EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

[anme]

The associate membership, if it ever happens, will have zero validity or benefit in the UK so affects nobody.

Are you aware:

1. That there are people in the world other than yourself?
2. That there are countries in the world that are not the UK?

 

[miami]

I post in one or two places about Brexit so, without reading back in this thread, I have said that if others want this EU citizenship they can have it, no problem.

I genuinely believe there is no altruistic motive from the EU in this, simply a (failed) attempt to divide the UK population on this matter.

I also genuinely believe that people have to be careful in such things. True, at the moment there is no EU army but it is proposed. Even then the likelihood of an EU war is slim, and conscription even slimmer, but things change over time, even the political complexion of the EU. Currently it is leaning leftwards but in 10 years it may lean to the right.

On the other hand a rightwards leaning UK may well introduce conscription far earlier. Those of us with EU passports may well be able to avoid it by fleeing to Germany or Finland or Croatia

 

[anme]

This European army stuff is really fantasy. Have you heard of NATO? An attack on one is an attack on all.

 

[gareth950]

I genuinely believe there is no altruistic motive from the EU in this, simply a (failed) attempt to divide the UK population on this matter.

I think you'll find the UK population is already deeply divided right down the middle over all things EU - and it's not any proposals coming from the EU about post Brexit arrangements that's fuelling that division.

 

[furnessvale]

This European army stuff is really fantasy. Have you heard of NATO? An attack on one is an attack on all.

If the EU army is a fantasy it is a fantasy in the minds of EU leaders not me.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

On the other hand a rightwards leaning UK may well introduce conscription far earlier. Those of us with EU passports may well be able to avoid it by fleeing to Germany or Finland or Croatia

I recall several in this forum saying a Brexit vote would be the trigger for them to depart but they are still here.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think you'll find the UK population is already deeply divided right down the middle over all things EU - and it's not any proposals coming from the EU about post Brexit arrangements that's fuelling that division.

Not quite down the middle. The majority who voted want out. Those who didn't vote aren't bothered either way.

 

[NSEFAN]

Not quite down the middle. The majority who voted want out. Those who didn't vote aren't bothered either way.

It was however quite a narrow majority. Being almost 50:50 split seems pretty divided to me. Those who aren't bothered either way can't really count towards either side of the argument.

 

[furnessvale]

It was however quite a narrow majority. Being almost 50:50 split seems pretty divided to me. Those who aren't bothered either way can't really count towards either side of the argument.

I agree. Perhaps the remainers who try to claim them on their side might heed this.

 

[ainsworth74]

I agree. Perhaps the remainers who try to claim them on their side might heed this.

Only as long as the Brexiters that try to claim them on their side do the same...

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Had a time warp allowed Gilbert and Sullivan to be alive today, the post-Brexit scenario would have certainly allowed enough scripted material for one of their operettas...:roll:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

On the other hand a rightwards leaning UK may well introduce conscription far earlier.

Is that a cunning plan to reduce the number of unemployed at one fell swoop?

 

[AlterEgo]

I agree. Perhaps the remainers who try to claim them on their side might heed this.

Perhaps we can all shut up about the will of the people as well?

 

[Busaholic]

I'd just like one single Brexiteer who believes that a simple majority means everything to come out and say that the same should apply in the USA, where the votes for Clinton now amount to a million and a half more than for Trump - no bullsh.t about Electoral College or states but simple arithmetic. It's EXACTLY the same principle.

 

[AlterEgo]

I'd just like one single Brexiteer who believes that a simple majority means everything to come out and say that the same should apply in the USA, where the votes for Clinton now amount to a million and a half more than for Trump - no bullsh.t about Electoral College or states but simple arithmetic. It's EXACTLY the same principle.

It isn't the same principle, because you haven't accounted for people who didn't vote in the USA election.

 

[Barn]

I'd just like one single Brexiteer who believes that a simple majority means everything to come out and say that the same should apply in the USA, where the votes for Clinton now amount to a million and a half more than for Trump - no bullsh.t about Electoral College or states but simple arithmetic. It's EXACTLY the same principle.

The electoral college is nonsense for a federal president. The idea is - I think - to preserve a primary role for the states in nominating the president but it doesn't make sense for a single office which is for all Americans. It should be a simple majority.

For Brexit, happily Leave won on a simple majority and it would almost certainly have won had the vote been on general election FPTP principles too.

 

[furnessvale]

I'd just like one single Brexiteer who believes that a simple majority means everything to come out and say that the same should apply in the USA, where the votes for Clinton now amount to a million and a half more than for Trump - no bullsh.t about Electoral College or states but simple arithmetic. It's EXACTLY the same principle.

What has Trump and the US election got to do with Brexit? They choose their system and we have ours.

Perhaps more relevant to the UK is our FPTP system which leaves minority parties such as Ukip grossly under represented in parliament.

 

[miami]

What has Trump and the US election got to do with Brexit? They choose their system and we have ours.

Perhaps more relevant to the UK is our FPTP system which leaves minority parties such as Ukip grossly under represented in parliament.

Agreed. And more importantly gives 100% of the power to the party that 75% didn't vote for on a manifesto that was never presented.

In many democracies changing constitutional rights requires far more than a simple majority - this ensures that 51% respect the rights of the 49%, taking those rights away requires "super majorities" and many layers of protection. Tyrant of he majority has been warned about many times, from Plato to Maddison, it leads to horrendous trampling of rights of minorities.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Perhaps more relevant to the UK is our FPTP system which leaves minority parties such as Ukip grossly under represented in parliament.

Minority parties seem to feel they have a God-Given right to have far more seats than they are entitled to. Welcome to the real world and long live FPTP.

 

[AM9]

Well there's no need to panic, because even if the Supreme Court allows the Government to go ahead with Article 50, there's the requirement of a mandate for Article 150 (ISTR) to withdraw from the EEA. It must be beginning to resemble wading through treacle to the brexit lot.

 

[miami]

We never agreed to leave the eea! A tiny majority said we should not be a member of the European Union. That's all. As leave campaigners said

"Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market"

 

[anme]

We never agreed to leave the eea! A tiny majority said we should not be a member of the European Union. That's all. As leave campaigners said

"Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market"

It should make us really angry that authoritarian brexit MPs and their lickspittle hangers-on are claiming that the referendum was about membership of the single market or even freedom of movement. It was about the *European Union*.

If you want to leave the single market, call another referendum.

 

[Trog]

The Government thinks that our membership of the EEA is a product of our membership of the EU, and that if we leave the EU we automatically leave the EEA. They may be right they may be wrong, our courts could decide either way. But both are somewhat irrelevant as unless both Britain and the rest of the EU agree that we are still in the EEA then we are out.

As for the referendum not being about the EEA most of the campaigning I saw was about migration and the cash transfers that being in the EEA would involve, so to say the vote was not about that is a bit on the legalistic cheese paring side to my mind.

 

[miami]

Leave campaigners explicitly said the referendum was not about the EEA, and that we would remain a member of the EEA. No legal trickery there, just more leave lies.

 

[anme]

The Government thinks that our membership of the EEA is a product of our membership of the EU, and that if we leave the EU we automatically leave the EEA. They may be right they may be wrong, our courts could decide either way. But both are somewhat irrelevant as unless both Britain and the rest of the EU agree that we are still in the EEA then we are out.

As for the referendum not being about the EEA most of the campaigning I saw was about migration and the cash transfers that being in the EEA would involve, so to say the vote was not about that is a bit on the legalistic cheese paring side to my mind.

You cannot claim a referendum decided anything other than the question on the ballot paper! How can you possibly claim otherwise?! *Think* what you are saying!

Given that the only economic models discussed by the leave campaign were Norway and Switzerland, by your logic we copy them, right?

 

[AlterEgo]

Minority parties seem to feel they have a God-Given right to have far more seats than they are entitled to. Welcome to the real world and long live FPTP.

I don't think the British public will tolerate such widespread parliamentary disenfranchisement for too much longer. Certainly by the time I am retired I expect the system to have changed.

 

[Trog]

As I said the referendum and any court verdicts here are irrelevant if the EU says we are out of the EEA if we leave the EU.

Just as a matter of interest were there separate negotiations for us to join the EU and EEA or did they come as a package? That might give some idea if leaving is also coupled.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I don't think the British public will tolerate such widespread parliamentary disenfranchisement for too much longer. Certainly by the time I am retired I expect the system to have changed.

I don't think most of the British public care about it much, and suspect that most who have thought about it probably think that FPTP is how we do it full stop. Or that it is a good system for keeping the more lunatic parties away from the levers of power.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I don't think the British public will tolerate such widespread parliamentary disenfranchisement for too much longer. Certainly by the time I am retired I expect the system to have changed.

If the British people took advantage of the fact that voting is available to all who qualify and more of them actually bothered to cast their votes, perhaps a different status quo may well ensue, but the laissez-faire attitude of some eligible voters who cannot be bothered to cast their vote only reflects on their attitude to voting.

 

[Barn]

Leave campaigners explicitly said the referendum was not about the EEA, and that we would remain a member of the EEA. No legal trickery there, just more leave lies.

Both leave and remain made clear that leaving the EU means leaving its single market. It is a strange position to believe that the people voted to leave the EU as a whole but somehow wanted to stay in parts of it. The question was binary.

The single market and customs union are the very core of the EU. They encompass ECJ jurisdiction, Commission regulation, imposed standards, (seemingly) freedom of movement and a ban on bilateral trade deals.

It is a desperate fantasy to believe that the UK voted to give up its Council and parliament representation but keep all that.

 

[47802]

We never agreed to leave the eea! A tiny majority said we should not be a member of the European Union. That's all. As leave campaigners said

"Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market"

I don't think that's really true a number talked about leaving the single market and coming up with a bespoke deal, the trouble was there was never proper discussion on this during the referendum because it was a negative for the leave camp, the bespoke deal claim was particularly outrageous because ultimately it depends on whether or not a third party in this case the EU wants to make such a deal.

The Brexitors will not accept a deal where we remain in the EEA because that will mean migration stays as now and we wont be able to make our own trade deals, so we will end up with either hard Brexit and WTO default which will damage our economy substancially at least in the short to medium term, or we end up with a bespoke deal with some access to the free market and some restrictions on migration and causing more limited damage to our economy but that depends whether or not the EU is willing to make such a deal.

Unfortunately I think the EU will want to teach a lesson and only offer EEA or hard Brexit, no wonder Cameron found the exit door fast.

 

[miami]

Both leave and remain made clear that leaving the EU means leaving its single market. It is a strange position to believe that the people voted to leave the EU as a whole but somehow wanted to stay in parts of it. The question was binary.

The single market and customs union are the very core of the EU. They encompass ECJ jurisdiction, Commission regulation, imposed standards, (seemingly) freedom of movement and a ban on bilateral trade deals.

It is a desperate fantasy to believe that the UK voted to give up its Council and parliament representation but keep all that.

Sure, they made it clear clear:

Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market

Only a madman would actually leave the market

Wouldn’t it be terrible if we were really like Norway and Switzerland? Really? They’re rich. They’re happy. They’re self-governing

Increasingly, the Norway option looks the best for the UK

Just more lies?

 

[Barn]

Sure, they made it clear clear:

Just more lies?

You've made my job more difficult by failing to attribute or source any of the quotes you gave.

Nevertheless, the first quote is from Daniel Hannan. He refers to the tariff-free goods trading arrangements which take in countries such as Iceland (EFTA/EEA), Switzerland (EFTA/non-EEA), Montenegro/Serbia/Albania/Bosnia/etc (neither), Turkey (customs union only). He is providing the view that, as an MEP, he has not heard any other EU countries expressing the view that they wish to impose tariffs on British goods. (I still haven't heard this desire expressed, although there is obviously the 'four freedoms' negotiation position being set out). Hannan is one of the leading proponents of the idea that we should reject standards harmonisation in favour of mutual recognition and seek trade deals with the rest of the world.

The second quote is from Owen Paterson. You have disingenuously cut out the rest of the paragraph where he makes clear that he is talking about the 'market' as in the economic marketplace only and that he favours a trading arrangement:

"Only a madman would actually leave the market. It is not the EU (which is a political organisation) delivering the prosperity and buying our goods, it's the members of the market, and we'll carry on trading with the market. I mean, are we actually really suggesting that the fifth largest economy in the world is not going to come to a satisfactory trading arrangement with the EU?"

The last two quotes are from Nigel Farage and Arron Banks respectively, who have nothing to do with the official leave campaign and, like any private individual, are entitled to express their views.

 

[EM2]

Theresa May reveals how her faith in God gives her confidence she is 'doing the right thing'

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...in-she-is-doing-the-right-thing-a7442616.html

Theresa May has described how her faith in God makes her convinced she is “doing the right thing” as Prime Minister.

In a rare interview – in which she said the “hugely challenging” task of Brexit leaves her with little time for sleep – Ms May opened up about her Christian beliefs.

Speaking with the Sunday Times, the Prime Minister was asked how she steeled herself for the job and the tough decisions ahead,[

She replied: “It's about, 'Are you doing the right thing?' If you know you are doing the right thing, you have the confidence, the energy to go and deliver that right message.”

Asked if that was a “moral” approach, Ms May added: “I suppose there is something in terms of faith.

“I am a practising member of the Church of England and so forth, that lies behind what I do.

“It's not like I've decided to do what I'm going to do and I'm stubborn. I'll think it through, have a gut instinct, look at the evidence, work through the arguments, because you have to think through the unintended consequences.”

In the interview, the Prime Minister admitted that it was the “really complex issues" at play in the process of leaving the EU that meant that “in this job you don't get much sleep”.

She said: “It is a moment of change. It is a hugely challenging time. And we need to get on with the deal in terms of Brexit. And I'm very conscious of that.

"I want to make sure that everything we do ensures Britain is a country that works for everyone. And that we really get out there and forge a new role in the world post-Brexit.”

Ms May spoke about growing up as the only child of a clergyman. Her father, Hubert Brasier, was the vicar of an Oxfordshire village.

She said: “Being brought up in a vicarage, of course the advantage is that you do see people from all walks of life, and particularly in villages you see people from all sorts of backgrounds and all sorts of conditions, in terms of disadvantage and advantage.

“What came out of my upbringing was a sense of service.”

On not having any children, the Prime Minister said: “Well, that wasn't possible, so you get on with life,” adding that she has nieces and nephews and godchildren.

Ms May revealed the celebrity aspect of the job has taken her by surprise, saying: “I did do my first wedding video the other day.

“I came out of a shop onto the street and there was a smart young man and he said, 'My friends are getting married today, will you do a wedding video for them?'

“It was sort of like a selfie, but I had to say, 'Hello James and Sarah, happy wedding day!'"

She was also asked if her husband, Philip – who accompanies her frequently - found it hard being a male political consort, replying: “Well, I hope it's getting easier than it used to be.

“We don't want a situation where we feel it's really difficult to be a man if a woman happens to be prime minister.”