AIBU to think that other than some people being upset or angry, there are no downsides for the UK if Brexit doesn't happen ?

[frumpety]

I can't think of any downsides to the UK not brexiting other than some of the population being upset for a bit. Can anyone else ?

Moussemoose Yes you have and I still don't get what you are getting at , the government has acted on a Advisory referendum, as they said they would

You can’t just keep voting until you get the answer you want

You can’t just keep voting until you get the answer you want
Why not?
That is what General and Local elections are all about .....

Only if its not what you wanted the result to be

In relation to Ireland the U.K. has to be very careful 800 years of oppression is not swept away in 100 years.

Personally, I am quite fond of referencing 1939. I think it demonstrates clearly the futility of Brexit. In 1939 we did not walk away from Europe, we did not turn our back and hide in a corner. We could have made peace with Hitler and abandoned Europe but we didn't.

It was clear we were part of Europe and needed to stand up for democracy in Europe. In 1939 we turned towards a European future helping and supporting our nearest neighbours.

Brexit will not work because we can not ignore Europe, we can not turn our backs and walk away. We are intrinsically linked to Europe and should take our place at the centre of the discussions and the debates.

The lesson on 1939 is to not run away. Brexit is running away.

Only if its not what you wanted the result to be
Indeed.
I did not want TM as PM
so I'm looking forward to another GE vote soon when the country can change its mind

Ta1kinPeace Yes, but we don't have another vote until the first vote has been carried out and after a set time,

but we don't have another vote until the first vote has been carried out and after a set time,
What do you mean by "carried out"
Manifesto promises met?
That has never happened after a GE after all

Ta1kinPeace And you will get one when in the next few years, we can always have another ref vote in time ( same as this one after 73)

Ta1kinPeace no but the party /person that is voted in gets to take up office, before we have the next vote after a time peroid

I think you will find that remain were fined as well

Best for Our Future given a £2,000 penalty for failing to submit documents about donations from Unison (£10,000) and the GMB (£20,000).

Stronger In campaign £1,250 fine.

LibDems fined £18,000 for failing to provide acceptable invoices or receipts for 80 payments with a total value of more than £80,000.

Nothing like the £70,000 penalty for Leave.EU for the lack of transparency of £8,000,000 of funding plus criminal investigations though eh?

Following its investigation into funding for the 2016 EU referendum, the Electoral Commission has referred: Better for the Country, the organisation that ran the Leave.EU referendum campaign; Arron Banks; Leave.EU; Elizabeth Bilney; and other associated companies and individuals. The National Crime Agency has now launched a criminal investigation.

The investigation focused on £2m reported to have been loaned to Better for the Country by Arron Banks and his group of insurance companies and a further £6m reported to have been given to the organisation, on behalf of Leave.EU, by Arron Banks alone.

£2.9m of this money was used to fund referendum spending on behalf of Leave.EU and donations to other campaign groups during the EU referendum.

Following its investigation, the Commission has reasonable grounds to suspect that:

Mr Banks was not the true source of the £8m loans made to Better for the Country.
Loans to Better for the Country, on behalf of Leave.EU, involved a non-qualifying or impermissible company – Rock Holdings Limited, which is incorporated in the Isle of Man.
Arron Banks, Elizabeth Bilney and others involved in Better for the Country, Leave.EU and associated companies concealed the true details of these financial transactions.
A number of criminal offences may have been committed.
Due to multiple suspected offences, some of which fall outside the Commission’s remit, the Commission has referred this matter and handed its evidence to the National Crime Agency.

You can try to spin the "oooh, but Remain campaigns were fined too" but there really is no comparison.

@Hesta54
So to carry out the 2016 vote
does that mean leaving the Customs Union?
or just leaving the EU and staying in the CU?
as they would both be carrying out the result

What? Apart from handing control of our armed forces and nuclear weapons to a drunk who can’t be seen in public after noon because he’s so shitfaced? Nah, can’t see any problem with that.

Ok I'll bite.

Democracy is not a one off event.

Frequently when negotiating treaties and enabling vote is carried out to agree negotiations should take place. Once the details are known another vote is held. This is how Trade Unions negotiate. This is how international treaties are negotiated.

When a Bill passes through parliament it is voted on several times. After major amendments are made another vote is taken.

The referendum was only advisory. Parliament is sovereign and can not be bound by a referendum or decisions made by previous parliaments.

The referendum would have been set aside if the vote had been legally binding.

Referenda do not fit in well in a report democracy- as this fiasco demonstrates.

Parliament is sovereign and will make a decision on how to progress.

If Parliament decides another referendum is legal, constitutional and democratic.

@Augusta2012
Apart from handing control of our armed forces and nuclear weapons to a drunk who can’t be seen in public after noon because he’s so shitfaced?

Lol! Do you not know that the UK cannot use its nuclear weapons without the agreement of the US? We don't have access to our own weapons and it's nothing to do with the EU.

@Augusta2012 the EU is not a dictatorship it is a democracy as I have explained to you in detail several times.

Buteo That's all right then, both are in the wrong, one more than the other, I robbed £1000 from a bank you've only robbed £100, Both robbed a bank

but we don't have another vote until the first vote has been carried out and after a set time,

Length of time between the 2015 and 2017 General Elections: 2 years and 1 month.

Length of time since the referendum: 2 years and 6 months.

I take it you feel safer with Trump lol

Last post was for Augusta

Yes the both robbed the bank and that would have nullified the result if it had been legally binding which it wasn't.

Moussemoose Blah, Blah, Blah, so why did parliament vote to give us the vote, vote to issue A50, etc etc,, so why are they carrying out the WILL OF THE PEOPLE ?

Childrenofthesun I think the Tories took up office after the vote had happened ie carried out the wishes of the people

Hesta because we a representative democracy. Carrying out the direct will of the people is what you get in a direct democracy.

Politicians in the HoC often make decisions in the best interest of the country that go against public opinion. Legalising homosexuality and abolishing the death penalty were both laws opposed by the public.

Politicians in our system, the system Brexiters are so fond of, act in the way they feel is best for the country.

This is the system YOU want to retain. Parliamentary sovereignty is what YOU think is at risk.

You can't now complain because parliament is, in fact, sovereign.

Any time you want to respond to the blah, blah points is fine with me. I am sure, like all Brexiters, you have throughly researched all these points and have lots of clever answers you are choosing not to share.

hesta surely the point is that if the referendum was legally binding, then both sides would have been bound by the electoral law and therefore not free to make up things to say simply to ensure people would vote for them. Had the referendum been legally binding then the vote would have been nullified by the fact both sides broke the electoral law.
So the referendum for the biggest change in UK history for many generations should have been properly thought out, and both sides should have been prevented from breaking the law for fear of prosecution. Just because both sides were fined that doesn't make their actions OK, or equal even.
Is that what democracy is now, whoever has the most money to manipulate other people is justified in winning because they successfully and illegally manipulated people into voting for them?