Whats the best solution for Brexit now? Watch

Themysticalegg
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#21
Report 1 month ago
#21
Drink apple juice and wait for it all to blow over.
0
reply
fallen_acorns
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#22
Report 1 month ago
#22
if I had the power to make the government do what ever I wanted?

1. Revoke article 50, and remain in the EU for the time being.
2. Change our electoral system to a proportional one that enables the quick effective formation of new parties.

Why?

Part 1 is because we are entirely unready to make the most of brexit at present, and we have already burned so many bridges and put ourselves in such an awful position as a country and internationally that if there was a chance at a good brexit (which I believe there was) - its gone now.

Part 2 is to avoid this mess in the first place. Create a modern proportional system that facilitates and actually enables new parties to grow. This way ideas such as brexit will manifest themselves organically and grow smoothly over time, avoiding situations such as when they had 15% of the vote and no representation in government. With this our politics will have to remain in touch with the people and we hopefully wont find ourselves in the mess we are in now, where our politicians are not representative of the people, and we are relying on referendums to fix our broken democratic systems because our electoral system is so ineffective at actually representing the will of the people.

So in short - cancel brexit for now, but change the electoral system so that it would potentially be easier for it to happen again IF the political will is there within the general public.
1
reply
Bashtopher
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#23
Report 1 month ago
#23
(Original post by DragonsOfAsshai)
Unfortunately that's expensive and a bit tedious. A lot of people have lost interest and there won't be a 50% majority until only 2 options are left, by which time no one will bother to vote. Better just to put 2 options on the table, May's deal and remain.
I think you misunderstand. Apologies for not explaining What Alternative Voting is fully. There is only one vote, and people would rank their preferences from 1-5 (I.e. 1 for their favourite and 5 for their least). The eliminations are worked on people's preferences. Thus, not tedious or expensive, plus no one's vote is wasted. There would also be no voter fatigue and would be a vote that allows for compromise on all options.
0
reply
Bashtopher
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#24
Report 1 month ago
#24
(Original post by ColinDent)
Embracing Brexit would definitely help us going forward, parliament has been fighting the outcome of the referendum from day one, had they actually done what they promised to do and backed the result then we would have got a better negotiated deal.
A bit of positive attitude and forward thinking goes a very long way, there are opportunities to push the UK and do trade deals that suit our needs and strengths but still there are many who are terrified of being outside of the EU because there will be some sort of doomsday scenario, that just won't happen because, and here's the kicker, as much as it is true that we need the EU's economy to remain strong the EU also need our economy to, that is the simple fact of the matter.
Parliament hasn't fought brexit from day one. If so, they would not have voted in favour of triggering article 50 with a huge majority in the first place. It is not parliament's fault that an agreement hasn't been met, it's the government's fault for only seeking parliament's opinion at the eleventh hour.

And tbh, 'embracing brexit' and using positive thinking is equivalent to international trade homeopathy. Trade agreements take years to form, sometimes they never come into fruition. WTO trade rules are a fall back and work out terribly economically when compared to eu trade agreements. The UK is wealthy, but the EU is far more powerful and will be less affected.

That's all I'm going to say on that. I'm not going to go into the practical side of Brexit for fear of the retort of "project fear". On this point, I always find it astonishing that no brexiteer ever mentions any potential downsides of Brexit. It's all sunshine and roses. Yet you often hear remainer (politicians at least) acknowledge that the EU needs reform but, ultimately, it's benefit outweighs it's flaws. Funny that.
0
reply
Bashtopher
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#25
Report 1 month ago
#25
(Original post by ColinDent)
How about May's deal or no deal.
These are the two options that will probably make the country worse off. Also, there are other options that still honour the referendum result: single market and customs union. Both of which have more cross party consensus than no deal and May's deal.

We don't know what the public thinks because they haven't been asked. In fact, the public may have changed their mind altogether after two years of botched dealings and exposed lies. That is why it's best to give the public a chance to rank their preferences of all options. That is possibly the most democratic thing to do.
0
reply
ColinDent
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#26
Report 1 month ago
#26
(Original post by Bashtopher)
Parliament hasn't fought brexit from day one. If so, they would not have voted in favour of triggering article 50 with a huge majority in the first place. It is not parliament's fault that an agreement hasn't been met, it's the government's fault for only seeking parliament's opinion at the eleventh hour.

And tbh, 'embracing brexit' and using positive thinking is equivalent to international trade homeopathy. Trade agreements take years to form, sometimes they never come into fruition. WTO trade rules are a fall back and work out terribly economically when compared to eu trade agreements. The UK is wealthy, but the EU is far more powerful and will be less affected.

That's all I'm going to say on that. I'm not going to go into the practical side of Brexit for fear of the retort of "project fear". On this point, I always find it astonishing that no brexiteer ever mentions any potential downsides of Brexit. It's all sunshine and roses. Yet you often hear remainer (politicians at least) acknowledge that the EU needs reform but, ultimately, it's benefit outweighs it's flaws. Funny that.
Yes parliament have been fighting leaving hence they voted for article 50 and have now ruled out no deal therefore removing our best negotiating position and stopping us leaving on the date they voted for.
The EU will not reform except for closer union and more swiping of sovereignty, unless of course after the upcoming EU parliamentary elections there are more Euroscepic MEP's than Europhile ones, but that couldn't possibly happen as the UK is the only country that has any issues with the EU.
0
reply
ColinDent
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#27
Report 1 month ago
#27
(Original post by Bashtopher)
These are the two options that will probably make the country worse off. Also, there are other options that still honour the referendum result: single market and customs union. Both of which have more cross party consensus than no deal and May's deal.

We don't know what the public thinks because they haven't been asked. In fact, the public may have changed their mind altogether after two years of botched dealings and exposed lies. That is why it's best to give the public a chance to rank their preferences of all options. That is possibly the most democratic thing to do.
What forgetting the last referendum is democratic? Not sure how many times this needs to be mentioned but we were all told before the referendum that leaving the EU meant leave the SM/CU and therefore everything else, yet we still voted to leave.
0
reply
DragonsOfAsshai
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#28
Report 1 month ago
#28
(Original post by Andrew97)
What legitimacy would that have? They are two options famous for being rejected.
Well there's no majority for anything so someone just has to pick the two most realistic options
0
reply
z-hog
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#29
Report 1 month ago
#29
(Original post by ColinDent)
What forgetting the last referendum is democratic?
The way they see it? Yes.
0
reply
ThePootisPower
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#30
Report 1 month ago
#30
Here's what I'd do.
Immediately revoke Article 50, but inform the EU that we intend to continue planning a Brexit deal.
Write into law that we will NOT leave the EU without a deal. No Deal is economic suicide, and the WTO trading rules we'd be operating on would be infinitely worse than staying in the EU. Sure, the EU is a bureaucratic fustercluck, but hell if it isn't better than no deal whatsoever!

(and by the way, please don't vote Brexit Party in the EU elections. Nigel Farage and Co never actually try to fix things through the EU system, they just tell all of the MEP's "Up Yours!" instead of working with the EU to help fix it's issues. Oh, and they don't have a Brexit plan of their own, so don't expect them to succeed where Parliament ahs failed.)

Have every political party draw up their own Brexit Withdrawal Agreement.

Have our MEP's run through each of these withdrawal agreements with the EU, so that we can write off anything the EU will refuse to agree to.

Ensure that parties offer alternative deals to their own withdrawal agreements, so if the EU wants to disagree with certain areas, we aren't immediately scuppered at the Negotiation table.

The people would then be allowed to vote in a public referendumfor the Brexit Deal they wanted (with NO remain option in order to make it clea that , however, rather than the Alternative Vote, which can actually sometimes create LESS representative results than First Past the Post because of the second and third choices of extremist voters, we'd instead use STAR voting.

STAR voting, or to give it it's full name, Score Then Automatic Runoff, would have voters rate each option on the ballot on a score from 0 - 5, with 0 being "no support for this option" and 5 being "full support for this option". The scores for each candidate deal are then summed, and the two highest-rated candidates are selected as finalists. In the instant-runoff round, the finalist who was given a higher rating on a greater number of ballots is selected as the winner.

I would personally use the second-highest rated candidate as a Back-Up deal, so if the EU rejects the first deal and we are unable to negotiate with the EU due to either red lines or fundamental differences, we can move down the list of candidates in order of scoring so that no further referendums are needed to select a new deal.

Ultimately, once a deal has been chosen by the people, and agreed to by the EU, we would have one last referendum - an Leave with this Deal or Remain in the EU referendum. If the people voted to leave, then we'd leave, if we voted to remain, we'd remain, and we'd enshrine the decision in law for the next 50 years as to end the debate and allow the divisions caused by Brexit to heal again.
0
reply
Bashtopher
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#31
Report 1 month ago
#31
(Original post by ColinDent)
Yes parliament have been fighting leaving hence they voted for article 50 and have now ruled out no deal therefore removing our best negotiating position and stopping us leaving on the date they voted for.
The EU will not reform except for closer union and more swiping of sovereignty, unless of course after the upcoming EU parliamentary elections there are more Euroscepic MEP's than Europhile ones, but that couldn't possibly happen as the UK is the only country that has any issues with the EU.
You understand that in this country parliament is sovereign, right? So you arguing against the EU because you want sovereignty for the UK, whilst also arguing against the UK parliament actually exercising it's sovereignty. That is literally your position in this quote. Baffling. Also, there are a host of MEPs from other countries that are "Eurosceptic", it is simply false of you to claim otherwise. AfD from Germany and Five Star Movement from Italy are two examples. And pro Europeans want reform too, and not necessarily towards an "ever closer union" ( btw, Cameron negotiated our exemption from that face of the EU anyways).

(Original post by ColinDent)
What forgetting the last referendum is democratic? Not sure how many times this needs to be mentioned but we were all told before the referendum that leaving the EU meant leave the SM/CU and therefore everything else, yet we still voted to leave.
Who told you that, Farage? Cameron? The side of a red bus? Vote
Leave? The last being shown to have broken the law in their campaign. That was during a campaign fraught with lies, whereby politicians on both sides made up what they thought brexit means. It wasn't decided and wasn't asked at the referendum. The referendum was leave or remain. It didn't say how we would leave or remain. We can leave and still be in a customs union. We can leave and still be in the single market (4 countries already have this status). We can leave with a deal or without. These are facts.

Another referendum can tell us how we can leave. So, far from being anti democratic and ignoring the previous referendum, the second referendum I propose asks how people would want to leave, and gives them the main four options of how to leave. Considering the economic forecasts and the failure of the government to get a good deal, and the fact that polls suggest people might have changes their mind, it is also democratic to have remain as an option. It's pretty simple to understand that what I propose is a follow up referendum, not a repeat. It is also clear that it's highly likely to result in leaving in some form or another. Moreover, it has the fortune of compromising between the 52% who voted to leave and th 48% that wanted to remain, so as to avoid the tyranny if the majority.

(Original post by z-hog)
The way they see it? Yes.
See above. Not forgetting - following up the previous referendum when more information gas come to light. And if you think leave is the will of the people, it would win again! At least in what I propose, we would also solve how to leave.
1
reply
z-hog
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#32
Report 1 month ago
#32
(Original post by Bashtopher)
See above. Not forgetting - following up the previous referendum when more information gas come to light. And if you think leave is the will of the people, it would win again! At least in what I propose, we would also solve how to leave.
You make the case totally dependent on parliamentary sovereignty and that's fine, the problem is this: Parliament's brief is to implement Brexit in whatever terms they like but they must do so. There is no going back on anything until that instruction by the electorate is met, instead we have a sizeable enough body of MPs committed to sabotaging and annulling the process. That's anti-democratic.

Nearly 500 of them signed up to it at the time article 50 was invoked, they said we had two years to negotiate a deal with the EU and if one couldn't be worked out the UK would leave without one. Then they shot down the only one the EU will offer and set out to make it 'illegal' to leave without one, leaving us where we are. I genuinely believe Brexit has been blocked, what's the way out? It's a catalogue of things enough to aggravate any democrat and to make the idea of a second referendum a red line. Of course that Remainers are prepared to overlook all that, that's understandable up to a point.
0
reply
ThePootisPower
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#33
Report 1 month ago
#33
(Original post by z-hog)
You make the case totally dependent on parliamentary sovereignty and that's fine, the problem is this: Parliament's brief is to implement Brexit in whatever terms they like but they must do so. There is no going back on anything until that instruction by the electorate is met, instead we have a sizeable enough body of MPs committed to sabotaging and annulling the process. That's anti-democratic.

Nearly 500 of them signed up to it at the time article 50 was invoked, they said we had two years to negotiate a deal with the EU and if one couldn't be worked out the UK would leave without one. Then they shot down the only one the EU will offer and set out to make it 'illegal' to leave without one, leaving us where we are. I genuinely believe Brexit has been blocked, what's the way out? It's a catalogue of things enough to aggravate any democrat and to make the idea of a second referendum a red line. Of course that Remainers are prepared to overlook all that, that's understandable up to a point.
The EU didn't offer us the deal Theresa put to Parliament. Theresa's job was to put together the deal to be handed to the EU after it had been passed through Commons, but because it's a bad deal, the MPs have RIGHTFULLY voted it down. Then, once the parliamentary agenda was handed to MPs after Theresa lost control, the divided house of commons cannot agree on a brexit deal either, with several options all being voted down for various reasons. nothing has a majority.

And the reason No Deal has been made illegal is ebcause it's ****ing lunacy. Not even Vote Leave wanted us to leave without a deal because it's that dangerous. We need an alternative arrangement with the EU post brexit, whether that be a Customs union or not, and until Parliament can pull together and create one, we can't move forward with Brexit.

It's not a concerted effort from Parliament to screw over Leave voters, it's Parliament being fundamentally broken and unable to agree.

Basically, it's incompetence, not a conspiracy.
0
reply
z-hog
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#34
Report 1 month ago
#34
(Original post by ThePootisPower)
The EU didn't offer us the deal Theresa put to Parliament. Theresa's job was to put together the deal to be handed to the EU after it had been passed through Commons, but because it's a bad deal, the MPs have RIGHTFULLY voted it down.
The deal voted down was the one negotiated between May and the EU, it is a sleight of hand to pretend it is all one sided. Who made the Irish issue the stumbling block, was it May's idea?
0
reply
SparkleNat
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#35
Report 1 month ago
#35
They should just revoke Article 50. It wouldn't be going against the "people's vote" because the vote was decided at less than 2% (48,1% v 51,9%) and in any other case the referendum would never have been accepted, but because the party leaders, both the Tories and the Labour MPs, are too far up their own back sides about who has the biggest sausage in their ill-fitting dress trousers the country is falling to ruin.
The people who this affects most -UK citizens living in the EU- weren't even allowed to vote. And big companies aren't helping either, because they don't give a ****, they're still stinking rich.
The ideal scenario is that Article 50 is revoked, but parliament is too busy having a pity party to do that, so what will probably happen is that Brexit will keep being delayed until somebody has the decency to fix the bloody government
Last edited by SparkleNat; 1 month ago
0
reply
ColinDent
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#36
Report 1 month ago
#36
(Original post by ThePootisPower)
The EU didn't offer us the deal Theresa put to Parliament. Theresa's job was to put together the deal to be handed to the EU after it had been passed through Commons, but because it's a bad deal, the MPs have RIGHTFULLY voted it down. Then, once the parliamentary agenda was handed to MPs after Theresa lost control, the divided house of commons cannot agree on a brexit deal either, with several options all being voted down for various reasons. nothing has a majority.

And the reason No Deal has been made illegal is ebcause it's ****ing lunacy. Not even Vote Leave wanted us to leave without a deal because it's that dangerous. We need an alternative arrangement with the EU post brexit, whether that be a Customs union or not, and until Parliament can pull together and create one, we can't move forward with Brexit.

It's not a concerted effort from Parliament to screw over Leave voters, it's Parliament being fundamentally broken and unable to agree.

Basically, it's incompetence, not a conspiracy.
So you don't feel that the predominantly remain parliamentarians are causing the problem regards moving on with brexit, I would personally not only blame the most hardcore of brexiteers, but also a much larger portion of parliamentarians that has been working to keep us within the confines of the EU.
There are some ( remainers) that try to argue that this is for the good of the country, but that particular argument is generally made by privileged middle class types that are really trying to say that we working classes didn't really know what we signed up for when voting to leave the EU.
F**k them and f**k the EU
0
reply
JayJ2001
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#37
Report 1 month ago
#37
Tbh, Brexit should have never happened, England should have just stayed in the EU, many more benefits. All I know is that England is going to leave for sure and that is gonna change England forever in a big way. I don't have any solutions to the current problem, I'd say just back out of the deal and stay in the EU if England can still do that

I'm heading to England at the worst time possible. Brexit won't affect me moving to the UK and into uni there. Brexit won't really affect me personally. Luckily I was born in England I have dual-citizenship, so that makes the moving process A LOT easier
1
reply
ColinDent
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#38
Report 1 month ago
#38
(Original post by SparkleNat)
They should just revoke Article 50. It wouldn't be going against the "people's vote" because the vote was decided at less than 2% (48,2% v 51,8%) and in any other case the referendum would never have been accepted, but because the party leaders, both the Tories and the Labour MPs, are too far up their own back sides about who has the biggest sausage in their ill-fitting dress trousers the country is falling to ruin.
The people who this affects most -UK citizens living in the EU- weren't even allowed to vote. And big companies aren't helping either, because they don't give a ****, they're still stinking rich.
The ideal scenario is that Article 50 is revoked, but parliament is too busy having a pity party to do that, so what will probably happen is that Brexit will keep being delayed until somebody has the decency to fix the bloody govermgove
48.2 v 51.8 is nearer 4% I know that the argument is that it would need 2% of those that voted to have voted differently for the result to go the other way, but they didn't, It's equivalent to arguing a football match that finished 2-1 to the home team would have been completely different had the 2 away goal scorers put the ball in their own nets, they didn't so the score remains the same.
0
reply
Laurence010401
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#39
Report 1 month ago
#39
The first referendum was based on lies on the side of buses. Everyone knows they were lies. We do not give the EU £350 million per week.
You hear loads of jokes on the internet about Brexit, about how it’s going to make our country ****. You hear everyone talking about how **** Brexit is, and how it’s going to **** our country up. How many people to you hear talking about wanting Brexit to happen? How many people would want our economy to be ****ed?
People now have a better idea of what Brexit is, and the full consequences, many of which have changed their opinion, from being a leader to a remainder. And we need a second referendum to prove this
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
1
reply
SparkleNat
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#40
Report 1 month ago
#40
(Original post by ColinDent)
48.2 v 51.8 is nearer 4% I know that the argument is that it would need 2% of those that voted to have voted differently for the result to go the other way, but they didn't, It's equivalent to arguing a football match that finished 2-1 to the home team would have been completely different had the 2 away goal scorers put the ball in their own nets, they didn't so the score remains the same.
I would love for you to tell me how 48,1 and 51.9 are closer to 4% different, nevermind politics, you should be looking at your math skills buddy
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How did your AQA A-level Biology Paper 3 go?

Loved the paper - Feeling positive (301)
15.13%
The paper was reasonable (1101)
55.33%
Not feeling great about that exam... (432)
21.71%
It was TERRIBLE (156)
7.84%

Watched Threads

View All