We need to talk about Brexit Watch

Dez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#21
Report 3 weeks ago
#21
(Original post by paul514)
A second referendum will just turn to a vote for Norway deal in that case.

The issue is remainers will always vote for the staying in the Eu option which is effectively what Norway is.
And this is only an issue because you personally don't agree with it and therefore don't believe anyone else should have a say.
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#22
Report 3 weeks ago
#22
(Original post by Dez)
And this is only an issue because you personally don't agree with it and therefore don't believe anyone else should have a say.
We have had a say, we dont need another. I am semi open to a referendum on

Should the country leave the European Union with.
- no deal?
- May's deal?

But it's a lot of expense for not a lot of gain
1
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#23
Report 3 weeks ago
#23
(Original post by Decahedron)
Less than 1% but in just few years everyone is a ****ing expert. Brexit the great educator.
I'd go along with that, the entire country has turned into mystic Meg!

We need to leave and have this debate in 3 or 4 years when the dust has settled
0
reply
Dez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#24
Report 3 weeks ago
#24
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
we dont need another.
Funny how it's pretty much only ever die-hard leave supporters who say this. If 60% of the country supported remain in a new referendum (which is what opinion polls suggest at the moment), would you still be crying about "will of the people"?
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#25
Report 3 weeks ago
#25
(Original post by Dez)
Funny how it's pretty much only ever die-hard leave supporters who say this. If 60% of the country supported remain in a new referendum (which is what opinion polls suggest at the moment), would you still be crying about "will of the people"
Well it's a good job polls are accurate isn't it?

The only crying is carried out by the people that cannot accept the majority of the country see the harm done in the communities around them and blame it on the EU. If we had another vote remain cannot be an option it would be undemocratic and further confirm the publics distrust in politics to carry out their promisses. Unless we are talking about the lifetime of a goldfish a once in a generation vote is not 2 year's!

Also it depends what poll you wish to quote and what agenda they wish to push.
0
reply
Dez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#26
Report 3 weeks ago
#26
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
Well it's a good job polls are accurate isn't it?
If we shut down any idea of referendum on the basis that opinion polls might be wrong then Brexit would never have got off the ground in the first place. Remember that in 2015, UKIP managed something like 16% of the vote. Pretty pathetic numbers by any metric.

(Original post by Burton Bridge)
The only crying is carried out by the people that cannot accept the majority of the country see the harm done in the communities around them and blame it on the EU.
They blame it on the EU because they've been sold the idea that somehow the UK is this oppressed underdog under the thumb of Brussels legislation. Which is pretty damn far from the truth. Most of the "harm done" is a result of British policies.

(Original post by Burton Bridge)
If we had another vote remain cannot be an option it would be undemocratic and further confirm the publics distrust in politics to carry out their promisses. Unless we are talking about the lifetime of a goldfish a once in a generation vote is not 2 year's!
Continually parroting this rubbish does not make it true. We've had an advisory referendum, there is nothing undemocratic about holding another, especially over such a complex issue. The only reason you try and shut it down as "undemocratic" is because you might not agree with the result.
0
reply
paul514
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#27
Report 3 weeks ago
#27
(Original post by Dez)
And this is only an issue because you personally don't agree with it and therefore don't believe anyone else should have a say.
No it’s a fundamental issue of splitting the vote of one side but not the other so you win by default.
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#28
Report 3 weeks ago
#28
(Original post by Dez)
If we shut down any idea of referendum on the basis that opinion polls might be wrong then Brexit would never have got off the ground in the first place. Remember that in 2015, UKIP managed something like 16% of the vote. Pretty pathetic numbers by any metric.
Not what I am suggesting though it is?

(Original post by Dez)

They blame it on the EU because they've been sold the idea that somehow the UK is this oppressed underdog under the thumb of Brussels legislation. Which is pretty damn far from the truth. Most of the "harm done" is a result of British policies.
And you are so convinced they are wrong and you are right because?


(Original post by Dez)

Continually parroting this rubbish does not make it true. We've had an advisory referendum, there is nothing undemocratic about holding another, especially over such a complex issue. The only reason you try and shut it down as "undemocratic" is because you might not agree with the result.
Continueing to parrot for another vote achieves nothing and only proves to hinder the negotiation for us to gain a good deal! If you cannot see why it is undemocratic then may you can explain why we should have an 'advisory' (would you still call it that if you win?) referendum which carries no legal assurance again?

What's the point, what do you think it will solve, at best you can only draw, how can it ever resolve anything? You know as well as me it can't and it should never happen
1
reply
Dez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#29
Report 3 weeks ago
#29
(Original post by paul514)
No it’s a fundamental issue of splitting the vote of one side but not the other so you win by default.
STV would fix that, but oh I forgot, we already had a referendum on that right? Can't change our mind now, once in a a generation, breakfast means breakfast, and so on. :rolleyes:
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
Not what I am suggesting though it is?
Well I kinda assume you have some justification for denying a plebiscite beyond just "because I say so". Maybe I was wrong.
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
And you are so convinced they are wrong and you are right because?
Because I've studied the evidence available to me and come to that conclusion.
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
Continueing to parrot for another vote achieves nothing and only proves to hinder the negotiation for us to gain a good deal!
What negotiation? May is refusing point blank to budge on anything now, pretty much. There's nothing left to hinder, the government have made a total train wreck out of the whole process and refuse to pick up the pieces.
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
If you cannot see why it is undemocratic then may you can explain why we should have an 'advisory' (would you still call it that if you win?) referendum which carries no legal assurance again?
Did I sugges that? I would in fact be in favour of a non-advisory referendum this time around, one with clear and full documentation of what each option entails, not the rubbish "red white and blue Brexit" type rhetoric we got last time.
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
What's the point, what do you think it will solve, at best you can only draw, how can it ever resolve anything? You know as well as me it can't and it should never happen
The problem we need to solve is the fact that no agreement with the EU has been reached despite the fact the A50 deadline is now less than two months away.

The way I see it, there's little other option available here other than a new referendum. It's clear that the government is unwilling to compromise, the EU will not renegotiate terms of the current agreement, Parliament do not support a new general election, and the only other options are to either crash out with no deal (uttlerly moronic) or unilaterally delay/cancel Brexit with no mandate (ditto).
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#30
Report 3 weeks ago
#30
So now I'm a moron for wanting no deal, banging no point carrying on this with you
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#31
Report 3 weeks ago
#31
Oh to hell with it

(Original post by Dez)
well I kinda assume you have some justification for denying a plebiscite beyond just "because I say so". Maybe I was wrong.

You seem to be in your world, instead of trying to belittle a POV you cannot understand try listening. I'm not against a future relationship with Europe. Even rejoining again however we need to leave first or the will of the electorate was not only not carried out but both sides completely lied!

(Original post by Dez)
Because I've studied the evidence available to me and come to that conclusion.

so what makes you think they hav'nt? What makes your conclusion greater than the majority of the countries?

(Original post by Dez)
What negotiation? May is refusing point blank to budge on anything now, pretty much. There's nothing left to hinder, the government have made a total train wreck out of the whole process and refuse to pick up the pieces.

She's got a loosing hand while people like you are weakening her negotiating position by ridiculous politically motivated comments like crash out, no deal is moronic, remove it from the table etc.


(Original post by Dez)
I would in fact be in favour of a non-advisory referendum this time around, one with clear and full documentation of what each option entails.

We had this last time, we were all aware that leaving the EU meant leaving the EU CU etc
Also if you win its only advice which I wont take and if we win AGAIN you will just continue to cry your bigoted bile that your opinion is greater, so please tell me whats the point if having a another?

(Original post by Dez)
The problem we need to solve is the fact that no agreement with the EU has been reached despite the fact the A50 deadline is now less than two months away.

We have an agreement it's what we agreed on when our MP voted for a50 it's the world trade organisation rules.
Last edited by Burton Bridge; 3 weeks ago
0
reply
paul514
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#32
Report 3 weeks ago
#32
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
So now I'm a moron for wanting no deal, banging no point carrying on this with you
My same reading of it
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#33
Report 3 weeks ago
#33
(Original post by paul514)
My same reading of it
I answered him anyway, some these remainers really need to hold the mirror up to their own actions before thay cast their stones.

Who the real prejudiced people are becomes clearer and clearer with every passing day.
0
reply
DJKL
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#34
Report 3 weeks ago
#34
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
You seem to be in your world, instead of trying to belittle a POV you cannot understand try listening. I'm not against a future relationship with Europe. Even rejoining again however we need to leave first or the will of the electorate was not only not carried out but both sides completely lied!



I would read Sir Ivan Rogers recent comments re that approach, he suggests it is , to paraphrase, handicaping all future negotiations re trade.

"If the supposed route to prosperity for post Brexit “global Britain” lies through a global
lattice work of preferential trade deals, how can one possibly seriously argue that the
ONLY bloc with which one does not need a free trade deal is the one with which one
does easily the largest volumes of trade?

And if a preferential trade deal with the EU is, in practice, essential, then you obviously
gain nothing by tumbling completely out to WTO rules, and then having to try and
scramble your way back up the hill to a preferential deal, under huge time pressure,
notably in those many sectors and issues on which a resort to WTO rules gives you
nothing.

You just hand the perfect negotiating hand to the other side. Listening to Ministers and
ex Ministers now loudly asserting that going out all the way would give us all the cards
in a free trade negotiation with the EU leaves one not knowing whether to laugh or cry.
Let me just repeat it in case you are wondering whether this can possibly be right or
whether I am spoofing.

We are now being flogged the proposition that in order to move from a deep preferential
agreement - the supranational political, juridical and enforcement aspects of high you
deplore, but which gives you much the best trading terms with the bloc, above all in the
sectors in which you are highly competitive - to a less deep, but normal EU preferential
agreement which gives you substantially better access than WTO terms, the best route is
to go all the way out to WTO terms first.

Because that will give you the whip hand in negotiations with a bloc for which the
absence of any preferential deal covers a vastly lower proportion of its trade than it does
of yours.

And the bloc would therefore come begging for a new preferential deal, drop completely
its demand for the backstop, accept that technological and administrative solutions to
the border suffice, when they have repeatedly previously made clear they cannot, and
settle for much less than the money that the U.K. Prime Minister had already agreed to
pay if she got an acceptable Withdrawal Agreement – which she now publicly agrees she
has.



The reality is that you would in exiting to WTO terms reset the baseline for future FTA
talks in the worst possible place for U.K. negotiators.

We would start them as a bog standard third country with no preferential deal in place,
not as a former member of the club seeking to argue, notably in goods, that the baseline
should be everything we wish to retain in friction free trade about the world we had as
members. In other words, by deliberately going to “no deal and WTO”, you reset the
baseline from which we all start as MFN (most favoured nation) trade, and have to build
everything up from that tabula rasa base."

https://www.ucl.ac.uk/european-insti...l_22012019.pdf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PxpHNXIKnY&t=
1
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#35
Report 3 weeks ago
#35
Great points and very trie but unfortunately not leaving the European Union is not an option.

I do agree with much that he say though, rejoining on the terms we currently have is highly unlikely to happen.
0
reply
Decahedron
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#36
Report 3 weeks ago
#36
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
I'd go along with that, the entire country has turned into mystic Meg!

We need to leave and have this debate in 3 or 4 years when the dust has settled
I would prefer No Deal and chaos.
0
reply
Dez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#37
Report 3 weeks ago
#37
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
You seem to be in your world, instead of trying to belittle a POV you cannot understand try listening. I'm not against a future relationship with Europe. Even rejoining again however we need to leave first or the will of the electorate was not only not carried out but both sides completely lied!
Politicians lie all the time.

(Original post by Burton Bridge)
so what makes you think they hav'nt? What makes your conclusion greater than the majority of the countries?
Well when they start spouting off nonsense like "Brussels controls our immigration" or "the EU is to blame for stagnant wages", it becomes pretty clear that they've not done any of their homework, and are simply looking for reasons to hate the EU.

(Original post by Burton Bridge)
She's got a loosing hand while people like you are weakening her negotiating position by ridiculous politically motivated comments like crash out, no deal is moronic, remove it from the table etc.
There's nothing politically motivated going on here - no deal would bring our economy to a standstill. There are no upsides to anybody for crashing out of the EU without a deal.

(Original post by Burton Bridge)
We had this last time, we were all aware that leaving the EU meant leaving the EU CU etc
False.

(Original post by Burton Bridge)
Also if you win its only advice which I wont take and if we win AGAIN you will just continue to cry your bigoted bile that your opinion is greater, so please tell me whats the point if having a another?
This is why I said it ought to be binding with full details of the plan going forward depending on which way the vote goes. No ambiguities, no "we should do X", no split campaign efforts.

(Original post by Burton Bridge)
We have an agreement it's what we agreed on when our MP voted for a50 it's the world trade organisation rules.
Yeah, no thanks. I prefer to live in a country where food and fuel doesn't cost double what they do now.
1
reply
DJKL
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#38
Report 3 weeks ago
#38
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
Great points and very trie but unfortunately not leaving the European Union is not an option.

I do agree with much that he say though, rejoining on the terms we currently have is highly unlikely to happen.
It all boils down to how leaving is defined and what form of relationship may be framed within two extremes..

Leaving, in its purest form is out, forget trade deals with anyone, because in trade deals we trade a little bit of sovereignty and self determination, UK in isolation, a North Korea in Europe; every step back from that involves deals that impact ability to act in a unilateral manner.

Remain has us as is, curtailments re what we can do but at least with a seat at one of the tables (because the EU is not the only rule setter, just one of them, we need to follow to trade and travel etc)

Between the two are myriad possible options, all have a price between self determination (to a degree) and economic wellbeing (to a degree), the fact that say HMG views the wishes of 17.4m votes as one thing does not make it so, the crazy part, if one reads Sir Ivan's full speech, is some players who might well 2-3 years ago have counternanced EEA/EFTA as a valid leave option now state that this is not the case (in their view, of course), the debate has spun so much that views/opinions have been thrown outwards to extreme edges and are showing little movement back to a less damaging middle path.

There may be a move in H of C behind The May Plan, but I suspect, and fear, that the red line insisted upon by those that might back it re the backstop are unlikely to be met by the EU, to me , unless things change, we are very possibly going out on accidental No Deal, accidental, unprepared No Deal, which is the worst version of No Deal possible. Even if the EU by some miracle was to agree backstop modification, and that looks very unlikely to me, then May might still not carry the H of C as by reaching to the ERG she is distancing the rest.

And the moral- there is no such thing as a free lunch, trade access has a price re money and governance, governance has a price re money and trade access.
Last edited by DJKL; 3 weeks ago
1
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#39
Report 3 weeks ago
#39
(Original post by Dez)
Politicians lie all the time.



Well when they start spouting off nonsense like "Brussels controls our immigration" or "the EU is to blame for stagnant wages", it becomes pretty clear that they've not done any of their homework, and are simply looking for reasons to hate the EU.



There's nothing politically motivated going on here - no deal would bring our economy to a standstill. There are no upsides to anybody for crashing out of the EU without a deal.



False.



This is why I said it ought to be binding with full details of the plan going forward depending on which way the vote goes. No ambiguities, no "we should do X", no split campaign efforts.



Yeah, no thanks. I prefer to live in a country where food and fuel doesn't cost double what they do now.
Well Dez I'd love to agree with you but then we would both be wrong!
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#40
Report 3 weeks ago
#40
(Original post by DJKL)
It all boils down to how leaving is defined and what form of relationship may be framed within two extremes..

Leaving, in its purest form is out, forget trade deals with anyone, because in trade deals we trade a little bit of sovereignty and self determination, UK in isolation, a North Korea in Europe; every step back from that involves deals that impact ability to act in a unilateral manner.

Remain has us as is, curtailments re what we can do but at least with a seat at one of the tables (because the EU is not the only rule setter, just one of them, we need to follow to trade and travel etc)

Between the two are myriad possible options, all have a price between self determination (to a degree) and economic wellbeing (to a degree), the fact that say HMG views the wishes of 17.4m votes as one thing does not make it so, the crazy part, if one reads Sir Ivan's full speech, is some players who might well 2-3 years ago have counternanced EEA/EFTA as a valid leave option now state that this is not the case (in their view, of course), the debate has spun so much that views/opinions have been thrown outwards to extreme edges and are showing little movement back to a less damaging middle path.

There may be a move in H of C behind The May Plan, but I suspect, and fear, that the red line insisted upon by those that might back it re the backstop are unlikely to be met by the EU, to me , unless things change, we are very possibly going out on accidental No Deal, accidental, unprepared No Deal, which is the worst version of No Deal possible. Even if the EU by some miracle was to agree backstop modification, and that looks very unlikely to me, then May might still not carry the H of C as by reaching to the ERG she is distancing the rest.

And the moral- there is no such thing as a free lunch, trade access has a price re money and governance, governance has a price re money and trade access.
The problem is far greater than meets the eye at first glance, it's made far worse by a weak government and the involvement of one of the sides of the Irish problem.

May is very much up the creak without a paddle and Corbyn really is not helping by pushing impossible demands like removing no deal as an option, furthermore I believe he knows this full well.

I think we will end up with no deal, I think there will then be further unhelpful attitudes and actions from our politicians with labour trying to blame the tories for everything and Tories literally spliting to form two parties. The next government will be either aablut minority or a Labour snp collective with a a other Scottish vote.

That's my prediction, bleak as it is.I hope I'm wrong
Last edited by Burton Bridge; 3 weeks ago
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

Do you give blood?

Yes (49)
9.37%
I used to but I don't now (14)
2.68%
No, but I want to start (188)
35.95%
No, I am unable to (122)
23.33%
No, I chose not to (150)
28.68%

Watched Threads

View All