Labour want to ignore the will of the people...

Conrad

BobQ wrote: »

You seem to assume that a second referendum would be about whether to leave or remain? That decision is made. What needs resolution is the kind of relationship we have outside the EU with the EU.You seem to be fighting a battle you have already won. This is not about repeating the original questions.

We've had the referendum on the principle of whether to remain, the last thing business or the EU needs now is another round of referenda and uncertainty, what if the next referendum result is challenged? It's now over it Govt to establish terms of exit and I am confident a deal acceptable to the people will be forthcoming. The prospect of further referenda would weaken our hand in the eyes of the EU

kinger101

Conrad wrote: »

We've had the referendum on the principle of whether to remain, the last thing business or the EU needs now is another round of referenda and uncertainty, what if the next referendum result is challenged? It's now over it Govt to establish terms of exit and I am confident a deal acceptable to the people will be forthcoming. The prospect of further referenda would weaken our hand in the eyes of the EU

We have no hand. The EU's red lines were drawn when Cameron tried to negotiate before the referendum. The EU will put forward two options. One won't be acceptable to the majority of those who wanted Brexit as it will involve the free movement of people and the acceptance of EU law. The other is FO. Britain should focus on it's trading relationship with the rest of the world. I suspect this is what the government will now do, as protracted bickering with the heads of 27 EU countries will just be pouring salt into old wounds.

BobQ

Conrad wrote: »

We've had the referendum on the principle of whether to remain, the last thing business or the EU needs now is another round of referenda and uncertainty, what if the next referendum result is challenged? It's now over it Govt to establish terms of exit and I am confident a deal acceptable to the people will be forthcoming. The prospect of further referenda would weaken our hand in the eyes of the EU

We are talking of one referendum on the type of Brexit. I see no reason why it would be challenged.

Whatever deal or no-deal is reached, it too will be disputed. The Brexit solution we agree will not satisfy all who voted for Brexit and it is a fantasy to imply otherwise.

kinger101

BobQ wrote: »

We are talking of one referendum on the type of Brexit. I see no reason why it would be challenged.

Whatever deal or no-deal is reached, it too will be disputed. The Brexit solution we agree will not satisfy all who voted for Brexit and it is a fantasy to imply otherwise.

I see a number of problems with a referendum on deciding what flavour of Brexit we have.

Any government would be out of it's mind to offer this IMO. If we accept there will be some form of Brexit, the light option is;

(a) not acceptable to the majority of those that wanted Brexit; and
(b) regarded as vastly inferior to remaining as we'd just be a silent subservient satellite state (try saying that out loud after a few beers)

It's a lose/lose scenario. Just deciding fully out at least keeps some people happy.

mayonnaise

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Immigration was the key issue in deciding the vote. There's no middle ground as Cameron found out. Totally non-negotiable.

Immigration was not on the ballot paper.
We could leave the EU while maintaining free movement and the mandate of the referendum (if there ever was one, as it was merely advisory) would have been met.

mayonnaise

posh*spice wrote: »

Indeed.Buy British.

Yeah.
Stop shopping in Aldi and Lidl for starters and get back to Tesco and Sainsburys.

Thank You.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5486489

:rotfl:

CKhalvashi

kinger101 wrote: »

I see a number of problems with a referendum on deciding what flavour of Brexit we have.

Any government would be out of it's mind to offer this IMO. If we accept there will be some form of Brexit, the light option is;

(a) not acceptable to the majority of those that wanted Brexit; and
(b) regarded as vastly inferior to remaining as we'd just be a silent subservient satellite state (try saying that out loud after a few beers)

It's a lose/lose scenario. Just deciding fully out at least keeps some people happy.

However deciding fully out is possibly going to be complete economic suicide, which won't keep the majority happy.

I see an EEA-style deal, but with a limit on inbound freedom of movement for probably 7 years to be the best option, and the one that will suit the majority.

I also see those limits being based on demand, possibly in a similar way to Croatian nationals now.

We need to be looking at making business with the world (including the 450m people on our doorstep) as easy as possible, whilst attempting to commit to a fully free trade approach with the rest of the world.

Remember that for any form of agreements, we need those that voted Remain (for whom assumptions should be automatically made) plus around 5% of those that voted Leave to form a majority. This should (IMO) make most of the work relatively easy, and ensure that things in the long term aren't much different to now.

Thrugelmir

mayonnaise wrote: »

Immigration was not on the ballot paper.

Then perhaps you need to educate yourself as to why people felt the way they did and reacted accordingly.

mwpt

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Norway and the UK are so very different in many respects. Far too simplistic.

Here is an outrageous suggestion. Omit the word Norway from my post.

mwpt

Conrad wrote: »

We voted to leave the EU

Yes.

make our own laws, represent ourselves in trade deals and implement a border policy of our own making.

No. There was nothing about that on the ballot paper.