-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...
- Thread starter ainsworth74
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
EM2
Established Member
So as it stands, there is no majority in Parliament for
- no deal
- the PM's deal
- hypothetical Labour renegotiated deal
- change to Article 50 timetable
- no confidence vote in government and ensuing general election
- Norway
- second referendum/'People's Vote'
Esker-pades
Established Member
So, we have to hope that no deal preparations are better than they appear to be in public. Fun(!)
Intercity 225
Member
- Joined
- 2 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 329
It’s very clear that the country is completely gridlocked when it comes to Brexit both in Parliament and in the wider public. It just goes to show why referendums are a terrible mechanism of government, they’re always hugely divisive, the campaigns are packed full of misinformation and at the end of it all no specific individual or party is officially responsible for the outcome.
Once this whole sorry saga is over I hope we never have a referendum on anything ever again, if Brexit ends up being cancelled then a UKIP style party should have to win a majority in a General Election in order to leave the European Union... and on the flip side if we do end up leaving then a Pro-European party should also have to win a General Election if they want to take us back in.
All that being said, because we’ve already had a referendum to get us into this mess and because the existing MPs of both major parties are hopelessly split themselves having another referendum is possibly the only way forward if the Withdrawal Agreement is voted down by Parliament next week (a highly likely scenario).
Now, what I'm going to outline next I don't think will actually happen BUT it'd be great to hear views of both Pro-Europeans and Brexiters because I think this is a solution that achieves all of these:
Process
1. The UK leaves the EU as scheduled on 29 March 2019 and we enter a transition period* - the original 2016 referendum has now been honoured.
*I’m fully aware that the transition period is only officially set to come into force as part of the wider Withdrawal Agreement but being realistic with 79 days to go a transition period of some sort is a certainty... there will be chaos on both sides of the channel otherwise.
2. We agree to hold another referendum in June 2020, with a question along the lines of the following:
On 29 March 2019 the United Kingdom left the European Union and entered a transition period. When the transition period expires on 31 December 2020 should the United Kingdom?
3. Following the referendum we'd then have around six months to prepare for whatever decision the electorate has taken.
Rationale
The majority of leading leavers are now pushing for a hard-Brexit but it's impossible to establish whether all of the 17,410,742 who voted to leave in 2016 wanted that flavour of Brexit because of the variety of options outlined by different leading Brexiters during the campaign and the broad brush question on the ballot paper. This would confirm it one way or another.
On the flip side, if we were to rejoin the EU it wouldn't be on our existing terms as we'd no longer have a rebate and we'd need to commit to joining both the Euro and Schengen. This means that Pro-Europeans would need to convince the electorate that "more" Europe than we have under our current terms is a good idea. As such, this new referendum couldn't be considered a "rerun" of the one in 2016.
The campaigns would run from March 2019 to June 2020 - fifteen months. This provides ample time and allows us to have intelligent, reasoned, debate between both camps.
Some major challenges both sides would face in the debate
WTO supporters would have to try and:
EU supporters would have to try and:
Whatever the outcome, the end result would be truly transformative for our country and very different to the status quo.
Thoughts?
Once this whole sorry saga is over I hope we never have a referendum on anything ever again, if Brexit ends up being cancelled then a UKIP style party should have to win a majority in a General Election in order to leave the European Union... and on the flip side if we do end up leaving then a Pro-European party should also have to win a General Election if they want to take us back in.
All that being said, because we’ve already had a referendum to get us into this mess and because the existing MPs of both major parties are hopelessly split themselves having another referendum is possibly the only way forward if the Withdrawal Agreement is voted down by Parliament next week (a highly likely scenario).
Now, what I'm going to outline next I don't think will actually happen BUT it'd be great to hear views of both Pro-Europeans and Brexiters because I think this is a solution that achieves all of these:
- Honours the original 2016 referendum result
- Allows the public the chance to vote again on the UK's position in Europe but without "rerunning" the original debate
- Provides two distinct alternative options for the UK - both hugely transformative
- Ends with a clear mandate to proceed
Process
1. The UK leaves the EU as scheduled on 29 March 2019 and we enter a transition period* - the original 2016 referendum has now been honoured.
*I’m fully aware that the transition period is only officially set to come into force as part of the wider Withdrawal Agreement but being realistic with 79 days to go a transition period of some sort is a certainty... there will be chaos on both sides of the channel otherwise.
2. We agree to hold another referendum in June 2020, with a question along the lines of the following:
On 29 March 2019 the United Kingdom left the European Union and entered a transition period. When the transition period expires on 31 December 2020 should the United Kingdom?
- Move onto World Trade Organisation rules
- Rejoin the European Union
3. Following the referendum we'd then have around six months to prepare for whatever decision the electorate has taken.
Rationale
The majority of leading leavers are now pushing for a hard-Brexit but it's impossible to establish whether all of the 17,410,742 who voted to leave in 2016 wanted that flavour of Brexit because of the variety of options outlined by different leading Brexiters during the campaign and the broad brush question on the ballot paper. This would confirm it one way or another.
On the flip side, if we were to rejoin the EU it wouldn't be on our existing terms as we'd no longer have a rebate and we'd need to commit to joining both the Euro and Schengen. This means that Pro-Europeans would need to convince the electorate that "more" Europe than we have under our current terms is a good idea. As such, this new referendum couldn't be considered a "rerun" of the one in 2016.
The campaigns would run from March 2019 to June 2020 - fifteen months. This provides ample time and allows us to have intelligent, reasoned, debate between both camps.
Some major challenges both sides would face in the debate
WTO supporters would have to try and:
- Explain to the public why the negative impact on the economy is worthwhile and deal with the backlash from businesses who threaten to close down/cut staff in the UK
- Probably admit that a hard border in Ireland is unavoidable and that our ports/surrounding areas on the south coast of England are going to have to undergo major infrastructure changes... with gridlock in the meantime
- Quickly line up alternative trade arrangements with other countries on better terms than we have through being a member of the EU... no easy feat!
EU supporters would have to try and:
- Explain to the public why we'd need to join the Euro and Schengen (as new members we'd be obligated to)
- Convince the electorate that becoming more integrated with the EU than we currently are is a good idea
- Show that the economic benefits we get from being a member of the EU far outweigh the membership costs
Whatever the outcome, the end result would be truly transformative for our country and very different to the status quo.
Thoughts?
Last edited:
trash80
Established Member
"This provides ample time and allows us to have intelligent, reasoned, debate between both camps."
Its not going to happen though is it?
Fifteen more months of this nightmare is going to be a tough sell to the GBP.
Its not going to happen though is it?
Fifteen more months of this nightmare is going to be a tough sell to the GBP.
A very interesting idea for a way through the incredible mess the politicians have got us into.
If we leave as scheduled on 29th March, haven't we legally left, so that we shall have lost the option to resume membership on the terms we have now? Presumably we could only attempt to go back in at the end of the transition period by way of another referendum if all 27 members of the EU were willing to accept a new application from us (from their side) and if we were willing to sign up to Schengen and the Euro (from our side, as things now required of prospective new members). We must have managed to lose a huge amount of good will with the 27 througb the bungled negotiations and hostile language of the last two-and-a-half hears (and more), so how generous might they feel inclined to be?
nlogax
Established Member
No. No it is not.
We've been attempting "intelligent, reasoned debate" for 2 and a half years already, and look where we are....
Howardh
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2011
- Messages
- 8,155
Which will be very useful when lorries are directed to the Unicorn Ferry @ Ramsgate!!
Intercity 225
Member
- Joined
- 2 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 329
Thank you
Yes that's correct, we'd be rejoining as a new member with everything that entails including the Euro and Schengen. The benefits these bring would need to be explained to the wider electorate by Pro-Europeans in order to win the referendum, not an easy task with public opinion as it stands. It does however make this second referendum significantly different to the first as the Pro-European campaign would need to be based on why further European integration is good for the UK rather than simply remaining on our current terms.
You're also right that all 27 EU members would need to accept our application but I can't foresee this being a major problem. Our fellow members don't want us to leave and would love us to return to the fold.
These are fair points, both the Leave and Remain campaigns in 2016 were diabolical and have directly contributed to the position we find ourselves in. The reasons why have already been covered to death so I'm not going to expand much further but in a nutshell in 2016:
- Leave was sold as a concept with no two leading advocates having exactly the same view of what Brexit should ultimately result in... as such it's impossible that electors knew exactly what they were getting at the end of the process.
- Remain was sold as "project fear" with silly talk of an emergency budget following a leave vote and the Pro-EU benefits barely featured in the debate... scare tactics that failed miserably.
As it stands right now we're in an echo-chamber and have been since February 2016 when the referendum was first announced. This is set to continue for at least another fifteen months Brexit or No-Brexit so I'd suggest it's better to solidify the debate in this fashion rather than to continue to argue around two different "concepts" indefinitely.
nlogax
Established Member
Fgs..really. Nigel? Is that you?
EM2
Established Member
Again, searching the BBC News website brings up no results, so I'm saying that's a fib.
Basher
Member
- Joined
- 6 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 332
No just means your poor at searching or it has been removed from the bbc site. I don't tell fibs, I say it straight as I see it.
Esker-pades
Established Member
The onus is on you to prove that it is true. Please provide a link to a media source (not Breitbart). Otherwise, the conclusion has to be that it isn't true.
Basher
Member
- Joined
- 6 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 332
I'm not here to prove anything for you, may be you should prove you know how to search on Google, and other search engines.
Esker-pades
Established Member
Then you have entirely missed the point of a discussion.
News of such a serious assault, on a key public figure in the Brexit ambit, supposedly reported at the time, doesn't just disappear.
Other less serious incidents of attacks on dear Nige - egging his car, verbal abuse, a gentle tap on his noggin with a placard - have all been reported widely. But no reports anywhere of the dispicable act of being spat on.
It's not a fib. It's a lie. Didn't happen.
Meanwhile the more rabid of Tory MPs are foaming at the mouth because the Speaker of the House of Commons has dared to protect the primacy of Parliament against being steamrollered by government.
Like a football team unhappy with a result they have taken to blaming the referee. The Brexit mess is entirely of the making of the Tories. That things are not going their way is their fault alone. Not Labour's, not the Speaker's.
Other less serious incidents of attacks on dear Nige - egging his car, verbal abuse, a gentle tap on his noggin with a placard - have all been reported widely. But no reports anywhere of the dispicable act of being spat on.
It's not a fib. It's a lie. Didn't happen.
Meanwhile the more rabid of Tory MPs are foaming at the mouth because the Speaker of the House of Commons has dared to protect the primacy of Parliament against being steamrollered by government.
Like a football team unhappy with a result they have taken to blaming the referee. The Brexit mess is entirely of the making of the Tories. That things are not going their way is their fault alone. Not Labour's, not the Speaker's.
Bloody hell. Do you sing God save the queen before getting into bed each night??
You also are talking about the man with a german passport and a (amittidly failed) merchant banker who is obsessed with trump and Russia. A real role model.
You need to back it up otherwise I call bs.
EM2
Established Member
Maybe I should:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=farage+spat&atb=v111-6_g&ia=web
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=farage+spit&atb=v111-6_g&ia=web
https://www.google.co.uk/search?sou...0....1..gws-wiz.......0j0i10j0i13.y_xmdvSXpWk
https://www.google.co.uk/search?ei=....147.313.2j1......0....1..gws-wiz.OmBn6d6N6bs
https://uk.search.yahoo.com/search;...sb-top-uk.search&p=farage+spat&fr=sfp&iscqry=
https://uk.search.yahoo.com/search;...xNTQ3MDU3NzYw?p=farage+spit&fr2=sb-top&fr=sfp
https://www.bing.com/search?q=Farag...-11&sk=&cvid=87510492F4744107A5186B7195626345
https://www.bing.com/search?q=Farag...-11&sk=&cvid=BEE6A8894FD344E5BBD5E43FB15FCC8A
So that's the results pages from four different search engines, each having been used to search for 'farage spat' and 'farage spit'.
See if you can find a link anywhere in there that shows the story that you say happened.
Interesting, isn't it, how all the Brexiteers wanted to Bring back Control and re-gain sovereignty for the Westminster parliament. It became very clear today that they are all no different from May herself. They don't want the soverignty of the parliament elected by the people but the sovereignty of the queen's ministers forming an executive to which there is no real check. Privy Council, Star Chamber, Henry VIII powers — the English feudal constitution in all its glory, happily backed by the Brexiteers against all forms of modern democracy as represented, for example, by genuinely democratic elections to the European parliament, a Europe where all the larger states except this one have genuine regional authorities with real powers, etc.
Very well put. Both 'Leave' and 'Remain' can have a number of permutations and were not at all defined (Remain as-is - ny interpretation, Remain but renegotiate, Remain with Schengen/Euro, etc...)
Where I think the Remain campaign faultered was:
-Having to try and sell the status quo, which is almost always never "sexy" compared to 'The Grass is Greener'
-Whilst there are clearly huge economic/trade benefits being in the EU, saying the UK benefits by £x bn per year is meaningless to Joe Bloggs in the street, especially when its percieved that *other* people are the beneficiaries of this (which I can completely empathise with - this was at a time when, for example, London house prices were skyrocketing off the affordability scale)
-It struggled to counter what I think was one of the main drivers of the Leave vote - immigration concerns. A load of posters with the likes of 'Here's Mr X from Germany. He works in the NHS thanks to the EU. He saved 4 lives this month' would have done the trick and given a *very* different slant on the immigration debate than what I feel was mainly irrational emotion.
All easy to say with hindsight.
Fun listening to farage loosing his s#it on. Lbc complaining about parliament enforcing parlementy sovigenerty over the wishes of the pm as he doesn't like what parliament had decided to do. I seem to recall this was all about give back control to parliament... Or is it only when it is in the direction they want.
It's another example of how parliament has always been sovergen despite what others may think.
It's another example of how parliament has always been sovergen despite what others may think.
nlogax
Established Member
I don't know that it's fun. The man continues to bathe in a soup of his own stupidity and prejudice which has helped utterly divide the country, and after all that still feels the need to fill the airwaves with the resulting stench. Oh well. I guess LBC love the ad revenue.
AlterEgo
Veteran Member
Yeah, we're all having a look and none of us can find any evidence to back up your false claim.
- Status