If we vote to Remain what happens?

CLAPTON

Moby wrote: »

Its patently obvious a vote to leave in England would trigger another referendum in Scotland. Brexiteers need to be careful the Union is very fragile!

It would seem reasonable that if a clear majority of people in Scotland want to lose the English subsidies and pay lots of money to the EU then they should have that right.
Surely you would support this democratic right of the Scottish people by voting brexit to trick them to leaving: entirely in keeping with left wing values.

Generali

Moby wrote: »

Its patently obvious a vote to leave in England would trigger another referendum in Scotland. Brexiteers need to be careful the Union is very fragile!

No it wouldn't. The Scots had their referendum and very clearly voted to remain in the Union.

http://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/when-if-at-all-do-you-think-another-independence-referendum-should-take-place

Scots don't want a neverendum and, being democratically minded for the most part, accept a democratic decision arrived at fairly.

mrginge

If Scotland wish to live in a world of perpetual referenda, driven by anything from the result of the EU vote to the colour of SamCam's hat then fine.
Let them pay for it out of their own budget and crack on boys.

Then they can vote to leave, sign up to the EU instead and have more referenda when the EU do things they don't like.

michaels

Moby wrote: »

Its patently obvious a vote to leave in England would trigger another referendum in Scotland. Brexiteers need to be careful the Union is very fragile!

two birds one stone

BobQ

Generali wrote: »

No it wouldn't. The Scots had their referendum and very clearly voted to remain in the Union.

http://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/when-if-at-all-do-you-think-another-independence-referendum-should-take-place

Scots don't want a neverendum and, being democratically minded for the most part, accept a democratic decision arrived at fairly.

Gen, I do not know how much of the Indy Referendum you will have seen in Aus. My recollection is that on several occasions in that the Pro side were asked if they agreed with Cameron that it was a decision for a generation. There were several occasions when the response was a qualified yes, with the qualification being that there were no subsequent game changers such as leaving the EU. I do not live there but if I saw it so did many in Scotland.

kabayiri

Suppose there is a sizeable Brexit vote but Bremain win the referendum, and more of the same is the order of the day.

What happens to these Exit voters, particularly those who saw the referendum as a protest vote?

It's like setting an expectation, and then not snuffing it out fully.

Will we see a further rise in protest parties like SNP and UKIP?

Will the Tory party fracture over Europe once again?

HornetSaver

One thing I've never understood in this debate is why - whether or not you believe the Remain camp's assertion that Britain is sovereign despite its membership of the EU - that we have never tried to flex that muscle. And I'm talking specifically about freedom to settle.

There is no doubt, not the slightest doubt, that should Brexit win, concerns over immigration will have been a decisive factor. I'm talking about the knock-on effects of overpopulation here, because those concerned about it on racial grounds are rightly dismissed as fringe lunatics who are not worth trying to influence.

So why did we never turn around to the EU and state that in two years' time (from whenever we said it), these will be the criteria for right of abode in the United Kingdom, and while we will have a Visa Waiver Programme to allow all EU citizens to visit for leisure or short-term business reasons, these are the conditions that must be met.

The worst they could have done is throw us out, which we're considering doing to ourselves anyway. Even those favouring leave want to negotiate their way back into the majority of the good bits.

vivatifosi

It's a fair question HS. I thought there was an interesting point made in the Paxman programme... that we don't send our political "top guns" to serve on the commission, alongside all of the other countries (he made a parallel to the Eurovision Song Contest. It strikes me that we play a different game.

HornetSaver

vivatifosi wrote: »

(he made a parallel to the Eurovision Song Contest. It strikes me that we play a different game.

Eurovision is an interesting parallel really.

In Eurovision, when we do have the ability to influence what we send to the contest, we vote for something which is not even popular here. I believe our entry this year peaked at something like 80 in the UK singles chart?

As far as the EU parliament is concerned, how many people could name two people who have been MEPs in this century, who were not members of UKIP? A high proportion of those who succeeded would name Nick Griffin!

BobQ

HornetSaver wrote: »

The worst they could have done is throw us out, which we're considering doing to ourselves anyway. Even those favouring leave want to negotiate their way back into the majority of the good bits.

This is a particularly good point.

Clapton often makes the point that there is not unanimity in the Remain camp. He has a point, but most of the differences as far as I can see are not on the principle of EU membership but the implementation. Corbyn clearly wants more employment laws, Cameron wants less constraints on businesses etc. But they at least have a plan to continue the present arrangement and stand up to anything that suggests closer integration.

But the differences in Brexit are more fundamental, some want a close association with the EU (like Norway) and others want the EU to be treated like another nation. The Leave campaign owe it to the public to state a credible plan and a clear vision post exit. The economists who wrote the case for Brexit see the future as the UK being independent of any trading block agreements, but so many Leavers have a vision of an EU deal that keeps much of what we are opting out of (be that Norway, Swiss, or something similar).