Brexit - the next steps

[Udayana]

All leavers knew exactly what they were voting for - just failed to check that the other leavers had the same destination in mind.

Theresa May came to a clear conclusion: "Leave means Leave" - then the hard line leavers failed to vote to leave when given the chance.

[ProfessorDavey]

All leavers knew exactly what they were voting for - just failed to check that the other leavers had the same destination in mind.

Indeed.

Remember the referendum on the voting system, which asked whether we wanted to continue to use the first past the post voting system or use the alternative voting system instead. In that case the non status quo option was clear. For brexit it wasn't and the equivalent would have been asking would have been asking whether we wanted to continue to use first past the post or to use a different method to select MPs, but without being clear what that different method would be.

And to continue with the analogy, image if the referendum campaign on that non defined new way of selecting MPs promised that it would make everyone's vote count, would retain link with MP, would produce strong and stable government etc, but with our defining what that method would be. And despite that 3 years after the vote we get a game of rock, paper and scissors between the Queen and the Archbishop of Canterbury as the proposed method (qv no deal) in other words something that would be disastrous and that no one suggested as an option in the campaign.

[ippy]

"But we didn’t vote to leave without a deal. That wasn’t the message of the campaign I helped lead. During that campaign, we said we should do a deal with the EU and be part of the network of free trade deals that covers all Europe, from Iceland to Turkey.

Leaving without a deal ... would not honour that commitment."

-- Michael Gove (source)

Are you referring to the same referendum I'm writing about the one here in the UK, the June 2016 referendum only the voting slip I put my cross on was for leave or remain only?

Regards, ippy.

[Stranger]

Are you referring to the same referendum I'm writing about the one here in the UK, the June 2016 referendum only the voting slip I put my cross on was for leave or remain only?

I believe that is the one Michael Gove was referring to, yes. There are good reasons why that was not about no-deal that have already been stated many times here (in exactly the same way that your coherent reasons for wanting to leave, haven't) and I was just pointing out that Gove (one of the people who led the leave campaign, as I'm sure you recall) seemed to agree just a few months ago.

Unless you have an argument that pretty much everybody who put their mark in the leave box did so on the basis, not of what they were told by the leave campaign, but on the basis of "do this at any and every cost to me and mine", then you can't claim it was a vote for no-deal.

[ippy]

I believe that is the one Michael Gove was referring to, yes. There are good reasons why that was not about no-deal that have already been stated many times here (in exactly the same way that your coherent reasons for wanting to leave, haven't) and I was just pointing out that Gove (one of the people who led the leave campaign, as I'm sure you recall) seemed to agree just a few months ago.

Unless you have an argument that pretty much everybody who put their mark in the leave box did so on the basis, not of what they were told by the leave campaign, but on the basis of "do this at any and every cost to me and mine", then you can't claim it was a vote for no-deal.

I've been against the idea of being in the EU as well as being against being in the EEC, yes even as far back as the EEC days, the very idea of ever closer union with the EU something we didn't even get a vote about is certainly something that is a complete anathema to me and obviously to the majority of people that took the most welcome opportunity to vote against being in the EU either.

It was very much a very long term held opinion of mine that this organisation wasn't the best deal for us here in the UK and I very much doubt I was the only one to find how offensive this EU was especially that phrase 'ever closer union', F O.

Regards, ippy.

[jeremyp]

As long as he gets us what was voted for, out of the EU, I couldn't give a monkeys, I'm hoping he makes a good job of that, we'll see so roll on the 31st.

Regards, ippy.

What do you think would be voted for in 2020?

[Stranger]

I've been against the idea of being in the EU as well as being against being in the EEC, yes even as far back as the EEC days, the very idea of ever closer union with the EU something we didn't even get a vote about is certainly something that is a complete anathema to me and obviously to the majority of people that took the most welcome opportunity to vote against being in the EU either.

It was very much a very long term held opinion of mine that this organisation wasn't the best deal for us here in the UK and I very much doubt I was the only one to find how offensive this EU was especially that phrase 'ever closer union', F O.

• It's actually very far from obvious that the majority who voted leave felt the same as you (rather than being persuaded by the campaign of the fictitious advantages of leaving) - where is your evidence?
  
  
• Even if a majority did, a minority who didn't (and believed the lies) could esily have made the difference.
  
  
• You have still not given any practical reason for your view and why it is so important to you that you don't seem to care how many people get hurt along the way.
  
  
• Cameron got an opt-out from "ever closer union".

[ProfessorDavey]

• It's actually very far from obvious that the majority who voted leave felt the same as you (rather than being persuaded by the campaign of the fictitious advantages of leaving) - where is your evidence?
  
  

He doesn't have any.

Actually from the post-referendum analysis of reasons for voting leave there were 2 recurring themes. The first being a nebulous issue with immigration, which went far beyond immigration from the EU itself (which is of course the only thing that is actually relevant to the referendum). The second being, to paraphrase, the view that we joined a common market and this has evolved into the EU - now that implies that the original 1973 common market was OK but the current EU isn't. Neither view aligns with Ippy's.[/list]

[ippy]

What do you think would be voted for in 2020?

The next election, if it isn't anything else it'll certainly be interesting jp.

Regards, ippy.

[ippy]

• It's actually very far from obvious that the majority who voted leave felt the same as you (rather than being persuaded by the campaign of the fictitious advantages of leaving) - where is your evidence?
  
  
• Even if a majority did, a minority who didn't (and believed the lies) could esily have made the difference.
  
  
• You have still not given any practical reason for your view and why it is so important to you that you don't seem to care how many people get hurt along the way.
  
  
• Cameron got an opt-out from "ever closer union".

I have pointed out why I haven't gone into setting up a clay pidgin shoot for remainers enough times.

The referendum was for leave or remain, you and your remaining compatriots are welcome to spend as much time as you like moaning amongst yourselves about how remain managed to loose and as far as I'm concerned the views of remainers are of no interest to me because all of your remain moans should have became irrelevant, surplus to requirements the moment the figures were added up on the day after the referendum. 

At the moment until we leave if there's any voting to be done my vote goes wherever I think it's the most likely place or person that'll comply with the referendum vote and completely remove the UK from the EU, but once we have left the EU it doesn't necessarily mean I'll be voting for the same people or person again.

In normal times, whatever's normal, I'm a no one particular party supporter there's very little I have in common with any single political party we have on offer here in the UK. 

Regards, ippy.

[jeremyp]

I have pointed out why I haven't gone into setting up a clay pidgin shoot for remainers enough times.

We know why. It's because you have nothing except your fear of foreigners. You won't tell us how you're going to benefit because you know you won't.

the views of remainers are of no interest to me

That's unfortunate because it is looking very much like they are right.

[Christine]

I have pointed out why I haven't gone into setting up a clay pidgin shoot for remainers enough times.

It's as if you know that whatever reasons you do have will be so easily shown to be irrational and based in misinformation you're scared of presenting them.

Eerily reminiscent of "I've got loads of evidence for God, but you wouldn't understand it, so I'm keeping it to myself". 

We have a government with no majority looking for a way to bypass the law and raising the spectre of violence in the streets if they don't get their way.  And you're worried about an "ever closer union" with friendly democratic states which we are formally NOT committed to? 

I sometimes wish I believed in a benevolent god, at least I'd be able to comfort myself asking it to help us.

[Gordon]

The referendum was for leave or remain, you and your remaining compatriots are welcome to spend as much time as you like moaning amongst yourselves about how remain managed to loose and as far as I'm concerned the views of remainers are of no interest to me because all of your remain moans should have became irrelevant, surplus to requirements the moment the figures were added up on the day after the referendum.

The irony being that the views of remainers are based on the known and assessed likely consequences of leaving the EU, and especially if that is on a no-deal basis, and these will quickly become increasingly relevant and very obvious (even to you) should the shit ever hit the fan on Halloween - such as there being no surpluses of anything, but shortages instead, and everything will cost more.

Hopefully though Brexit will be stopped by hook or by crook so that the rest of us aren't dragged down by this suicidal Tory-inspired idiocy.

[Roses]

The irony being that the views of remainers are based on the known and assessed likely consequences of leaving the EU, and especially if that is on a no-deal basis, and these will quickly become increasingly relevant and very obvious (even to you) should the shit ever hit the fan on Halloween - such as there being no surpluses of anything, but shortages instead, and everything will cost more.

Hopefully though Brexit will be stopped by hook or by crook so that the rest of us aren't dragged down by this suicidal Tory-inspired idiocy.

Hear! Hear!

[Stranger]

The referendum was for leave or remain, you and your remaining compatriots are welcome to spend as much time as you like moaning amongst yourselves about how remain managed to loose and as far as I'm concerned the views of remainers are of no interest to me because all of your remain moans should have became irrelevant, surplus to requirements the moment the figures were added up on the day after the referendum. 

So once again, you are running away from the points that have been raised. And by the way, Michael Gove (who I quoted about the vote not being for no-deal) is not a remainer.

At the moment until we leave if there's any voting to be done my vote goes wherever I think it's the most likely place or person that'll comply with the referendum vote and completely remove the UK from the EU, but once we have left the EU it doesn't necessarily mean I'll be voting for the same people or person again.

And once again (again) you don't seem to care about the consequences for anybody just so long as you get some warm fuzzy feeling that EU courts don't have any say and there no "ever closer union" that we were opted out of anyway.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Heard something on Radio 4 earlier that I'd forgotten. When he announced that the tories would promise a referendum, what Cameron actually said was that they'd give the public a choice between leaving and the deal he'd just negotiated. Somehow that critical last bit didn't make it to the actual question (which has caused huge problems because the proponents of any of the various versions of leave all claim now, "and that's what 17.4m people voted for" when clearly all of them could have done no such thing), but it's interesting that that's what he said people would vote on nonetheless.

     

[Nearly Sane]

The latest idea on the border in Ireland looks like many of the old rejected ideas with a new term applied to make it look different. Struggling to avoid thinking that it is merely a piece of handwaving which the EU will reject which will allow the govt to postpone, and have an election on the nasty EU.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49881345

[jeremyp]

And there we have it.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49890199

Boris Johnson admits there will be a hard border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. Note that he claims it is not a hard border, but if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

[ProfessorDavey]

And there we have it.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49890199

Boris Johnson admits there will be a hard border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. Note that he claims it is not a hard border, but if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

And regardless of what happens with brexit this will simply not be allowed under the international legal obligations of the Good Friday Agreement.

So if there is a no deal brexit the UK and RofI will be required rapidly under their international obligations to put in place a solution that returns to a position of no hard border. And the only thing that could be done immediately would be to, in effect, trigger the backstop. So rather than eliminate the back stop a no deal brexit will ensure it has to be immediately implemented. 

[jeremyp]

And regardless of what happens with brexit this will simply not be allowed under the international legal obligations of the Good Friday Agreement.

I don't think Boris Johnson gives a flying fuck about the GFA. It will be broken.

[ProfessorDavey]

I don't think Boris Johnson gives a flying fuck about the GFA. It will be broken.

I don't think it will as it will be reneging on international legal obligations and the international community will take an extremely dim view, with serious implications on our ability to gain influence and deals abroad. Most notably, were we to renege on GFA agreement we can kiss goodbye any chance of a deal etc with the US.

[jeremyp]

I don't think it will as it will be reneging on international legal obligations and the international community will take an extremely dim view, with serious implications on our ability to gain influence and deals abroad.

I don't think the leading Bexiteers care about that.

Most notably, were we to renege on GFA agreement we can kiss goodbye any chance of a deal etc with the US.

Yep.

Mind you, it's clear that the USA can't be trusted to honour their obligations in international deals either.

[Udayana]

https://inews.co.uk/news/britain-brexit-europe-boris-johnson-paid-budget-150m-week-ons-638866

Britain’s contribution to the EU budget was £150m a week, significantly lower than the £350m cited by pro-Brexit campaigners in the 2016 referendum campaign, according to the Office of National Statistics.

Figures published yesterday showed that the UK’s net outgoings to Brussels were as low as £7.8bn a year on average over the past five years, once the rebate and other payments were taken into account.

[Udayana]

And regardless of what happens with brexit this will simply not be allowed under the international legal obligations of the Good Friday Agreement.

So if there is a no deal brexit the UK and RofI will be required rapidly under their international obligations to put in place a solution that returns to a position of no hard border. And the only thing that could be done immediately would be to, in effect, trigger the backstop. So rather than eliminate the back stop a no deal brexit will ensure it has to be immediately implemented.

In the event of a no-deal wouldn't the backstop implemented be between the island of Ireland and the GB rather than the UK and RoI?

Even if Ireland accepted a version of the alternative arrangements proposed by BJ (assuming this might happen) so that we left with a deal , those arrangements are likely to drift in the same direction imo.

[ippy]

We know why. It's because you have nothing except your fear of foreigners. You won't tell us how you're going to benefit because you know you won't.
That's unfortunate because it is looking very much like they are right.

Where I wrote: 'the views of remainers are of no interest to me', and a part of your reply says, 'We know why. It's because you have nothing except your fear of foreigners. You won't tell us how you're going to benefit because you know you won't'.

Can't think of where I have said or implied that I've got some fear of foreigners, I have said something like having to many immigrants come crashing over a cliff here into the UK in such vast apparently uncontrolled numbers isn't that desirable.
===

I then went on to say: 'the views of remainers are of no interest to me', to which your response was: 'That's unfortunate because it is looking very much like they are right; well again we could be going around in circles on that one, great, fine you go ahead, just don't involve me.

Regards, ippy.