Elan Tedrona Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 If you look at the stuff coming out of Berlaymont it's pretty clear they would love to shaft us as badly as possible to prevent others looking to follow us out. Understandable under the circs but that means its not in our interests to trigger A50 in the short term. The key to getting the best deal for Britain and the other 27 is going to be selling a deal in each capital that is mutually beneficial and then forcing Brussels to accept it. That process can start way before A50 is triggered. Also really serious end negotiations can only start next May with the new occupant of the Elysee is in place so talking to Hollande is pointless. With the volume of genuine and cross decking trade we have with Holland and elections coming up in the spring I'd personally start serious talks with the cloggys on what sort of deal they would be happy with as a first point of call. UK negotiating position going into Article 50: - Currently in recession - Currently battling potential secession of Scotland and Gibraltar - Hugely dependent on maintaining financial passport for City - Has no leverage since it has already chosen to leave. EU negotiating position - Doorway to single market - Not under any pressure to negotiate - Need to set example that you don't get better terms out vs. in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lex Luthor Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 (edited) And you know this how? - because it's widely accepted in the press and elsewhere that younger people would have been the beneficiaries of the online registration extension, which would have been in favour of remain. Hence, why Farage was complaining about it and saying it may have been enough to swing the vote. But at least we agree that the democratic process was bent. That's not what they are saying at Glastonbury - they could organise tickets for themselves but not to vote? Come on! There is no outcome to uphold - it is only an indicitive poll. There is now. 65% (Yes 48% of those who voted), but what about those who were disenfranchised? You mean like... http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/rail-passengers-left-stranded-unable-8270653 http://www.leightonbuzzardonline.co.uk/news/politics/updated-council-sorry-for-polling-station-error-which-left-linslade-voters-unable-to-vote-in-eu-referendum-1-7445502 "In a sign of how extensive the problems were, staff at one station said that of the first 30 voters to show up, only three were on the register. The rest were told to come back later." - That quote doesn't say much really. Did they come back later? Did they vote? Then we'll have to presume, especially, as these were travelling to their homes outside of London, unless they commute to Scotland, that the majority of them were probably going to vote to leave anyway. That is unfortunate, but we can't really account for acts of God in referendums, unless it's monsoon season. And all of the above, certainly doesn't even add up to even 1% of the population, even if they were all going to vote remain! Come on, at least have a bit of graciousness about it. Edited June 25, 2016 by Lex Luthor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litotes Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 It would be parliamentary suicide. Every MP that voted for it would be eviscerated at the next election. Their careers would be over. No Sane MP will go against the will of their constituents. That would be the same as saying they do not believe in democracy. And bare in mind outside London it would be a monumental landslide victory for the party that would uphold the vote. If they vetoed it we might see Farage as the next PM. Can you imagine. But why do you say that? Surely the remainers would vote for the MPs that did that... Your logic doesn't follow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elan Tedrona Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 I think we will end up with a deal like Norway. Sadly we haven't been accumulating a staggeringly large sovereign wealth since 1960 like they have. Oops. Norway follows all of the EU laws and rules. Pays into the EU budget. This is what the UK wants? It's basically the current terms but worse with no say on making the rules. That is the best case scenario. The immense stupidity of the situation can not be stressed enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxy lady Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 (edited) But why do you say that? Surely the remainers would vote for the MPs that did that... Your logic doesn't follow. There isn't a straw feeble enough that someone won't cling on to it. In Wakefield for example 116,000 folk voted Brexit. 66.3% of the vote. They elected Mary Creagh as MP. She got 40% of the vote 6% more than her nearest rival. I'm just trying to imagine Mary Creagh telling 116,000 folk that she is no longer representing the wishes of her electorate. Orgreave would be like a peace camp. Edited June 25, 2016 by foxy lady Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litotes Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 - That quote doesn't say much really. Did they come back later? Did they vote? The whole point is that they were potentially disenfranchised - I have no idea if they came back later to vote - maybe they couldn't 'cos they had to be elsewhere. The electoral system failed them. Then we'll have to presume, especially, as these were travelling to their homes outside of London, unless they commute to Scotland, that the majority of them were probably going to vote to leave anyway. That is unfortunate, but we can't really account for acts of God in referendums, unless it's monsoon season. I disagree, looking at the demographic of people in employment in the SE, we could surmise (in the way you have done) that they were going to vote remain. Again they were disenfranchised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eater Sundae Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 The problem with the 'Leave' campaign was that it was split into two factions, with different agendas. On the one hand, you had Johnson, Gove, Grayling and Stewart, who seemed to favour a Single Market option, which would inevitably mean acceptance of free movement of labour. On the other you had Farage, who focused on strong controls on migration, which would rule out the first option. It looks as though Farage will be excluded from the negotiating team. So all the people who voted on the issue of migration are likely to be disappointed. The former group were quite happy to pick up the votes generated by Farage, whilst denouncing his campaign. I feel that there will be a lot of working class voters who will feel betrayed once the Brexit deal is done. It would not surprise me if UKIP is given a second wind, by opposing this deal on the grounds that it does not meet even their minimal demands for migration control. As the conservatives are in government, they will be doing the negotiating. Farage won't get a look in. If it goes to a vote in parliament to ratify the exit deal (I don't know if it has to), then again it will be the conservatives who will control it as UKIP only has 1 seat. I imagine that the conservatives will all pull together on this and there won't be any split as the brexiters have got their way - I don't think the remainers in the conservatives will dissent. The natural Labour voters who voted leave will get nothing out of this at all. I agree they will feel betrayed. Edit. Ie, no reduction in immigration and no more money for the NHS - a double whammy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XXTickerXX Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 But why do you say that? Surely the remainers would vote for the MPs that did that... Your logic doesn't follow. Because in nearly every single area outside London the leave vote was bigger than the Remain vote. That's why it looked like a map of blue outside London. Do you think anyone wants to vote for a lying politician who completely ignores your vote. You would have to have a mental age of 2 to vote for someone who ignores democracy because it does not suit them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radan Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 What about the WWIII and end of civilisation claims? What about the promise in 1975 that it was just a single market, and the UK Government would always retain sovereignty over the laws made that effect the UK? My parents voted to go into the EEC back then, and are a bit upset that they were lied to. Should we rerun the 1975 referendum? You seem confused. How can we rerun the 1975 referendum? However, there is no legal obligation to obey the current one. It hasn't been through parliament. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litotes Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 Norway follows all of the EU laws and rules. Pays into the EU budget. This is what the UK wants? It's basically the current terms but worse with no say on making the rules. That is the best case scenario. The immense stupidity of the situation can not be stressed enough. Exactly. This wasn't highlighted enough in the campaign - by voting out, we now get the worst of both worlds - We might be trading with the EU, but only if we allow unfettered movement of workers, but with no way to influence the system (this is what Norway has). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts