People’s Vote Delusion

[PersonaNonGarter]

It isn’t going to happen. For the following reasons:

1. May Government won’t vote for a second referendum
2. No new post-May Tory Government will vote for a second referendum
3. Jeremy Corbyn and those in the Labour Party front benches won’t vote for a second referendum
4. There is no agreement about what the referendum would ask.
5. There is no plausible timetable for a referendum.

Why would Corbyn want a second referendum? He is a Leaver wanting to win in Leave seats. And he wants to implement his domestic agenda, not waste any further time on Brexit votes. The current situation SUITS him.

Quietrebel What is wrong with have pride in your country and wanting to put your people first ? In a look after your family first type way

How is harming the UK economically and culturally looking after "your own people?"

Pride in ones country? yep the rest of the World is laughing at us.

I can see the idea of Janet Street Porter's 'boycotting' France, or to make it really effective, the whole of the EU, is going to be really effective.
Don't forget the EU is desperate to buy more Austin Allegros and ,,,,,,,erm?

Having pride in your country doesn't look like this.

JSP should be calling for a boycott of the Tory party who are the root cause of all this.

@hesta54

Nothing wrong with pride in your country and looking after your own.
My point has always been that FOM is a positive, not a negative, and that many aspects of it can be better regulated domestically and also from within the EU. Again, the rules that made detached workers cost less tax were not changed because the UK wanted to keep it that way.
It's just not been managed well.
Insisting on an end to FOM and all the issues that derive from that is like burning down your house because you no longer like your kitchen.

"Boycotting France." Good Lord.

Honestly, for a country that wants to "take back control" we seem awfully good at avoiding taking responsibility for our decisions.

Boycotting France, stupidity in abundance JSP

I suppose you want to block the chunnel up and stop eating rustique or the many other things boycotting would involve. Dappy moo fancy coming out with ignorant twaddle like that more words fail me as I'm aghast that anyone can come out with something so ridiculous

@Buteo
Many thanks for that so it seems that the EU (or the European Council at least) accepts the fact that some member states will seek to adopt an integration-lite route. @LouiseCollins/leavers is this not good news for the stay-in and help to define/exemplify a minimal integration grouping within the EU as highlighted earlier. It would seem to be the case that the EU has already accepted this and the European Union Act 2011 could be re-enacted as a democratic backstop. Surely this is preferable to the current chaos and dim prospects of a no-deal or Canada-type deal?

@Hesta54
indistinct but the EEA/ETFA would inc FOM, most leavers want an end to FOM or at least some proper control, ( job based visa) not at the starting salary levels that they’re suggesting at the moment, most people in the U.K. would be happy to be on 30,000 pa

Accepted but surely the cost of restricted FOM shouldn't be as high as decimation of key economic sectors such as manufacturing, aerospace etc ... Particularly as much UK immigration isn't even from EU and arguably non-EU migration is of more concern to many leavers given the greater degree of cultural disparity? As mentioned previously, other EU member states are concerned about FoM and the impact on their societies - we're already outside of Schengen, wouldn't it be better to stay in and work with similarly minded nations to establish some sensible FoM limits (e.g. no more than 0.5% of working population per year or something)?
Even if FoM is a red-line for some leavers wouldn't it be better to move to EEA/EFTA+CU for a period of time (say ~10 years) to restructure our economy before moving to a Canada-style relationship in the longer term? I still think this would be inferior to the stay-in and fight for greater control option but at least it wouldn't result in the likely recession we're currently facing.

@Hesta54
What is wrong with have pride in your country and wanting to put your people first ?
Nothing wrong with this but it seems clear that the current Brexit path is very far from delivering on this. Triggering A50 has placed UK in woefully weak negotiating position with respect to EU and any nation that already has a trade deal with the UK via the EU. Moreover it places us in a v. weak position for any future trade deals as all nations are aware our economy is currently setup as heavily dependent on EU integration and consequently UK is a distressed negotiator. How is this putting the people that voted leave first - Sunderland being a prime example?
If you agree, surely the right answer is to push for EEA/EFTA+CU (option 1 above) or remain (option 2)?

@indistinct, thanks for your recent posts. I accept that the EU says that it will allow “ever closer union” to permit different paths of integration. I can however cite approx. 40 years of evidence that it has not, in practice, done much like this.

In any case, this would only mean a brake on further integration from where we are now. It does nothing to address the position that EU integration has gone far too far already.

I was dimly aware of the European Union Act 2011, though the reminder was v. useful. I’d be far less confident about the willingness of any UK government to actually do what it or any similar future act required of them (“Lisbon” anyone?) and in any case as somebody pointed out its been repealed.

I don’t think your “stay in and work with others” on FOM proposition will cut it, to be honest. For myself, I’m not greatly concerned about free movement, but I recognise that this is largely because in the job I have, I’m not (for the most part) competing with EU nationals in the labour market. For many of those who are, FOM change is vital.

EFTA as an interim position I would personally be prepared to accept. For myself, I’d probably accept EFTA as an outcome of the referendum result too but the FOM issue for others would remain.

“Stay in and fight for control” after the 2016 referendum result, on the other hand, I would not be prepared to countenance. Either democratic votes mean something, or they don’t.

but the EEA/ETFA would inc FOM, most leavers want an end to FOM or at least some proper control, ( job based visa) not at the starting salary levels that they’re suggesting at the moment, most people in the U.K. would be happy to be on 30,000 pa

There is no evidence for this. Instead, the most recent YouGov evidence (August 2018) is that most people believe that "people from the EU should be free to come to Britain as long as they have
a job to come to, or have a place at a British university".

See page 8 of the YouGov survey report - d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/4e1ciqwvua/Copy%20of%20PV%20results%20180807%20day%20one_w.pdf

It says, as long as they have a job to come to or a university place - NOT - "as long as they have a job supported by a job-based visa and a £30k salary".

Freedom of Movement cuts both ways. It is our tremendous loss and the loss of our children to cease to be free to live and work in other EU countries. Why do Leavers always see this through the prism of people who don't want to take advantage of their freedom of movement rights (including their own children).

Leavers always assume that the UK will always be relatively prosperous and free. They cannot imagine a serious downturn in our economic and political fortunes. In their wildest dreams, they never imagine that one day, their children might be the ones wishing they could look for low paid/low skilled jobs elsewhere in Europe.

@figmentofmyimagination

Great, a question with a relatively simple answer. Leavers do not "always" see things the same way. For those who want FOM to end I'd suggest they see it that way because the chances of them realistically being able to exercise it are very small, and all it brings is competitors for the part of the labour market they are in/trying to stay in!

Also, it's currently free movement of people, not free movement of workers only.

the EU rules are; can be deported if not in work after 3 months (unless you can support yourself) can't be a benefit tourist and med bills claimed back from country of origin.

the UK enforces none of this.

Surely though most people want more for their kids then they had? perhaps inc studying, travelling and working in Europe?

Either democratic votes mean something, or they don’t

I am afraid that this reads as little more than and empty soundbite.
The Government at the moment cannot agree what it wants, so has hamstrung itself when trying to negotiate. The option of cherry picking is not and never was on the table, which they knew from the off, and saying la la la, I'm not listening didn't change that. At the moment, the omens for a good deal which does not damage the UK do not look promising. Do we still go ahead despite this? What form of democracy is it, if the wishes of an electorate as interpreted by a weak government has to be held to for 5, 10, 20, or 100 ago? At what stage does the mandate expire?

The people of NI democratically voted to Remain. Yet they are being dragged out and potentially dragged into mayhem. So how does that work as democracy then?

In their wildest dreams, they never imagine that one day, their children might be the ones wishing they could look for low paid/low skilled jobs elsewhere in Europe.

And please Leavers, don't bother to come on and say it's all about Tarquin and Jocasta and their 'gap yah'. It won't be, Tarquin and Jocasta's Leave voting Daddy will have bought them Maltese passports; it will be Kylie and Ryan who miss out.

@bellinisurge, the referendum was voted for by the UK parliament, its outcome will be similarly, approved (or not) by the UK parliament. This was a UK wide referendum on a single national franchise.

@perigrina. The mandate expires when we have a) carried it out, and b) allowed sufficient time to elapse after that to evaluate the result of doing so. I'd suggest that around 40 years from the date of departure would be appropriate.

For those who want FOM to end I'd suggest they see it that way because the chances of them realistically being able to exercise it are very small, and all it brings is competitors for the part of the labour market they are in/trying to stay in!

Given that both Sunderland and Cornwall had a heavy Leave vote and neither have appreciable numbers of immigrants, would you explain which part of the labour market immigrants are stopping them from getting or staying in?

@LouiseCollins28 and everyone can pretend all they like that NI is entirely the same as rUK (apart from no abortion rights and no equal marriage which apparently doesn't matter). But it isn't. And The people of NI voted more clearly to Remain than the whole of the UK voted to leave because they know what could well happen if they are dragged out. So both Unionists and Nationalists voted together for the same thing.

@bellinisurge

"rUK" not sure I understand this reference in the context of your post, please can you help. Who has left? Or maybe, who do you want to have left the UK?

On the vote in NI you are right, more voted to remain than leave. Same is true for Scotland, by a wider margin as well. NI, interestingly has the lowest proportion of turnout for any of the 4 nations, which if Unionists and Nationalists voted together en masse for the same thing surely it wouldn't do? I don't dispute for a moment that the votes to leave and remain were both "cross community" though if that's the right term.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_United_Kingdom_European_Union_membership_referendum,_2016#Results_by_United_Kingdom_constituent_states

So, a vote = a vote, and you are right.

What's the solution for you then? Do the majority Remain votes in Scotland and NI keep the UK in the EU, despite the UK wide vote being a win for Leave?

The mandate expires when we have a) carried it out, and b) allowed sufficient time to elapse after that to evaluate the result of doing so. I'd suggest that around 40 years from the date of departure would be appropriate.

a) I have already asked - whose version of Brexit is to be carried out? The one once espoused by Farage of Norway, or the one espoused by the Norths (EEA/EFTA), or the one by May/ERG/DUP? I don't recollect being asked which option we would prefer. Is that not a lack of democracy? OK you may say not, we elected a Government to act for us, but May lost her majority, don't forget. The option she had already tried to put on the table wasn't supported by the electorate or then she would have got her 60/100 seat majority, and could be said to have won a mandate for her version of Brexit.

b) This is enshrined in which Law? Or is just something which you would like to see, (possibly like Rees-Mogg and me too, that it won't affect you because you are likely to be dead then.) Again the question needs to be posed, why do we have Parliamentary elections at least every five years, and Local Government ones every three, but somehow, this 'mandate' i.e. opinion poll supposedly trounces all that?

Democracy is an ongoing process. We don't make one decision and then abdicate all responsibility.

When you make a big decision you choose to proceed several times. You are buying a house:
You choose to visit the house
You choose to put an offer in
The offer is accepted and you choose to proceed
Once the survey is complete you choose to proceed.

You make the decision to move forward at several points, you can withdraw if the offer is lowered or raised or if the survey is unsatisfactory or if you just change your mind.

UK Democracy works like this. In Parliament a Bill has several readings and a committee stage changes can be made at several points and a bill is voted on more than once.

Democracy is not one decision it is naive to think it it is.

Democracy is not one decision it is naive to think it it is.

Apparently for the Leavers of this Referendum it was. Had Remain won, it would have been 'unfinished business'. It would not just have been Farage saying that either. It would have gone on until the Rees-Moggs, Johnsons, Foxes, Redwoods and co leave/get kicked out of Parliament or are dead. There may or may not be another generation to take their place - I suspect not in such large numbers.