The UK is Out - New PM - and whither now for Article 50

Dodger58

Tomw85 said:

I voted out and still back my decision, however I do agree that there should have been a third option on the ballet, vote to leave if a better deal cannot be agreed. That would have been my preferred option, however both Cameron and the EU failed to realise just how many people had had enough of the EU and his negotiations offered us very little.

The concessions we have were slowly being eroded and I believe would have continued to even further if we were stay.

Two points on this:
1. I think Cameron knew he needed concessions from the EU but they were too 'blind' to realise that they had to give any.
2. As you correctly say concessions have been and will continue to be eroded.

This is why I am more than happy to be in the process of disentangling ourselves from the EU.

Tomw85

Dodger - I agree, I think if the EU knew what the outcome would have been that there would have been more given to try and prevent it. Although that said, I do worry that they do not care and are so set on pushing ahead with their plans that they there is a chance they wouldn't have done anything differently anyways.

thornburyiron

As I posted a couple of weeks ago my tenuous relative who is a translator at the EU in Brussels said vote remain if you want her to keep her job or leave if you don't want to be part of a German led federal state of Europe. They've already applied to join NATO as such so they're determined to do it.

Whitehorsehammer

some interesting thoughts in this piece.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2016/07/second-referendum-only-way-get-britain-back-brexit

thornburyiron

That's all it is. Someone's thoughts.

grey_til_I_dye

Tom

It isn't, at least for me, that I don't see a future, just that I don't see it as being better than in the EU.

It's fine saying we can get trade deals with new partners, but the question is will they be better than the UK could have got within the EU? If not, what's the benefit?

And if the UK strikes independent trade deals (as it must), that will presumably have an impact on how they trade with the EU, and what deals they make.

I can only see short and medium term damage to the UK economy as a result of choosing Brexit (it took Australia and China 10 years to come up with their trade agreement), and I very much doubt that the long-term will bring any great benefits beyond what the UK would have had from within the EU.

And if the UK end up with something like the Norway agreement, then the pain will have been for absolutely no real benefit whatsoever.

Tomw85

Whitehorse, lies were told on both sides - look at Osbourne for the remain camp. Also all we have had from most of the press since the result is project fear and the markets tumbling.

I work in property in Islington and I have read so many articles about prices dropping 10-20%. So far all of the deals I had agreed before Brexit as still moving forward to exchange. Yes there has been a bit of renegotiating (2-4% at most) but that is just because people are quoting the papers as their evidence of the market crashing.

It is not the case, I even had multiple bids on a property last week. Yes the very top end is slow, but it was even before the referendum. In fact there are now rumblings that it is starting to move again now that the £ is down and foreign investors are coming back to pick up deals.

There is a counter to every argument, but rather than keep trying to talk things down in the hopes it will give more cause to try and change the result lets embrace the challenge ahead and see that there is a world beyond the EU.

NEoldiron

Thorn, regarding the link that Whitehorse provided, as Richard Dawkins the author of the piece asked,

"What do you have to lose in holding a second referendum? Do you not have the courage of your own convictions? Do you, perhaps, have stirrings of queasiness as you watch some of your most vocal leaders abandoning the sinking ship they helped to scupper – or at least displaying a disquieting cluelessness about what to do with the country now that they’ve “taken it back”?"

A little more than "That's all it is. Someone's thoughts"

This matter is far too important to be decided by fewer than 2million votes.

thornburyiron

How big a difference would it have to be before it was accepted then? 5M, 10M?

Why not make all football matches a draw unless one team wins by 2 or 3 clear goals.

If remain had won by the same margin you'd have been arguing until you were blue in the face that the result must stand because that's democracy.

Tomw85

Neoldiron, I am still waiting for you to come back to me on the questions that I put back to you earlier...

Moojor

I would have been happy with a second referendum if remain had won because I don't believe a large number of people who voted would have felt lied to when straight afterwards some of the biggest claims were proven to be false and those campaigning to remain wouldn't have all just quit or run away from their responsibilities.

Tomw85

David Cameron has quit and George Osbourne is no longer in his position following the result. Again you can counter most arguments.

Say we had a second referendum and the result was to leave again, would you actually accept that or would you carry on saying that over 17m people are idiots who believed a few sound bite lies and push to over turn the result again?

Moojor

Erm... if remain had won Cameron wouldn't have quit. So no that argument isn't countered.

PrestonHammer

Why didn't the remain camp bust the lies instead of coming out with whoppers of their own?

MrsGrey

thornburyiron said:

That's all it is. Someone's thoughts.

Like your relative who works in Brussels?

Tomw85

Moojor said:

Erm... if remain had won Cameron wouldn't have quit. So no that argument isn't countered.

Very fair point Moojor, I think one of these is in need for me ;facepalm

thornburyiron

Mrs G I believe she's been present at various confidential meetings and would probably be sacked anyway if it was known she'd been talking. As for her being my relative I've no idea as it seems so far removed I'd have no idea what to call it

claretandbluesky

I am amazed that we found anyone to take the job once Dave left as I feel Theresa may is faced with one of the worst decisions we could imagine, she must sacrifice the economy for the idea of democracy or sacrifice the idea of democracy to save the economy. I do state the word 'idea' of democracy as I do believe it only to be an idea that can be manipulated by information providers, so a more accurate description would be a mechanism through which the information providers do battle to impose their agenda through persuading the populous.

I also feel that were the leave - remain question put to parliament it would be an overwhelming majority to remain. This could be interpreted two ways, the first being that the MPs voting are fortunate to fall within the group of people that the world is working out ok for, or the other way to view it is that they are actually willing and able to inform themselves of the real facts and able to weigh and measure the risks versus reward for the nation as a whole than your average member of the public. I would probably say both would be about equally true personally.

NEoldiron

Tomw85

"I am still waiting for you to come back to me on the questions that I put back to you earlier..."

If you mean this, "what evidence you have to show that we were not losing our ability to veto etc etc." an absence of evidence does not prove a negative.

If you mean this, "we will suddenly stop being the 5th/6th biggest economy in the world", well if the likelihood of the City losing its financial passport becomes a reality together with the drop in inward foreign investment .......


Thorn,
if you've read my earlier posts I've said consistently that the referendum should not be viewed as a legally binding decision - which it isn't, but read the article by Richard Dawkins and see how other countries do it.

Grey's last post sums it up for me.

NEoldiron

AKA,

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-referendum-result-not-legally-binding-lawyers-letter-a7129626.html

Also FYI I'm coming from Canning Town if you must know. ;wink

grey_til_I_dye

pards

Leaving aside the fine point, sorry, but that is tosh.

You have no idea how well or ill-informed thorn's relative is, nor how that compares to those posting on here.

So it s far, far from SURE.

thornburyiron

I don't know if I can even call her a relative as she is in some obscure way related to a relative of mine as a kind of in law in law sort of way so I do not personally speak to her.
I am merely relaying what she has told my relative and although I gather she really loves her job she doesn't at all like where she's doing it.

IronHerb

Whether it is legally binding or not is irrelevant. If MP's go against the referendum result they will most likely be voted out of office at the next general election, and probably lose out to UKIP who will enforce an unsatisfactory exit.

thornburyiron

What's an unsa

IronHerb

United Nations Special Advisor ;lol

Corrected now ;ok

grey_til_I_dye

thorn

Not trying to discredit her or you, jut pointing out that pards assuming she was better informed than anyone else on Brexit was a bit of a stretch.

thornburyiron

Grey I don't feel discredited I'm just relaying what she has said. It's the federal ambitions which get to her most. She is obviously better informed than most but not necessarily better informed than all.

Tomw85

NE sorry but I don't buy either of your points. Surely if the EU is not pushing for ever closer union there would be a mandate or something to say so. I gave evidence to show that it is, I can't really do much more than that.

Also re London losing its financial passport, can you provide anything to support your claims here?

I have given plenty of other examples to show that we should continue to have a strong economy, I couldn't help notice that you didn't provide anything to counter that as your views that we will become a small divided nation are just that, your views and not based on fact.

grey_til_I_dye

thorn

What makes her better informed? The simple fact that she is employed within the EU?

What information is she able to access that is not public domain?

Is every EU employee better informed than any non-EU employee?

What happens when EU employees disagree about something?

Who trumps whom?

pardew

What on earth makes you think that

a) you are qualified to make such a statement

b) that someone you have never met, and know nothing about, is so well-informed.

It's a nonsense.

MrsGrey

pards/thorn

I am not challenging how much she knows or doesn't know. I was trying to make the point that her views are just opinions. She will bring to the process of forming an opinion her own priorities, prejudices and attitudes.

If it follows that anyone whose opinion is based on first hand experience is right, how do you explain the fact that many people have just as much, and possibly more, knowledge but come to a different conclusion?