Jump to content

The Consequences of Brexit [Part 6] READ FIRST POST BEFORE COMMENTING


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, NERVY-OWL said:

No chance we would get anything like that from the EU anyway, the only deal we'd get is one that favours them not us. We'll see if out really means out now, I know if they try to wriggle out of leaving it will make me think twice about voting for anything in the future

We can already do all of what I described. The EU rules completely allow for it, and what I’ve described is basically how the Dutch run their immigration controls currently.

2 hours ago, Fudbeer said:

I voted remain but you have to respect the result, can not accept a second referendum  with remain as an option.I think if we can not agree terms then much as I  have concerns about it then certainly initially we may have to leave without a deal. 

We can’t destroy the economy on a point of principle mate

 

People need to get some perspective 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Fudbeer said:

I voted remain but you have to respect the result, can not accept a second referendum  with remain as an option.I think if we can not agree terms then much as I  have concerns about it then certainly initially we may have to leave without a deal. 

Why not? People are entitled to change their mind, they do so in GE's, and they are less permanent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Bargepole23 said:

Why not? People are entitled to change their mind, they do so in GE's, and they are less permanent.

A GE is now for a fixed term of 5 years so people cant change their mind until one is called, so to be fair the same should also happen for referendums. Perhaps parliament should pass a law stating that any referendum on the same issue cannot be held until a given time is up and its a pity that has not already been done.

Edited by apelike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ez8004 said:

No we don’t. The European courts have already stated that we can unilaterally revoke A50. We need no confirmation from the EU whatsoever to do this. However we will need a new piece of legislation to invoke it again. 

Since I never said anything about needing confirmation then I can only conclude that you are trying to build a strawman. Now are you going to actually answer the substantive point I made or do I have to rub your nose in it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, RJRB said:

May has lost the backing of her own party and should hand the reins to an acknowledged pro Brexit leader.

The problem with that is that in the absence of a general election or a second referendum, any further deal would be almost certainly closer to the EU such as the Norway deal or some other form of customs union to remove the need for an Irish backstop. A pro Brexit leader would be unlikely to negotiate that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, apelike said:

Perhaps parliament should pass a law stating that any referendum on the same issue cannot be held until a given time is up and its a pity that has not already been done.

If they're gunna do that they might as well set figures for turnout and the margin required to declare a definite outcome.

 

One things for sure when there's only a couple of percent difference between the two options, it only causes further arguments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

The problem with that is that in the absence of a general election or a second referendum, any further deal would be almost certainly closer to the EU such as the Norway deal or some other form of customs union to remove the need for an Irish backstop. A pro Brexit leader would be unlikely to negotiate that.

I think the EU have already stated they are not prepared to negotiate further so basically any idea of renegotiation is dead in the water.

3 minutes ago, geared said:

If they're gunna do that they might as well set figures for turnout and the margin required to declare a definite outcome.

That is something that has already been discussed in the Lords but has basically been given a no for a number of reasons. I will see if I can find the details.

 

But IIRC one of them was that a referendum is advisory.

Edited by apelike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, mafya said:

Mays bill doesn’t take us out of the EU it keeps us tied in and over a barrel! 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/brexit/8193941/brussels-brexit-boast-following-rules-for-years-to-come/

The fact that Parliament is made up of about 75%  of remainers and the Withdrawal Agreement which Mrs May supports suffered such a massive defeat can only lead to the conclusion the only way the UK will leave the EU is without a deal.   There is no point in any further negotiations between the UK and EU taking place.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, apelike said:

That is something that has already been discussed in the Lords but has basically been given a no for a number of reasons. I will see if I can find the details.

 

But IIRC one of them was that a referendum is advisory.

You'd think it was written in blood the way some people rant on though.

Link to comment
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.