MidlandsChap
Member
- Joined
- 15 Apr 2018
- Messages
- 194
Agreed, to some people it means remain.
-
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
Agreed, to some people it means remain.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
BananaRepublic
Member
- Joined
- 9 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 777
Had parliament voted for the May/EU deal tonight, we would have been leaving in 16 days, with a transition period.
However, tonight’s status is, we are leaving without a deal.
If tomorrow’s vote rejects leaving without a deal, it doesn’ change the status, which remains the same, we are leaving without a deal, until action takes place to change that position .
If MP’s vote to extend the A50 period, the status again remains leaving without a deal.
If the EU reject a request for an extension, we leave without a deal, regardless of what parliament do or say.
If the EU agree to an extension, it will only granted if a reasonable case can be made, with a restricted timescale.....and with strings attached.
The problem then will be to pass primary legislation in time to suspend the legally established leaving date of 29th March.
Time is running out and the EU are fed up. Unless the UK can come forward with a viable solution, they will not be interested in continuing with this circus any longer.
One report from Brussels (BBC) suggests that the practical limit to an extension prior to the EU parliamentary elections, would be late May and not July as some have speculated.
It amounts to around 7 weeks only.
The mess gets even messier.
However, tonight’s status is, we are leaving without a deal.
If tomorrow’s vote rejects leaving without a deal, it doesn’ change the status, which remains the same, we are leaving without a deal, until action takes place to change that position .
If MP’s vote to extend the A50 period, the status again remains leaving without a deal.
If the EU reject a request for an extension, we leave without a deal, regardless of what parliament do or say.
If the EU agree to an extension, it will only granted if a reasonable case can be made, with a restricted timescale.....and with strings attached.
The problem then will be to pass primary legislation in time to suspend the legally established leaving date of 29th March.
Time is running out and the EU are fed up. Unless the UK can come forward with a viable solution, they will not be interested in continuing with this circus any longer.
One report from Brussels (BBC) suggests that the practical limit to an extension prior to the EU parliamentary elections, would be late May and not July as some have speculated.
It amounts to around 7 weeks only.
The mess gets even messier.
TommyL4
Member
- Joined
- 3 Dec 2018
- Messages
- 21
As a non-UK citizen, the whole Brexit process just reminds me of Arrow's impossibility theorem, and surely this can't be easily fixed through a series of "binary" votings...
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
Just trying to think back to the time of the referendum, but was the threat to the car plants in Britain ever mentioned should a "leave" vote was successful?
krus_aragon
Established Member
I recall that some owners of the car plants advocated "remain" , and explained their reasoning in a letter to their employees. I'm sure this will have referred to the perils of a "leave" result, but at the time it was unclear how many of their workers were persuaded by their argument.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
We voted on the matter in 1975.
If you argue that the EU has changed drastically since 1975, then my reply will be that the understanding of what would happen on leaving the EU has changed drastically since 2016.
YorkshireBear
Established Member
- Joined
- 23 Jul 2010
- Messages
- 8,692
Saw a quote on BBC from one couple, which said ''..... We're great Britain we've grown potatoes in the back yard before we can do it again..... ''
This got me a bit worried, I live in a city centre flat, am I going to starve?
In all seriousness, having to grow food in gardens is a hell of an aspiration.
This got me a bit worried, I live in a city centre flat, am I going to starve?
In all seriousness, having to grow food in gardens is a hell of an aspiration.
NSEFAN
Established Member
Perhaps this whole thing has been a big conspiracy, instigated by the NHS as a way of starving the country and getting us all to lose weight. And without a deal, fuel will become expensive and people will have to start walking or cycling to work. Think of the reductions in heart disease and diabetes, not to mention the improved air quality from fewer cars and less business activity!
Bantamzen
Established Member
Some hardcore Brexiteers seem almost grimly determined to drive this country back 40 years so long as we are not in the EU. Of course if you were to ask the same person saying this if they would be prepared to get up at half past three in the morning to go help the local farmer with the harvest.... Well you get the idea. But don't worry, I know a place were us Yorkshire folk can score free potatoes...…
In the meantime, as a country we have to deal with the hard nosed reality of Brexit. The government has spent most of the time following the referendum trying to appease the shouty leavers instead of getting on with the job, and this is the result, chaos. Quite honestly nothing short of a more in depth referendum or General Election can sort this mess out. But even now, when we teeter on the brink, nobody seems particularly interested in actually solving the problem, just blaming everyone else. Putting it bluntly, we are <insert expletive here>.
Yes. However it was quickly written off as project fear. Back then we held all the cards, and experts were to be ignored if you didn't feel they were saying the right things.
I don't actually see how a second referendum or general election will solve things. The second referendum will only work if it's put forward as a "OK, here's what's actually going to happen, this isn't a re-run of the last one" and the majority of the public get on board with that.
General election? No chance of solving anything. Neither of the main parties are electable right now, but both will gain large numbers of seats because our electoral system is geared up to let everyone vote for "the least worst party". Is Corbyn really going to stand on a "we want to keep giving the EU £350m a week so they can tell us what to do" platform and expect to win? At least May can't roll out the "coalition of chaos" or "strong and stable" sound bites any more, small blessings!
As you say, we are #&@=+*?!
Yes, nearly 40 years ago.
And wasn't it the very same people who voted in then voted out?
Last edited:
It's boring me now.
A majority of MPs don't accept we voted out and appear to do whatever they can to try and force another referendum on whether we're in or out.
I don't understand this and the reluctance to accept the result of the first vote.
Remaining shouldn't be an option.
A majority of MPs don't accept we voted out and appear to do whatever they can to try and force another referendum on whether we're in or out.
I don't understand this and the reluctance to accept the result of the first vote.
Remaining shouldn't be an option.
700007
Established Member
One thing Parliament isn't quite grasping:
They voted last night against a deal.
Tonight, I can guarantee they will vote against no-deal.
What do they want?
Instead of having all of these votes now, they should have happened ages ago. We would have ended up in the same position, 'most likely a no-deal Brexit'. This would then allow the government, and subsequently the economy, its businesses and the population to plan out how they intend to get over a no-deal Brexit as frictionless as possible.
Giving just over 2 weeks for everybody to plan that is a major government failure.
They voted last night against a deal.
Tonight, I can guarantee they will vote against no-deal.
What do they want?
Instead of having all of these votes now, they should have happened ages ago. We would have ended up in the same position, 'most likely a no-deal Brexit'. This would then allow the government, and subsequently the economy, its businesses and the population to plan out how they intend to get over a no-deal Brexit as frictionless as possible.
Giving just over 2 weeks for everybody to plan that is a major government failure.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Why not? Because you think you might lose?
It is lunacy not to reconsider your position in the face of changing evidence.
To me it should be
- Remain
- No deal
- May's deal
- Pursue an alternative softer Brexit on the Norway/Switzerland model
...using an AV system so the vote is not split given that there are 3 Leaves and 1 Remain there.
Bantamzen
Established Member
Any referendum (AV) would have to be on how Brexit would shape up, i.e. no deal, EEA deal etc, but would almost certainly have to cover the option to back out or delay because right now the House simply cannot make it's mind up so despite the majority of people who voting wanting to leave, we are faced with the real possibility that this is may be the only option that doesn't bomb our economy. As for a General Election, well the threat of it at least might sharpen a few minds in the House.
What do they want? Don't know!
When do they want it? Yesterday!
A metaphor for Brexit if ever there was one! The really, really daft thing is that the government, EU & Houses could agree on deal that is the current agreement in all but name & the vast majority of people wouldn't notice. Just so long as we didn't have the EU stars on the passport cover, and didn't have to vote for MEPs many people would bask in their own ignorance! After all, who gives a stuff if policy is driven by unelected bureaucrats in Whitehall or in Brussels when we have precious little say either way? I've always said it, Brexit is a paper exercise, moving policy from A to B.
NSEFAN
Established Member
Should MPs vote for an action that is likely to make their constituents worse off, even if their constituents want it?
The vast majority of MPs voted to enact the legislation to leave the EU as a result of the referendum. What's happened since then is the same discussion that had started decades ago was restarted "how do we actually want to leave?". And it turns out, as back then, there's no consensus for any of the options - which is entirely why the leave side of the debate entirely side stepped that issue during the campaign.
It should never have gotten to this point. We should have worked out what we wanted before we submitted the A50 notification, if not the referendum. That way this self-destruction of our parties could have been done without a ticking clock.
BananaRepublic
Member
- Joined
- 9 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 777
Up to now, there’s been very little appetite in the HoC for an extension to A50, but now in a panic they’ll vote for it with a landslide.
However, how are they going to pass the necessary primary legislation to modify, or suspend the existing law that states the date and time of exit and revokes the European Communities Act at that time?
Then what?
The EU may only be willing to offer a couple of months and only on the basis there is a concrete plan I resolve the matter.
What chance of a concrete plan with the current state of play?
However, how are they going to pass the necessary primary legislation to modify, or suspend the existing law that states the date and time of exit and revokes the European Communities Act at that time?
Then what?
The EU may only be willing to offer a couple of months and only on the basis there is a concrete plan I resolve the matter.
What chance of a concrete plan with the current state of play?
Bantamzen
Established Member
Then what? BAU (Business As Usual), spend 95% of any additional time given to us by the EU members fighting & name calling, then rush through some half-arsed deal that nobody wants, vote on it, reject it, rinse, repeat....
BananaRepublic
Member
- Joined
- 9 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 777
Precisely.
Bantamzen
Established Member
Your user name is ironically fitting for this debate at the moment!
Its exactly what Westminster seems to be turning us into! Personally I'm planning to win big on the lottery, buy a nice house in the countryside with a bit of land, declare it a republic, build a wall and wait for this all to blow over in.... 
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
If the country had a referendum and voted to move the entire UK to the Moon, would you insist that the result gets accepted and cannot be changed? Once the scientists had come back and informed us that moving to the Moon is basically impossible because we don't have the technology to do it (and besides, there's no atmosphere there so we'd all suffocate), would you still be insisting that MPs carry on with the task of moving us to the Moon. If it was proposed to have another referendum to reconsider in the light of the emerging evidence about moving to the Moon, would you be telling us that you don't understand the reluctance of scientists to accept the result of the first vote, and declaring that staying on Earth should not be an option in any further referendum?
Howardh
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2011
- Messages
- 8,185
Even now there are suggestions that may will have a third go - this time threatening the DUP/ERG that another vote against will kill Brexit. If that's the case, could it still be lost by pro-EU Tories as it only takes a handful to vote against? A risky strategy; wouldn't she be better of dropping those red lines and getting Labour on board?
Her strategy is run down the clock and force MPs into a corner where the only way they can go is to vote for her "deal" which she refuses to regard as dead even after the defeats. So far a craven House of Commons has gone along with her. Will things now finally change? (If not, what a model for a future prime minister of the extreme left or the extreme right who wants to force through policies that have no support—she's shewing what can be done if you're thick-skinned and stubborn enough.)
BananaRepublic
Member
- Joined
- 9 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 777
Something proponents of a second referendum need to consider, apart from the fact it may result in another vote to leave, or no clear result, is that a vote to remain will not return us to the status quo before June 2016.
In fact, status quo was not an option on the ballot paper back then.
The ful implementation of the Lisbon Treaty sees to that.
Cancellation of Brexit will leave a politically weakened UK and the EU will not just forget the whole episode so easily.
In addition, any damage already done, will not be undone by a decision to reverse Brexit.
If anything, more damage will almost certainly be inflicted, by continuing uncertainty and a certain degree of lack of trust.
Nissan’s decision not to expand their operation in Sunderland won’t be reversed, because there were more compelling reasons not to build the next X-Trail there than simply Brexit on its own. UK and European Infinity sales were a disaster as well.
Meanwhile, Honda won’t be changing their minds about completely pulling out.
Most of their export output was going to the USA and mainland European sales had been collapsing. They are also facing global sales problems and have decided to retrench and focus on domestic production and a major emphasis on developing EV’s.
This would have happened regardless of Brexit, even if the timescales were a little later.
I haven’t even mentioned the bitterness and politely legacy that will endure and fester in the UK for many years to come, or the potential fallout from such an environment.
In fact, status quo was not an option on the ballot paper back then.
The ful implementation of the Lisbon Treaty sees to that.
Cancellation of Brexit will leave a politically weakened UK and the EU will not just forget the whole episode so easily.
In addition, any damage already done, will not be undone by a decision to reverse Brexit.
If anything, more damage will almost certainly be inflicted, by continuing uncertainty and a certain degree of lack of trust.
Nissan’s decision not to expand their operation in Sunderland won’t be reversed, because there were more compelling reasons not to build the next X-Trail there than simply Brexit on its own. UK and European Infinity sales were a disaster as well.
Meanwhile, Honda won’t be changing their minds about completely pulling out.
Most of their export output was going to the USA and mainland European sales had been collapsing. They are also facing global sales problems and have decided to retrench and focus on domestic production and a major emphasis on developing EV’s.
This would have happened regardless of Brexit, even if the timescales were a little later.
I haven’t even mentioned the bitterness and politely legacy that will endure and fester in the UK for many years to come, or the potential fallout from such an environment.
Bantamzen
Established Member
May: Oh yes, the, uh, my Brexit deal...What's, uh...What's wrong with it?
Westminster: I'll tell you what's wrong with it, Prime Minister. Its dead, that's what's wrong with it!
May: No, no, its uh,...its resting.
Westminster: Look, matey, I know a dead deal when I see one, and I'm looking at one right now.
May: No no its not dead, its, its restin'! Remarkable deal, my Brexit deal, idn'it, ay? Beautiful backstop agreement!
Mr. Praline: The backstop don't enter into it. It's stone dead.
Owner: Nononono, no, no! its resting!
Etc, etc......
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Mvann
Member
Basically what I said further back, except I was thinking more along the lines of sending Rees-Mogg and boris. Added to the fact that if we now remain the pound will rise against the Euro and we can add more populist MEPs to the number that the EU commission are panicking over from the rest of Europe
- Status