Will Brexit happen?

phillw

Rich2808 wrote: »

Of course if you don't implement the previous vote - what is the point one might argue of another vote? Do you just keep voting until your side wins?

Sure, that is democracy.

Leavers are demanding an early general election when the 2017 general election settled that for 5 years because apparently we voted wrong & also demanding the same votes in parliament until they get the right result.

You can't have it both ways.

We either put off a GE until 2022 and the conservatives stop repeatedly asking for parliament to vote on the same thing or we have another referendum.

ukcarper

phillw wrote: »

Sure, that is democracy.

Leavers are demanding an early general election when the 2017 general election settled that for 5 years because apparently we voted wrong & also demanding the same votes in parliament until they get the right result.

You can't have it both ways.

We either put off a GE until 2022 and the conservatives stop repeatedly asking for parliament to vote on the same thing or we have another referendum.

I heard a Labour politician say that if we are going to have a referendum it should be Boris's deal against an amended deal that includes staying in customs union. What do you think of that.

buglawton

This is Parliament's 'Hallowe'en Advent Calendar'. Except that every day till Hallowe'en brings not a treat but a Brexit-delaying trick!

Herzlos

Rich2808 wrote: »

Of course if you don't implement the previous vote - what is the point one might argue of another vote? Do you just keep voting until your side wins?

Some might suggest we have already voted to leave - so any further vote should be accept the deal or leave with no deal? Once we have left - after a suitable period (41 years perhaps) we can hold another once in a generation vote to go back.

Can you provide any justification for enacting the thing before asking the people if they actually want the thing?

Sailtheworld

ukcarper wrote: »

I heard a Labour politician say that if we are going to have a referendum it should be Boris's deal against an amended deal that includes staying in customs union. What do you think of that.

It's more than three years since the last referendum and a lot of water has passed under the bridge. If we've got to go through the ball ache of another referendum then we should really be finding out if people have changed their mind on the fundamental question of whether we should leave the EU.

Question 1 - Would you like the UK to leave the EU.

Question 2 - If the UK decides to leave the EU what type of deal would you prefer....

Aegis

Sailtheworld wrote: »

It's more than three years since the last referendum and a lot of water has passed under the bridge. If we've got to go through the ball ache of another referendum then we should really be finding out if people have changed their mind on the fundamental question of whether we should leave the EU.

Question 1 - Would you like the UK to leave the EU.

Question 2 - If the UK decides to leave the EU what type of deal would you prefer....

Or possibly:



Rank the following statements in order of preference:


1. The UK should remain in the EU. (expected impact on current GDP - Nil)

2. The UK should leave the EU on Theresa May's deal. (expected impact of X%)

3. The UK should leave the EU on Boris Johnson's deal. (expected impact of Y%)

4. The UK should leave the EU without a deal. (expected impact of Z%).
5. The UK should cancel article 50 and remain in the EU, but should continue to put together proposals for leaving which can be put to the people no less frequently than every two years. (impact depends on eventual deal)



Impact assessments provided by the ONS.




Once you have the preferences, you can run a single transferrable vote to eliminate the least popular outcome at each stage to work out the position which best represents a compromise. This would ensure that if you ended with a close tie between No Deal and Remain, you'd see where the votes from options 2, 3 and 5 went if their options were eliminated. There might still be a close run, but at least politicians would then be ablle to actually state what the public want rather than merely assuming it.

phillw

Aegis wrote: »

but should continue to put together proposals for leaving which can be put to the people no less frequently than every two years. (impact depends on eventual deal)

Boris would love that, he could get people to vote for the same proposal every day.

Eventually he'd get a win by default.

phillw

Herzlos wrote: »

Can you provide any justification for enacting the thing before asking the people if they actually want the thing?

It's because it sounded good when the guy down the pub said it.

Herzlos

phillw wrote: »

It's because it sounded good when the guy down the pub said it.

I think that's it, I've never actually had an answer. It just doesn't make sense*.


Take ordering food:

You're at a table of 10, 6 people wanted a giant seafood group platter, 4 didn't. (Clear) majority wins). Chef comes back and says half the seafood is off. Common sense would dictate that at that point the waiter or table can ask the table to confirm what they want. Brexiteer logic is that they need to have the off seafood on the table (I'm not sure if they need to eat it or not) before considering ordering something else.


If it's reasonable to confirm doing the thing before actually doing the thing when it comes to dinner, why is it to preposterous to do it with something that irreparably change our relationship with the world?
Honestly the only answer I keep coming back to is "Because if we ask the people again they might remain" which is equally bizarre. If you have another referendum and people vote to Remain, then the will of the people is obviously now to remain. If it was a Leave, then you've cemented the argument to leave and Parliament can get on with it (ideally with a kind of Leave specified as suggested by JRM).


The only risk is a tiny majority either way, which will cause things to rumble on for another 40 years, but I'm pretty sure that could be avoided by using an STV system.


*It reminds me of my drunken friends transparent stalling/negotiating tactic of "Ok, lets go after I have another beer" and he then returns with 2 "Oh, yeah, I'll need to finish both of them" or "Let's go into that club for 5 minutes and see what it's like" followed by "Well, we're here now, may as well stay".

Takedap

Now looks like Boris would rather cancel the bill rather than let people read it before they decide.