Printable version of thread

Posted by: vidcapper Jun 28 2016, 06:01 AM

Regardless of your personal feelings on the result of the EU referendum, do you think that MP's should respect the result, and no do as some sources have suggested they might, try & block Brexit by any means possible?

Posted by: danG Jun 28 2016, 06:16 AM

Ideally a referendum should never have been held and we just stayed in. Let the Ukip supporters moan.

Now though I think MPs should try and get us to stay in, as 52% really isn't a big enough majority for Leave to be taken into effect (especially with all the lies the campaign spread)

Posted by: vidcapper Jun 28 2016, 06:23 AM

The main problem with that scenario, is that it is pissing all over democracy - IMO a far more dangerous precedent than merely leaving the EU.

Posted by: vidcapper Jun 28 2016, 06:28 AM

ON a side issue, who voted, and in what numbers?

[I've avoided Daily Mail articles, so hopefully my URL's might be followed]

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/eu-referendum-brexit-young-people-upset-by-the-outcome-of-the-eu-referendum-why-didnt-you-vote-a7105396.html

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/06/how-did-different-demographic-groups-vote-eu-referendum

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36616028

Posted by: Joe. Jun 28 2016, 06:47 AM

I agree with the Dan, it should never have gone to the public. Unlike the recent Irish ref on equal marriage, it wasn't an easy enough yes/no question. People didn't understand the possible consiquences and what they were voting for. As a result, the country is in the biggest political mess I've seen.

I don't really get where they get the numbers but apparently more than 1 million people who voted leave wish they could change their vote... http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-referendum-bregret-leave-petition-second-remain-latest-will-we-leave-a7105116.html

Posted by: princess_lotti Jun 28 2016, 08:31 AM

In my opinion this referendum actually undermines our representative democracy. If we give our MPs a mandate they should've had the responsibility to use it and make this decision on behalf of the electorate. 75% of MPs don't support Brexit so I think they should keep fighting for what they believe in. My local MP has tweeted support to a second referendum due to the fact his constituents are asking for one.

Posted by: Taylor Jago Jun 28 2016, 08:32 AM

Yes, but the fact is there were over 1,250 searches for "What is the EU?", over 600 searches for "European Union membership", and over 1,200 searches for "European Union" and "EU rules", and this is using Google Trends, whose numbers are taken down so that the highest number is 100. So for comparaison, I compared "EU rules" to "selfie" for the 24 hours after polls closed (00:30 GMT+2, Friday 24th to 00:30 GMT+2, Saturday 25th, in the UK only). "EU rules" was the most searched term out of the two.

It's a bit like if a girl searched "Can I get pregnant from my first sexual encounter?" after having an unprotected sexual intercourse the night before. Thousands of voters have done something potentially affecting the rest of their lives without knowing anything about their actions. So I agree with Dan and Joe, people who have no understanding whatsoever about what they are voting for should not vote on something so important.

Posted by: princess_lotti Jun 28 2016, 08:32 AM

This is a huge constitutional decision and there should've been targets set, such as 60% support to pull out the EU.

Posted by: vidcapper Jun 28 2016, 08:52 AM

But that wouldn't make the issue go away - a majority for Brexit would be a gift for UKIP.

In 1979, there was the first referendum on Scottish Independence - they voted Yes to independence, but it failed due to just such a target.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_devolution_referendum,_1979

Ever since then, the SNP has grown in strength...

See a possible parallel between that situation, and UKIP?

Posted by: princess_lotti Jun 28 2016, 09:01 AM

So what would make the issue go away? There is always going to be people who wish to remain part of the EU and those who wish to leave. Also maybe we should clarify with that link you just sent me, it wasn't for Scottish Independence, but for Scottish devolution which is completely different and was passed in the 1997 referendum.

Posted by: Dobbo Jun 28 2016, 09:47 AM

Despite not necessarily agreeing with the result, a referendum was the correct decision.

Posted by: richie Jun 28 2016, 09:57 AM

For me, the next step is to leave England and Wales to it. If anybody wants to talk about a lack of democracy then it's the way a handful of marginal seats in England seem to be swaying the balance for all. I'd never been in favour of Scottish independence until 2014 but couldn't see anything other than Tory rule being the norm, especially with a reduction in the number of seats and a redrawing of constituency borders.

I might change my mind if both the Labour and Tory party split into the clear factions they are and a more proportional system of representation were brought in, but that isn't going to happen and we'd still have to deal with this awful result that the referendum gave us.

Posted by: Colm Jun 28 2016, 09:59 AM

Democracy is overrated.

Posted by: vidcapper Jun 28 2016, 11:21 AM

But why are you assuming that those searches were by 'Leave' voters - they could just as easily have been by 'Remainers'?



Sorry about that, I did mean to type 'devolution'.



That's one of the scariest things I've ever read here!

Posted by: vidcapper Jun 28 2016, 11:24 AM

The main problem with MP's trying to circumvent a democratic vote, is that it sets a VERY dangerous precedent!

What if the Tories were to lose the next election, then decide 'We don't like that result, so we'll ignore it..'

There's a word for governments that do that - DICTATORSHIP!

Posted by: Colm Jun 28 2016, 11:28 AM

Why are you scared?

In theory democracy makes sense. Unfortunately, people are easily manipulated by fear and will base their choices on whoever proposes to do something about perceived threats.

Posted by: vidcapper Jun 28 2016, 11:51 AM

But what is the alternative - having politicians arbitrarily choose which election results they accept??

Posted by: Colm Jun 28 2016, 12:09 PM

I didn't say there was an alternative. I stated that democracy is over rated.

It may well be the best we have but it's still deeply flawed.


Again I wonder why you are scared of my comment.

Posted by: Taylor Jago Jun 28 2016, 12:13 PM

That's not the point. Whether they supported 'Leave' or 'Remain', they should have done those searches BEFORE going to the ballot box.

It's like being in a control room, pressing a big red button, and then reading the instructions manual to see what it does. It's stupid and potentially dangerous.

Posted by: Umi Jun 28 2016, 12:27 PM

I think at the end of the day it is difficult to support parliament overturning the result. Would it be the best thing to do in terms of the UK's relationship with the EU? Sure. But it's still the government failing to respect the choice of the people and no matter how poorly informed that choice is, it's the one that was made. It's of course correct to say that the issue should never have gone to a referendum in the first place and the result is the perfect evidence of why that is, but MPs should have done something about that before it got to this point. They should have ran a better campaign, or prevented the issue from going to referendum in the first place.

Vidcapper is also correct that overturning the result gives UKIP exactly what they want (a reason for continued existence) as well as further cementing the belief of the ignorant that the establishment is out to get them. The people who voted to leave the EU will still want to do so because nothing will have convinced them otherwise, and the issue will not be put to bed.

Basically, if you overturn the referendum result then nothing has changed in the UK except it's now a significantly less friendly place for immigrants to be in and there's a lot of people randomly full of hate for their European neighbours. If you allow Brexit to go ahead then eventually people will realise how misplaced their hatred was and maybe the country can go back to being a progressive place.

Posted by: Umi Jun 28 2016, 01:05 PM

Also I'm inclined to make the UK and its economy a sacrificial lamb so that other EU countries can see what the cataclysmic results of leaving the EU would be. Ideally we're looking at Zimbabwe-style hyperinflation here, possibly crossed with parts of the landmass randomly sinking into the ocean.

Posted by: vidcapper Jun 28 2016, 02:14 PM

I've explained why - because it sets a dangerous precedent of MP's ignoring election results they don't like!



Is that a direct quote from Project Fear?

Posted by: Colm Jun 28 2016, 02:25 PM

Why would there even be elections in a non-democratic system? Have you not heard of dictatorships?

Posted by: Suedehead2 Jun 28 2016, 10:01 PM

I have been saying since Cameron first promised a referendum a few years ago that there should be a second vote if the first vote was to leave the EU. That second vote should be held after negotiations on the terms of withdrawal had been completed. At least that would mean that people should have a better idea of what they were voting for.

Unfortunately, that is looking unlikely at the moment. Once Article 50 has been invoked, the process is irreversible. The UK would have to reapply for entry, presumably accepting the euro as part of that process. At the moment some EU leaders say they don't want to start talks until Article 50 has been invoked. I hope those leaders see sense and agree to some discussions before the irreversible process starts.

Posted by: TheSnake Jun 28 2016, 10:12 PM

I said have a general election as the Labour Party can put a second referendum in their manifesto if they want.

Posted by: Rooney Jun 28 2016, 11:15 PM

I think there is easily a way out of it, but they will leave it as long as possible. It would be by another democratic means of course, but it would surely leave us in a much worse place. Facts are facts, the campaigns were both a less, but the Leave campaign was horrific. Unregulated and full of complete and utter lies to scare people. Never mind Project Fear, the Leave campaign was pretty much all that to a tee.

We're going to come to a conclusion that is most likely the logic of leaving the EU without actually leaving the EU. Immigration won't change and we will have access to the single market. Only we now hold no power in the EU and they are free to shit on us accordingly. The country may have (just) voted to leave, but just as many people almost wanted to stay in Europe, so we're likely to see even more moaning from the Leave side when they don't get what they wanted.

We have just caused economic uncertainty because people think we a divine right to rule the world as we please. When nothing is really going to change, we just lose power over vetoing any laws.

Posted by: Steve201 Jun 28 2016, 11:19 PM

"Democracy is the worst type of government, apart from all the rest"

Posted by: Steve201 Jun 28 2016, 11:23 PM

The thing about people saying they voted Leave and have been lied to is that many people did listen to the remain side quoting facts from the IMF and many other establishment institutions but you know what they ignored them because they don't trust them or care anymore because these are the same institutions who didn't predict a lot of other recessions etc - people voted Leave because their communities have changed utterly socially,culturally and economically since the 1970s and no one really asked them for a say!

Posted by: vidcapper Jun 29 2016, 05:13 AM

But I would stipulate that any 2nd referendum not be held until any renegotiations had been officially ratified, so that they could not be reneged in the event of the original referendum result being reversed.

Personally though, no renegotiation would change my vote, as my decision was based on loss of sovereignty, rather than any of the scaremongering by *either* side.

Posted by: vidcapper Jun 29 2016, 05:59 AM

I bet all those MP's who are claiming the referendum is 'only advisory' would have claimed it as gospel if the result had gone the other way...

Posted by: vidcapper Jun 29 2016, 06:09 AM

Having read that article, I have to say it is disingenuous to quote the estimated number of 'regretful leavers' without also listing the numbers who regret voting for Remain.

The figures quoted are 1.130m in the former category, and 0.696m in the latter, giving a net switch of 0.434m - too few to have changed the overall result.

Posted by: popchartfreak Jun 29 2016, 07:21 AM

Parliament.

All that the people voted for was to Leave. There was no further detail or breakdown on what that meant. The people arguing for leave dont agree what it means, the public dont agree what it means, they have no idea what it means or what the consequences of each and every scenario means. That's why we elect people who do (or are supposed to) know what they are doing.

If there is a second referendum the Leavers will be split over what exactly that means, which means the Norway model will win. If the majority of MP's get their way, the Norway model will win. Now that we have seen the chaos that Leave means, the appetite for years of more of it will eat into the Leave support gradually. I don't believe there is a case to reverse the vote unless a party wins an election with that as it's central reason for existing.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Jun 29 2016, 07:29 AM

Even though you still haven't managed to provide a single significant example of where that supposed loss of sovereignty has been a bad thing. Other Leave campaigners have also been unable to provide any examples.

Posted by: vidcapper Jun 29 2016, 08:24 AM

OK, then - the EU tells us to give votes to prisoners, a policy that a large majority of the electorate resists - including even some people who've backed the Remain campaign.

The issue of deporting convicted criminals is another example.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Jun 29 2016, 12:32 PM

No it didn't. That was the ECHR and it said that the blanket ban on prisoners voting was wrong. It left the way open for some (possibly even most) prisoners still being barred from voting. Frankly, I don't see why most prisoners should not be able to vote. Regardless, it is hardly a major issue. Similarly, the butcher who voted Leave so that he could sell mince in pounds and ounces (not that he was prevented form doing so in the first place) will get no sympathy from me if his business goes bankrupt.

Similarly, we are able to deport criminals, subject to certain safeguards like them not being in danger of torture after deportation. That proviso seems perfectly reasonable for a supposedly civilised country. EU membership also includes the European Arrest Warrant which makes it a lot easier for criminals and alleged criminals to be brought back to the UK to face justice. There must be a lot of British criminals in Spain who will be only too pleased when the UK can no longer use this device.