1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

So what now for Brexit?

Discussion in 'Personal' started by dumpty, Dec 13, 2018.

  1. monicabilongame

    monicabilongame Star commenter

    interesting input from Tony Bliar this morning on R4 that as the mood across the EU on things like immigration is changing since 2016 we should stay in and push for change within.
     
  2. irs1054

    irs1054 Star commenter

    Although the Electoral Commission has an important part to play, its role, as yet, is largely advisory and Parliament is free to push through a referendum in a very short time, if it so desires. Whether this would be desirable is very much open to debate. certainly there is a question whether any such legislation would be able to make it through because of the basic arithmetic of the parties. The most realistic timescale would probably be about 26 weeks. However, the EU has indicated on more than one occasion that a referendum (as long as it included the option to remain) would be one of the grounds for extending Article 50.

    The issue of the question has actually been resolved because logically there are only two options which can certainly be implemented, May's deal and remain. However, logic has nothing to do with the current situation in Parliament where you have entrenched "tribes" mostly talking nonsense at each other. The arithmetic of the current situation has produced an almost perfect stalemate unless one or more of the "tribes" decide to cooperate. (which would require them to shift their entrenched positions)

    This is a Gordian knot of mega proportions with no one around to cut through it. The situation is completely chaotic which means it is impossible to make any sort of a coherent prediction about what will happen.
     
    EmanuelShadrack likes this.
  3. dumpty

    dumpty Star commenter

    If you look at May's deal it is clear she felt all she needed to take care of was immigration. Yet a massive majority of MPs appear to be against her deal because her deal keeps us under the control of the EU, unable to be free and trade freely.
     
  4. florian gassmann

    florian gassmann Star commenter

    Do you really think they could decide on the question to ask "in a short time"? Just passing the legislation for the 2016 referendum took more than six months, and there the question was a very simple binary affair. If there should be a 2019 referendum, many MPs are against the option of a ballot paper including "remain" (as that has already been decided) and want a simple choice between the deal on offer or no deal. Others, like you want a binary choice between the deal on offer and remain. Yet others want a three-way question involving all three options (which might involve two separate polls, or the potential complexity of transferable votes, which the Electoral Commission are unlikely to want).

    In any case, another referendum cannot be seen to be rushed through with a shorter campaign period than the first referendum, otherwise its legitimacy will be questioned even more than the 2016 one has been questioned.

    Finally, while the EU might well extend Article 50, it is unlikely they would do so for more than a few weeks, as leaving the UK still in the EU for the European Elections starting on the 23rd May would cause huge logistic problems for seats which have been re-allocated on the basis of our departure.

    Absolutely everything is stacked against another referendum - not least the government's refusal to back the idea, the damaging delay it would cause to UK business and the sheer uncertainty of the result.

    Do you not think that politicians, not voters, should decide on the course of action to take? Don't you think that is what they are paid to do on our behalf? :cool:
     
  5. dumpty

    dumpty Star commenter

    The thing is, some issues are very clear. One is May's deal simply must have the backstop removed and she has known this pretty much since Chequers and very, very clearly since her plan was made official weeks ago - yet she really does not seem to listen or want to work on changing it.

    The EU understandably believes the UK will not walk (our parliament keeps saying this too) so has no incentive at all to change or tweak this deal.

    So she HAS to rip it up and start again, she must know this. Bringing it back to parliament in its present form or with a few more words of effort to avoid the backstop from all sides, will not wash.

    One (slight but there) concern for remainers is May is now clear herself that Brexit is her defining moment. She has her get-out-of-jail card in promising to quit. That could mean she will accept WTO rather than be seen as unable to deliver - to misquote her, that 'anything is better than nothing'.

    Extending A.50, even if she was now saying she would rip the deal up and start afresh on a new package that parliament likes, she knows the Tories would then in all likelihood insist she steps down and lets the new leader take over.
     
  6. irs1054

    irs1054 Star commenter

    Given that I have basically dealt with all these points I have to wonder why you've bothered.
     
    EmanuelShadrack likes this.
  7. red_observer

    red_observer Star commenter

    There now has to be a second referendum. No other option makes sense.
     
  8. FrankWolley

    FrankWolley Star commenter


    There is no other deal, May's deal can't be torn up. If she allows a No Deal Brexit, she, not Cameron (or Johnson, Rees-Mogg et al) will be blamed and her legacy will be destroyed (and history will be very unkind to her).

    If push comes to shove, I suspect she'll gamble on another referendum...
     
  9. irs1054

    irs1054 Star commenter

    The deal that May has come up with is probably (give or take a few details) the same one that anyone would have come up with. This is it. This is the deal. This is what you voted for when you put your mark in the leave box even if you didn't think about it at the time.

    What this referendum has unleashed is unbound chaos within the British political system and the driving force is, in the main, petty English nationalism and bigotry combined with fear.

    The UK used to considered totally stable and politically, at least, a bit boring. Not any more, the World is shaking at their collective heads at the way our political system has essentially imploded and is engaged in spouting arrant nonsense at almost every turn.

    This is a crisis.

    We have two realistic options if we are to remain even vaguely a working economy able to service the needs of its citizens. May's deal or remain. The idea that we crash out of the EU on no deal (which the real hard line brexit-nutters call WTO terms) will basically crash our economy, jobs will go public services will go and even things such as pensions will be under threat. This is not "project fear", this is reality calling.

    And in amongst all this our politicians are in total denial.
     
  10. dumpty

    dumpty Star commenter

    There are reports ministers would back a 'May's deal or no deal' ballot. I still think fear of no deal winning will ensure some kind of deal gets through.

    It could be (also if the EU agree) but I agree time has run out for that - and May chose that route of the clock. I do not think she wants no deal but she seems to have this view if she runs down the clock the MPs will fold (even though they again and again tell her they won't) so....


    .......yes, she mght, but only on her deal or no deal. This has been reported today as an option ministers are backing.

    I do think this can be the only tactic behind her behaviour, that she cares not about parliament and really believes the people will back her deal.
     
    border_walker likes this.
  11. Geoff Thomas

    Geoff Thomas Star commenter

    And there is no need for a long campaign. From decision to vote need only take three or four weeks.
     
  12. Photo51

    Photo51 Established commenter

    Constitutional experts think it will take much longer
     
  13. Geoff Thomas

    Geoff Thomas Star commenter

    We don't have a constitution.
     
  14. oldsomeman

    oldsomeman Star commenter

    The question I can not get any answers to on here or elsewhere is why her ministers are muttering. I have read the whole initial document. Its a working document. Why cannot the point out the bits disliked and tell her exactly what they want, including Cobyns contributing as one assumes he knows what he wants from his desire to talk a new agreement..It seems to me that there much ado about nothing. Vain glory and indecision go before a fall.
    I listened to a DUP MP in a political show last night and she waffled a lot. When asked if acceptable the backstop she said no.eventually, after an avoidance of the question at least 3 times..They do not even know what they want re Ireland except they don't want hard border the want Ireland distinct form NI, but no border.
    My initial reaction was you can't have your cake and eat it. If the EU wants separation then a hard border must exist if we leave...or NI must have checks on its borders before folks. goods etc can come to the UK. As Ireland's economy depends a lot on selling to the UK it should be finding a solution rather than just threatening. Yes, it sounds too simplistic and possibly is, but it still does not change the facts that you can not have your cake and eat it where NI is concerned. If we want NI to stay in the UK (and I personally do) then it will become a hard border if there is a hard brexit. The inconvenience of that will have to be suffered..not because we say so but the Eu says so.
     
    T34 likes this.
  15. oldsomeman

    oldsomeman Star commenter

    We have case law which acts as a constitution. It sets the presidents.
     
  16. Geoff Thomas

    Geoff Thomas Star commenter

    That would be White House pectin.
     
  17. chelsea2

    chelsea2 Star commenter

    This can be applied to the whole of the Brexit fiasco, which leavers are only now beginning to understand.

    No - we are the ones who are expecting goalposts to be moved, not the EU.

    Why should the EU change the rules, just because we don't like the current game? When we leave the EU, the same rules should apply to the UK as to any other country outside the EU. So any suffering is a consequence of those who voted leave.
     
  18. dumpty

    dumpty Star commenter

    You say that and of course you are entitled to that opinion but not only do many leave voters disagree, the fact parliament does not see May's deal as what people voted for, should give you food for thought.

    So why not jump at a deal that stops FOM but otherwise keeps us under EU jurisdiction? Could it be the driving force is independence, able to do our own thing and be held accountable for it? The only fear I see is fear of change.

    By now any other nation voting against the EU would have found a way to ignore their referendum, or force them to vote again and find a way to stay with the EU. If they feel they can laugh at people not willing to roll over and be told what to do, let them laugh. They should be crying.

    You are forecasting this all while the economy is doing fine, wages are up, unemployment lowest ever etc. And that just months from leaving the EU.

    The simple truth is you do not know the reality of leaving the EU. Neither do I. The only reality is the vote came back saying we want to give it a go.

    They are not our masters. They promised to implement the decision of the people. It is that which should not be denied.
     
    T34 likes this.
  19. Stiltskin

    Stiltskin Lead commenter

  20. Stiltskin

    Stiltskin Lead commenter

    You've got to love statistics! Wage growth is 3.1% (wish I got something near that!) yet at the same time the average worker is earning less than they were in 2008.

    What we could do with are some people in parliament who are not in it for the money/self interests, who have knowledge on specific areas and can make decisions without having to ask what the general population want all the time.
     

Share This Page