The Brexit referendum thread: potential consequences for GB, EU and the Brits in CH

	Quote:	Mikers
	Problem is, what is the way out ? There just isnt one. Remain - Goes against wishes of democratic vote. Leave - Economic catastrophe. General Election - Nothing fixed. Rerun of vote ("Final Say") - sounds great. What do you do if the result is 51% vs 49% to remain on a lower turnout ? There just isn't a fix without some sort of disaster.

The sensible (so obviously won't happen) is a re-run of the vote, and in the event of a remain win, there should be an independent commission set up to assess the viability of Brexit in the future - i.e. potential upsides and downsides.

This obviously should have been done in the first place, well before any Brexit vote happened, but I cannot see any alternative way of sensibly informing people of the realities of leaving otherwise.

[Mikers]

	Quote:
	The sensible (so obviously won't happen) is a re-run of the vote, and in the event of a remain win, there should be an independent commission set up to assess the viability of Brexit in the future - i.e. potential upsides and downsides. This obviously should have been done in the first place, well before any Brexit vote happened, but I cannot see any alternative way of sensibly informing people of the realities of leaving otherwise.

ok so, to play devil's advocate, we rerun it. leave win 51-49%. same turnout.

Now what do we do ? say "ok thats it we're heading off the edge ?" you just cant do that, which is why its being stopped currently even though johnson hates it.

its a fundamental error. The commission bit should have been done in 2011 and should not just have looked at what if we leave, but also a what if we stay scenario - do we go for closer union, do we try and stay on the edge but in as well as soft leave and hard leave.

then a vote with the full range of ways to leave AND ways to stay.

but now we have had the referendum as is its a dogs dinner either way. We will stay, im fairly sure of that, johnson will be out, Ken Clarke will be in (for a while) or something similar and there will be unrest for a while, but we should end up staying as we are, but people will feel disenfranchised for a generation.

[John William]

The worst part of all this is that there's no British negotiating team ( worthy of the name ) in Brussels
trying to secure a deal with the EU and get round the backstop that so irks the ERG Eurosceptics
in the Tory Party before the 31st October.

All that's there by all accounts is David Frost which despite all Boris's promises that he will leave no
stone un-turned to secure a deal with the EU, has in reality shown himself up badly as a man
that's thrown in the towel even before stepping into the role of PM.

David Frost - British diplomat and the UK's Chief Negotiator for Exiting the EU

[Jim2007]

	Quote:
	The sensible (so obviously won't happen) is a re-run of the vote, and in the event of a remain win, there should be an independent commission set up to assess the viability of Brexit in the future - i.e. potential upsides and downsides.

How is it sensible to hold another advisory referendum? There is no way to enforce it without a GE and the FPP system is no compatible with the referendum process and is unlikely to provide a mandate to implement the decision of a referendum.

	Quote:	Mikers
	ok so, to play devil's advocate, we rerun it. leave win 51-49%. same turnout. Now what do we do ? say "ok thats it we're heading off the edge ?" you just cant do that, which is why its being stopped currently even though johnson hates it. its a fundamental error. The commission bit should have been done in 2011 and should not just have looked at what if we leave, but also a what if we stay scenario - do we go for closer union, do we try and stay on the edge but in as well as soft leave and hard leave. then a vote with the full range of ways to leave AND ways to stay. but now we have had the referendum as is its a dogs dinner either way. We will stay, im fairly sure of that, johnson will be out, Ken Clarke will be in (for a while) or something similar and there will be unrest for a while, but we should end up staying as we are, but people will feel disenfranchised for a generation.

I think the question should have been multi-part.

Do you want to leave? YES/NO
In the event leave wins a majority are you willing to leave with no deal? YES/NO

That way we would know beyond doubt whether No Deal is an acceptable outcome or whether leaving the EU should be a negotiated settlement.

	Quote:	Jim2007
	How is it sensible to hold another advisory referendum? There is no way to enforce it without a GE and the FPP system is no compatible with the referendum process and is unlikely to provide a mandate to implement the decision of a referendum.

Not sure of your point; the first vote was exactly the same situation - not constitutionally valid, but a government (3 governments ago) agreed to go with it. No reason the same stipulation couldn't apply to a new referendum.

	Quote:
	I think the question should have been multi-part. Do you want to leave? YES/NO In the event leave wins a majority are you willing to leave with no deal? YES/NO That way we would know beyond doubt whether No Deal is an acceptable outcome or whether leaving the EU should be a negotiated settlement. Not sure of your point; the first vote was exactly the same situation - not constitutionally valid, but a government (3 governments ago) agreed to go with it. No reason the same stipulation couldn't apply to a new referendum.

If you want to do it better, I would do the following:
1. Cancel the article 50 procedure
2. Get the EU to agree on general leaving conditions that would be applicable to any country that would leave and would be non-negotiable

3. Hold a binding referendum

	Quote:	k_and_e
	2. Get the EU to agree on general leaving conditions that would be applicable to any country that would leave and would be non-negotiable

I think this is pretty much the whole problem. There's no solution to leaving unless you want a no deal and every member state would have its own unique set of issues with a departure (for example, UK/Ireland border where a hard border presents a whole new can of worms).

There is no one-size-fits all except for a no deal which, it seems, nobody apart from a hard-core minority wants.

	Quote:	k_and_e
	If you want to do it better, I would do the following: 1. Cancel the article 50 procedure 2. Get the EU to agree on general leaving conditions that would be applicable to any country that would leave and would be non-negotiable 3. Hold a binding referendum

Your second point is never going to happen, it is in the interest of the EU to keep as many aboard for as long as possible and thus making a leave as shitty as can be.

[Mikers]

	Quote:	k_and_e
	3. Hold a binding referendum

this would suffer the same problem. if it was close (51-49, 52-48) it would lead to massive problems. all this "it was advisory" junk is just the sort of crap that annoys the average citizen because its brazenly trying to legal your way out of it. The government said they would implement the referendum result. full stop.

so a rerun is just as fraught with difficulty.

its a mess.

	Quote:
	Your second point is never going to happen, it is in the interest of the EU to keep as many aboard for as long as possible and thus making a leave as shitty as can be.

The default way to leave is simply a no-deal. End of.

Why should the EU add endless, tailor-made clauses to Article 50 for each member state to ease their passage out, as and when they fancy it?

Don't get me wrong - a no deal is utterly stupid but you can't peg it on the EU doing it as a roundabout way of preventing people leaving.

	Quote:	Mikers
	this would suffer the same problem. if it was close (51-49, 52-48) it would lead to massive problems. all this "it was advisory" junk is just the sort of crap that annoys the average citizen because its brazenly trying to legal your way out of it. The government said they would implement the referendum result. full stop. so a rerun is just as fraught with difficulty. its a mess.

They did, but we are 2 governments down the line, and as mentioned before, one of our founding pricinciples of democracy is that no future government can be bound by a previous government's decisions.

	Quote:
	Your second point is never going to happen, it is in the interest of the EU to keep as many aboard for as long as possible and thus making a leave as shitty as can be.

So the EU is Hotel California.

	Quote:	k_and_e
	So the EU is Hotel California.

Because we haven't had so much whine since 1969?

	Quote:	k_and_e
	2. Get the EU to agree on general leaving conditions that would be applicable to any country that would leave and would be non-negotiable

That is the exact problem with the EU !!


One size does not fit all and it is really stupid to try and make it fit all

[Jim2007]

	Quote:
	They did, but we are 2 governments down the line, and as mentioned before, one of our founding pricinciples of democracy is that no future government can be bound by a previous government's decisions.

You don't have 'founding principles' or anything like that, just traditions and as we're seen they are easily forgotten.

	Quote:	Jim2007
	You don't have 'founding principles' or anything like that, just traditions and as we're seen they are easily forgotten.

Of course we do. We don't have a written constitution, but we certainly have founding principles going back to the Magna Carta.

Ironically, one argument against having a written constitution is exactly that it would bind successor governments.

[Jim2007]

	Quote:	k_and_e
	So the EU is Hotel California.

Do you ever actually bother to educate yourself on the topic? Nothing could be simpler that leaving the EU as A50 sets out:

3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.

If all the UK wanted was to just walk away the could have done so, but as we all know that is not what they want....

Expecting the other 27 member states to disadvantage themselves or endanger their union in order to give the UK the deal they want is simply dumb and will not happen.

[amogles]

	Quote:	Mikers
	Problem is, what is the way out ? There just isnt one. Remain - Goes against wishes of democratic vote. Leave - Economic catastrophe. General Election - Nothing fixed. Rerun of vote ("Final Say") - sounds great. What do you do if the result is 51% vs 49% to remain on a lower turnout ? There just isn't a fix without some sort of disaster.

There used to be an old fashioned concept called compromise. Get the others to approve some of your points in return for conceding on some of their points.

We wouldn’t be in the mess we’re in if there weren’t so many people trying to have it all their way.

But the idea is so out dated, I know

[Jim2007]

	Quote:
	Of course we do. We don't have a written constitution, but we certainly have founding principles going back to the Magna Carta. Ironically, one argument against having a written constitution is exactly that it would bind successor governments.

The Magna Carta was an agreement between nobles and the king and the last of it was repealed sometime around 1848.... there is not even a provision to require the Speaker of the House to impartial and to remove him if he fails to do so... never mind anything else.

And as we've seen yesterday even the so called sovereign parliament is not sovereign it is subject to the government, a minority one in this case.

Get real and stop swallowing the nonsense that the upper classes have been peddling you for the last couple of hundred years. "Oh yes we got a constitution, but it is unwritten and that is a great advantage because it makes it very flexible", yes it certainly is.

[Jim2007]

	Quote:	amogles
	We wouldn’t be in the mess we’re in if there weren’t so many people trying to have it all their way.

You would not be in this mess, if the UK had joined other modern democracies in having a codified and enforceable democratic process.