If we cancel article 50 and stay in Europe then what?

[Cantdoright1]

Surely if the public vote for something and it doesn't happen because parliament don't agree with it so won't let it happen, then we no longer live in a democracy. No point voting ever again as parliament can do what they like with the result. I don't understand why people want is to stay in Europe just because the process of leaving has been so badly handled by those in power. Or do people just accept that when the going gets tough we give up on democracy?

What happens when remainers vote for something they care about but it never happens because the government don't want it to? If we remain were all shafted on any future votes.

I don't know how people can be so fixated on remaining that they are willing to ignore the impacts of remaining on democracy, and the far reaching consequences - much bigger ones than leaving or staying in the EU. There is much more to this now than remain or leave, so much more is at stake.

Why do you expect others to provide you with evidence when you dont have the common courtesy to do so yourself

It is the innocent until proven guilty principal being applied.

The remain voters claim the referendum was illegal, but have not presented evidence nor explained why article 50 was started if the result was null and void due to illegal activities. Remember both Cameron and May are remain supporters so had the referendum been illegal surely that was their ideal opportunity to ignore it?

@PizzaCafe - I guess coz TM wanted another general election hoping to gain more support with her actions... but she lost support (though still the largest party).

She is also bringing her vote on substantially the same issue to parliament for a 3rd time??? Is that not undemocratic? When stuff changes, have another vote. Not a betrayal - especially if you have options on HOW people would like to leave if they still wish to.

The referendum was flawed.

It was about constitutional change which also involved taking away peoples rights and changing international relationships, trading relationships with no clear direction for a future alternative. It should never have been. Its purpose was to sort out the Tory party not the country.

Referendums should be used advisedly if at all.

If we revoke there should be a inquiry into how we got into this mess.

And people should remember a referendum is not the same as an election. Different rules apply.

And people should remember a referendum is not the same as an election. Different rules apply

Once article 50 was started it became binding unless there are extensions or article 50 being revoked.

Numerous extensions is my best guess as MP's know of they revoke they will not be elected at the next general election.

Numerous extensions is my best guess as MP's know of they revoke they will not be elected at the next general election.

How do you know that? Likely to be the only time I'd vote for my current MP.

The remain voters claim the referendum was illegal, but have not presented evidence nor explained why article 50 was started if the result was null and void due to illegal activities.

This is because, from a legal stance, at the time of being conducted the referendum was not legally binding (it was legally advisory). Due to this the legal options to call it null and void couldn't be followed as these are set for binding votes.

David Cameron stood down, as he realised he made a massive miscalculation .

Theresa May took the opportunity to advance her career, but to gain the support of the fractured party she could not be seen to have an ounce of remainer in her, so she towed the line to the hard Brexiters on the Tory party.

The seeds of the reason a referendum was called and the resulting shot show lay decades back in the Tory party history.

To understand why the government have plowed on with a Brexit means Brexit stance, despite the findings of the investigation, read up the history of the Tory party, paying particular attentions to the anti E.U. sects.

The remain voters claim the referendum was illegal, but have not presented evidence nor explained why article 50 was started if the result was null and void due to illegal activities.

This is because, from a legal stance, at the time of being conducted the referendum was not legally binding (it was legally advisory). Due to this the legal options to call it null and void couldn't be followed as these are set for binding votes.

David Cameron stood down, as he realised he made a massive miscalculation .

Theresa May took the opportunity to advance her career, but to gain the support of the fractured party she could not be seen to have an ounce of remainer in her, so she towed the line to the hard Brexiters on the Tory party.

The seeds of the reason a referendum was called and the resulting shot show lay decades back in the Tory party history.

To understand why the government have plowed on with a Brexit means Brexit stance, despite the findings of the investigation, read up the history of the Tory party, paying particular attentions to the anti E.U. sects.

A remain voter has agreed that leave voters count too

One reason we are such a dangerously divided country is because May has completely ignored 16m voters.
As for her being a remainer, her actions since the vote have shown her to be a brexitier, no remainer wouldn't have triggered A50 with zero plan.

Numerous extensions is my best guess as MP's know if they revoke they will not be elected at the next general election

EU have categorically ruled that out, won't happen, far more likely May will ignore the indicative votes & MV3 will pass and ERG will run the negotiations for the next 2 years.

I'd suggest its leaver MPs that need to worry, remainers seem to care a lot more about the EU than leavers do.

The remain voters claim the referendum was illegal, but have not presented evidence nor explained why article 50 was started if the result was null and void due to illegal activities

Other remainers have definitely explained this

Sorry...posted to early

As loud has clarified in her excellent post

PizzaCafe2016

Once article 50 was started it became binding

No, the legislation to start A50 was binding not the referendum.

No, the legislation to start A50 was binding not the referendum

But had there been no referendum why would there have been a need to start article 50? I remember Cameron staying the result would be honoured, but that was because he was certain it would be a remain win.

I'd suggest its leaver MPs that need to worry, remainers seem to care a lot more about the EU than leavers do

All MP's in both Conservative and Labour party should worry as both parties in their manifestos before the 2017 general election committed to honour the result of the 2016 referendum. Are they doing that? No they are not.

Labour have changed track as they know if they include a 2nd referendum in their manifesto before the next election there are a lot of easy votes to be had. Just like in the 2017 election when Labour promised student loans would be scrapped.

Conservative MP's have recently jumped ship or resigned because their prefer remain.

All Brexit has done is to reinforce a big % of the population's view that as always MP's can't be trusted. Some say that the turnout for the 2016 referendum was huge. Considering the significance of the result I would say that 72% was a poor turnout.

But had there been no referendum why would there have been a need to start article 50?

True, but that still doesn't make the referendum legally binding.

It was advisory, this is another one of those pesky facts leavers struggle with.

“All Brexit has done is to reinforce a big % of the population's view that as always MP's can't be trusted”

And from a remainer POV all brexit has done is reinforce to a big %age of the population that MPs put party and personal ambition above the good of the country and therefore cannot be trusted - so same outcome. Remainers are not cheering on the vast majority of MPs I can assure you

The biggest issue if we leave will be the lack of hope. That's what's keeping the wheels on the bus at the moment.

If we leave with May's deal people will realise how terrible it is and we will have to live with years of the ERG complaining that everything is shit because of the deal and because of the EU. They'll also spend all of their time trying to change it.

If we leave with no deal - the above with knobs on.

Leavers will realise over time they were missold but they'll be no compensation unlike PPI.

Remainers will wonder what's the point anymore as no one listens. After the marches, the petitions...

After you open Pandora's box, all that is left is hope. And after that's extinguished?

We will get back on track and there will be years of bleakness.

Whilst the govt might be worried about flares of violence , I'm more worried about the general long term malaise.

Arguing the toss about the UK being stuck down a hole will not provide a solution for getting out.
Rightly, 'remainers' had spotted the hole and voted against going into it but have been dragged down anyway.
Leavers have jumped in and forgot a ladder or in fact any means of getting out and are now expecting others to think of a 'solution'.
So far 'leavers' have scrabbled around making the hole deeper and wider making a 'rescue' gradually more difficult.

There is no rescue.
Only hope lies in MPs remembering today that they are not there to bow to mob rule, that they should serve the nation as representatives and not mere mouthpieces of their parties, that they have a duty to act in the interests of the country at large and not just a selective part of it, that they have free will and a conscience.

So far 'leavers' have scrabbled around making the hole deeper and wider making a 'rescue' gradually more difficult

My analogy is:

It's like a snowball being pushed in the snow. As time passes the snowball becomes heavier and harder to push. Eventually it will be too big to push anymore and it will come to a standstill.

should serve the nation as representatives and not mere mouthpieces of their parties

On paper yes, but in reality it never happens.

From a remainer point of view MPs have been terrible. Most of them - labour and tories have put their party before country.

In reality, labour and tories should both split: Corbynite vs ‘new labour’ and remaining tories vs UKIP.

But they didn’t want to do that because they want to ‘take the party with’ them... which means that the electorate are left with Tory vs labour or muddle vs muddle. Electorate could vote for Lib Dems as I do - but they don’t seem v popular... not sure why.

Leavers deciding that there's no point in voting in future is positive for Remainers. Leaves the political process in hands of those that can be trusted with it?