For anyone against having a second referendum...

[Elle087]

As we get closer to March 29th we are not only running out of time but running out of options.

Many leave voters will have you believe that all 17.4 million of them voted with a no deal in mind so having another referendum would be undemocratic.

But i ask anyone with this viewpoint to come on here and tell me how this can possibly be true when some of the most prominent leave campaigners were on record before the vote saying that no one was talking about leaving the single market and we could be like Norway?
How many of the 17.4 million people voted thinking this would be true?

With a no deal brexit this will be confirmed as complete lies so the people must be consulted again before we let this happen.

I'm 99% certain that if the only choices were remain or no deal then remain would win by quite a margin, maybe 60/40.

this is a hilarious post. honestly sometimes I think it is remainers who had absolutely no idea what they were voting about ?!

But Nigel Farage, Dan Hannan, Arron Banks, Matthew Elliot, Luke Johnson and Owen Paterson (to name a few) all said we wouldn't have to leave the single market and that we could be like Norway. All leave campaigners, were they lying?
And try and answer me yourself rather than posting youtube videos.

And try and answer me yourself rather than posting youtube videos

[sceptical]

The video is evidence. Where's yours? I voted leave, took it all rather seriously, watched and read everything I could in the run up to the vote, and it was crystal clear from where I was standing that leaving the EU meant leaving the single market.

Anyway, it is a moot point. Norway don't want us; we have been faffing about for years getting this and that concession from the EU. Why transfer that to EFTA etc. Let's do the honourable thing and get on with what we voted to get on with, given that millions and millions and millions of people voted in good faith that the answer would be taken seriously, including those that voted remain.

I've just given you six names of people who lied to the British people which has quite probably swayed the vote in leave's favour, how is that not evidence?

And you can't keep saying that's what we voted for because millions voted thinking we could stay in the single market.

Can you honestly tell me that you think all 17.4 million people who voted leave will be happy with a no deal?

Let's do the honourable thing and get on with what we voted to get on with
What a load of bollocks. There is nothing 'honourable' about pursuing a course of action that will see the country worse off. The BBC reported yesterday that the government has "allocated to ministries £2bn set aside in case the UK leaves on 29 March without MPs having accepted any deal" and "letters will be sent to 140,000 firms updating them on what they should do while 3,500 troops will be put on standby to help government departments."

Troops FFS. But let's just forge ahead with no deal anyway . Maybe blackcurrant can come up with one (preferably more) GOOD reason why a no deal scenario is desirable. I won't hold my breath though.

Elle087 you saying it doesn't make it evidence.

If Labour in particular stopped trying to sabotage this for their own political gains and starting backing the government in what they are trying to do, no deal wouldn't happen. The WA would pass and we could get on with making a trade deal.

The honour is sticking to the course of action that was promised, namely implementing leaving the EU.

So are you saying that Nigel Farage, Dan Hannan, Arron Banks, Matthew Elliot, Luke Johnson and Owen Paterson didn't say we could stay in the single market and be like Norway?

The burden is on you to prove that they did.

Here you go...

...not to mention what exactly you think was said - i.e. evidence in the face of the evidence I posted that documents that it was quite clear what leave meant.

No, thats remainers. Leave said that wouldnt happen. We could remain in the single market and called all bad stuff project fear.

If parliament cannot resolve Brexit then I don't see how we can move forward without either a general election where it is clear what each party will do on Brexit (can't see this happening!) or a referendum. I also don't see how No Deal can be a serious option without parliamentary support. I don't believe it's something that we can or should drift into - it should be an active decision. But I also don't think that the referendum gave a mandate for No Deal. The options that are now on the table are very different from what was presented by either side during the referendum campaign - the situation has changed, we should have another vote on it.

Thank you. Fair enough.

We still have to leave the EU. That is what was voted for. So passing the WA through parliament and then making a trade deal seems to me to be the reasonable thing to do.

There seems to be a misconception among many people in both the government and public, that people who voted leave somehow thought that that meant staying in the EU. I don't get why you all think that. Can you explain? The leave vote was for 'leave the EU'.

What would a second referendum do, apart from give those preparing it a chance to fix it to the right answer?

No deal is the default for leaving the EU. Anything else, with favourable terms FOR the UK, is a bonus.

I agree.

I believe in remain and still firmly do. I have some sympathy with some leaver arguments but I also dont believe leaving is the best way to resolve them. I also think us leaving is good for the EU. Weve been a petulant teenager almost since joining. They must see they would be better "without us but with us" so to speak as they wouldnt keep having to deal with our tantrums.

Mays deal seems to be the only marginally sensible option. If theres anither referendum I will vote remian again but I am of the view that Parliament have to sort this shit as it was their creation.

What would a second referendum do, apart from give those preparing it a chance to fix it to the right answer?

It would give everyone the chance the vote on the actual deal now on offer, whatever that may be at the time of the referendum.

Before the first vote we had that many versions of brexit presented to us how could anyone have voted for the same thing.

I'm a remainer but my other half and mother in law both voted to leave because they thought it would give us tighter controls over our borders but keep us in the single market.
Now they know this probably isn't the case they want the opportunity to vote again.

It's not a democratic vote if it's based on lies.

If the next referendum was a choice between remain or leave with no deal everyone would know exactly what would happen no mater what way the vote went.

You only have to visit the official leave campaign website to see what people were told before the vote.
www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/why_vote_leave.html

"There is a free trade zone stretching all the way from Iceland to the Russian border. We will still be part of it after we Vote Leave"

"Taking back control is a careful change, not a sudden step - we will negotiate the terms of a new deal before we start any legal process to leave."

I think it is fair to say there were lies and misconceptions on both sides of the argument. The leave campaign is full of 'we could' and 'we should' rather than concrete promises, and that is because it was impossible to know how the other side in the negotiations would negotiate after the event. Although, a crystal ball should not have been needed based on David Cameron's attempts to negotiate before the referendum.

The leave campaign is blamed for a lot, but Euroscepticism in the UK runs very deep and the real leave campaign has been underway for over thirty years.

Sadly the leave campaign was shocking, dumbed down and full of silly bullet points. The reasons I want to leave the EU were not reflected in slogans they used, and I understood the implications, i.e. hard brexit. I think the leave campaign damaged the leave campaign.

You understood the implications of hard Brexit and voted for it

Er, yes. I voted to leave the EU, fully and completely. That's what was on the ballot, that's what I voted for. Did you think people voted for something else?

I want to leave the EU were not reflected in slogans they used, and I understood the implications, i.e. hard brexit.

That's great and i'm sure there are others in the same boat.
But how many of the 17.4 million were caught up in the lies and voted accordingly?
I have two close family members who feel cheated that the brexit they voted for isn't being implemented.
And this is the problem we face no matter how we leave because every leave voter seems to have their own vision of what brexit should be.

Another vote on remain or leave with no deal will leave no uncertainty on what people have voted for.

I wouldn't expect to get a free toy without buying a Happy Meal, therefore I wouldn't expect to get tariff free access to the EU market without paying my sub. I would aim for a mutually beneficial agreement that had no restrictions on my dealings with other trading partners. As it is int he interests of both parties to do so, this is what I would hope for. Years of dealing with the EU have shown me this may not always be possible and to be prepared for it.