2.2 milion (so far) sign petition calling for 2nd EU referendum.

antrobus

cells wrote: »

The EU28 if it were a country would have the highest GDP in the world. This is dispite not having the same level of natural and historical advantages the USA has (eg USA has a lot more natural resources and didn't have the same sort of damage in ww2 and has an inbuilt lead in a lot of sectors like media software computers etc not to mention they have a faster growing population and one single language which also helps them)

According to the IMF and the CIA, China has the the highest GDP in the world. Of course, that might have something to do with the fact that there are 1.4 billion Chinese. In the same way that EU28 have more people than the USA - 510m versus 320m.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)

P.S. The USA does not have one single language. Over 10% of them speak Spanish.

vivatifosi

The irony is that a few common sense steps could have prevented all of this.

Stop any immigrant claiming benefits for their first five years here, just NHS access under reciprocal healthcare arrangement.
If a job is not highly specialised and on a list of shortage skills, then it has to be advertised in this country and in English and or Welsh.

Neither of these restrict the right to the freedom of movement under the founding treaty principles, but both would go a significant way to assuaging the fears as many who voted out.

I voted remain and continue to think that this is a terrible situation. But I also wish the EU would wake up to its own intransigence and realise that there are more important things than Junker and his federalist pet project.

antrobus

patman99 wrote: »

Over 2.2 million people have signed a petition caling for the Govt. to hold a 2nd EU referendum vote.....

Apparently, 39,000 of them were from the Vatican City. Which is interesting on two counts. One, because what has it got to do with them? And two, because the Vatican City only has a population of 800.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/26/petition-for-second-eu-referendum-may-have-been-manipulated

CLAPTON

cells wrote: »

The EU28 if it were a country would have the highest GDP in the world. This is dispite not having the same level of natural and historical advantages the USA has (eg USA has a lot more natural resources and didn't have the same sort of damage in ww2 and has an inbuilt lead in a lot of sectors like media software computers etc not to mention they have a faster growing population and one single language which also helps them)

do they have 25% youth unemployment in any of their states?

prowla

vivatifosi wrote: »

The irony is that a few common sense steps could have prevented all of this.

Stop any immigrant claiming benefits for their first five years here, just NHS access under reciprocal healthcare arrangement.
If a job is not highly specialised and on a list of shortage skills, then it has to be advertised in this country and in English and or Welsh.

Neither of these restrict the right to the freedom of movement under the founding treaty principles, but both would go a significant way to assuaging the fears as many who voted out.

I voted remain and continue to think that this is a terrible situation. But I also wish the EU would wake up to its own intransigence and realise that there are more important things than Junker and his federalist pet project.

It is the EU's inability (or refusal) to come up with a solution to the issue that people will want to move to the land where the streets are paved with gold that has led to this outcome.

That arrogant fool Junker had such an ego that he thought he could dictate his will to nations.

HornetSaver

Can I just say, now, that I voted Remain, have not signed this petition, am not going to sign this petition, and would never demand the overturning of a vote unless there were evidence that it was not free and/or not fair. No-one is suggesting electoral fraud, and barring one incident under investigation, there was no intimidation, violence, anything of that nature.

That said, there is one interesting piece of legal disentanglement that needs to be done if we wish to remain in the Common Market. In 2011 Parliament enshrined into law that there could be no transfer of power from London to Brussels without a referendum. We have just had a referendum, which was explicitly about taking powers back from Brussels.

So far so good.

The tricky bit comes if we leave the European Union but wish to remain part of the Common Market (as our half-American answer to Donald Trump seems to favour). Whilst on the one hand we would be taking control of many powers, we would also be transferring a pretty important one the other way (the requirement to abide by the rules of the Common Market without any ability to influence those rules). Therefore, to exit the EU, we would either need to also exit the Common Market, have a referendum on whether to do a deal to remain in the Common Market, or repeal a piece of legislation which forbids Westminster from giving up sovereignty without putting the matter to the people.

Vectis

chewmylegoff wrote: »

I'm not sure that democracy is defined as a single one off vote being binding on the electorate forever with no possibility of any future change of stance even if, after the passage of time, it is no longer reflective of public opinion. Public opinion changes over time, sometimes very rapidly, and the politicians we elect to represent us need to respond to that. Even if we leave the EU in about 2 years it doesn't mean that a future government won't be able to take us back in (albeit the terms of re-entry would probably be quite rubbish).

Perhaps we will leave and be desperate to rejoin in the future and end up using the Euro as a condition of reentry, perhaps not. Perhaps we will never even leave. Who knows, the referendum result is not binding and the way forward is uncharted.

True, there's always the opportunity in the future to revisit the question and see if we want to rejoin. How about in 40 years time, which is roughly the length of time since the last referendum - that seems fair, doesn't it? Let's open the discussion again in 2056.

Mind you, would you bet any money on the EU being around in 40 years time? I certainly wouldn't.

HornetSaver

Vectis wrote: »

Mind you, would you bet any money on the EU being around in 40 years time? I certainly wouldn't.

Nor would I.

My main concern with leaving the EU was the prospect of it continuing to exist and becoming more influential and uniform, with us on the outside. My preferred option was that we got opt-outs from ever closer union, the ability to choose not to enact anything daft they came up with in the future, and the influence to try and repeal some of the more absurd regulations already on the books - a freeze on the political stuff and British influence on the shape of the European economic situation.

Now that that's off the table (acknowledging that there is debate as to whether it was on the table to begin with), my preferred option is that it unravels as soon as possible, as this will mitigate most of the potential downsides of Brexit.

Rinoa

vivatifosi wrote: »

I voted remain and continue to think that this is a terrible situation. But I also wish the EU would wake up to its own intransigence and realise that there are more important things than Junker and his federalist pet project.

The irony is many in the EU now think the same.

French Prime Minister Manuel Valls said yesterday, ""We must put an end to this sad and finicky Europe. Too often it is intrusive on details and desperately absent on what's essential.We must break away from the dogma of ever more Europe. Europe must act not by principle but when it is useful and pertinent."

Similar thoughts are spreading throughout the EU. It's as if they've all just realised they've been going down the wrong road all these years.

Shame it took them so long.

mwpt

vivatifosi wrote: »

The irony is that a few common sense steps could have prevented all of this.

Stop any immigrant claiming benefits for their first five years here, just NHS access under reciprocal healthcare arrangement.

Our very own democratic process could have done this but the increasingly vicious left wing opposition parties would have turned it into a media frenzy and blocked it.