If we vote for Brexit what happens

CLAPTON

wotsthat wrote: »

T

There should never have been a referendum. Cameron should've promised a full parliamentary debate and vote on EU membership and the electorate could've considered the respective positions during the GE campaign.

It interesting how many people complain about democracy in the UK and find the Swiss model something to praise : I guess there will be far fewer in the future.

PS: I'm not implying that you were ever in favour of Swiss style referendums.

Moby

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

*sigh*

The 28% that didn't vote gave up the responsibility to those who did.

Again - that's how referenda work. The 28% can therefore no longer be included in the calculation of "what the country voted for". Effectively they [STRIKE]have[/STRIKE] had no say on the matter.

Why aren't you getting this? Is it just because it doesn't fit a narrative?

I don't 'get it' either because in my view the referendum was a dirty little device constructed to shore up the tories against UKIP.....in no way was it intended to give the country a democratic say on their sovereignty etc. It then morphed into a slag fest on immigration. We live in a Parliamentary democracy. We elect MP's to make hard nuanced decisions like this. For these reasons the referendum was a huge fat mistake and now we have to find a way through......so no I don't 'get it'!

CLAPTON

Moby wrote: »

I don't 'get it' either because in my view the referendum was a dirty little device constructed to shore up the tories against UKIP.....in no way was it intended to give the country a democratic say on their sovereignty etc. It then morphed into a slag fest on immigration. We live in a Parliamentary democracy. We elect MP's to make hard nuanced decisions like this. For these reasons the referendum was a huge fat mistake and now we have to find a way through......so no I don't 'get it'!

well of course, our MPs don't get the opportunity make those decisions for any EU matters any more.

TrickyTree83

Moby wrote: »

I don't 'get it' either because in my view the referendum was a dirty little device constructed to shore up the tories against UKIP.....in no way was it intended to give the country a democratic say on their sovereignty etc. It then morphed into a slag fest on immigration. We live in a Parliamentary democracy. We elect MP's to make hard nuanced decisions like this. For these reasons the referendum was a huge fat mistake and now we have to find a way through......so no I don't 'get it'!

You say such things as if people who disagree with you (Remain I assume) are by default wrong, possibly stupid, and possibly racist or xenophobic.

I welcomed the opportunity to have my opinion heard by means of a referendum on EU membership. I detest the political institutions of the EU, so I voted to leave them. If we want to retain single market membership or freedom of movement, that's what we'll get. I have no problem with that, I voted to leave the EU, nothing more, nothing less.

I completely disagree that it was a huge fat mistake. I don't agree with the majority of MP's on a great many things. I often find them self-serving and duplicitous, on both sides of the house. I vehemently disagree with many more things that come out of the liberal left of politics though. So for me to have my say on the sovereignty of the UK in its trade negotiations for me was welcomed, and entered into with enthusiasm. I marked that X on the option to Leave with hope.

To sum up the reason why, I don't think we need to be in the EU to do the good things that the EU does. But we do need to be out of the EU in order to trade with whomever we want on terms that we would like. Leaving the EU doesn't stop us doing good things as a nation, who we vote into power may have bearing on that, but it doesn't physically stop us. But being in the EU actually does stop us from doing something which I believe will be a benefit to this nation for generations to come. Maintaining our single market membership whilst also being able to negotiate bilateral trade deals would be a marvel of free trade and enterprise. And that's why I voted to leave the EU.

beecher2

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Brexit is still going to happen. It just won't be the Brexit tantrumming Kippers want.

May can't go to Parliament for a vote without MP's knowing what they are voting for.

The Brexit means Brexit bollards has to end now and some actual options need to be presented.

Hard Brexit is so damaging to the UK it won't go through.

Sorry Nige. Guess you'll have to wait a bit longer for a British Fourth Reich.

May can say what sort of Brexit she wants but it depends on the negotiations if she gets it. EU negotiators might say that if she isn't willing to accept free movement of people then she gets none of the things she wants.

gfplux

A good overview from Jolyon Maugham in the FT of this morning's judgement and what it means for the notification timetable.

http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2016/11/03/2178734/after-the-high-courts-brexit-decision-forget-about-activating-article-50-in-march/

"Shortly after the decision was handed down, the government announced it would appeal. That appeal is likely to be heard in the Supreme Court in early December. The government should not be confident — and appealing is no free hit.

Lingering, unaddressed, in the background to this litigation is a question about whether an Article 50 notification is reversible. The High Court in reality proceeded on the assumption that a notification, once given, could not be withdrawn. But the Supreme Court has a different legal obligation and it might feel legally compelled to address that assumption directly.

Addressing it would require a politically explosive referral to the European Court in Luxembourg – the question whether a notification is reversible is one of European law – with a likely delay of around three months. And a finding by the Supreme Court that an Article 50 notification could be ‘pulled’ would leave ajar the door to a prospectively damaging continuation of the Referendum campaign until such time, if any, as our exit is formalised."

StevieJ

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

abstention

noun
1.
an instance of declining to vote for or against a proposal or motion.

Therefore declining to vote Remain or Leave is a decision by that person to leave the handling of the vote to those who do turn up. Seceding responsibility to the turnout, who now represent the views of the electorate.
.

Not quite as simple as that, sometimes circumstance can affect whether or not someone votes.

Almost two million UK students are eligible to vote in the June referendum and huge efforts have been made by universities and colleges across the UK to increase student voter registration numbers. The date of the referendum, however – outside of term-time – means many students who registered to vote at the recent local elections (5 May), may need to re-register if they will be at a different address on 23 June.

http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/news/Pages/students-unaware-EU-referendum-date-many-registered-at-wrong-address-poll.aspx

Yamumuk

I find it quite peculiar to accept the stance that Brexiters were the radicals, the ones against big business, the ones against the status quo, the peasants revolt etc. Also there seems to be the premise that it would be the voice of the small people being heard over and above the grossly powerful corporations that gave us szero hours contracts, use cheap labour etc.Whether you like it or not, whther we are in the E.U. or not we operate within the system known as captilism.

For its many ills, it is the system that gives you the NHS through the money you earn for the company your work for that are capitalists. Or maybe you operate as self employed or run your own business within the very same system. This system provides social security, health care, a system where food is in shops that by and large actually seem to work.

I believe leaving the E.U. will disrupt the balance potentially to a degree to turn the U.K. from a top economy to a minor economy that everyone will essentially forget. Somewhere between economies of Eastern Europe and the third world.

That is what Brexit is up against.

There is NO way they are going to let Brexit happen in any close to what you may like, get used to that.

For all its ills those really in charge.. i.e. the bankers and the massive corporations, they will not let it happen. Look at Nissan - we want protection - granted at cost to us without any consultation at all. Repeat ad infinitum or there will be no companies or banks here anymore.

Money talks and that is exactly what it is doing right now.

I don't particularly like these entities but at the same time I appreciate the basic and largely enjoyable life I live and I voted to retain what we all have, including not having further conflicts in Europe of which economic stability is a great part.

So you might want immigrants out, you might your government to make their laws but it is not likely to happen. The alternatives are far, far worse. The reason is because the world has changed and is dangerous. Remember the unprecedented multi pronged threats I mentioned. Better together is the right way for the future IMO.

The alternatives will lead us to real poverty. People would not even know what hit them.

Carry on your weak pointless arguments all you like but they are against a backdrop of future unemployment, poverty, hatred, distrust and national bankrupcy.

TrickyTree83

StevieJ wrote: »

Not quite as simple as that, sometimes circumstance can affect whether or not someone votes.
http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/news/Pages/students-unaware-EU-referendum-date-many-registered-at-wrong-address-poll.aspx

If they didn't re-register it can't have been that important to them in the first place. I did, I was in the middle of moving house, twice in 6 months! It didn't stop me registering to vote in the referendum.

It's not an excuse I'm afraid StevieJ. They abstained by default.

Edit: just to be clear for the pedants.

They abstained by default if they were registered in the wrong location and were unwilling to travel to that location to vote.

MobileSaver

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Again - that's how referenda work. The 28% can therefore no longer be included in the calculation of "what the country voted for".

Is it just because it doesn't fit a narrative?

Ha ha, you are the one who wants to ignore (or at least presumes to know) the wishes of 13 million people in the UK but I'm the one trying to fit a narrative! :rotfl:

I know it's hard but you simply need to accept that the majority of the country do not agree with you and did not vote to leave the EU.