WEBCHAT GUIDELINES 1. One question per member plus one follow-up. 2. Keep your question brief. 3. Don't moan if your question doesn't get answered. 4. Do be civil/polite. 5. If one topic or question threatens to overwhelm the webchat, MNHQ will usually ask for people to stop repeating the same question or point. More here.
Webchat with three experts on Brexit and the EU: Friday 15 March at 10am(107 Posts)
Following on from this week’s ongoing events in Parliament, we thought it would be interesting to have a webchat with our friends at The UK in a Changing Europe on Friday 15 March at 10am.
As some of you will know they’ve joined us a few times before - you can view their previous webchat in January here.
Here’s some information about the guests and their backgrounds:
Professor Jonathan Portes is senior fellow at The UK in a Changing Europe and Professor of Economics and Public Policy in the Department of Political Economy at King's College London. Previously, he was principal research fellow of the National Institute of Economic & Social Research. Before that he was chief economist at the Cabinet Office, and previous to that chief economist at the Department of Work and Pensions.
Professor Catherine Barnard is senior fellow at The UK in a Changing Europe; Professor in European Union Law and Employment Law at the University of Cambridge; and senior tutor and fellow of Trinity College. Catherine specialises in EU law and employment law.
Professor Barnard will only be able to join us for half an hour, as she is kindly stepping out from a four-hour meeting for this (!)
Professor Anand Menon is Director of The UK in a Changing Europe and Professor of European Politics and Foreign Affairs at King’s College London. He has held positions at Sciences Po, Columbia University and NYU. He has written on many aspects of contemporary Europe and is a frequent commentator on national and international media and you may have seen him on Question Time last week.
Please do join us on Friday to talk about what’s going on, what might happen next, and what’s going on (again). If you can’t make it, please post your question on this thread in advance. Please bear in mind the webchat guidelines one question each (follow-ups allowed if there’s time), and please be polite. Also following recent chats/guest posts we’ve updated our guidelines to let people know that, if one topic is overwhelmingly dominating a discussion with a guest, mods might request that people don't continue to post what's effectively the same question or point. Rest assured we will ALWAYS let guests know that it's an area of concern to multiple users and will encourage them to engage with those questions.
Looking forward to this and the little pen sketches given above are interesting, thank you.
Can you please ask your contributors named above to state, from the outset, their own position on Brexit. This should include if they voted in the Referendum in 2016, and whether (if they did) they voted for Remain or for Leave?
If I post a question now it'll probably be out of date by morning.
Thanks for joining us again
agree with Hazard, thank you for joining us again.
I think if this whole Brexit farce has taught us anything it should be that actually we DO need experts so thank you in advance.
After the scandal of illegal activities by some campaigners and the covert use of social media by firms such as Cambridge Analytica, how we be sure that our democracy is not highjacked yet again by foriegn interference, cheating, lying, and extreme bias in the media if we have another public vote?
Thank you so much for joining the chat again. I found your answers last time incredibly helpful.
If we end up not leaving or are granted a significant extension, to what extent has the UK's participation in EU projects already been affected and how easy or difficult would it be to pick up where we left off?
Why has the criminal manipulation and dark money used to fund and influence the first referendum not been at the forefront of the argument?
Hello again, and thanks.
Given that the DUP has opposed, since its inception, all attempts prior to the Belfast Treaty to ensure peace in Northern Ireland, can we infer that in its stance on Brexit it has returned to its traditional raison d’être, and is using the Referendum outcome above all to thwart the peace process - especially as NI will potentially be very badly affected? Why is it not coming under pressure from NI business to desist from its stance? How can Parliament marginalise and defuse the DUP?
Yy borntobequiet question, also littlespaces question & why does television/papers get away with such manipulation of the truth & facts & why when the referendum was such a close result, the remain vote is usually ignored by everyone, thank you.
Thanks for joining us really like to be involve in this discussion.
Thank you for joining the discussion again.
Why has been so hard to achieve an indicative vote on any positive plan that would command a majority in Parliament, and what plan do the panel think could realistically command a majority now.
As experts do you predict that the UK will actually leave the EU?
Sheesh, can we not just stop this, you know, go back to where we were?
If we did, how much damage do you think all this will have done?
Baffled how we can have been lied to so badly, how the campaigning was so dishonest, and then so much store is set by a referendum result that should be void.
Do you think that it is ironic that the most reluctant member of the EU is less able to cut ties with the EU than the likes of France and Germany (if ever they wanted to!)
Did anyone realise at the time of the Good Friday Agreement that it would tie us to the EU for always?
As a political commentator said yesterday "the most crazy thing is that 15 years ago, no one gave a stuff about the EU" so at the time of the GFA, it was an irrelevance but surely protecting peace in NI is more important?
I also would like to ask why the fraud/over spending and foreign influence isn't a bigger issue? or is electoral law in the UK unfit for the 21st century?
IS this really the car crash we all fear, or simply bombast?
If we don't leave, do you think the UK's leavers will be sufficiently powerful to frustrate the Eurocratic drive to turn all EU countries into provinces of Brussels?
Do you predict civil unrest over the vote in favour of a request for an extension of article 50?
The divorce deal was supposed to be the easy part, and we know how it’s going. Assuming it goes through at some point...How long do you predict it will take to negotiate the real deal, the trade deals? And what strategy is at the base of the tariff proposal published yesterday by the government?
If we make some assumptions about what might happen next (stay with me, I know these might not come to pass..)
- The WA passes
- May steps down
- Replaced by someone altogether more 'Brexity' (BoJo et al)
What would you anticipate any future relationship and trade deal with the EU to look like?
Have we, as far as you are aware, made any in roads to developing a strong negotiating team (one can only hope this is the plan, not to make the same mistake twice)?
This is a question about the politicians and the public who (ignorantly) deny input from experts and expertise. Its a cheeky second question.
The explanations you have given on previous web chats have come to bear with precision and prescience. Thank you. You accurately explained on the last web-chat that the most likely outcome would be an extension and, of course, you have been proved right.
Do you think the fashion for denial of experienced expert knowledge is uniquely British and American phenomenon? Why has it happened? Will wider respect for knowledge and deeper understanding return within our lifetimes?
What are your views on Russia’s involvement on both the initial referendum and the leave campaign?
This thread is not accepting new messages.
Please login first.