Can people/Remainers explain what they are tying to achieve with Revoke?

[EggAndButter]

I initially wanted to post on AIBU but I didn’t have the guts and thought it wouod just be moved anyway...

I’m getting tired of Brexit.
Tired of the lies and dreams of the Leave side.
But just as tired of the dreams and wishful thinking of the Remain side.

So I am asking Remainers on here

What do you expect to achieve with Revoke?

How are you planning to deal with the Leave side being left down?
How will you deal with the inevitable instability coming with Revoke? There will a lot of very angry People around.... people who will be feeling left down. People in the north who have always being feeling that the South and London never listens to them and that this is another proof they don’t. And being sure that you have the ‘right’ solution isn’t going to be enough.

I have the same questions for Leavers btw. It’s just that the answer seems to always be ‘that’s the will of the people. Just suck it up’ :(

As we are going deeper and deeper into this brexit mess, it’s clear that there is one way to go back to what the U.K. has. That ship has well and truly sailed.
It’s also clear that No Deal will be a nightmare.

So the only way out I can see is a deal. A deal that will worse for the U.K. than being in the EU. A deal that both sides ‘will just have to suck it up’.
A deal where no one will be truly happy because the other solutions (No Deal or Revoke) just aren’t possible. But the only way out until the U.K. can sort itself out, its political system that has more or less collapsed, its priorities in the middle of a climate crisis, social issues, poverty and economic downturn, its press. (Whilst crossing fingers that whilst it’s doing that, no one will use that opportunity to take power -Trump style for example)

Not feeling very positive about it all. But even less so when I see both sides just sticking to their mantra and refusing to accept that, basically, they have both lost the game.

There are some people whose minds will never change no matter what the facts but we can’t continue to appease them at the cost of everyone else’s well being.
A lot of people who voted leave will have changed their minds now they are faced with the reality.
We don’t even know if the majority of the country still want to go.

{We don’t even know if the majority of the country still want to go.}

Until the reality of what Leaving REALLY means gets into the mind of all in the UK it will be a mixed bag. Start cutting UC and closing hospitals and whatever and the message might start to get through.

What I am saying is that I dint want to ignore people who voted Leave (if we get Revoke) than I want to ignore people who voted Remain (if we get No Deal).

Neither of them is a situation is desirable.

I agree with Leclerc that nothing has started négociations wise. And that whatever agreement (it be WA, No Deal OR Revoke) is actually NOT solving the problems there was in the first place.

And that’s what I find frustrating. I feel no one is talking about the real issues yet.

It is disenheartening to see exactly the same process that we had during the referendum campaign happening again.

Basically, each side fighting their corner and wanting to win with no plan at all about what will happen afterwards.

My point is that Revoke isn’t going to be easy either and Revoke wo a plan for what will happen after isn’t good.
What will Revoke mean for example? Does it mean staying in the EU because it feels safe but still be grumpy about it. Or does it mean embracing the European concept and deciding to REALLY be part of Europe?
How will the poverty, social etc.. issues be tackled within that?
How can the worries and issues Leavers have be addressed?

Revoke as such isn’t a plan. It will not be the same than it was before the referendum. So what will that mean for the country? That’s what I want to hear from our political leaders.

We don’t even know if the majority of the country still want to go

But we also don’t know the majority of the country actually want to stay either.

And what does the majority mean in that sort of situation? Is it 50% plus one vote? Is it 52%, 60%, 75%??
Countries in Europe that seeing as Eurosceptic are countries were 70+% of people are pro Europe. Do we need to have 70% of people voting for Revoke to say that’s what the population decided??
I dint know if Remain would win a new referendum but I’m pretty sure that there is t 70% of people that want to stay in the EU.

Revoke because I'm genuinely frightened of the consequences of leaving, long and short term. They seem far worse to me than riots and violence short term, though that would be terrible. I still think leaving even with a deal is worse. I think if the UK has any hope of recovery we need the support and funding of the EU.

As for how to fix it, I'd look to experts, of which I'm not one, but if you're looking for uninformed opinions/ideas:

Austerity clearly isn't working so that needs to be binned. Invest money into places where it will save money/reduce burden on other services/generate income. e.g.:

Fund the NHS properly and slowly bring it back so that the private contracts are phased out and it becomes an actual national health service again. That ensures best value for money. Currently, it's a private system which happens to be named the NHS, and it doesn't have the required capacity. Health problems including mental health problems exacerbated by this underprovision must be costing the economy, benefits system, and NHS itself a ridiculous amount of money.

Scrap/reform Universal Credit because it's barbaric and causing problems from mental health to feasibility of return to work to physical health to security of homes for children. All of which have knock on effects. First just go back to whatever we had before which was at least mostly functional. Long term consider the financial viability of a universal basic income system, or at least something extremely simple. Perhaps a three level system: Low-waged adult/Non-waged adult/Dependant top-up. (Second or more adult in a household classed as "dependant"). Forget about the notion of "scroungers", it is cheaper and more humane to support a few "scroungers" than it is to put so much energy into trying to catch people out especially when it penalises genuine claimants.

Put money back into education and family support, childcare, sure start centres, etc. Social care so that social services can handle caseloads adequately and elderly and vulnerable people bed blocking in hospitals can be moved to a more appropriate care facility and/or supported to return home. The dream would be community centres which replace the function churches once filled, there are a few dotted around already which do this well, so replicate the model - with the right mix of freedom to be run by local people plus funding these can do a massive amount of good and reduce burden on other services.

Look at other countries to see what they have in place in terms of state funded/subsidised/controlled - public transport, childcare, education, social housing/rent, libraries, sports, facilities, arts, business startups, etc - see if any of them are feasible to be implemented here and which are likely to make/save more than they cost.

Get young people involved in and clued up about politics and the EU - other EU countries have politics/civics as part of their school curriculum at least at the end of secondary school, and much stronger focus on languages.

And yes, of course, the first response will be "Where is the money for this?" Brexit has cost this country billions. If we can pull money out of our arses for that we can pull it out in order to make change that will actually benefit the country and encourage our economy to recover and blossom. Or make change incrementally, though I'd argue that the current state of the country is desperate enough to throw more rather than less money at it now. There is no point continuing with Brexit due to some ridiculous sunk-cost fallacy. Budgets of a country are nothing like household budgets and austerity is more about political ideology than saving money.

Bertie, I'm sure you genuinely believe what you write but sorry to say, utter drivel from start to finish. Basically your prescription is to spend vast extra sums of (presumably other people's?) money. Your proposals with cost the country billions.

{I agree with Leclerc that nothing has started négociations wise. And that whatever agreement (it be WA, No Deal OR Revoke) is actually NOT solving the problems there was in the first place.}

You don't need to agree with what I say (obviously) but you should take very good note of what the EU have said (in November) that the WA WILL be signed if the UK wants to deal in any way shape or form.
Personally I believe the European Parliament, not the sniveling bodies in Westminster. Theresa signed over the driving position to the EU by invoking A50.
There is no such thing as 'no deal' as there is unfinished business that has to be resolved however 'hard' a 'Brexit' might be wished.

BertieBotts
Your post is certainly on the right lines. It is certain that the 'old' NHS could and should have been made more efficient but privatising it is not the way. Health 'trusts' should not be competing for funds, but have a collaborative and enhancing standpoint, highlighting best practice, and integrate it far more with 'social service' in terms of looking after people to stop them getting ill (where possible) rather than the expensive version of trying to make them better after they have already got ill.
Public transport to support the public, not private profit. Again the old systems were not forward thinking enough and it was easy for 'bosses' to simply do whatever was done before. Their 'brief' should be to make the travelling public's experience better, not line a (probably offshore) company.

OP, I actually think a lot of Leavers don’t care about the EU at all.

What they care about is that they and their communities have been left behind by globalisation.

Leaving the EU isn’t going to make many Leavers’ lives any better and may well may it worse.

Do you know what I think would be a good start? Fitch the House of Commons, it’s falling apart anyway, and move government out of London, away from the City, to somewhere like Birmingham which is more centrally located. I very much doubt that would cost any more than has been wasted on Brexit, and will continue to be wasted.

Actually address the real issues that concern voters, not some stupid Tory squabble that has been jumped on as an end to all our ills.

Revoke as such isn’t a plan
Of course it’s a plan. Whenever you are looking at major change the impact of doing nothing against the other options is always considered.

The time and money we are wasting on this farce should be spent sorting out the myriad other issues that actually need addressing like the Environment, Health and Social Care, Education, Policing etc.
You know the stuff that actually will make people’s lives better.

Basically your prescription is to spend vast extra sums of (presumably other people's?) money. Your proposals with cost the country billions
Still won’t cost as much as Brexit will.

Yes. I absolutely want the country to spend billions putting it right. Brexit has already cost billions and is likely to do irreparable damage if it goes ahead. Billions is a lovely emotive figure, isn't it? Yes, please let's spend billions fixing the damage austerity and privatisation has caused.

"Other people's money" well no clearly it's not coming out of my personal bank account, I'm not the Queen, but neither does the UK work like that any more. It doesn't come out of anybody's personal bank account. The government does have money to spend, from taxation and so on - what is that for? Primarily, to look after its citizens (which includes generating enough money to keep itself afloat, and paying back debts). Secondly, to stimulate the economy and create more money causing growth. The former helps massively with the latter. Obviously political ideology differs on how much "looking after" is reasonable for citizens but even on a purely economic level - poverty and poor mental health and lack of education all cost the country a massive amount - you get a more efficient money-making system when these problems exist on a smaller scale.

The government collects money from citizens through personal taxation, you know that right? So it's not the government's money, until it's collected it's the person's. Generally speaking, the less they take of most people's money the better IMO.

gamerwidow Revoke isn’t addressing a lot of issues.
What does mean to stay in the EU and why? Is a very important question.
Is the U.K. staying out of fear or is it staying because it wants to participate to the European Project? These are not the same thing at all.

The U.K. has been eurosceptic for at least the last 20 years, if not more. The Remain campaign WAS project fear. It wasn’t about how all the good this the EU has done, how wonderful it was to be part of that project. It was about far of what the U.K. wouod loose.
In the last 10+ years, the U.K. has been more and more against any decisions taken by the EU. The country who has voted NO the most in the European Parliament.
So Is Revoke about staying the same, aka eurosceptic, being hard on the EU never getting things right but no economic hardship?

Or is it about embracing being European and working WITH the EU to bring a better future? I which what does it mean? How do we the future of Europe? Have a look at the campaign for the European elections in other countries and you will see that people have different ideals and different things they want to achieve for the EU. I havent seen ANYONE in the U.K. defending n idea of what they want for the EU in the future. Just remain and leave stuff rehashed again and again.

A significant issue is the difference between political cooperation as members of the EU and the scientific and industrial collaboration.
The science, industrial and educational aspects have been brilliant over the years as the 'attitudes' of those working in these various fields are reflected and enhanced by working 'across borders'. This has been badly let down by a continued drip feed of anti Europe 'crap' by politicians who spout negative views at the efforts of our cousins.
Of course the efforts by 'industry' don't get the headlines that negative biassed press and politicians spout on a daily basis.

The EP recognises that it has been a bit slow off the mark on some things, maybe some positive contributions by the UK would help things along but instead you have the likes of Farage, Bo Johnson and others 'finding fault' rather than moving things in a positive direction.

I haven't said taxation rates should change so you're alright there then :o by the time it's being spent it's the government's money.

In the UK most people are taxed via PAYE so it's usually collected before the person sees it at all. I think most people would obviously prefer to pay less in tax but I think a balance is important, I'm happy to have a portion of my earned wage going to collectively benefit the population of the country as a whole.

If taxation rates are to be unchanged Bertie, where is the money coming from then?

Generally speaking, the less they take of most people's money the better IMO.

Take that to a logical conclusion and don't collect any taxes. How would roads be build, clean water provided, schools and hospitals built and staffed? Most of us realise that these things cost but if we all chip in, they are to the benefit of us all.

As more and more Leavers are coming to the same conclusion as you OP - that no deal is a disaster and that there’s no deal that won’t be worse for the U.K. Then the obvious thing is to revoke.

There is already instability and many angry people. I don’t fear the consequences of revoke as much as I do a bad deal when the population who still believes in Brexit, finally realises they’ve been had...

I would have thought it was pretty obvioys, op - we want to stop the insanity that us Brexit and just not leave the EU. I would have thought it was pretty obvious why we would want to do that - it was a bad decision, based on outright lies and cheating, and it's clear to everyone now tgat what we will get will not be what were sold. Yes, the leavers will be upset, but frankly I couldn't really care less. I would rather they had to be upset, and all of us got the chance not to wreck our country. A d why shoikd I care what they think? they made it clear enough they don't give a damn what the nearly half the countty who voted rrmain think.

The real Project Fear was the Leave campaign - stoking fear of the EU, fear of foreigners, fear of the future.

If taxation rates are to be unchanged Bertie, where is the money coming from then?

Did you actually read my post then, because I said people would say that at the bottom. Nah I think you just saw "left winger" and went "money pissed up the wall then". If you read it I do explain why this is worth spending money on even though it might seem frivolous.

Anyway -

The same place the Brexit money has come from. By rearranging things, by effecting change gradually. No, there would not be the room in the budget to immediately fix schools, housing and the NHS overnight, but over time, look at other countries to see where the best savings can be made, look at where the cash drains are the most severe, target things which would improve those things first.

Also, EU funding is often funnelled towards these kinds of projects - another reason to stay in the EU.