Jump to content


The Consequences of Brexit [part 5] Read 1st post before posting

Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, apelike said:

As people on here are so fond of believing polls here is some information from the Electoral Commission public survey: 

 

Views on Information Provided in Advance of 2016 EU Referendum


"As part of its report on the 2016 referendum on the UK’s membership of the European Union, the Electoral Commission ran public opinion surveys
on the public’s view of the information available to inform their decision. It found:


Our public opinion survey explored whether voters had enough information about the ‘leave’ and ‘remain’ arguments to be able to make an informed decision how to vote in the referendum. Sixty two percent of respondents agreed that they did compared to 28 percent who disagreed. There was a clear pattern by age group with those aged 18–34 least likely to agree they had enough information to make an informed decision (52 percent agreed), 35-–54 year olds more likely (63 percent agreed) and those aged 55+ most likely (70 percent agreed)...

 

Respondents were also asked, separately, whether they had enough information about what would happen in the event of a Remain vote and a Leave vote. Sixty five percent agreed that they had enough information about what would happen in the event of a Remain vote (26 percent disagreed) and 45 percent agreed that they had enough information about what would happen in the event of a Leave vote (46 percent disagreed)."

 

Taken from a House of Lords Briefing Paper titled "Referendums and Parliamentary Democracy Debate" dated 19 July 2018

 

When were the EC polls run?

3 minutes ago, Lockdoctor said:

I am not missing any point. The fact is the WTO rules are the default position, if the UK leave the EU without a deal. Article 24  part of WTO rules/law.,

Parliament passed legislation after David Cameron resigned  into law that the UK are leaving the EU.  It is now irrelevant whether the referendum result was advisory. 

Legislation can be reversed..otherwise we'd still have hanging and bearbaiting..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TCH you seem to have messed up the quotes..

 

But it seems that you and other remainers will not like it or accept it because its not what you want to hear. Dont forget that the referendum was also based on 2 simple basic questions.

4 minutes ago, truman said:

When were the EC polls run?

I take it was prior to the debate, but in any case it does not matter as the questions were put after the referendum and people were asked how satisfied they were with the information provided before the referendum and voting. That is something that would not change given the questions put.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Lockdoctor said:

It is now irrelevant whether the referendum result was advisory. 

Right, we're actually getting somewhere!

 

The referendum is now history and has passed into government policy and then legislation.

 

The government is finding it impossible to enact the legislation in a way satisfactory to the majority of Parliament and the majority of the country so what exactly is wrong with Parliament changing tack either with or without another referendum?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, apelike said:

TCH you seem to have messed up the quotes..

 

But it seems that you and other remainers will not like it or accept it because its not what you want to hear. Dont forget that the referendum was also based on 2 simple basic questions.

I take it was prior to the debate, but in any case it does not matter as the questions were put after the referendum and people were asked how satisfied they were with the information provided before the referendum and voting. That is something that would not change given the questions put.

How long after the referendum? Not long I bet now we've seen what's involved in leaving..if it doesn't matter why bring it up?  Wonder what the result of the same poll would give now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lockdoctor said:

You've just proved you have no understanding of WTO Article 24.  The idea of Article 24 is a temporary arrangement (up to 10 years)  until a trade agreement is agreed.

Article 24 is a temporary arrangement that has to be agree'd by both sides.

 

https://www.politico.eu/article/britain-10-year-interim-zero-for-zero-trade-deal-brexit/

"While a "zero-for-zero" interim tariff deal may be legally feasible according to the rule-book, it is also highly unlikely that the remaining EU 27 countries would agree to such an arrangement without significant concessions from the U.K. government on budget contributions and free movement of people. There is also no obligation under WTO rules for either side to agree to tariffs of zero."

 

Quote

A zero for each side would mean some kind of temporary agreement has been arranged.

Yes, that's *exactly* what it means. That's why you correctly called it a "temporary arrangement" above.

 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/783900/Britain-secret-Brexit-10-year-tariff-free-trade-deal-negotiations

An insider said: “Of course it would require the agreement of both parties, but by not agreeing it the other EU member states would be imposing penalties on their own businesses, which is not a great idea. There’s a big global picture here and the EU can’t afford to disrupt that."

 

Quote

There is nothing stopping the EU following the UK,  if we decide to use Article 24 to justify not implementing tariffs on goods coming from the EU.

I'm afraid you've entirely missed the point of Article 24 and it's reason for existing :?

 

*Only* if the EU agree's.

 

Quote

The point you are missing is that the UK can use Article  24 to implement zero tariffs on all goods coming from the EU and still implement tariffs on the same goods imported from countries outside the EU, If we wish to do so.

*Only* if the EU agree's.

 

Quote

Article 24 will give the UK time to decide what future trade arrangements we want and which countries we want  to negotiate trade deals with, without the expense and disadvantages  of the EU withdrawal agreement on offer.

*Only* if the EU agree's.

Edited by Magilla

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

Right, we're actually getting somewhere!

 

The referendum is now history and has passed into government policy and then legislation.

 

The government is finding it impossible to enact the legislation in a way satisfactory to the majority of Parliament and the majority of the country so what exactly is wrong with Parliament changing tack either with or without another referendum?

You're ignoring the fact that Parliament passed legislation which gave the choice of whether the UK remain or leave the EU to the UK electorate  via the 2016 EU referendum.  It is absolutely wrong, if Parliament don't follow the UK's electorate  instructions and implement the UK leaving the EU.  Implementation can either be through Parliament agreeing to the EU withdrawal agreement on offer or the UK leaving the EU on 29th March without a deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, apelike said:

But it seems that you and other remainers will not like it or accept it because its not what you want to hear. Dont forget that the referendum was also based on 2 simple basic questions.

Why on earth would I not want to hear that people tend to believe that they are more informed than they actually are? I've just told you that human nature explains that.

 

It was actually one simple basic question but if you don't actually know what the EU is then it's not that simple anymore. 😳

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, apelike said:

I think the Remain or Leave question was quite clear and stated just that.

Obviously, I fundamentally disagree.

 

I don't believe most voted for no-deal and I still don't think the UK public will accept that result.

 

Time will tell...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Magilla said:

Obviously, I fundamentally disagree.

 

I don't believe most voted for no-deal and I still don't think the UK public will accept that result.

 

Time will tell...

 

Yes it will.

 

For me however I will accept what parliament decide but I dont think it should be a public decision for reasons I have stated before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Lockdoctor said:

It is absolutely wrong, if Parliament don't follow the UK's electorate  instructions and implement the UK leaving the EU. 

37% of the electorate voted leave.

36% of the electorate voted remain.

 

Given that neither side could attract a majority of the electorate in an advisory referendum, the government were't obliged to do anything other than what they deem to be in the best interest of the country as a whole. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, apelike said:

No democracy is about the will of parliament who are our democratic representatives, and not the will of the people and that is where people get it wrong.

What was campaigned for is immaterial as the choices were clear on the ballot paper for all to read. 

If democracy is the will of parliament then parliament should be acting in the best interests of the people. MPs should not be behaving as delegates.

 

If they can’t act in our best interests and in the national interest then they need to go back to the people. GE preferably. Referendum if absolutely necessary.

26 minutes ago, Magilla said:

Obviously, I fundamentally disagree.

 

I don't believe most voted for no-deal and I still don't think the UK public will accept that result.

 

Time will tell...

 

There is no way the public will accept no deal as a result. No chance.

 

Some people think they want it but they have no idea what it means. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

37% of the electorate voted leave.

36% of the electorate voted remain.

 

Given that neither side could attract a majority of the electorate in an advisory referendum, the government were't obliged to do anything other than what they deem to be in the best interest of the country as a whole. 

They only counted votes from the electorate, who both registered to vote and actually voted in the  2016 EU referendum.  They announced the day after the EU referendum vote that leave won because they got 52% of the votes cast and remain only got 48%  of votes cast.  Whether the democratic decision to leave the EU is in the best interest of the country as a whole is irrelevant, just as stating the EU referendum  was advisory is now irrelevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.