Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Poll : Article 50 Extension
BuzzJack Music Forum > General Discussion > News and Politics
vidsanta
What do you think?
Botchia
Even if the deal goes through on 12 March, it would be highly irresponsible and undemocratic for the government to rush through so much legislation without appropriate Parliamentary scrutiny for 29 March. Equally, it wouldn't be great for them to ignore the referendum and just stay in and revoke Article 50. Any such decision should come from a vote of the people who, contrary to popular Tory myth, ARE allowed to change their will over time and in full possession of the facts.
Doctor Blind
The critical date is 2 July - that is when the next EU Parliament is due to start. It is possible that an extension (and increasingly likely IMO) from 29 March to that date will be sought in order to confirm a deal.
Botchia
I can see there being a consensus for 2 months initially and maybe then up to the end of the current Parliament.

The only issue is, would we have to go ahead with EU elections just in case we change our minds again and don't actually leave by 1 July?!
Doctor Blind
QUOTE(BotchLikeThis @ Feb 25 2019, 08:59 PM) *
The only issue is, would we have to go ahead with EU elections just in case we change our minds again and don't actually leave by 1 July?!


I think as long as a deal is agreed 'in principle' before mid-May then the leaving date can still be the end of June without any reason for this to be the case.
Suedehead2
If we are still members of the EU when the new parliament sits for the first time, we are entitled to have members. The elections are due at the end of May, but I suspect we would need to hold them in June if we end up holding them. Some countries have gained extra seats because of the loss of the UK's seats. I would guess they would have to keep those seats with the elections so close.

5 Silas Frøkner
f*** the referendum!!!
vidsanta
QUOTE(BotchLikeThis @ Feb 25 2019, 08:47 PM) *
Even if the deal goes through on 12 March, it would be highly irresponsible and undemocratic for the government to rush through so much legislation without appropriate Parliamentary scrutiny for 29 March. Equally, it wouldn't be great for them to ignore the referendum and just stay in and revoke Article 50. Any such decision should come from a vote of the people who, contrary to popular Tory myth, ARE allowed to change their will over time and in full possession of the facts.


As long as that doesn't mean just the 'approved' version of them. Both sides must be allowed to campaign however they see fit.

QUOTE(5 Silas Frøkner @ Feb 25 2019, 10:06 PM) *
f*** the referendum!!!


ANY referenda, or just the ones you don't like the result of? teresa.gif
5 Silas Frøkner
Just this one
vidsanta
QUOTE(5 Silas Frøkner @ Feb 26 2019, 07:28 AM) *
Just this one


Because it's one you care about, or because the result was close?
Harve
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Feb 26 2019, 08:48 AM) *
Because it's one you care about, or because the result was close?

Lots of reasons. The result of the referendum doesn't have legitimacy or the support of the UK electorate because:

- a binary question was asked when the array of options means that it wasn't a Yes/No question;
- those potential outcomes/plans were not made clear beforehand. There was no 2014-style White Paper for Leave, and in any case the White Paper based on the 2016 Leave campaign would've proven woefully inaccurate;
- the result was extremely close;
- the winning campaign lied and broke the law;
- the referendum was advisory which meant that the government interpreted the result of the referendum to suit their agenda;
- nearly 3 years have passed since the referendum, which is becoming an increasingly significant length of time - over half an electoral cycle. During this period, many things have happened that might make the 2016 choice clearer;
- the electorate has also changed - over 2 million people have reached voting age, and over 1.5 million have died. This 3.5 million is far, far bigger than the margin that Leave won by;
- many people have changed their mind during this time (in both directions! which is why polls have only shifted a little bit);
- immigration is far less salient of an issue now but it was a huge part of the Leave campaign.
- we're at an impasse and we have exhausted other options that might otherwise have been preferable (general election, passing the deal, renegotiating another deal). We have to do something. Extending article 50 is still an option on the table, but this just means that we're still going to run into the exact same problems in June.

Now that things are clearer, another referendum would give a clearer mandate for the country to accept. Not a solution without huge problems and I'm sure the next referendum will also be a shitshow, but that's the nature of Brexit - everyone loses, this would give us a chance of cutting our losses.
vidsanta
QUOTE(Harve @ Feb 26 2019, 08:49 AM) *
Lots of reasons. The result of the referendum doesn't have legitimacy or the support of the UK electorate because:

- a binary question was asked when the array of options means that it wasn't a Yes/No question;
- those potential outcomes/plans were not made clear beforehand. There was no 2014-style White Paper for Leave, and in any case the White Paper based on the 2016 Leave campaign would've proven woefully inaccurate;
- the result was extremely close;
- the winning campaign lied and broke the law;
- the referendum was advisory which meant that the government interpreted the result of the referendum to suit their agenda;
- nearly 3 years have passed since the referendum, which is becoming an increasingly significant length of time - over half an electoral cycle. During this period, many things have happened that might make the 2016 choice clearer;
- the electorate has also changed - over 2 million people have reached voting age, and over 1.5 million have died. This 3.5 million is far, far bigger than the margin that Leave won by;
- many people have changed their mind during this time (in both directions! which is why polls have only shifted a little bit);
- immigration is far less salient of an issue now but it was a huge part of the Leave campaign.
- we're at an impasse and we have exhausted other options that might otherwise have been preferable (general election, passing the deal, renegotiating another deal). We have to do something. Extending article 50 is still an option on the table, but this just means that we're still going to run into the exact same problems in June.

Now that things are clearer, another referendum would give a clearer mandate for the country to accept. Not a solution without huge problems and I'm sure the next referendum will also be a shitshow, but that's the nature of Brexit - everyone loses, this would give us a chance of cutting our losses.


1. A multi-choice referenda is very problematic, as no single option is likely to gain a majority.

2. There was no White Paper on Leaving, as those in power had no interest in creating one - but that in itself is not a valid reason for holding a referendum.

3. Yes, it was close, but all that was required was a simple majority.

4a. Both sides lied.
4b. It is impossible to prove that overspending made a decisive difference.

5. Huh? The government was in favour of Remain, as they made clear in the leaflet.

6. Things always change, but if we waited *in case they did*, nothing would *ever* happen.

7&8. The electorate is always changing, but if we took that into account too much, we'd be having elections every week! Also, you appear to be assuming that almost all of the 3.5m would vote Remain. If fact, they'd have to split more than 2-1 in favour of Remain to change the result - an extremely unlikely outcome, as I'm sure you'd agree. smile.gif

9. I disagree. Immigration is still as much of an issue as it ever was - it's just become ever more politically incorrect to discuss it...

10.Covered elsewhere
Crazy Chris-tmas
As you probably guessed I voted for the third option.
Crazy Chris-tmas
QUOTE(5 Silas Frøkner @ Feb 25 2019, 10:06 PM) *
f*** the referendum!!!



A very worrying attitude. Would you say "F*** the election" then next time and let the Tories govern indefinitely?
Suedehead2
QUOTE(Common Sense @ Feb 26 2019, 11:17 AM) *
A very worrying attitude. Would you say "F*** the election" then next time and let the Tories govern indefinitely?

Elections are not advisory. As a consequence, the result of an individual election can be annulled if the winning side is found to have broken the law.
T Boy
QUOTE(Common Sense @ Feb 26 2019, 11:17 AM) *
A very worrying attitude. Would you say "F*** the election" then next time and let the Tories govern indefinitely?


Your attitude is decidedly more worrying. You’re essentially saying ‘F**k the country’ just so you can indulge your low key racism.
blacksquare
Extend with another referendum with a clearer mandate. Ideally, a referendum where one side doesn't break the law.

People change their minds and things change. You cannot undermine democracy with democracy.
Holly and Izzy
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Feb 26 2019, 09:28 AM) *
7&8. The electorate is always changing, but if we took that into account too much, we'd be having elections every week! Also, you appear to be assuming that almost all of the 3.5m would vote Remain. If fact, they'd have to split more than 2-1 in favour of Remain to change the result - an extremely unlikely outcome, as I'm sure you'd agree. smile.gif


Well, no. It's not 3.5 million new voters.

We have 1.5 million deaths, let's assume largely among the over-65s, which were approx a 65-35 split between Leave and Remain. So we lose about 970k Leavers and 530k Remainers, taking it down to 16.4m Leavers, 15.6m Remainers.

2 million new young voters we should assume take after a similar demographic model as the youngest group that voted, which is about 30-70 Leave and Remain, so not so extremely unlikely. This makes for 600k new Leave voters, 1.4 million new Remain voters. Making the predicted results of demographic shift 17 million all in (as indeed a couple of months ago we passed that threshold). Unfinished business by a long way, particularly as it will continue to trend in one direction.

And that's before assuming anyone changes their minds. Which plenty of people will probably have had reason to, given the events of the last 32 months.
Holly and Izzy
Actually all of those rebuttals are pretty bad, ranging from 'but the Remainers are just as bad' to 'you can't prove that there was overspending even though its existence throws democracy into question' to a statement about generally having to wait for things to change that just seems to ignore the reality of this specific case but this one...

QUOTE(vidcapper @ Feb 26 2019, 09:28 AM) *
2. There was no White Paper on Leaving, as those in power had no interest in creating one - but that in itself is not a valid reason for holding a referendum.


Might it not be the biggest reason yet?! The reason a second referendum is being considered as a serious possibility and not just a fantasy from certain Europhiles is that the Brexit process has so far been nothing but a clown fiesta and a car crash by an incompetent government with no plan on leaving. It may have been out of the voters' control to ensure one was produced but that there wasn't made a mockery of the whole process from the beginning.
vidsanta
QUOTE(Suedehead2 @ Feb 26 2019, 01:44 PM) *
Elections are not advisory. As a consequence, the result of an individual election can be annulled if the winning side is found to have broken the law.


But that doesn't mean the result is overturned, just rejected - it would have to be re-fought on the *same* basis.

and need I remind you of the Winchester by-election - originally won by 2 votes, but when a rerun was ordered, the public was so pissed off that they increased that margin to over 21,000!
vidsanta
QUOTE(Iz~ @ Feb 26 2019, 02:55 PM) *
Actually all of those rebuttals are pretty bad, ranging from 'but the Remainers are just as bad' to 'you can't prove that there was overspending even though its existence throws democracy into question' to a statement about generally having to wait for things to change that just seems to ignore the reality of this specific case but this one...


IMO those were very reasonable rebuttals for the most part - ISTM that most Remainers now just respond on reflex to even the best anti-EU arguments (and I'm not suggesting mine are that).
Crazy Chris-tmas
QUOTE(T Boy @ Feb 26 2019, 01:57 PM) *
Your attitude is decidedly more worrying. You’re essentially saying ‘F**k the country’ just so you can indulge your low key racism.



It's not racist when we live on an island with finite space and already massively stretched NHS, education and housing services and am not specifying any race, colour or nationality in particular should be stopped from coming. Remember I have been married to a non-white for 26 years so can hardly be racist. rolleyes.gif
mald487
QUOTE(Common Sense @ Feb 26 2019, 03:36 PM) *
It's not racist when we live on an island with finite space and am not specifying any race, colour or nationality in particular should be stopped from coming. Remember I have been married to a non-white for 26 years so can hardly be racist. rolleyes.gif


Where is she from?
Crazy Chris-tmas
QUOTE(mald487 @ Feb 26 2019, 03:39 PM) *
Where is she from?



The Philippines. She'd already been here working since 1985 though when I met her in 1991.
vidsanta
QUOTE(mald487 @ Feb 26 2019, 03:39 PM) *
Where is she from?


Would it matter?
5 Silas Frøkner
QUOTE(Common Sense @ Feb 26 2019, 03:36 PM) *
It's not racist when we live on an island with finite space and already massively stretched NHS, education and housing services and am not specifying any race, colour or nationality in particular should be stopped from coming. Remember I have been married to a non-white for 26 years so can hardly be racist. rolleyes.gif

Austerity has caused all of these issues with the NHS, Education etc. nothing to do with immigration at all biggrin.gif

Also like 80% of the uk is undeveloped so full my arse
vidsanta
QUOTE(5 Silas Frøkner @ Feb 26 2019, 04:22 PM) *
Austerity has caused all of these issues with the NHS, Education etc. nothing to do with immigration at all biggrin.gif

Also like 80% of the uk is undeveloped so full my arse


And we'd like to keep it that way, thanks very much - most people like the idea of green spaces.
Suedehead2
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Feb 26 2019, 03:17 PM) *
But that doesn't mean the result is overturned, just rejected - it would have to be re-fought on the *same* basis.

and need I remind you of the Winchester by-election - originally won by 2 votes, but when a rerun was ordered, the public was so pissed off that they increased that margin to over 21,000!

Not that again. The Winchester contest was re-run because of flaws in the conduct of the election, not because the winning side broke the law.
T Boy
QUOTE(Common Sense @ Feb 26 2019, 03:36 PM) *
It's not racist when we live on an island with finite space and already massively stretched NHS, education and housing services and am not specifying any race, colour or nationality in particular should be stopped from coming. Remember I have been married to a non-white for 26 years so can hardly be racist. rolleyes.gif


I did say low key racism. I don’t think you believe yourself to be racist but on the other hand your biggest issue is people not born here moving to live here and your so adamant to stop these people different from you tha you want us out of the UK as soon as possible whether or not we have a deal to ensure that the people who already do live here can actually live comfortably.
5 Silas Frøkner
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Feb 26 2019, 04:26 PM) *
And we'd like to keep it that way, thanks very much - most people like the idea of green spaces.

I’d happily swap you for a million Syrian refugees
Suedehead2
QUOTE(Common Sense @ Feb 26 2019, 03:36 PM) *
It's not racist when we live on an island with finite space and already massively stretched NHS, education and housing services and am not specifying any race, colour or nationality in particular should be stopped from coming. Remember I have been married to a non-white for 26 years so can hardly be racist. rolleyes.gif

Have a snese of perspective. Lebanon is not that much larger than Cornwall. It is currently home to around two million Syrian refugees. Here, the Daily Mail gets hysterical about the idea of a few thousand refugees in the entire country. What does that say about this country and its people?
mald487
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Feb 26 2019, 03:42 PM) *
Would it matter?


No, obviously. It's just interesting condsidering some of his view points.
Popchartfreak
QUOTE(T Boy @ Feb 26 2019, 06:24 PM) *
I did say low key racism. I don’t think you believe yourself to be racist but on the other hand your biggest issue is people not born here moving to live here and your so adamant to stop these people different from you tha you want us out of the UK as soon as possible whether or not we have a deal to ensure that the people who already do live here can actually live comfortably.

We need to stop calling immigration control racism. I dont agree with it but its not a simple blavk or white issue when people i know from the eu who can vote and partner also want to control immigration. You can argue they are misinformed, naive, fearful or any number of issues - and i do say what i think if thats the case - but its a stretch to make assumptions. SOME people no doubt are racist and extreme but not half the voting population.....
vidsanta
QUOTE(Suedehead2 @ Feb 26 2019, 04:29 PM) *
Not that again. The Winchester contest was re-run because of flaws in the conduct of the election, not because the winning side broke the law.


IMO that wouldn't make a difference - the notion of a unelected court overruling an election result was what rankled people.

Also, the only people that give a sh1t that Leave broke the law are, surprise surprise, Remainers. rolleyes.gif
Harve
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Feb 27 2019, 07:30 AM) *
Also, the only people that give a sh1t that Leave broke the law are, surprise surprise, Remainers. rolleyes.gif

Not the best indictment for Brexiteers when you imply that they don't care about the rule of law.
Suedehead2
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Feb 27 2019, 06:30 AM) *
IMO that wouldn't make a difference - the notion of a unelected court overruling an election result was what rankled people.

I look forward to someone like Rosemary West trying the “unelected court” argument.
blacksquare
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Feb 27 2019, 06:30 AM) *
Also, the only people that give a sh1t that Leave broke the law are, surprise surprise, Remainers. rolleyes.gif


Funniest thing I have read on here in a while.

Tawdry Hepburn
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Feb 27 2019, 06:30 AM) *
Also, the only people that give a sh1t that Leave broke the law are, surprise surprise, Remainers. rolleyes.gif


Did you actually sit there with a straight face while you were typing this out? huh.gif
vidsanta
QUOTE(Tawdry Hepburn @ Feb 27 2019, 09:46 AM) *
Did you actually sit there with a straight face while you were typing this out? huh.gif


Well, mostly teresa.gif Anyone who got the Leave result they wanted, isn't going to be that bothered...
Popchartfreak
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Feb 27 2019, 10:07 AM) *
Well, mostly teresa.gif Anyone who got the Leave result they wanted, isn't going to be that bothered...

Presumably you wouldntmind if we got remain foreign money to finance a political movement to make sure all elections nd referendums are swayed againat what you belueve in if weve established that no one gives a shit about law and democracy.

We now have the perfect excuse for that to happen.
vidsanta
QUOTE(Popchartfreak @ Feb 27 2019, 11:12 AM) *
Presumably you wouldntmind if we got remain foreign money to finance a political movement to make sure all elections nd referendums are swayed againat what you belueve in if weve established that no one gives a shit about law and democracy.


Your standard cut/paste response. mellow.gif

Now mine : is it any wore than ignoring a referendum result. mellow.gif

Now that the usual platitudes have been exchanged, back to business...

*All* elections swayed against? Unlikely in the extreme, as very few elections are close enough to be vulnerable to such things, and in any case, we are not some 3rd world country whose fragile democracy would be vulnerable to such outside influences.
Popchartfreak
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Feb 27 2019, 11:24 AM) *
Your standard cut/paste response. mellow.gif

Now mine : is it any wore than ignoring a referendum result. mellow.gif

Now that the usual platitudes have been exchanged, back to business...

*All* elections swayed against? Unlikely in the extreme, as very few elections are close enough to be vulnerable to such things, and in any case, we are not some 3rd world country whose fragile democracy would be vulnerable to such outside influences.

So hypocrisy then, as well as frightened of democratic votes.
vidsanta
QUOTE(Popchartfreak @ Feb 27 2019, 04:59 PM) *
So hypocrisy then, as well as frightened of democratic votes.


I don't have politicophobia.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2019 Invision Power Services, Inc.