Who would be to blame if EU negotiations break down and we leave with no deal?

You are ignoring the fact referendums are advisory only.
I agree we should have an election.
Boris has been a massive cause if the issue as they have prevented Mays deal going anywhere, hence its amusing to see him halted by the same tactics he used on May.

If they start from scratch the damage will be done for some people. A big mess that will continue to divide the country because it was flawed.

I'm saying that all those arguments made by all those remainer MP's about not knowing how to leave because they didn't know what those who voted to leave actually meant are just false arguments, because we know what the majority of us voted for and that is the issue.
Had remain won we wouldn't then have been asking if people meant remain as it is, or with deeper integration or even remain but carry on attempting renegotiation, we would have just remained.
The vote to leave should result in exactly that and nothing less.

Parliament wouldn't have to have acted upon anything if we voted to remain. By voting to leave parliament must do something, which is why questions are raised about how people expected we should leave in 2016. We can't 'just leave' because being non-members wasn't the default and existing position.

We did not vote on how to leave in 2016, so MPs and others are right in saying we do not know what leave voters wanted in 2016. How people voted in an election three years after doesn't necessarily reflect the intentions behind the 2016 vote.

It's a bloody good indication though.

Not really, no.

Firstly, the turnout for the EU election was abysmal compared to the turnout of the referendum. It's entirely possible that it disproportionately favoured the extreme ends of the Brexit debate if the only people who bothered to turn up were the people who held those positions. If turnouts matched, or were very similar, then you may have a point... but they didn't.

Secondly, no deal wasn't seriously discussed during 2016. The mood at the time, at least from what I had read/seen, was that we would leave the EU with a trade deal. Vote Leave explicitly presented this as their policy and other prominent leave campaigners made it clear that we should be leaving the EU with one. Remember 'they need us more than we need them'?

Not really, no.

Firstly, the turnout for the EU election was abysmal compared to the turnout of the referendum. It's entirely possible that it disproportionately favoured the extreme ends of the Brexit debate if the only people who bothered to turn up were the people who held those positions. If turnouts matched, or were very similar, then you may have a point... but they didn't.

Secondly, no deal wasn't seriously discussed during 2016. The mood at the time, at least from what I had read/seen, was that we would leave the EU with a trade deal. Vote Leave explicitly presented this as their policy and other prominent leave campaigners made it clear that we should be leaving the EU with one. Remember 'they need us more than we need them'?

We should have a referendum, preferably a deal vs remain.

Not really, no.

Firstly, the turnout for the EU election was abysmal compared to the turnout of the referendum. It's entirely possible that it disproportionately favoured the extreme ends of the Brexit debate if the only people who bothered to turn up were the people who held those positions. If turnouts matched, or were very similar, then you may have a point... but they didn't.

Secondly, no deal wasn't seriously discussed during 2016. The mood at the time, at least from what I had read/seen, was that we would leave the EU with a trade deal. Vote Leave explicitly presented this as their policy and other prominent leave campaigners made it clear that we should be leaving the EU with one. Remember 'they need us more than we need them'?

Agreed, although I would prefer something which included no deal and at least one deal option.

To split the leave vote no doubt.
I would prefer just no deal or a deal option, no remain one.

1) I'm not a believer in using turnout as a tool against anything regarding results of democratic elections. If you dont show you dont count in democracy, that's the rules I'm afraid. However while we are on the subject of democracy and turn out, I do think turnout for the EU elections provides proof of the fake concern for remaining in the EU shown by some hard core groups. I mean the turn out for the European elections was high in comparison to other previous European elections. Quite litterally remainers are more or less absent from electing their beloved MEPs, that's why farage has had so much success and been an MEP for years. If there was a tiny fraction of genuine passion for remaining in the EU farage would not get a look in European elections, in reality its leavers as a majority that vote in the EU elections, most remainers pre 2016 didn't even know they existed, it of they did they cared so little they never voted.

2) No deal was talked about a lot, although I dont think anybody would want no deal. A Canada deal is the ideal for leavers which unfortunately was rejected.

This big mess as you put it will not go away if we abandon leaving the EU, it will simply get bigger.

Except it could be an even bigger mess economically, which is the big unknown.
The only way you have of sorting it out is an election with one party getting a mandate to get it through, that way they can override the DUP. I dont think as many people care about the backstop as is made out. What people forget is Mays deal was only ever temporary and we could be half way through it by now. The referendum as is and everything thats followed imo is one of the biggest waste of time and poisonous things for the UK in modern history. It wont stop after we have left.

Wouldnt surprise me in future if theres another one about rejoining.

Not at all. A referendum with three or more options should involved ranked voting, which wouldn't split the leave vote.


I agree that 'If you don't show up you don't count' when it comes to electing people and making a decision (such as in a referendum), but when we're talking about using one election to gauge the opinions of people from a prior election then it is important. What you've described is one of the reason why we shouldn't use the 2019 EU elections as an indicator of what people thought in the 2016 referendum.

Can you provided examples of when a no deal was mentioned "a lot"? You're correct that a Canada deal was mentioned often. A Norway/Swiss style deal was also frequently mentioned/brought up.

We should have a referendum, preferably a deal vs remain.

I agree with you about having a general election.

This si where Labour have been scandalous, but Boris can hardly complain as he has spent years playing games and trying to destroy May. All as bad as each other.

The fact that Boris is so far ahead in the polls is testimony to how shocking a job Jezza is making of leading the opposition.

If Brexiters had spent less time looking for someone else to blame for the Brexit debacle, they would have had Brexit a long time ago.

But who are we kidding. We are the most obese nation in Europe. Such personal responsibility is an alien concept to most Brits.