If there is a second referendum ...

kabayiri

As I see it.

The flaw with the last referendum was that one of the options left the government in a completely unprepared position. They obviously expected Remain to win the day.

The solution to this seems to be offering another referendum (sorry 'People's vote!) with an option for which the government are in a completely unprepared position ....

....only that on this occasion, the clock is approaching 5 Rels and the daleks are pushing the bomb over the mine shaft.

kabayiri

Tromking wrote: »

I’m leaning toward not taking part in any new referendum should it come to pass, engaging in it would only seek to delegitimise the original vote in my opinion.

Why pass up on the opportunity for some custom artwork?

They have to count spoilt ballot papers.

I'm going to do my bit by telling all millennials that they can forego the pesky polling booths by tweeting "Remain" to @StayAndKeepIbeefaHolsCheap. It must be valid...coz it's soshal meedja innit.

THE_Terry_Urr

Filo25 wrote: »

We can just leave it is just that the vast majority of people who know anything about the economy and trade agree it would be a major hit to the UK economy, that isn't some kind of EU punishment beating, just how the economy and trade works.

A massive increase to barriers to trade with our biggest trading partner isn't going to be good for either party. and no obviously even an FTA isn't going to remotely replace all the benefits of our current trading position.

There is a reason that Thatcher viewed the UK pushing the EU's single market as one of her proudest achievements and it's not because she was a committed Europhile...

You're just falling for the propaganda and most of us realise that so far, those with a pro-EU agenda for whatever reason have done little else but lie and deceive.
Who is to say that just because this is what some people think that it will turn out to be true? If they are so good at looking into the future they should all be rich enough & powerful enough not to need to wag fingers at others, surely?

There could well be some changes, some rebalancing but all trade and dealings with the EU are not going to stop at 11:00p.m. on March 29th. New barriers are certainly not going to be good for either part but the UK would have one major advantage; it would not be hamstrung by EU rules. So while the EU as always would spend years bickering about what they will do about their £60 billion/year trade surplus with the UK disappearing the UK could have any problems solved and new sources & agreements organised very quickly. The EU aren't known for their speed in decision-making; that's just how the EU are.
A lumbering, indecisive behemoth.

Times have changed greatly since the days of Thatcher. We have the internet now & so instant access to many things which were not available in the Thatcher years. Global trade has also evolved greatly since then; could you buy for example Kenyan green beans in the winters of the 80's? No you could not, so Thatchers views may well have been as different today as the times we live in.

How sad it is that those at odds with a democratically-made decision must use subterfuge, both in forums and elsewhere. Especially when so many of their lies have already been exposed.

THE_Terry_Urr

Filo25 wrote: »

Firstly if the will of the people is to leave the EU, I have no idea why any Leave supporter is afraid of a ref to reiterate,surely it would put the question to bed for years (and quite possibly get a harder Brexit than Parliament is ever likely to vote for)?

There's no fear, we had a vote. You just want the EU preferred option of trying again and again and possibly again until the answer comes that you want. That is not on.

Filo25 wrote: »

Secondly it wouldn't be a re-run of the first referendum, it would actually have specific clear guidance to government as to exactly what voters wanted to happen, not much chance of Parliament being able to ignore that, nobody could say that about the first ref.

Oh come on, you couldn't get much clearer than "in" or "out".
Everybody knows what the EU is. It's all online & easy to find, so no excuses about "but they didn't know...". All that's being advocated is a rerun because some don't want to leave, nothing more.

Filo25 wrote: »

Parliament could decide to enact "Norway+" tomorrow (leaving us in both SM + CU) and that would still be delivering on the promise to Leave the EU, not that I would expect many Leavers to be happy about it.

Ah, back to this old argument again even if it has been done to death.
Norway pay for the privilege of access; that is not "leaving the EU". Or will the EU instead pay the UK for access to our market since they have a £60 billion surplus? Your dreaded levers would probably be happier with that.
Norway must also abide by EU single market rules; that is not "leaving the EU".

Parliament is running out of time to decide much else than accept the deal or refuse it. There's an interesting thread called "Brexit and everyday life" in the "Marriage, Relationships & Families" subforum where the OP is a Houses Of Parliament official representative. You might like to have a look at the timetable posted there.
Realistically and despite all the media hype the only options are to accept the deal or to leave with no deal.

Herzlos

Every Leaver seems to have a different idea of what "Leave the EU" actually means. Norway, being in the EEA and not the EU would count as leaving. As would leaving but remaining in the CU and SM, and following all their rules.


That's why we need to establish what the question actually means.

THE_Terry_Urr wrote: »

There's no fear, we had a vote. You just want the EU preferred option of trying again and again and possibly again until the answer comes that you want. That is not on.

The EU has never actually done that though, and if you're so sure that the public still want to leave this would be the perfect opportunity to shut up all those traitorous remainers. So what's the problem?


Leaving the 'will they / won't they' aside (and May has denied it so it's almost certain, I think the aim would be to do it before the end of March. It shouldn't take too long to set up, and a short campaign on both sides (with some extra scrutiny that Leave is following the rules) should be sufficient.


If Mays deal is shot down next week, then we could comfortably hold a referendum at the end of February and have a month to decide what to do with the result.

Thrugelmir

Filo25 wrote: »

Parliament could decide to enact "Norway+" tomorrow (leaving us in both SM + CU) and that would still be delivering on the promise to Leave the EU, not that I would expect many Leavers to be happy about it.

Still leaves the UK with the 4 freedoms. Interesting that immigration isn't being discussed any longer just trade. Yet the shortage of houses, nurses, police and teachers (as examples) grows ever longer. Money alone isn't the answer either. Requires long term planning. Speed of growth of population is unmanageable.

Herzlos

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Still leaves the UK with the 4 freedoms.

But the 4 freedoms weren't on the ballot.

Interesting that immigration isn't being discussed any longer just trade.

I'm sure I'd seen some surveys showing that a majority of people weren't willing to harm the economy to reduce migration, but I doubt I could find it again. I think we've moved on to the point where the economy is much more important that immigration.

Yet the shortage of houses, nurses, police and teachers (as examples) grows ever longer. Money alone isn't the answer either. Requires long term planning. Speed of growth of population is unmanageable.

It's absolutely manageable, if you've got competent planners doing the planning. Unfortunately we don't.

LHW99

Every Leaver seems to have a different idea of what "Leave the EU" actually means. Norway, being in the EEA and not the EU would count as leaving. As would leaving but remaining in the CU and SM, and following all their rules.


That's why we need to establish what the question actually means.

See p.8
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/515068/why-the-government-believes-that-voting-to-remain-in-the-european-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk.pdf

Lungboy

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Interesting that immigration isn't being discussed any longer just trade.

Indeed, Javid was supposed to lay out the government's plan for post-Brexit immigration today but he bottled it , so the vote next week will be taken with no idea on what the policy will be. That's insane for something that was such a huge part of the reason so many voted to leave.

sevenhills

LHW99 wrote: »

Heavven help us all - I doubt it will reduce any of the current splits in the country as I can't see a large majority for a win however it goes.
Shall we have No Deal / No Brexit - but a 60% vote for one option before it can be implemented ....... as I believe some thought it should have been last time?

The options should should be, leave, remain and the TM deal. The referendum would be not be first passed the post, but voters should state their first, second and third preference.


I just hope thats not too complicated