The Consequences of Brexit [part 5] Read 1st post before posting

[nightrider]

43 minutes ago, apelike said:

Err, no.. In an advisory referendum neither choice counts unless parliament says it does and is democratic in principle only as the electorate are only given a direct vote to answer a question and it was either to remain or leave. It just so happens in this case that the government made a promise to the electorate to uphold the result and parliament accepted it. 

 

Its a moot point, the leader of that government resigned. In any case He had no mandate to speak for what parliament may or may not do with the result of an advisory referendum.

[ez8004]

16 minutes ago, Lockdoctor said:

You've just proved you have no understanding of WTO Article 24.  The idea of Article 24 is a temporary arrangement (up to 10 years)  until a trade agreement is agreed. A zero for each side would mean some kind of temporary agreement has been arranged. There is nothing stopping the EU following the UK,  if we decide to use Article 24 to justify not implementing tariffs on goods coming from the EU.  The point you are missing is that the UK can use Article  24 to implement zero tariffs on all goods coming from the EU and still implement tariffs on the same goods imported from countries outside the EU, If we wish to do so.   Article 24 will give the UK time to decide what future trade arrangements we want and which countries we want  to negotiate trade deals with, without the expense and disadvantages  of the EU withdrawal agreement on offer.

You are missing the very fundamental point that the UK cannot default on to WTO rules and expect others to follow when trading with us if we are not a member of the WTO as an independent member.  There is absolutely no certainty that we automatically become an independent member if we leave without a deal.  In fact, we likely to not be able to do so if there is no deal because we are so entangled with the EU.  We are only currently members of the WTO via the EU.  Your original statement that we are a founding country of the WTO as if it means something.  Well, newsflash so were 124 other nations in 1995.  We are not as important in this respect as you may like to think.

 

Still not told me how you are going to get around 20 nations blocking our fast track membership as an independent member, of which two of the countries are the US and China.  Want to answer this first?

Edited December 17, 2018 by ez8004

[Top Cats Hat]

17 minutes ago, apelike said:

19 minutes ago, apelike said:

Our public opinion survey explored whether voters had enough information about the ‘leave’ and ‘remain’ arguments to be able to make an informed decision how to vote in the referendum.

That is a very strange survey.

 

There is an old saying which goes 'you don't know what you don't know.' If you polled people on how intelligent they thought they were, then put the answers on a graph  of their actual IQ scores, the line designating their own view of their intelligence would always  certainly be above that of their actual intelligence*.

 

People rarely admit to being dumb or gullible so maybe a simple survey asking basic questions about the issues would have been a more useful exercise. 

 

 

[Lockdoctor]

Just now, ez8004 said:

You are missing the very fundamental point that the UK cannot default on to WTO rules and expect others to follow when trading with us if we are not a member of the WTO as an independent member.  There is absolutely no certainty that we automatically become an independent member if we leave without a deal.  In fact, we likely to not be able to do so if there is no deal because we are so entangled with the EU.  We are only currently members of the WTO via the EU.  Your original statement that we are a founding country of the WTO as if it means something.  Well, newsflash so were 124 other nations in 1995.  We are not as important in this respect as you may like to think.

I am not missing any point. The fact is the WTO rules are the default position, if the UK leave the EU without a deal. Article 24  part of WTO rules/law.,

5 minutes ago, nightrider said:

Its a moot point, the leader of that government resigned. In any case He had no mandate to speak for what parliament may or may not do with the result of an advisory referendum.

Parliament passed legislation after David Cameron resigned  into law that the UK are leaving the EU.  It is now irrelevant whether the referendum result was advisory. 

[truman]

36 minutes ago, apelike said:

As people on here are so fond of believing polls here is some information from the Electoral Commission public survey: 

 

Views on Information Provided in Advance of 2016 EU Referendum

"As part of its report on the 2016 referendum on the UK’s membership of the European Union, the Electoral Commission ran public opinion surveys
on the public’s view of the information available to inform their decision. It found:

Our public opinion survey explored whether voters had enough information about the ‘leave’ and ‘remain’ arguments to be able to make an informed decision how to vote in the referendum. Sixty two percent of respondents agreed that they did compared to 28 percent who disagreed. There was a clear pattern by age group with those aged 18–34 least likely to agree they had enough information to make an informed decision (52 percent agreed), 35-–54 year olds more likely (63 percent agreed) and those aged 55+ most likely (70 percent agreed)...

 

Respondents were also asked, separately, whether they had enough information about what would happen in the event of a Remain vote and a Leave vote. Sixty five percent agreed that they had enough information about what would happen in the event of a Remain vote (26 percent disagreed) and 45 percent agreed that they had enough information about what would happen in the event of a Leave vote (46 percent disagreed)."

 

Taken from a House of Lords Briefing Paper titled "Referendums and Parliamentary Democracy Debate" dated 19 July 2018

 

When were the EC polls run?

3 minutes ago, Lockdoctor said:

I am not missing any point. The fact is the WTO rules are the default position, if the UK leave the EU without a deal. Article 24  part of WTO rules/law.,

Parliament passed legislation after David Cameron resigned  into law that the UK are leaving the EU.  It is now irrelevant whether the referendum result was advisory. 

Legislation can be reversed..otherwise we'd still have hanging and bearbaiting..

[apelike]

TCH you seem to have messed up the quotes..

 

But it seems that you and other remainers will not like it or accept it because its not what you want to hear. Dont forget that the referendum was also based on 2 simple basic questions.

4 minutes ago, truman said:

When were the EC polls run?

I take it was prior to the debate, but in any case it does not matter as the questions were put after the referendum and people were asked how satisfied they were with the information provided before the referendum and voting. That is something that would not change given the questions put.

[Top Cats Hat]

4 minutes ago, Lockdoctor said:

It is now irrelevant whether the referendum result was advisory. 

Right, we're actually getting somewhere!

 

The referendum is now history and has passed into government policy and then legislation.

 

The government is finding it impossible to enact the legislation in a way satisfactory to the majority of Parliament and the majority of the country so what exactly is wrong with Parliament changing tack either with or without another referendum?

[truman]

10 minutes ago, apelike said:

TCH you seem to have messed up the quotes..

 

But it seems that you and other remainers will not like it or accept it because its not what you want to hear. Dont forget that the referendum was also based on 2 simple basic questions.

I take it was prior to the debate, but in any case it does not matter as the questions were put after the referendum and people were asked how satisfied they were with the information provided before the referendum and voting. That is something that would not change given the questions put.

How long after the referendum? Not long I bet now we've seen what's involved in leaving..if it doesn't matter why bring it up?  Wonder what the result of the same poll would give now?

[Magilla]

1 hour ago, Lockdoctor said:

You've just proved you have no understanding of WTO Article 24.  The idea of Article 24 is a temporary arrangement (up to 10 years)  until a trade agreement is agreed.

Article 24 is a temporary arrangement that has to be agree'd by both sides.

 

https://www.politico.eu/article/britain-10-year-interim-zero-for-zero-trade-deal-brexit/

"While a "zero-for-zero" interim tariff deal may be legally feasible according to the rule-book, it is also highly unlikely that the remaining EU 27 countries would agree to such an arrangement without significant concessions from the U.K. government on budget contributions and free movement of people. There is also no obligation under WTO rules for either side to agree to tariffs of zero."

 

Quote

A zero for each side would mean some kind of temporary agreement has been arranged.

Yes, that's *exactly* what it means. That's why you correctly called it a "temporary arrangement" above.

 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/783900/Britain-secret-Brexit-10-year-tariff-free-trade-deal-negotiations

An insider said: “Of course it would require the agreement of both parties, but by not agreeing it the other EU member states would be imposing penalties on their own businesses, which is not a great idea. There’s a big global picture here and the EU can’t afford to disrupt that."

 

Quote

There is nothing stopping the EU following the UK,  if we decide to use Article 24 to justify not implementing tariffs on goods coming from the EU.

I'm afraid you've entirely missed the point of Article 24 and it's reason for existing

 

*Only* if the EU agree's.

 

Quote

The point you are missing is that the UK can use Article  24 to implement zero tariffs on all goods coming from the EU and still implement tariffs on the same goods imported from countries outside the EU, If we wish to do so.

*Only* if the EU agree's.

 

Quote

Article 24 will give the UK time to decide what future trade arrangements we want and which countries we want  to negotiate trade deals with, without the expense and disadvantages  of the EU withdrawal agreement on offer.

*Only* if the EU agree's.

Edited December 17, 2018 by Magilla

[Lockdoctor]

19 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

Right, we're actually getting somewhere!

 

The referendum is now history and has passed into government policy and then legislation.

 

The government is finding it impossible to enact the legislation in a way satisfactory to the majority of Parliament and the majority of the country so what exactly is wrong with Parliament changing tack either with or without another referendum?

You're ignoring the fact that Parliament passed legislation which gave the choice of whether the UK remain or leave the EU to the UK electorate  via the 2016 EU referendum.  It is absolutely wrong, if Parliament don't follow the UK's electorate  instructions and implement the UK leaving the EU.  Implementation can either be through Parliament agreeing to the EU withdrawal agreement on offer or the UK leaving the EU on 29th March without a deal.