Just one sec...
Hey there! Sign in to have your say on this topicNew here? Join for free to post

Why do Brexiters oppose a second referendum?

Announcements Posted on
Take our short survey, £100 of Amazon vouchers to be won! 23-09-2016
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    Is there a Commons majority for any particular Brexit?

    Will May call an election on the terms of any particular Brexit?

    In many ways a second referendum is May's best way forward.

    No Conservative politician will commit himself in advance to saying he will back the negotiated departure terms whatever they may be; and that is perfectly right. No-one can claim a mandate for any particular Brexit from the referendum result because Leave didn't table a Leave platform in order to maximise support.

    All the other parties beyond the DUP and the single UKIP MP backed Remain and none of them including the DUP and UKIP would regard themselves as bound to support any particular Brexit deal.

    Laying particular Brexit terms before the voters in a general election is possibly the only way May can lose the next election.

    A second referendum with the threat that a "no" vote won't be taken as a Remain vote but a vote to go back to the table to renegotiate Brexit doesn't look quite so bad.
    Since when did Parliament ratify treaties, they're ministerial prerogative powers, there is literally no point in having any vote on any terms of any form, because, once again, you're talking about either the terms are approved or there is no deal, and allegedly nobody wants this hardest possible brexit.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Even as a remainer, if we have another one where does it end? best 2 out of 3, best 3 out of 5? the people have spoken
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Since when did Parliament ratify treaties, they're ministerial prerogative powers, there is literally no point in having any vote on any terms of any form, because, once again, you're talking about either the terms are approved or there is no deal, and allegedly nobody wants this hardest possible brexit.
    Parliament doesn't ratify treaties. Parliament approves treaties to provide political cover for ministers to ratify them.



    It is inconceivable that the terms of Brexit will not be put to a Parliamentary vote following the completion of negotiations but in any event there will have to be legislation giving effect to whatever the deal is. You can't just repeal the European Communities Act and expect the clock to magically turn back to 1972 but equally you can't say all European law remains in force until we get round to doing something else because some things require Brussels's involvement and we positively have to set up a parallel process even if we are not proposing to change the underlying law.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by intelligent con)
    Why do Brexiters oppose a referendum on the terms of Brexit? You're always going on about democracy but surely once we actually know what the terms of exit are then people should be able to vote on it to see if its what they actually wanted.

    People had no idea what deal they would get when they voted to leave the EU and leave voters all had very different opinions on what deal should be obtained so why exactly is it a bad idea to see if the majority of the country actually approves the deal we get or if they want to remain in the EU? All I ever seem to hear from brexiters is "we had a vote get over it" or "you hate democracy" but surely denying people a right to vote on the deal we actually get is undemocratic. Are you just afraid the result wouldn't be what you want this time?
    For me i simply don't see how it serves my self interest at the moment. Right now we're winning the war (movement is towards article 50).
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    Parliament doesn't ratify treaties. Parliament approves treaties to provide political cover for ministers to ratify them.



    It is inconceivable that the terms of Brexit will not be put to a Parliamentary vote following the completion of negotiations but in any event there will have to be legislation giving effect to whatever the deal is. You can't just repeal the European Communities Act and expect the clock to magically turn back to 1972 but equally you can't say all European law remains in force until we get round to doing something else because some things require Brussels's involvement and we positively have to set up a parallel process even if we are not proposing to change the underlying law.
    Might want to tell Parliament that...http://www.parliament.uk/documents/c...office/p14.pdf

    But I have a question for you, given you need a couple of hundred of them, can you name 50, or even a dozen, England and Wales MPs who wish for the hardest possible brexit?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    because I need that cash from the world's continiung uncertainty with sky-high metal markets and turmoil on the stock exchanges
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Might want to tell Parliament that...http://www.parliament.uk/documents/c...office/p14.pdf
    Thanks for that. I think this makes my point nicely

    "There is no presumption that Parliament will debate every treaty laid under the Ponsonby Rule, but once Parliament has been presented with the text of a
    n important or controversial treaty it is difficult in practice for the Leader of the House to resist a debate on it. Indeed Ponsonby’s original announcement included the promise that, ‘if there is a formal demand for discussion forwarded through the usual channels from the opposition or any other party, time will be found for the discussion of the treaty in question’. "


    But I have a question for you, given you need a couple of hundred of them, can you name 50, or even a dozen, England and Wales MPs who wish for the hardest possible brexit?
    Why do they need to be supporters of the hardest Brexit possible?

    First of all the clock is only running if Article 50 has been activated. I still think May will try and negotiate a treaty change providing for Brexit without ever activating Article 50. Activating Article 50 plays into the hands of the EU. They can play it long and we become increasingly desperate. If Article 50 is not activated, we throw a spanner in the works of the EU, until a deal is struck.

    Even if Article 50 is activated, unless the clock has totally run down, the risk is that MPs will say "go back and get a better deal" When a civil dispute is mediated, one of the key things is to ensure that the key people are at the mediation for the other side because there is a tendency for for people who are not at a negotiation always to feel they could have done better (Mr De Valera please take a bow).
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Try talking about something different for a change. Maybe change your username as well, unless it's meant ironically.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    Thanks for that. I think this makes my point nicely

    "There is no presumption that Parliament will debate every treaty laid under the Ponsonby Rule, but once Parliament has been presented with the text of a
    n important or controversial treaty it is difficult in practice for the Leader of the House to resist a debate on it. Indeed Ponsonby’s original announcement included the promise that, ‘if there is a formal demand for discussion forwarded through the usual channels from the opposition or any other party, time will be found for the discussion of the treaty in question’. "




    Why do they need to be supporters of the hardest Brexit possible?

    First of all the clock is only running if Article 50 has been activated. I still think May will try and negotiate a treaty change providing for Brexit without ever activating Article 50. Activating Article 50 plays into the hands of the EU. They can play it long and we become increasingly desperate. If Article 50 is not activated, we throw a spanner in the works of the EU, until a deal is struck.

    Even if Article 50 is activated, unless the clock has totally run down, the risk is that MPs will say "go back and get a better deal" When a civil dispute is mediated, one of the key things is to ensure that the key people are at the mediation for the other side because there is a tendency for for people who are not at a negotiation always to feel they could have done better (Mr De Valera please take a bow).
    Wow, you're perhaps the most deluded I've seen yet, honestly believing that first there will be formal negotiations without article 50 as well as that we will somehow not leave of we chose not to take the probably quite nice offer. It's a case of wanting the hardest possible brexit because that's exactly what opposition to a deal would be.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Wow, you're perhaps the most deluded I've seen yet, honestly believing that first there will be formal negotiations without article 50
    I think that is the way Theresa May is going.

    Play hardball and bugger up the EU until the other 27 are willing to talk. It is what de Gaulle would do and possibly a certain lady with a handbag.

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/br...army-j55kfp7b5

    as well as that we will somehow not leave of we chose not to take the probably quite nice offer. It's a case of wanting the hardest possible brexit because that's exactly what opposition to a deal would be.
    In the 1970s House of Lords reform was blocked by an alliance of those who wanted no change and those who thought the change was inadequate. I see a possibility of the same thing here.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I am suspicious that May is just delaying it so that it does not become an issue anymore and we never leave. If I am right and we do not leave, next general election I will withdraw my support for Tory and vote UKIP.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Luke7456)
    I am suspicious that May is just delaying it so that it does not become an issue anymore and we never leave. If I am right and we do not leave, next general election I will withdraw my support for Tory and vote UKIP.
    I don't think that is politically tenable.

    Leave may not look like a lot of Brexit supporters think it will look, but many of them expect a degree of independence that is merely historical and goes beyond anything exercised by other non-EU G20 countries.

    Something called Brexit must be put forward by government. I think only a major war or a collapse of the EU to the point that there is really nothing much left to quit could prevent that.

    Brexit might not happen but that will not be the government's doing. If it doesn't happen that would be because the government tries and fails to deliver it. I cannot see how the government could survive that failure.

    Failing to try and implement Brexit would be a breach of faith on the part of the government so vast, May would be out on her ear. Any attempt to call a second referendum on the issue to try and validate such a decision would be pointless. Let's say a second referendum was called and Remain wins; it isn't going to win by an overwhelming majority. The issue isn't settled. We are just back where we were before June.

    The starting point for failure is the government has to negotiate a deal whether under Article 50, or as I suggest, not. Either that deal has to fail to gain a Parliamentary majority or the government realises it wouldn't get it through Parliament. May doesn't need Parliamentary approval to trigger Article 50 or to commence negotiations but the idea that a deal can be struck under prerogative powers without Parliamentary support is fanciful and ignores the levers of our constitution. No-one has tried that in the UK since 1688.

    If the deal does have a Parliamentary majority then there is no more to be said, the deal goes through. If it can't get through Parliament, then either May has to call a general election on the issue or a referendum. The problem with single issue elections is the unwillingness of the public to see them as single issue. The public exercise their own judgement. If May loses that election, Brexit is doomed. If she loses a referendum, Brexit may be doomed depending on how the campaigns were put to the public.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    I don't think that is politically tenable.

    Leave may not look like a lot of Brexit supporters think it will look, but many of them expect a degree of independence that is merely historical and goes beyond anything exercised by other non-EU G20 countries.

    Something called Brexit must be put forward by government. I think only a major war or a collapse of the EU to the point that there is really nothing much left to quit could prevent that.

    Brexit might not happen but that will not be the government's doing. If it doesn't happen that would be because the government tries and fails to deliver it. I cannot see how the government could survive that failure.

    Failing to try and implement Brexit would be a breach of faith on the part of the government so vast, May would be out on her ear. Any attempt to call a second referendum on the issue to try and validate such a decision would be pointless. Let's say a second referendum was called and Remain wins; it isn't going to win by an overwhelming majority. The issue isn't settled. We are just back where we were before June.

    The starting point for failure is the government has to negotiate a deal whether under Article 50, or as I suggest, not. Either that deal has to fail to gain a Parliamentary majority or the government realises it wouldn't get it through Parliament. May doesn't need Parliamentary approval to trigger Article 50 or to commence negotiations but the idea that a deal can be struck under prerogative powers without Parliamentary support is fanciful and ignores the levers of our constitution. No-one has tried that in the UK since 1688.

    If the deal does have a Parliamentary majority then there is no more to be said, the deal goes through. If it can't get through Parliament, then either May has to call a general election on the issue or a referendum. The problem with single issue elections is the unwillingness of the public to see them as single issue. The public exercise their own judgement. If May loses that election, Brexit is doomed. If she loses a referendum, Brexit may be doomed depending on how the campaigns were put to the public.
    I think you have to be willing to call the other persons bluff in life. Not so much in the hope they will not go through with there intents but in the realization that if they cannot back down then seeing the consequences of neither side compromising is better then seeing the consequences of you compromising but the other side not.

    If we cannot reach a deal with Europe, then the best alternative is to pull out without a deal and cease trading with them. I know this may sound outlandish and very painful, however having our entire future dictated to us without having a say is a worse scenario to be in. Once we stay in after not been able to reach a deal with the EU we send the EU a message they can walk all over us because if they stand firm we will always back down.

    If someone is un willing to negotiate or compromise on issues that are of key importance to you then there is little hope for a successful relationship of any kind whether that is trading relationship romantic relationship or friendship.

    We voted out that needs to be respected. I think we can have a debate on any terms of trade etc, however that is having a debate on those terms not a debate on whether we in fact decide to stay or leave. We already had that debate and decided to leave. In the same way that my ex lost all respect for me when she cheated on me and i still wanted to make it work (I was stupid there and she was always a *****) the EU would lose all respect for us if we stayed now.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. Oops, you need to agree to our Ts&Cs to register
  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: September 21, 2016
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Poll
How do you eat your pizza
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22

Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.