I believe over 30% of those that voted in Scotland voted to leave? Aren't "they" also a "they"?
- Status
I believe over 30% of those that voted in Scotland voted to leave? Aren't "they" also a "they"?
That was part of the what many of us who were on the side of remain were saying throughout the campaign and what the leave campaigners studiously ignored.
Explorer
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2003
- Messages
- 1,516
Absolutely. I can remember saying that even if we leave we should should still retain access to the single market, and the leave campaign website was arguing for exactly the same thing, no doubt in order to maximise their vote. Quite a different story now eighteen months on.
Which is why it won't happen.
Archie Gemmill Goal
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 8,324
The remain side were quite clear what it could mean, and the leave side denied that was true. Now that it is becoming reality the leave side insist that was what people voted for.
A rather bizarre claim to make that somehow those who voted to leave were voting not for what the leave side were proposing and championing but rather voting for the worst case scenario their opponents were warning against.
Archie Gemmill Goal
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 8,324
Oh they are very much a 'they'.
From Badscience
Publicising the impact assessments will weaken their negotiating position because they will show that they haven't been assessed?
“it is not the case that 58 sectoral impact assessments exist” (David Davis)
dyqik said:
Publicising the impact assessments will weaken their negotiating position because they will show that they haven't been assessed?
“it is not the case that 58 sectoral impact assessments exist” (David Davis)
Last edited:
Information Analyst
Penultimate Amazing
Yes, just over a million of them. If they had voted Remain along with the 1.7 million who did, the UK-wide result would have been pretty much reversed. Mind you, the same can be said about the 1.5 million Londoners who voted Leave, compared to the 2.3 million who voted Remain. And, of course, for every Scottish Remain voter, eight English voters made the same choice.
Yeah they basically promised the voters every advantage of EU membership with none of the drawbacks. In fairly short order they were talking about a hard brexit, the very thing the remain campaign had been accused of scaremongering for bringing up during the campaign.
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 12, 2010
- Messages
- 21,162
No: there's very good reason to believe that the EU (or the EC and European Parliament, to be more precise) would want the UK to remain members of the EU even under exactly the same conditions that existed prior to the referendum.
And there are two major factors underpinning this: 1) the UK is a very strong component of the EU (the second largest economy in the EU after Germany, a major contributor to the EU budget, and a major draw in any EU trade negotiations), and thus the UK leaving the EU would be a big economic blow to the EU; and 2) the UK leaving the EU would deal a massive blow to the integrity and (potential) viability of the whole "European Project", as well as acting as a philosophical and practical template for other nations whose populations might be more easily tempted to vote to leave as a result.
And that's why I think the EC/European Parliament would most likely jump on the opportunity to revoke Article 50 and allow the UK to remain in the EU as if nothing had ever happened. I don't think they will push for Euro membership or any other UK "concessions" or stipulations as some sort of price to pay for revoking A50.
On a wider related issue.... my personal view (and one which I've held for many months now) is that May and other senior pro-remain Conservative grandees met with EU/EC leaders post-referendum and had an off-the-record discussion along the following lines: "We don't want to leave the EU, and you don't want us to leave the EU. But we need to give the strong impression that we are diligently and faithfully enacting the will of the people. However, we will ensure that there will be a UK parliamentary vote on the final deal, and you and we will also ensure that the only deal the UK can obtain will be a very poor outcome for the UK. We will then be confident of three things: 1) the UK parliament will vote against ratification of the deal; 2) the UK public will be able to be convinced that in light of the above events, a second referendum is appropriate and fair; and 3) the outcome of such a second referendum will be a "remain" majority. You will then be able to revoke Article 50."
I realise that this has more than a whiff of "conspiracy theory" about it, but I just have a sneaking suspicion that this is the long game here. Of course, I could be miles off-base. Time will tell.
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 12, 2010
- Messages
- 21,162
There is IMO zero chance that the UK government would seek the revocation of A50 without at the very least a) the conclusion of the Brexit negotiations and the understanding of the deal that was on the table, and b) the rejection of that deal in a UK parliamentary vote. I also believe that even with those two conditions, the UK government would not seek A50 revocation without also c) a second UK referendum whose outcome was a majority for "remain".
On the pre-referendum campaigning issue, it's important to remember that actually neither "side" in the debate ("Remain" and "Leave") really knew what a Brexit future would look like in practice. And in that context, it was always inevitable that the "Leave" side would make Brexit look as rosy as possible, and the "Remain" side would make Brexit look as apocalyptic as possible. I believe it's also a truism that a large majority of "Leave" voters really had no idea what they were actually voting for, and did not have the information or the understanding to figure out the true ramifications. I think a sizeable proportion of "Leave" voters did so out of a combination of the superficial attraction of the "take back control from faceless Eurocrats who are seizing loads of our money and loads of our capacity to make our own political decisions" mantra, the insular (and ignorant) immigration issue, and some form of a prevailing desire to reject the authority of "establishment" political parties (and remember, the official position of the Conservatives, Labour, LibDem and SNP was for "Remain") in favour of "outsider" agitators (funnily enough, I think a very similar psychology drove the rise of Corbyn to become Labour leader, and in turn the better-than-expected performance of Labour under Corbyn in the last General Election).
I think that the decision to hold the referendum was a disastrous mistake by Cameron and his advisers - a mistake for himself, for his party/Government, for the country, and for the EU. I think he (wrongly) bargained that he would go to the EU with the threat of a "Leave" result, use that as a device to radically alter (i.e. improve) the UK's deal with Europe, return to Westminster triumphantly waving his metaphorical Neville Chamberlain "piece of paper", ride to a "Remain" outcome in the referendum as a result of his renegotiation, and cement his place in UK political history as a result (in addition to strengthening his position within his own party, and his party's position among the electorate). I also suspect that the original 1970s referendum on entering the EEC was probably a significant factor in the decision to put the "Leave"/"Remain" decision to a referendum, rather than (as should have been the case) leave it entirely in the hands of parliament (whose lower house is, after all, elected to represent the population....).
Disclaimer: I was (and still am) a strong proponent of "Remain", albeit under different terms and under a significant reorganisation of the EU as a whole.
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
Sorry, but you are vastly overestimating your standing, your value and such.
There is fair resentment towards Britain and all of those extremely special exceptions you got and nobody else. They will be for most part gone. You won't be getting old stuff back.
In fact, Britain's value for EU is now mostly in Brexit. You are doing such perfect job at it, that it is killing most of exiters elsewhere or outright turning them into sort of supporters of EU.
How can anyone reasonably tell us that a tiny majority in the U.K. is the will of the people of the UK but a substantial majority in Scotland is not the will of the people of Scotland?
I've no idea, maybe ask someone who has claimed that?
Well the poor man only works 3 days a week, how can you expect him to do every little thing ?
Extremely well managed, the Brexit process would have, IMO, had a pretty bad impact on the UK economy and hence on the UK as a whole.
At the moment, omnishambles doesn't even begin to cover it. My Brexit-supporting mates down the pub are getting increasingly worried that things aren't going to turn out as rosy as they would have hoped and that David Davis isn't really on top of things.
Stupidity from the NHS Chief:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-41908302
I'm virulently anti-Leave but even I know enough to accept that any money wouldn't become available until after payments to the EU cease......
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-41908302
I'm virulently anti-Leave but even I know enough to accept that any money wouldn't become available until after payments to the EU cease......
You have, if your words have any meaning.
If I have then I apologise for poor communication as I did not mean to convey that.
Yeah - I know he should be trying to get the money the NHS England needs but this is rather silly.
I've listened to him in the past and he seems quite a sensible person so I'm assuming this is an act of desperation, tying to leverage political embarrassment to get the required increase in funding.
(Plus of course the £350 wouldn't just be for NHS England - there are other NHSs in the UK that have a claim to some of that money if it is going to be dished out.)
- Status