Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

What would happen if Parliament voted down Brexit? watch

    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    from what i've read, the most likely way to remain would be to call for a general election (nobody voted for teresa may so THATS NOT A DEMOCRACY ITS A DICTATORSHIP). then to get a pro-eu PM who could persuade our country, and ignore the referendum or call for a second. ultimately Brexit has lead us into a sort of dictatorship
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Davij038)
    I'd be all for this though- because then there's at least there's be a greater mandate for brexit. Rather than a 2% majority and a minority of MPs.

    Referendums are advisory and can be bypassed by parliament- I think the referendum can legitimately be ignored if it was superceded by a General Election result - say if Owen Smith won on a pro EU platform.

    Additionally this gives the chance for the Tories to set up their vision of a post Brexit vision which at the moment involves Boris, fox and Davis shouting at each other in a darkened room.
    The majority lead is actually 4%.

    While I'm of course against this happening, my point was that this is highly unlikely because of the damage to both Labour and Concersatives MPs. If they vote it down, they will not stay for long. The outrage would ensure that Brexit will return, just without them in parliament.

    It all goes back to the fundamentals really - the majority wants Brexit.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Twinpeaks)
    What I find most concerning, is that people think remain campaigners are only upset because "we lost". Why do you think we would be so petty, as to care about losing?

    I don't give a **** about the fact my side lost. What I give a **** about is the outcomes of Brexit. Do you want me to provide you with some?

    I care about the effect this is going to have on EU immigrants.

    I care about the effect this is going to have on our economy (let's be real)

    I care about the effect this is going to have on our most disadvantaged areas who receive the most money from the EU for regeneration. Therefore I care about the effect this is going to have on children and young people from deprived areas.

    I care about the effect this is going to have on our actions towards environmental sustainability and climate change prevention.

    I care about the effect this is going to have on our research. With many disciplines receiving at least a quarter of their funding from the EU, some a third. Also in regards to the percentage of research academics in the UK who contribute to high quality research in British institutions who are in fact immigrants.

    And this continues, you know I can so easily provide links to back all that up but it's so commonly known I'm sure I don't need to waste my time.
    The EU is what forces us to develop as a country, socially, academically, environmentally and economically. But oh. I don't give a toss about the effect this is going to have on my life, and everyone else's, all I care about is the fact that we lost.

    That idea represents a very concerning mindset of the Brexit group. You still seem to think your campaign was a competition, you're still in denial about the consequences of your actions.

    How can you still be in denial about the lies of the Brexit campaign?

    You don't want an argument, because you know how right we are. You've collectively ****ed us over. But hey, congrats, you've "won". That's all that matters, right?

    Welcome to Little Britian.
    Maybe I should have worded it another way - you only want another referendum because you want to remain in the EU.

    First of all, I just want to remind you that we are all stakeholders in this referendum. You might disagree with someone's view but you have to accept that some people see things differently to you. You have mentioned a few areas of concern, can you specify what happened since the referendum that makes you think those areas are threatened?

    You should examine your response and look at how many assumptions you have made. You seem fixated that Brexit will mean disaster for the UK without any evidence to back it up. You then argue that people should vote again because Leave voters were 'lied' to.

    You are accusing me of thinking of this as a game, which is insulting considering I've just stated the obvious and common understanding about the rule of the referendum. I again emphasise - our judgements and priorities are different.

    I'm all for a serious debate, but please don't shout me down and make me the bad person when I was pointing out the undertone of your previous post.

    I understood the arguments of the Remain side and I have accepted some of their points. I have posted a thread explaining why I'll be voting Leave. My judgement is that the EU is becoming an unaccountable political construct where democratic mandates are becoming increasingly ignored. In my opinion it is necessary to leave the EU and for me the arguments for Leave outweighs Remain. Obviously not everyone agrees but that's where I stand.

    The least I can ask for those who disagrees is to respect my personal judgements and apply some common understanding to this debate, as I have always done for the Remain side.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    Yes people who ignore democracy are heroes, do you also like Kim Jong UN for his lack of democracy?

    A politician who blocks the will of the people are not heroes they would be betraying the people who put them there and failing in the job they are supposed to be doing.
    People who put the best interests of a nation before their political image/appeal would be slightly heroic.

    It was a close referendum, its not like they are deciding to block 98% of the country's intentions, they are blocking just over half. And I'd be surprised to see if 52% or more people still think Brexit is a good idea in the wake of the entire remain campaign's true intentions, and the nature of the deal that we're going to be offered, alongside the spike in hate crime and racial abuse in the wake of Brexit.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CherishFreedom)
    The majority lead is actually 4%.

    If they vote it down, they will not stay for long. The outrage would ensure that Brexit will return, just without them in parliament.
    Of course they won't.

    Politics simply doesn't work like that.

    Owen Smith has promised to re-run the referendum. Why? His constituency voted more strongly for leave than the country as a whole, but he knows that will not matter when the next general election comes round. That is the case even if Theresa May calls a general election this afternoon.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CherishFreedom)
    The majority lead is actually 4%.

    While I'm of course against this happening, my point was that this is highly unlikely because of the damage to both Labour and Concersatives MPs. If they vote it down, they will not stay for long. The outrage would ensure that Brexit will return, just without them in parliament.

    It all goes back to the fundamentals really - the majority wants Brexit.
    Sure, but we have a parliamentary democracy in which the majority including the PM have been advised to do something they do not believe in. It's like Corbyb being given a mandate to sell the NHS.

    I think (and I say this as someone frankly bored by it all now) that there needs to be a second general election based on Europe so we can decide fully what we are going to do and can have a parliament that has an idea of what they're doing.

    This doesn't have to be right away- but I think we are going to be seeing Gordon Brown MK2 and be in very choppy waters as the government and civil service tries to make sense of what is going on.

    Edit: Rakas21 this more or less answers you too
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Davij038)
    Sure, but we have a parliamentary democracy in which the majority including the PM have been advised to do something they do not believe in. It's like Corbyb being given a mandate to sell the NHS.

    I think (and I say this as someone frankly bored by it all now) that there needs to be a second general election based on Europe so we can decide fully what we are going to do and can have a parliament that has an idea of what they're doing.

    This doesn't have to be right away- but I think we are going to be seeing Gordon Brown MK2 and be in very choppy waters as the government and civil service tries to make sense of what is going on.

    Edit: Rakas21 this more or less answers you too
    I would say the referendum should give a pretty clear instruction to MPs on their post-referendum stance. However it's regrettable that there are still a number of MPs who has completely forgotten their job's description - to represent the people.

    Even though I agree that a general election is beneficial to leaving the EU, I think calling for one any time soon will be too destabilising. However I hope that people will be highly sensitive to any signs that may reveal the government's level of commitment for Brexit, and pressure them to get on with it. I don't think we should rush through the process, but it is annoying that a minority seems to be exploiting this as an opportunity to invalidate the referendum or to hold another one hoping that the result will be different.

    Personally I think we should trigger Article 50 in March or April 2017 because it coincides with the French election and is only 5 to 6 months away from the German election. Eurosceptic parties will be most vocal during the election periods and will help the UK to make its case for a favourable transition. Any highly unfavourable terms to the UK may intensify anti-EU sentiments which is something Merkel nor Hollande wants. Merkel and Hollande's influence over the EU will also be weaker during that period as their continued influence is reliant on them getting re-elected.

    I hope by then our government can get together a team of skilled negotiators and capitalise on the political changes in Germany and France.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Davij038)
    Sure, but we have a parliamentary democracy in which the majority including the PM have been advised to do something they do not believe in. It's like Corbyb being given a mandate to sell the NHS.

    I think (and I say this as someone frankly bored by it all now) that there needs to be a second general election based on Europe so we can decide fully what we are going to do and can have a parliament that has an idea of what they're doing.

    This doesn't have to be right away- but I think we are going to be seeing Gordon Brown MK2 and be in very choppy waters as the government and civil service tries to make sense of what is going on.

    Edit: Rakas21 this more or less answers you too
    I don't buy the comparison with Brown for May really, although there'll be a weakening of the economy it's not the same scale and more importantly the electoral winds are substantially in the Tories favour right now. May will likely win the 2020 and 2025 elections.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    I don't buy the comparison with Brown for May really, although there'll be a weakening of the economy it's not the same scale and more importantly the electoral winds are substantially in the Tories favour right now. May will likely win the 2020 and 2025 elections.
    Economy: arguable, we haven't left yet

    Electability: true, though if there was half decent opposition I think it would be a different story.

    Can't see May standing in 2025- maybe Boris'll get it if negotiations go well.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CherishFreedom)
    I would say the referendum should give a pretty clear instruction to MPs on their post-referendum stance. However it's regrettable that there are still a number of MPs who has completely forgotten their job's description - to represent the people.
    No- representative democracy entails that an MP works in what they deem to be in the interest of the people they represent. We are not a direct democracy.


    Even though I agree that a general election is beneficial to leaving the EU, I think calling for one any time soon will be too destabilising. However I hope that people will be highly sensitive to any signs that may reveal the government's level of commitment for Brexit, and pressure them to get on with it. I don't think we should rush through the process, but it is annoying that a minority seems to be exploiting this as an opportunity to invalidate the referendum or to hold another one hoping that the result will be different.

    Personally I think we should trigger Article 50 in March or April 2017 because it coincides with the French election and is only 5 to 6 months away from the German election. Eurosceptic parties will be most vocal during the election periods and will help the UK to make its case for a favourable transition. Any highly unfavourable terms to the UK may intensify anti-EU sentiments which is something Merkel nor Hollande wants. Merkel and Hollande's influence over the EU will also be weaker during that period as their continued influence is reliant on them getting re-elected.

    I hope by then our government can get together a team of skilled negotiators and capitalise on the political changes in Germany and France.
    eh?

    Governing pro EU parties will be incentivised to make leaving the EU as difficult as possible in order to quell eurosceptic parties.

    It's like saying if Scotland left the union we should give the Scots what they want in order to deter plaid Cymru.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Davij038)
    No- representative democracy entails that an MP works in what they deem to be in the interest of the people they represent. We are not a direct democracy.
    No I'm afraid that's not their job. Here is an excerpt from the official Parliament website:

    "The UK public elects Members of Parliament (MPs) to represent their interests and concerns in the House of Commons."

    Clearly if they do not represent the interests and concerns of their constituents, or at least the majority, then they aren't doing their job.


    (Original post by Davij038)
    eh?

    Governing pro EU parties will be incentivised to make leaving the EU as difficult as possible in order to quell eurosceptic parties.

    It's like saying if Scotland left the union we should give the Scots what they want in order to deter plaid Cymru.
    Eurosceptic sentiments are on the rise in Germany and France, especially the latter. President Hollande is already at significant risk of losing to Marine Le Pen of the National Front. If he proposes terms that are hugely unfair to the UK as a way to deter more countries from leaving the EU, this would help Le Pen to make a moral argument for presidency and 'Frexit'.

    I don't think Hollande or Merkel will 'give way' entirely, but they will find it hard to be too hard line on their stance towards Brexit during that period.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    UKIP would become the 3rd biggest party
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sdotd)
    UKIP would become the 3rd biggest party
    Really? More seats than the SNP. Please list which seats that will be.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    Really? More seats than the SNP. Please list which seats that will be.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Swing seats are all over the country, rejecting the will of the people is going to p*** them off and they will vote for ukip as a protest


    But it won't happen anyway. May would be sacked immediately by the tories if she doesn't deliver brexit
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sdotd)
    Swing seats are all over the country, rejecting the will of the people is going to p*** them off and they will vote for ukip as a protest
    I do not understand how people fail to understand electoral arithmetic.

    If a seat is a Labour/Tory marginal, if one of those parties loses votes to a protest vote, the other wins. The protest vote doesn't win.


    But it won't happen anyway. May would be sacked immediately by the tories if she doesn't deliver brexit
    A party, the majority of whose MPs backed remain, will sack May if she fails to deliver the Brexit which she has promised to deliver and which, if it is blocked, will be blocked by them. Yeah right.
 
 
 
Poll
Are you going to a festival?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

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

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