ChatterBank0 min ago
Uk Govt Rejects 2Nd Referendum
Can we now just get on with it?
https:/
https:/
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by retrocop. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
//Parliament closes for summer this week.....//
parliament rises on the 21st July, which is the week after.
http://
parliament rises on the 21st July, which is the week after.
http://
perhaps more importantly, article 50 cannot be invoked until this process has been followed, and exhausted. this won't even begin until the 19th.
http://
http://
I'm sure one can read all sorts of wishful thinking from fantasists if one looks for it.
The main concern now is whether we get a, capitulating to the EU, PM who decides abandoning all reasons to exit is a agreeable compromise to get access to the single market and betrays the country by accepting a Norwegian type stitch-up. Given the lack of adequate candidates for Tory leader, that can't be ruled out. But would cause ructions and put the Tory party in opposition for decades.
The main concern now is whether we get a, capitulating to the EU, PM who decides abandoning all reasons to exit is a agreeable compromise to get access to the single market and betrays the country by accepting a Norwegian type stitch-up. Given the lack of adequate candidates for Tory leader, that can't be ruled out. But would cause ructions and put the Tory party in opposition for decades.
// I'm sure I read somewhere that there might have to be another referendum to ratify any new 'Brexit' treaty // itchy
it has been mentioned
but then excluded
anyway what would the question be:
Do you want to commit suicide again ?
it would be an overwhelming YES
with hundreds f thousands running towards beachy head
( that would be a reference to Lemmings throwing themselves off cliffs - to an Brexiters who can read .... )
it has been mentioned
but then excluded
anyway what would the question be:
Do you want to commit suicide again ?
it would be an overwhelming YES
with hundreds f thousands running towards beachy head
( that would be a reference to Lemmings throwing themselves off cliffs - to an Brexiters who can read .... )
// we get a, capitulating to the EU, PM who decides abandoning all reasons to exit is a agreeable compromise //
OG - you are clearly one of the thinkers on Brexit - and have noticed that even the really crazy ( sorry really committed ) Brexiters have back tracked.
St Nige said of £350m to the NHS, " oops I shouldna said that ". and someone else has admitted that you cant have free trade without free movement of people
so the new PM is onto a hiding for nothing
and historically ( yeah I know you got History O level once or sumfing ) of one election ( that where everyone queues for hours and puts random crosses on bits of paper ) where Nicky Kaldor and X Baloch said [two eastern europeans - well theyre gonna soon go home innit ?]
" zees is one election we think Labour ought to lose "
OG - you are clearly one of the thinkers on Brexit - and have noticed that even the really crazy ( sorry really committed ) Brexiters have back tracked.
St Nige said of £350m to the NHS, " oops I shouldna said that ". and someone else has admitted that you cant have free trade without free movement of people
so the new PM is onto a hiding for nothing
and historically ( yeah I know you got History O level once or sumfing ) of one election ( that where everyone queues for hours and puts random crosses on bits of paper ) where Nicky Kaldor and X Baloch said [two eastern europeans - well theyre gonna soon go home innit ?]
" zees is one election we think Labour ought to lose "
I've promised to keep out of further "Brexit" threads but I cannot help myself.
"I'm sure I read somewhere that there might have to be another referendum to ratify any new 'Brexit' treaty "
There will not be a "Brexit Treaty". When the UK leaves all that will happen is that it will no longer be bound by the Lisbon Treaty. The negotiations that will follow our implemening Artcile 50 will be to determine the relationship that will exist between the UK and the EU. There is no need for a referendum to "ratify" the details. Some may be determined quickly; others may take some time. The implication of another referendum to ratify those negotiations suggests that if the electorate votes against them then Brexit cannot occur. And that is clearly nonsense. The country voted to leave the EU - full stop (because that's all the question asked). It did not vote to leave only if the new reationship is acceptable.
"I'm sure I read somewhere that there might have to be another referendum to ratify any new 'Brexit' treaty "
There will not be a "Brexit Treaty". When the UK leaves all that will happen is that it will no longer be bound by the Lisbon Treaty. The negotiations that will follow our implemening Artcile 50 will be to determine the relationship that will exist between the UK and the EU. There is no need for a referendum to "ratify" the details. Some may be determined quickly; others may take some time. The implication of another referendum to ratify those negotiations suggests that if the electorate votes against them then Brexit cannot occur. And that is clearly nonsense. The country voted to leave the EU - full stop (because that's all the question asked). It did not vote to leave only if the new reationship is acceptable.
"The implication of another referendum to ratify those negotiations suggests that if the electorate votes against them then Brexit cannot occur. And that is clearly nonsense."
I suppose this is right, but we can still dare to dream...
Seriously, though, this rejection was inevitable and correct. A second referendum on the details of whatever negotiations follow finally triggering Article 50 might make some sense if they are "concluded" with time to spare before the two-year deadline. Otherwise, it's hard to see the point as NJ says.
I suppose this is right, but we can still dare to dream...
Seriously, though, this rejection was inevitable and correct. A second referendum on the details of whatever negotiations follow finally triggering Article 50 might make some sense if they are "concluded" with time to spare before the two-year deadline. Otherwise, it's hard to see the point as NJ says.
I can't remember where I read this, but if I find the link I'll post it. It was stuff to do with treaties and international law that I am not sure anyone really understands.
Ironically the only scenario where a referendum would definitely NOT apply would be if there was no agreement, and Britain;s membership simply lapsed after the 2 years. This, I feel sure, would be Farage's ideal scenario (if he's still sober enough to know what;s what by then :-) )
Ironically the only scenario where a referendum would definitely NOT apply would be if there was no agreement, and Britain;s membership simply lapsed after the 2 years. This, I feel sure, would be Farage's ideal scenario (if he's still sober enough to know what;s what by then :-) )
I’ve have a re-read of this thread and I must say, Peter, I’m somewhat taken aback by your remarks:
“( that would be a reference to Lemmings throwing themselves off cliffs - to an Brexiters who can read .... )”
Some 17m people voted for Brexit. I know quite a number of them. I don’t know any who are now regretting their decision; I don’t know any who believed that there would be £350m a week to be spent on the NHS (and in fact cannot be sure that it was actually said in so many words); but most importantly, I don’t know any of them who cannot read. Whilst illiteracy is not to be condemned as a sin in quite the way it once was, it is somewhat insulting to suggest that voting to leave the EU should be concomitant with being unable to read. It’s not very nice.
On a lighter note:
“…and someone else has admitted that you cant have free trade without free movement of people”
Show me one example, outside the EU and the EEA, of nations which freely trade with each other being forced to accept free movement of people as a condition. It simply doesn’t happen elsewhere and to suggest that one can only take place if the other is compulsory is simply ridiculous. The EU originated the idea that trade and freedom of movement are compulsory partners and if it was suggested anywhere else in the world it would be, quite rightly, laughed at. It is precisely because of conditions like this which the EU has laid upon its members that a referendum on membership was needed in the first place. If the EU had behaved like other normal trading blocs across the world do then it would have been unnecessary.
“( that would be a reference to Lemmings throwing themselves off cliffs - to an Brexiters who can read .... )”
Some 17m people voted for Brexit. I know quite a number of them. I don’t know any who are now regretting their decision; I don’t know any who believed that there would be £350m a week to be spent on the NHS (and in fact cannot be sure that it was actually said in so many words); but most importantly, I don’t know any of them who cannot read. Whilst illiteracy is not to be condemned as a sin in quite the way it once was, it is somewhat insulting to suggest that voting to leave the EU should be concomitant with being unable to read. It’s not very nice.
On a lighter note:
“…and someone else has admitted that you cant have free trade without free movement of people”
Show me one example, outside the EU and the EEA, of nations which freely trade with each other being forced to accept free movement of people as a condition. It simply doesn’t happen elsewhere and to suggest that one can only take place if the other is compulsory is simply ridiculous. The EU originated the idea that trade and freedom of movement are compulsory partners and if it was suggested anywhere else in the world it would be, quite rightly, laughed at. It is precisely because of conditions like this which the EU has laid upon its members that a referendum on membership was needed in the first place. If the EU had behaved like other normal trading blocs across the world do then it would have been unnecessary.
NJ
//it is somewhat insulting to suggest that voting to leave the EU should be concomitant with being unable to read. It’s not very nice. //
Equally it is also insulting to be described as a racist for voting to leave. Allegedly, according to one bigoted view here, we voted to leave to kick out the "horrid foreigners". Only an ignoramus would vote on that basis and believe it to happen.
Some like to be dictated to and toe the line but others wish our laws and constitution to be made in this country by people we know and can sack !!
//it is somewhat insulting to suggest that voting to leave the EU should be concomitant with being unable to read. It’s not very nice. //
Equally it is also insulting to be described as a racist for voting to leave. Allegedly, according to one bigoted view here, we voted to leave to kick out the "horrid foreigners". Only an ignoramus would vote on that basis and believe it to happen.
Some like to be dictated to and toe the line but others wish our laws and constitution to be made in this country by people we know and can sack !!
NJ, you are beginning to sound like you are a judge and not aware of anything in the real world. Both the Leave camp poster and the website said ‘Let’s give the NHS our 350 million the EU takes every week.’. Clear enough intention to me, but then again I am not a judge.
Why don’t we just get on with this and stop all the moaning. The protestations were begun by the Leave camp when they thought that they were going to lose – both the petition and the notion that 48/52 wouldn’t be a good enough majority. The only poor losers are a few picnickers. I can imagine what poor losers would have looked like if Cameron had said that 48/52 wouldn’t be enough of a margin thinking that he would lose and then winning and changing his mind.
I saw a decent topical footballing analogy on another site which said that the vote was really about whether we should sack the foreign manager who was playing 4 3 3 and go back to an English manager and 2 3 5. You have won, we are going back to the old system, but please let us see some results before you expect us to acknowledge that you were right. I want the country to do well and hope that you were right of course.
Why don’t we just get on with this and stop all the moaning. The protestations were begun by the Leave camp when they thought that they were going to lose – both the petition and the notion that 48/52 wouldn’t be a good enough majority. The only poor losers are a few picnickers. I can imagine what poor losers would have looked like if Cameron had said that 48/52 wouldn’t be enough of a margin thinking that he would lose and then winning and changing his mind.
I saw a decent topical footballing analogy on another site which said that the vote was really about whether we should sack the foreign manager who was playing 4 3 3 and go back to an English manager and 2 3 5. You have won, we are going back to the old system, but please let us see some results before you expect us to acknowledge that you were right. I want the country to do well and hope that you were right of course.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles4 mins ago
One World Built On A Firm Foundation
Music15 mins ago
Death Of Three Young Ladies Backpacking...
News23 mins ago
ChatterBank25 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.