To be furious if this is true-the freedom of movement

[Rebecca2014]

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/evan-davis-newsnight-bbc-daniel-hannan-mep-eu-referendum-brexit_uk_576e2967e4b08d2c56393241

Seriously? majority of people who voted for leave wanted control of our borders, we brought into your story of an Australian style point system now it seems there's still going be freedom of labour movement which is basically the same thing expect they get less legal rights.

I didn't just vote leave for immigration but yes it was a big reason and if I known this, if remain had a better hammered this home I bet MANY leave voters would not have voted the way they did. If anything if this happens, many leave voters will join the remain voters in rage at the lies we been fed. (NHS, Immigration)

I have been a vocal leave supporter on here but now I am feeling pretty scared about what I have voted for. I blame the remain campaign for having an totally shit and ineffective campaign and Cameron should never have been the leader of the remain camp, as majority of people despise him and don't take any notice of what he says.

Snowy EU trade makes up 13% of our GDP but 3% of theirs. They have us over a barrel.

3% of 27 nations combined GDP..... a 'tiny' amount? Really?

Plenty believed the rhetoric of the leave campaign because a. they'd had years of lies about the eu so the extraordinary lies didn't seem unusual to them b. they were step by step thinkers who need to follow smaller bits of info to see a bigger picture (not stupid, just a type of learning) c. they were angry about their lot in some way and want change.

So I agree with the op: the remain campaign should have countered this with step by step information on why it was a bad idea - they should have tackled the 2 big fears: lack of work, crumbling nhs.

They didn't because half the remainers were tory and couldn't give a shit about lack of work or the crumbling nhs.

I voted remain because I'm a humanitarian and attracted to humanitarian politics which the eu promotes and protects. I also live in suburbia and whilst working class have a relatively stable town. I've also lived abroad as a migrant and enjoy the movement of peoples. I also think the nhs is already paid for by our national insurance and doesn't need more money, it needs less of the boys club creaming off the money from it. So my life experiences lead my to a remain vote.

Chris no it isn't tiny, but the EU are aware it makes up a much more significant proportion of our GDP. That isn't good for negotiations

Since when is 3% a big figure, Chris?

The other 97% really make up for it. Especially when you consider that the financial services industry and its associated GDP-boosting wealth would migrate to Frankfurt.

Since when is 3% a big figure, Chris?

When 3% of 27 nations nation GDP, is discussed in the same breath as the UK financial services industry which accounts for 1% of our GDP.

TBH, it's about time and I sincerely hope it will happen soon that contrary to their actions hitherto, the EU will act swiftly and in the interest of all EU citizens and for the benefit of the EU citizens, with no regards to Britain. Negotiations of the best deal for the EU, focus on boost to economies hit by the Brexit, focus on boost to economies of new members. Anything else would make no sense and wouldn't be beneficial for anyone. Not even Britain because my understanding was, that Leavers were sick of all negotiations and wanted to get out as fast as possible, get rid of the EU forever, because Britain only loses money from it.

Yes the referendum indeed does exactly that, because in a democracy, the government governs at the will and under the instruction, of its people. The question was asked. The people made their wishes known. Its we want out of the EU. It is exactly the same principle of asking for a vote, on say going to war. In that instance, it would be irrelevant that the 'peace' campaigners then jump up and down shouting, how stupid are you for not realising we havent even got an aircraft carrier to go to war with. The principle vote remains. Some voters will have known we have no aircraft carrier, some voters wont, but the government would have to act quickly to ensure we then did get ourselves an aircraft carrier PDQ, to fulfill the mandate given to them, by the people. A mandate they must act on.

I can see that you believe this is true chris and I think it would be much fairer if it was. The problem is, people voted for something for which we have no roadmap. Nobody knows what's going to happen or how to make it happen. Saying the politicians are just going to have to sort it and that's that is all very well, but at the moment nobody seems to want to do any sorting and nobody seems to know how or when they could sort it even if anyone were volunteering.

Also, as I pointed out upthread and you've swerved quite nicely, none of us was even asked about the EEA or EFTA. So that particular shitstorm lies ahead of us too, with no mandate either way for us to be able to demand the politicians act on.

The public can vote for a referendum giving every citizen a million quid, or expelling every non-white. Doesn't mean that Parliament can or should carry it out.
There isn't a magic money box.

Both major parties are in meltdown, going through leadership crises. So there is a political vacuum, noone with the authority to do much.
Brexit leaders set off the bomb without any plan for The Day After.
Politicians are currently planning leadership campaigns. Maybe later they'll get round to planning what to do for the country & the economy. What's left.

Referenda are advisory only. Cameron's idiocy was not to require a minimum % vote for out.

If Brexit goes through without requiring a majority vote in the House of Commons, then our form of representative democracy is in deep trouble:
Any future demagogue (or PM) will be able to pick their moment on any issue, bypass our elected representatives and fool / inflame the public just long enough to win a referendum.

Western states with a written constitution have many checks, brakes and balances to stop a demagogued citizenry from smashing the really important things in a brief period of rage.
Unfortunately the UK constitution is based on a medieval monarchy, unsuited to the modern world.

If the US elect Trump, his actions will be severely limited, whereas the Dream Team that Bojo & Gove are building are not, except by having only a small Tory majority in Parliament.
If they think they can win a much larger one, then they'll call a GE for more freedom to dismantle the welfare state.
Probably not what many Brexiters intended.

I can see that you believe this is true chris and I think it would be much fairer if it was. The problem is, people voted for something for which we have no roadmap. Nobody knows what's going to happen or how to make it happen. Saying the politicians are just going to have to sort it and that's that is all very well, but at the moment nobody seems to want to do any sorting and nobody seems to know how or when they could sort it even if anyone were volunteering.

Also, as I pointed out upthread and you've swerved quite nicely, none of us was even asked about the EEA or EFTA. So that particular shitstorm lies ahead of us too, with no mandate either way for us to be able to demand the politicians act on.

I agree, there is no road map. I disagree that no one knows how to make it happen. Junker was wrong on 1 point yesterday, demanding (without any mandate to demand) we invoke article 50 now, and he was right on another point, the tory party is in chaos, indeed David Cameron immediately resigned from the task. We dont vote in Prime Ministers for them to run off to lie down in a dark room, when we ask them to do something thats hard.

Yes its not been the easy, soft option. Yes, people in general hate change, they feel unsettled and even more so when there is a sense of leaderless ship. Cameron should have done the opposite to what he has done. He should have stood by his commitment when offering a referendum, to abide by and implement the will of the people.

I havent swerved the EEA or EFTA question, it was always accepted that renegotiation must now be entered into. I think its naive of the remain camp to think the EU (who are inextricably linked to the EEA/EFTA) would happily allow us to remain in those arrangements whilst outside the EU council. There are possibly various options regards trade agreements post Brexit, one of which includes negotiating continuation of the single market. (And this little shitstorm thats exploded on this thread) To ask me to provide a detailed plan of all other options, sit round the table, and ensure its implemented, is as mad as asking poor Rebecca. Much as Id love Junker, or Angela Merkel to ring me this morning, I fear she wont.

I don't agree we need a Parliamentary vote for Brexit. The Tories were elected in part because they promised the referendum vote and Cameron has rightly said we will be leaving the EU although not giving notice until the Tory MPs choose their new leader in October. It does not need to go back to Parliament to be democratic.
I would never have held the Scottish or this referendum at all - they were both a mistake but it's done now and we have to make the best of it.

I think our unwritten constitution works very well.

It does not need to go back to Parliament to be democratic.

But it does politically, because no PM wants to be the one to pull the trigger.

Referenda are advisory only. Cameron's idiocy was not to require a minimum % vote for out

Yup. The first Scottish devolution referendum failed on those grounds. The 2nd one didn't have to meet the minimum % beyond 50%+1 of those who voted.

Had it been required to meet the same criteria as the 1st one it would easily have exceeded them. The result being there was no room for doubt as to its credibility and it being a firm base to work on.

But it does politically, because no PM wants to be the one to pull the trigger.

Well, they should. And if they don't, the EU should act to protect its people and do it for them.

Interesting chart showing MPs views on the EU. The vote in parliament could go either way.

The EU has no power to pull the trigger for a member country.

It's like being at work and saying 'I'm leaving' but not giving your notice in writing. The EU can't do anything until they have formal notice

3% of 27 nations combined GDP..... a 'tiny' amount? Really?

3% divided by 27, even unevenly, is negligible for the countries concerned.

The referendum which changed the status quo was the 2nd devolution referendum. It needed The Scotland Act to do so which required a majority of MPs and the House of Lords to approve it.

OP, we said it loud and clear and backed it up with FACTS but were accused of scaremongering. The facts were dismissed as irrelevant because "we've had enough of experts". What more were we supposed to do if people were determined to believe what they wanted?

You are cherry picking statistics! The EU is not one homogenous country!

imo, < sticks head above parapet > A Scottish IndyRef should have a minimum % requirement too.
However, if we Brexit on 52% it would be difficult to justify a minimum for Scottish Indy

My basic point: fundamental change that may cause massive economic damage at least in the shortterm should require a minimum % vote, a minimum consent to suffer for the supposedly golden future.
That would help reduce civil unrest if the economy really nosedives and the poor in particular are hard hit by more austerity.

If those who voted Brexit find nothing has changed in 6 or 12 months - except more austerity, higher prices & unemployment - they will probably be even angrier.
So what will they do ?

The EU has no power to pull the trigger for a member country.

Unfortunately. But hence my question to all Leavers - isn't it time to put pressure on your political representatives to act swiftly? If not, perhaps the 27 countries should put pressure on the EU to put steps in place, whatever they are, to speed it up.
I mean, I don't get it. You voted to leave. You want to get out of the EU. How come you don't have a plan for a swift exit? This is not a bloody opera where Traviata sings for three hours before dying of advanced consumption. Clear cut.

Apparently in law there's good reason to say that we can't leave unless the Scottish Parliament agrees. That could be interesting.