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.

Great, some meat ...

Unable to support Redcar steel works because of EU state aid rules

Your assertion, you provide proof. Newspaper articles don't count. Which EU directive, and (most importantly) did the UK government actually submit a plan ? Or (as I vague recall) did the UK not submit anything "because" . I am well aware the EU has very clear guidelines on state aid. They have to, since the UK government is currently state-aiding airlines that have been affected by Brexit. But "clear guidelines" are not a prohibition.

Unable to deny prisoners the right to vote when it's no business of the EU whether they have it or not.

Nothing to do with the EU, I'm afraid. How well did you research things ? Was it a one or two coffee read of the Telegraph ?

Persistent problems in deporting foreign criminals. IMO this should be virtually instant upon the completion of their sentence.

See previous point. Nothing to do with the EU. ECHR yes. But as you already knew, that precedes the EU by many years and was set up by the UK who was the first signatory.

So out of 3 "reasons" (certainly not to be cheerful) about why you think the UK should leave the EU, one is questionable, and two are outright red herrings.

We get it. You want to leave. Your choice. Your vote. By all means. But please don't use a load of bollocks to then justify it to people who are experiencing real difficulties as a result.

For the OP and others reading for the first time, this is a microcosm of the past decade. Loads of nonsense reasons for Leaving that never stand up to scrutiny. Which is why the Leave campaign had to resort to lies, slurs, threats and violence.

LouiseCollins28 managed to singlehandedly swerve all the really good leaver arguments I've heard over the years, so there's some credit there.

"How do we deal with those who feel let down by the political establishment if we do not leave?"
Right, OK so its been asserted (correctly I'm sure) that we can't have a wholly new Parliament "post revoke". So what could we do that I'd like??

I think a new election "post revoke" is essential, and if I cannot legitimately prevent previous candidates from standing again, what can I do to change it's makeup and behaviour? while retaining features I want.

The problem here is that any legal changes will be needed to be passed by Parliament, and I cannot see any prospect of current Parliamentarians voting to make their own position more precarious, which is exactly the outcome I think is needed.

They ain't going to vote for term limits (I don't want them anyway)
They aren't going to vote for changes to funding which would disadvantage them (which I do want)
They are unlikely to vote to change the electoral system given this has been recently rejected by the electorate.

So what, with the same people, can we change? I guess we could ask them to behave differently, for example, to oppose further transfers of power away from themselves to the EU but since many of them are very keen to see those things, I can't see them doing that.

In any case, this from a Leaver POV is merely preventing an already dire situation from becoming even worse.

Funny, for someone who started off as an uber-establishment Tory, LouiseCollins28 has a whiff of the heads-on-spikes revolutionary about them

Which must be pants-filling news for the Tory party. This is what you have done to your core demographic. Turned them into Leavistas ....

Again with the Year Zero stuff @LouiseCollins28 . Obviously it's a fixed an idea in your head as my description of it is in mine. Anyhoo, if Leavers could come up with something other than unicorn fantasy, perhaps people would listen to them more.

"Leavistas" @DGRossetti . Me like.

how interesting that you know my voting record DGR. Oh that's right, you don't!

4 decades of failure, a referendum with a clear result and our representatives are still not acting upon it.

Problem is that 51.9%/48.1% is NOT a clear result, particularly in an advisory referendum.

They ain't going to vote for term limits (I don't want them anyway)

Yet you want to get rid of the whole of the current HoC and debar them from standing again, ever. I would have thought a fixed period compromise was a good one.

They are unlikely to vote to change the electoral system given this has been recently rejected by the electorate.
There was one option put, which wasn't a proportional system. There are other options which could have been put. I expect that Parliament will vote for change within the next 20 years or so when both the major parties realise that they are not going to win outright again.

OK so I have failed to make any headway at all from a leaver POV. So I'll throw it back to you all, since even the most minor changes I have proposed have got people's backs up big style.

to remind you, these were frumpetys questions

"How do we deal with those who feel let down by the political establishment if we do not leave ? I don't think I can or should answer that as someone who wants to remain. Perhaps leavers could ? If we don't leave, what changes would you like to see ? What if anything would diminish the feeling of being let down ? Not what you think others might do or feel, but you personally ?"

In a "post revoke" scenario what changes would you make to address the sense of let down? and deliver changes leavers would like to see, us having not left the EU.

how interesting that you know my voting record DGR. Oh that's right, you don't!

How interesting that I said "comes across as" rather than "is". Wonderful thing the English language. Such nuance. So many shades of meaning. It can almost be too much for some and they find themselves having to pare it back .... "Brexit means Brexit" is probably a good example of this.

@twofingers a 1.4 mil vote majority is a clear result. sorry you don't agree with that. Anyhow I am trying to answer a scenario where we don't leave

Read your post again please DGR, you wrote "who started off as"... clearly suggesting you know how I have voted in previous elections.

What about the Irish border and the GFA?

That's my biggest issue with all of this.

What about the impact on the people of NI and Ireland?

{Do you think the EU state funding rules are a govt excuse to not support red car?}

My business is not overly profitable, maybe the state can pay me, rather than having to pay taxes to the state?
If Redcar and whoever cannot make money, or even 'break even', why are they in business?
I would be much better off if the government paid for some workers to do things that I need to do?

a 1.4 mil vote majority is a clear result.

What is it with Leavers and their loose grasp of everything arithmetic ?

1.4 million is a meaningless figure unless it's express in relation to something else. In this case the total number of votes cast.

Try going to India, and suggesting that a 1.4million majority out of a billion is "a clear result".

52% over 48% is not a "clear result" when it comes to trying to move and entire country forwards. Hell, it's not a clear result trying to move a household forward.

But then again we return to a flawed referendum. Spilt milk etc ....

{ I guess we could ask them to behave differently, for example, to oppose further transfers of power away from themselves to the EU but since many of them are very keen to see those things, I can't see them doing that.}

The aggregate direction of 'power' and legislation taken by the EU (which is democratic and takes opinions from all 28 countries into account or at least discussion) is likely to have greater benefit for all the EU rather than some of the batshit plans from Westminster which as we can readily see, are happy to ignore anyone outside London and the South East.

Louise fwiw your pov seems quite similar than what other Leavers I know have. Theyve always wanted to leave and think the EU is a disaster that only bring problems and red tape. and stop the UK to do what they want.
My IL, as farmers, have always been keen on telling me how awful it that the EU insisted that they keep a record of al animal movement and double tag them. That was much before we even started to talk about brexit!

And that, imo, isnt solved in a matter of months. The EU has lots of defects just as much as it has a lot of qualities. So the discussion isnt a black and white discussion, more having lots of greys and what you are happy to do wo in order to get .
This is another reason why I dont like Revoke the way it is. it doesnt even start to address those issues.

I also think many people have no idea what the EU is doing for them. (That, imo, is the EU fault. They should never have agreed to finance so many project wo also asking for a cler recognition of what they have done). For example all the cycle paths were i lived have been built thanks to EU funding. Bit if you didnt know, you wouldt guess. Actually I know for a fat that nearly no one knows where I live and they all think its the council that has been amazing beause they are

Finally, I dint think the issue can be solved the way it is with MPs and PM policies. If your party doesnt get through, you do have to just suck it up but with the knowledge that in 5 years or so, you will have the opportunity to make yourself hear and change things.
With Brexit, its very much an all or nothing approach, no second chances.

We so desperately need new blood in the political world (I fully agree with you there) AND a change of how politics are conducted (aka learning to compromise and find middle ground). For that we need time (Hence the WA isnt that bad imo).
In some ways I do hope that the political class is going to be more and more split between different parties and we dont have this situation where one party always has the majority (or close to). Having to REALLY make some coalition would do a lot of good to all of the dinosaurs in Westmister.

Sorry that was very long

Again we have people who cannot accept the result. 52/48 is a clear result, in a 2 way fight, it just is.

Again though, I was trying to respond to a scenario where that result has been overturned by Parliament voting to "revoke" and not Leave.

Introduce the limits on freedom of movement for labour that we were always allowed to introduce. Make sure seasonal labour doesn't impinge on people's ability to claim benefit out of season if needed. Require better standards on providing accommodation from those using seasonal labour. Incentivise uk benefit claimants to do seasonal labour away from their normal place of residence.
All of which actually won't affect that many people or jobs but it's a crowd pleaser.
Introduce properly funded and regulated ID cards - which I was always opposed to but, fuck it. Make it a requirement to provide ID cards for accessing any benefit (including nhs services). Again, the number of people taking the piss currently is smaller than Leavers fantasise about but it's another crowd pleaser.
You mean that kind of thing.

Sorry for all the spelling mistakes too. Letters seem to have missing all over....

Read your post again please DGR, you wrote "who started off as"... clearly suggesting you know how I have voted in previous elections.

(re-reads)

Funny, for someone who started off as an uber-establishment Tory,

Nope, still nothing there about how you voted. There is an assumption about your political views. An assumption I would be more than happy to correct should you so wish. Ultimately I can only form an opinion based on what you write. One of the internets contributions to egalitarian debate, I'd like to think.

1Tis, your view that transfers of power to the EU is a positive, fine. Many Leave voters do not see it like that, they just don't. The question I was asked was how to deal with the let down if no "Leave" happens. So how, if no Leave occurs will you deal with those who are "let down?"

I dont think 52/48 is a clear result.

Nigel Farage himself had said it would be a clear result (of course he was thinking that they would have lost 52/48 rather than the other way around...).

A result like this is plenty to say you have the majority for a government that will stay for 5 years and then be kicked out.
Its a different ball park for a vote that is an all or nothing situation. Many people believe the bar should have been put at 60 or even 70% or 60% of the electorate rather than the voters. That was a mistake from DC.

@bellini thanks for the list but a big fat No! from me to virtually all of that.

Definite no to ID cards.

Make it easier for more people to claim more benefits more of the time, oh hells no!

Implementing free movement restrictions might be worthwhile but is a hopelessly poor substitute for controlling our own borders, but ok I'll give you that one.

thanks