that don't benefit from trading in the wider EU. I assume they mean small shops, small farmers and small factories, perhaps, that just sell their goods locally.

Those small businesses though have as customers the employees of big businesses, sometimes the big businesses themselves - where I work we sub out loads of work to local firms to make tooling, repair buildings, maintain the airfield etc.

[blandy]

1 hour ago, Awol said:

FWIW this is one of the best prospects about Brexit, imo. ...If we leave (inshallah) it seems we could get a total realignment of the domestic political scene, not over night, but still pretty quickly.

All the Kings horses and men won't put the Tories back together after this, and I think forming a gov of national unity would be appropriate out to the 2020 election. There will be lots to do in a practical sense, but the referendum itself has let the reform genie out of the bottle and at civil society level people may well start to ask how exactly we want to use the powers we get back, once we have them again.

As discussed the political elements of the Remain and Leave campaigns have shown themselves to be utterly cynical shits. I think it's opening many eyes to quite how dysfunctional things currently are. If we do leave, there's a good chance something really quite good could come out of it. 

Possibly, and it would be most excellently good if it did. Equally though a terrifying alternative could happen. Because the outers don't all have anything like the same vision of what they want if/when we leave we could have a tory Gov't, led by Johnson, continuing to fight about what they want with some depts going one way and others another way An even more dysfunctional gov't breaking up the NHS, trashing the environment, unable to decide what it is trying to achieve in negotiations to leave the EU - in the free market or out of it? like Canada like Norway and all these other different examples? or Like the USA or India? Gove says one thing, Boris says another (then changes his line a week later).

The out people have completely failed to put out any remotely viable or credible vision of what a post EU UK would be like.

If I could guarantee that leaving would destroy the tories for ever, I'd vote leave with joy. I fear it would just unleash the very worst of them.

[Awol]

7 minutes ago, blandy said:

They (the outers) want to rip up red tape, they say - i.e. they want to get rid of environmental protection, workers rights, consumer protection, social measures and such like. Some of them want to privatise the NHS. These all seem like really bad things to do. Why would I vote for any of that?

And they talk about European rules affecting small businesses that don't benefit from trading in the wider EU. I assume they mean small shops, small farmers and small factories, perhaps, that just sell their goods locally.

Those small businesses though have as customers the employees of big businesses, sometimes the big businesses themselves - where I work we sub out loads of work to local firms to make tooling, repair buildings, maintain the airfield etc.

First paragraph: I haven't seen anyone say they want to trash workers rights, environmental protections etc. so that's all supposition AFAIC, but even if some individuals DO want that the leave side is not a government, it can't legislate, it's a cross party campaign group. 

The referendum is like instructing a barrister, you tell them what you want and it's their job to reach the best outcome within the parameters of your instruction. So in this case, we want out of the EU & it's your job, government, to get the best possible deal. 

Second & third para: lifting some of the regulation off small businesses seems pretty sensible to me, it simply won't apply to firms like yours selling into the EU. Not sure what the relevance is to your subbies though unless they are also trying to sell there services into the EU, in which case they carry on normal jogging with their existing business processes.

There isn't a downside in that for anyone, no extra regulation, just an upside for the 94% of UK businesses not selling into the declining* EU market.

*Declining in terms of global share of GDP and of total UK export market (down 11% in a decade).

[Awol]

9 minutes ago, blandy said:

Possibly, and it would be most excellently good if it did. Equally though a terrifying alternative could happen. Because the outers don't all have anything like the same vision of what they want if/when we leave we could have a tory Gov't, led by Johnson, continuing to fight about what they want with some depts going one way and others another way An even more dysfunctional gov't breaking up the NHS, trashing the environment, unable to decide what it is trying to achieve in negotiations to leave the EU - in the free market or out of it? like Canada like Norway and all these other different examples? or Like the USA or India? Gove says one thing, Boris says another (then changes his line a week later).

The out people have completely failed to put out any remotely viable or credible vision of what a post EU UK would be like.

If I could guarantee that leaving would destroy the tories for ever, I'd vote leave with joy. I fear it would just unleash the very worst of them.

Ultimately if your priority is the dislike of a domestic party over the actual sovereignty* of the country itself, I can't really argue against what you are saying. 

FWIW the best answer to 'what is the alternative to being in the EU' is 'not being in the EU'. The talk of the Swiss, Norweigian or Canada models illustrates the flaw in the question. By definition they all have their own bespoke arrangements with the EU, as will we. 

What is certain is UK being at liberty to do further FTA's with countries of our choosing on a bilateral basis, therefore extending our prospects for free trade beyond the only continent in the world that hasn't grown economically since 2006.

*I know you don't agree on the sovereignty issue either, but if a politically appointed foreign court (ECJ) has ultimate authority & supremacy over the highest national court (UK Supreme Court) then by any definition you are not a sovereign country. I don't think that point can credibly be argued, can it?

[tonyh29]

3 hours ago, Fairy In Boots said:

I was in general terms referring to Article 50. When a state intends to leave they get a two year period to negotiate a exit deal. The EU is obliged to try to get them to remain, but the notice period which we will give if we vote No is binding and once set in motion it can't be stopped unless the member states of the EU allow it which is a no brainier for them as they'll pretty much fold by then. Or we could reapply which will be fast tracked but we would probably get a poorer deal. I'm sumising but given its hardly rocket science as to how it will play out shout leave get the nod. A vote to leave would give our political leaders the collateral to really get us a good deal, remain weakens any potential bargaining power. 

I think you may have mis-understood article 50  , it's 2 years to agree a divorce settlement  it isn't the EU obliged to get us to remain  ..  you'd end up with some mixed agreements and various deals being discussed by the member states and then offered to us

 

the only way we can remain is if we invoke article 49 and say we've changed our mind ,

[blandy]

49 minutes ago, Awol said:

By definition they all have their own bespoke arrangements with the EU, as will we. 

What will it look like? There's no coherent or consistent vision provided.

Will we have to abide by all the "rules" that Switzerland and Norway do?  Free movement of people? if not, what will be the "price" we pay for not having free movement?

If there is a price (and there will be) how can I or anyone decide if it's worth paying, for my circumstances? If I'm not presented with more credible and coherent information, then I am going to dismiss the "case" being made as not credible.

[tonyh29]

2 hours ago, blandy said:

Indeed you have. One of the best bits of the joke is that Cameron promised it because he wanted to shut up the little Englanders on the tory right and to head off the UKIPs from taking tory votes and splitting the tory party.

I don't dispute the notion that Cameron did what he did in order to see off the UKIP threat  , but I'm curious to know what the estimated 18- 20% of labour voters that defected to UKIP are known as ? presumably they weren't the anti semites as most of them seem to have stayed in the labour party

 

[blandy]

54 minutes ago, Awol said:

*I know you don't agree on the sovereignty issue either, but if a politically appointed foreign court (ECJ) has ultimate authority & supremacy over the highest national court (UK Supreme Court) then by any definition you are not a sovereign country. I don't think that point can credibly be argued, can it?

I'm not overly fussed by the whole definition of Sovereignty. Most of the laws of this nation are made by this nation's Govt. Many aspects of our life and that of almost all nations are determined by multi-nation, multi-business bodies. Defence - NATO, Aviation - ICAO, Then there's ISO, and all the safety standard stuff. Most trading blocks have something like CE Marking requirements and standards. The world isn't made up of sovereign nations in the strictest terms any more, and hasn't been for decades.

Yes the odd, rare instance occurs where the ECJ makes a ruling in a legal case that the Gov't of the day doesn't like. But it doesn't cover our national law, only EU law. Sometimes the high court will do the same. Boo hoo. It is of absolutely no concern to me whatsoever. it doesn't harm anyone's lives, basically. It's a total non-argument to me personally.

[blandy]

2 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

I don't dispute the notion that Cameron did what he did in order to see off the UKIP threat  , but I'm curious to know what the estimated 18- 20% of labour voters that defected to UKIP are known as ?

Dunno mate. Why does it matter? Call them what you like. I'm talking about a specific part of the Tory membership which genuinely does exist and was (to me) relevant to the discussion because it was influencing Cameron's decisions.

[tonyh29]

Just now, blandy said:

Dunno mate. Why does it matter? Call them what you like. I'm talking about a specific part of the Tory membership which genuinely does exist and was (to me) relevant to the discussion because it was influencing Cameron's decisions.

I don't think anyone wanting to leave the EU has to be referred to as a little Englander when it's clearly a derogatorily term in the context of which it's being used  ... I was just curious if your insult was only reserved for Tories  ? 

 

[Awol]

29 minutes ago, blandy said:

What will it look like? There's no coherent or consistent vision provided.

Will we have to abide by all the "rules" that Switzerland and Norway do?  Free movement of people? if not, what will be the "price" we pay for not having free movement?

If there is a price (and there will be) how can I or anyone decide if it's worth paying, for my circumstances? If I'm not presented with more credible and coherent information, then I am going to dismiss the "case" being made as not credible.

What your asking for is the outcome of a negotiation before the negotiation has taken place. Back to the barrister example, it's like saying I want you to argue for X,Y & Z... Now please tell me now what the result will be? It's impossible.

In terms of generalities clearly the Leave side want to regain control of the judiciary (there is no discrimination between EU law and national law, only areas where the ECJ is yet to assert its supremacy over the national body of law. In principle the ECJ is sovereign), regain control of who is permitted to come into the country & maintain a level of free trade with the EU. 

The consequence of that is leaving the single market & having an FTA with the EU, because the single market entails the free movement of people.  

With a trade deficit of £60Bn plus in favour of the EU it's not credible that they wouldn't sign an FTA with the UK which is the euro zones largest single export market.

EDIT to add: When primary and secondary legislation is added together, 55-65% of new laws in the UK come from the EU. That's not insignificant and beyond the UK's legal ability to stop.

Edited May 31, 2016 by Awol

[Fairy In Boots]

23 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

I think you may have mis-understood article 50  , it's 2 years to agree a divorce settlement  it isn't the EU obliged to get us to remain  ..  you'd end up with some mixed agreements and various deals being discussed by the member states and then offered to us

 

the only way we can remain is if we invoke article 49 and say we've changed our mind ,

Which is effectively what I've said. Granted I'm sumising, now put yourself in the EU's shoes one of your main contributors and biggest markets says I'm off. You have two years to sort out a deal, do you cut your nose to spite your face and be petty? or strike a favourable deal and possibly heavily insentivise return to the status quo? Article 49 is basically the political equivalent of a reset button, how and why we push it determines the future but we're to big a fish to not be wanted back in the aquarium. 

[Davkaus]

Weatherspoons have decided to get involved and put beermats in all of their pubs telling people to vote Leave. I guess I won't be drinking there again. I'm getting really **** tired of companies campaigning for the political views of their owners.

[blandy]

1 minute ago, tonyh29 said:

I don't think anyone wanting to leave the EU has to be referred to as a little Englander when it's clearly a derogatorily term in the context of which it's being used  ... I was just curious if your insult was only reserved for Tories  ? 

I don't mean that anyone who wants to leave is a little englander. That wasn't my point at all. I do mean that there are a certain group of the Tory party that are little Englanders. There are probably a few L. E. s in Labour as well, though I haven't come across any that I can recall.

They're just the kind of very nationalistic, anti-foreigner, borderline racist, "pull up the drawbridge, we're full....it's PC gone mad....Everyone on the dole is a scrounger....God bless the Queen....Oi Garçon two beers pronto..." types and their wealthier relatives. Sometimes they wear fancy dress of Nazi uniforms to Tory fundraisers or get caught muttering darkly off the record.

[Demitri_C]

One thing from the leave campaign is, how do they intend to stop immigration from how it is now? Its all good saying we can control our borders but how do you intend to stop them? Build a wall? Close the Euro tunnel? 

[Davkaus]

2 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

One thing from the leave campaign is, how do they intend to stop immigration from how it is now? Its all good saying we can control our borders but how do you intend to stop them? Build a wall? Close the Euro tunnel? 

I'm pretty sure that most of the people moving over here from the EU would have no intention of doing so illegally, so I'm not sure we need to go all Donald Trump on them.

Illegal immigration will still be an issue, but it's a drop in the ocean really.

Edited May 31, 2016 by Davkaus

[Demitri_C]

1 minute ago, Davkaus said:

I'm pretty sure that most of the people moving over here from the EU would have no intention of doing so illegally, so I'm not sure we need to go all Donald Trump on them.

Illegal immigration will still be an issue, but it's a drop in the ocean really.

I think this leave campaign is based significantly on immigration. Most people i speak to who are voting out say its because of that

[Awol]

2 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

One thing from the leave campaign is, how do they intend to stop immigration from how it is now? Its all good saying we can control our borders but how do you intend to stop them? Build a wall? Close the Euro tunnel? 

You do what every other country outside the EU does, border controls and entry visas for those countries with whom you do not agree visa free travel. Anyone presenting at the airline check in desk or ferry port who isn't entitled to get on the transport, doesn't. Being an island is pretty useful in that respect  

This is normal stuff that happens everywhere else outside the EU. 

[Davkaus]

Just now, Demitri_C said:

I think this leave campaign is based significantly on immigration. Most people i speak to who are voting out say its because of that

Yes..I'm not sure how that seems like a relevant response to my post though. We'll just...not allow immigration from the EU? We don't need a wall, we just tell people they're not allowed to come,  in the same way every non-EU country does? I'm sure there would be exceptions for skills we have shortages of, etc, but for the most part, a big "no entry for EU citizens" sign will do the job.