Current Affairs EU In or Out

[The Esk]

Think about what your asking for and decide for yourselves if having your own way is truly worth tha

The very same point could be made to those who want Brexit at any cost just because a referendum voted for it.

If it makes no economic sense to leave the single market or the currency union at a time when the world is just about to enter a protectionary phase then the government and Parliament should have the leadership to take that decision.

We live in a parliamentary democracy. There would be nothing undemocratic about Parliament deciding not to proceed if the economic case demonstrated thus.

 

[peteblue]

The very same point could be made to those who want Brexit at any cost just because a referendum voted for it.

If it makes no economic sense to leave the single market or the currency union at a time when the world is just about to enter a protectionary phase then the government and Parliament should have the leadership to take that decision.

We live in a parliamentary democracy. There would be nothing undemocratic about Parliament deciding not to proceed if the economic case demonstrated thus.

Esk, the cards have been thrown in the air, it just so happens that they are all falling down into place for the UK.......Everything is going our way and after we have left we will progress and become the country we deserve to be, a player in the world again..... The EU is finished, it just hasn't realised it yet.........

 

[Tubey]

The idea of holding a second referendum is simply disgusting. How can anyone who believes in democracy be happy to see the results of Brexit ignored? The question on the vote was quite simple, it read: 'Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?' There was no mention of a second vote if we didn't like the terms agreed on our leaving or anything of the sort. The people were asked a question and they gave they're answer, anyone who opposes this should think very hard about the consequences of ignoring a democratic mandate. If we Ignore the referendum and the 17.4million voters then this country will have shown itself to be no better then a fascist state or a banana republic. Think about what your asking for and decide for yourselves if having your own way is truly worth that.

It's this simple.

The first referendum question: 'Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?'

The answer comes back No.

All fine. Go through parliament, get approval for Article 50 to start the process to leave (which will pass through as parliament will accept the democratic principle of the referendum).

At that point, we're negotiating the terms of leaving. We have NOT been asked what terms we leave on - neither parliament or a referendum has had a chance to judge those terms.

Therefore, the second referendum makes perfect sense - not to ask again if we should leave, but the question should be.

"Do you support the process of leaving the European Union via the Brexit Act 2018 (or whatever it'll be called)?"

At that point, we should actually have referendum after referendum until the answer is Yes, because Article 50 can be cancelled at any point in those two years, so if we keep getting the answer No at that point, there's no reason not to re-run (it'd be ludicrous if it was an unimportant issue, but this is the biggest issue of a generation - it makes sense to do it thoroughly).

But during the process, if we keep getting No and it's looking likely the public have changed their mind for economic reasons or whatever, then we should ask the original question again.

People who have applauded the referendum have applauded democracy in action - therefore, why are you all so scared of democracy continuing to act? You trusted and applauded the public for its' decision in the first instance; why be so wary of asking them again about the terms? Or, if you really are afraid of another referendum, why not advocate parliament having a free vote on it according to their conscience, given they are elected to govern?

 

[peteblue]

It's this simple.

The first referendum question: 'Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?'

The answer comes back No.

All fine. Go through parliament, get approval for Article 50 to start the process to leave (which will pass through as parliament will accept the democratic principle of the referendum).

At that point, we're negotiating the terms of leaving. We have NOT been asked what terms we leave on - neither parliament or a referendum has had a chance to judge those terms.

Therefore, the second referendum makes perfect sense - not to ask again if we should leave, but the question should be.

"Do you support the process of leaving the European Union via the Brexit Act 2018 (or whatever it'll be called)?"

At that point, we should actually have referendum after referendum until the answer is Yes, because Article 50 can be cancelled at any point in those two years, so if we keep getting the answer No at that point, there's no reason not to re-run (it'd be ludicrous if it was an unimportant issue, but this is the biggest issue of a generation - it makes sense to do it thoroughly).

But during the process, if we keep getting No and it's looking likely the public have changed their mind for economic reasons or whatever, then we should ask the original question again.

People who have applauded the referendum have applauded democracy in action - therefore, why are you all so scared of democracy continuing to act? You trusted and applauded the public for its' decision in the first instance; why be so wary of asking them again about the terms? Or, if you really are afraid of another referendum, why not advocate parliament having a free vote on it according to their conscience, given they are elected to govern?

There was no yes or no vote.....

We voted to leave.....

 

[Joey66]

It's this simple.

The first referendum question: 'Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?'

The answer comes back No.

All fine. Go through parliament, get approval for Article 50 to start the process to leave (which will pass through as parliament will accept the democratic principle of the referendum).

At that point, we're negotiating the terms of leaving. We have NOT been asked what terms we leave on - neither parliament or a referendum has had a chance to judge those terms.

Therefore, the second referendum makes perfect sense - not to ask again if we should leave, but the question should be.

"Do you support the process of leaving the European Union via the Brexit Act 2018 (or whatever it'll be called)?"

At that point, we should actually have referendum after referendum until the answer is Yes, because Article 50 can be cancelled at any point in those two years, so if we keep getting the answer No at that point, there's no reason not to re-run (it'd be ludicrous if it was an unimportant issue, but this is the biggest issue of a generation - it makes sense to do it thoroughly).

But during the process, if we keep getting No and it's looking likely the public have changed their mind for economic reasons or whatever, then we should ask the original question again.

People who have applauded the referendum have applauded democracy in action - therefore, why are you all so scared of democracy continuing to act? You trusted and applauded the public for its' decision in the first instance; why be so wary of asking them again about the terms? Or, if you really are afraid of another referendum, why not advocate parliament having a free vote on it according to their conscience, given they are elected to govern?

Basically No as we voted on the ballot paper out for the Parliment of this country to deal with it end of!
All the other referendums on Europe were dealt that way when we voted to stay in!
No 2 Nd referendum on the terms utter ridiculous IMO!Youwant your cake and eat it any terms may well be rejected by the EU any rate this is in the realms of a banana republic!

 

[Tubey]

There was no yes or no vote.....

We voted to leave.....

Great, so if that's your view, let parliament have a free vote on it and respect our democratic institutions.

Or do you prefer the EU to set terms to proper screw us over, knowing our politicians have to accept it because the referendum already said so apparently? Are you really happy with being in that weak a position?

 

[Tubey]

Basically No as we voted on the ballot paper out for the Parliment of this country to deal with it end of!
All the other referendums on Europe were dealt that way when we voted to stay in!
No 2 Nd referendum on the terms utter ridiculous IMO!Youwant your cake and eat it any terms may well be rejected by the EU any rate this is in the realms of a banana republic!

Then what's the point in negotiating? Think about it - if the UK parliament has no choice but to accept the terms anyway, the EU should absolutely slaughter us with the terms. Why do anything else - we don't have a leg to stand on.

 

[peteblue]

Great, so if that's your view, let parliament have a free vote on it and respect our democratic institutions.

Or do you prefer the EU to set terms to proper screw us over, knowing our politicians have to accept it because the referendum already said so apparently? Are you really happy with being in that weak a position?

My view is that we should initiate article 50, because that is what we voted for, the government should negotiate and the final deal should be voted on either by parliament or another referendum.........what is your problem.......

 

[Old Blue 2]

At that point, we're negotiating the terms of leaving. We have NOT been asked what terms we leave on - neither parliament or a referendum has had a chance to judge those terms.

It's called a 'Mandate'. That is what the referendum was.

Once voted upon, it is for the civil servants of the respective Government departments and the Government of the day to take forward the specifics of leaving.

In the same way a General Election is a 'Mandate'. It is then for the party or parties with an overall majority to form a Government and bring forth the Acts of Parliament that they see fit.

You do NOT set down the minute details of the prospective terms and conditions of leaving the EU in a mandate. That is totally stupid...

 

[Tubey]

My view is that we should initiate article 50, because that is what we voted for, the government should negotiate and the final deal should be voted on either by parliament or another referendum.........what is your problem.......

I don't have one if that's your position, because it is also mine.

However, the "final deal" shouldn't be hamstrung by the first referendum. The terms should be voted on freely, either in parliament or by referendum, without being tied to the first referendum result. Otherwise it's pointless.

 

[Tubey]

It's called a 'Mandate'. That is what the referendum was.

Once voted upon, it is for the civil servants of the respective Government departments and the Government of the day to take forward the specifics of leaving.

In the same way a General Election is a 'Mandate'. It is then for the party or parties with an overall majority to form a Government and bring forth the Acts of Parliament that they see fit.

You do NOT set down the minute details of the prospective terms and conditions of leaving the EU in a mandate. That is totally stupid...

Agreed completely. That's exactly what I'm saying (so I'm hoping your intent was to agree with me here!)

There should be either a free vote in parliament (based on what the MPs think is the correct course of action) or a separate referendum on the terms themselves.

 

[peteblue]

I don't have one if that's your position, because it is also mine.

However, the "final deal" shouldn't be hamstrung by the first referendum. The terms should be voted on freely, either in parliament or by referendum, without being tied to the first referendum result. Otherwise it's pointless.

The deal will be whatever the deal is. We are leaving the EU, because that was the vote, the terms have yet to be defined. If however the EU does not wish to deal with us for whatever reason, then two years after serving article 50 we are out. Whatever happens we will be better off......we have moved on, the politicians understand this and have started to see the opportunities, the Trump result just emphasises the opportunity..........

 

[Tubey]

The deal will be whatever the deal is. We are leaving the EU, because that was the vote, the terms have yet to be defined. If however the EU does not wish to deal with us for whatever reason, then two years after serving article 50 we are out. Whatever happens we will be better off......we have moved on, the politicians understand this and have started to see the opportunities, the Trump result just emphasises the opportunity..........

So, again, that means voting on the 'deal', whether by referendum or parliament vote, is completely pointless if we went with what you are saying.

 

[peteblue]

So, again, that means voting on the 'deal', whether by referendum or parliament vote, is completely pointless if we went with what you are saying.

We have voted to leave. That is a done deal, now we are voting on the terms, not whether we leave or not.......

 

[Tubey]

We have voted to leave. That is a done deal, now we are voting on the terms, not whether we leave or not.......

Yes but if the terms aren't acceptable, we don't leave, cancel Article 50, then re-activate it to re-negotiate. Otherwise what is the point in voting on the terms? You have to have two options at the very least.