UK parliament very likely to consider new Brexit referendum - Hammond

[nauseus]

6 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Entirely off topic, but sadly my dogs are entirely useless when it comes to 'protection' (I think).

 

To look on the bright side, one of them barks madly whenever anyone comes close to the house during the night ????.

I was trying to look on the bright side!

[Brigand]

My my my, all the politicians from all corners of the the parliament really have cocked-it-up good and proper. Sad to see such a once great country in such a mess due to self-serving incompetent politicians and angry people. Seems like the digging and amateur dramatics is set to go on for a while yet. It appears that there is no half-way house with the EU and it looks like the choice is off you go or be told what to do like everyone else. Also, "negotiation" is a process of coming to a win-win ending for both sides, what we are seeing here is hard bargaining, which is about win-lose for one side or the other. The politicians should have just gone for the Canada +++ deal as that would have had the biggest chance of pleasing some and appeasing others with a successful business outcome too. The nonsense we are seeing at the moment is simply is a joke.

Although, to be honest, it looks like to me that it is all slowly inching towards either the canceling of Article 50 or a second referendum which will deliver the "right" answer. I don't think the UK will leave after all and the last 3 years will end up being a massive example of how bickering children behave in the adult world. However, history will judge David Cameron harshly whatever the outcome, I reckon. 

[Just Weird]

On ‎4‎/‎12‎/‎2019 at 9:06 PM, Justin Side said:

Putting it back to the people is the only democratic way to go.

I cannot see why anyone  would disagree with this.

Apart from the right wing extremists of course.

 

It's already been put to the people, in 2016! 

 

What do you want, a precedent so that if certain people don't agree with a 2nd result they can insist on a 3rd referendum and so on, ad infinitum?

[luckyluke]

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

When has any previous national referendum in UK required a supermajority?

I don't know. 

However it is certainly 

 the time to implement it. 

If Leavers had win with a supermajority, no problems as now had arise. 

As the results would have been evident. 

This is about the future of a nation. 

But too late now.

The U.K. will have to deal with it. 

But a lesson learned for all the countries which eventually are intend to leave the E.U. in a short or long future. 

 

 

 

 

[geoffbezoz]

31 minutes ago, Chelseafan said:

You said

 

" Depends whose or what lifetime is used as reference I guess.  There was one in my parents lifetime but already two in mine. However there were none in my pet dogs lifetime. "

 

You didn't say whether your parents (or dog) had participated.

 

I said ASSUMING you're parents were over 44 then they would have SEEN 4 referendums. I didn't say they participated in them including the Scottish referendum . If they had passed away then that's a different kettle of fish

 

 

Thats exactly it. You made presumptions based on your own prejudices with respect to referendums. I gave you facts and you decided to to try and be obtuse. For your information it is most likely I am twice your age.  Unlike many, yes my parents did participate in the 1975 election because they thought it was their duty. Canines did not have the vote then all though judging  by some responses they should be allowed to now perhaps. It could avert yet another baddogs dinner . However to confirm the second Fact. my dog lived from 1984 to 2000 so hence there were no referendums in the UK in his lifetime.

 

I sincerely hope that article 50 will be revoked based on its potential illegality that is now being challenged as per another thread,  and then the  EU will amend the rules so that a withdrawal of any country will require  a 2/3 rds majority of member states in order to ensure yet more extremist factions do not have the opportunity destroy currencies, jobs and peoples positions just because cranks like Farage etc want to stand and be heard on their personal "soapbox"

[Chelseafan]

Just now, geoffbezoz said:

Thats exactly it. You made presumptions based on your own prejudices with respect to referendums. I gave you facts and you decided to to try and be obtuse. For your information it is most likely I am twice your age.  Unlike many, yes my parents did participate in the 1975 election because they thought it was their duty. Canines did not have the vote then all though judging  by some responses they should be allowed to now perhaps. It could avert yet another baddogs dinner . However to confirm the second Fact. my dog lived from 1984 to 2000 so hence there were no referendums in the UK in his lifetime.

 

I sincerely hope that article 50 will be revoked based on its potential illegality that is now being challenged as per another thread,  and then the  EU will amend the rules so that a withdrawal of any country will require  a 2/3 rds majority of member states in order to ensure yet more extremist factions do not have the opportunity destroy currencies, jobs and peoples positions just because cranks like Farage etc want to stand and be heard on their personal "soapbox"

No I made an ASSUMPTION not a PRESUMPTION and I'm happy to be corrected.

 

Your assumption on my age would make you 90. ????

 

 

 

[evadgib]

51 minutes ago, Brigand said:

My my my, all the politicians from all corners of the the parliament really have cocked-it-up good and proper. Sad to see such a once great country in such a mess due to self-serving incompetent politicians and angry people. Seems like the digging and amateur dramatics is set to go on for a while yet. It appears that there is no half-way house with the EU and it looks like the choice is off you go or be told what to do like everyone else. Also, "negotiation" is a process of coming to a win-win ending for both sides, what we are seeing here is hard bargaining, which is about win-lose for one side or the other. The politicians should have just gone for the Canada +++ deal as that would have had the biggest chance of pleasing some and appeasing others with a successful business outcome too. The nonsense we are seeing at the moment is simply is a joke.

Although, to be honest, it looks like to me that it is all slowly inching towards either the canceling of Article 50 or a second referendum which will deliver the "right" answer. I don't think the UK will leave after all and the last 3 years will end up being a massive example of how bickering children behave in the adult world. However, history will judge David Cameron harshly whatever the outcome, I reckon. 

Incase you missed it.

[billd766]

14 hours ago, elliss said:

 Because ,  it is not achievable , dream on .

It actually IS achievable, but NOT under the current leadership

[billd766]

3 hours ago, geoffbezoz said:

Agreed and people should note and not  forget that what you have illustrated is exactly a similar parallel as to what provided the platform and window of opportunity to what occurred last century in that other European country.  But I still am of the opinion that the only way to influence and change it is by remaining within the EU, not leaving it.

Ask David Cameron how well he got on whilst trying to influence and change the policies while he was the UK PM.

[Kwasaki]

53 minutes ago, billd766 said:

It actually IS achievable, but NOT under the current leadership

Exactly T. May & Hammond voted to remain.

[Disaantri]

That's probably because there was no Brexit leader who came forward with a plausible plan which would have been acceptable to their parliamentary colleagues!

[Pattaya46]

On 4/12/2019 at 9:06 PM, Justin Side said:

Putting it back to the people is the only democratic way to go.

I cannot see why anyone  would disagree with this.

Hi. I am not from UK - so not really concerned - but what you say seems very similar to Ms May's strategy: Make them vote again and again until the result is the one we want ! Doesn't seem very democratic to me... 

 

If you want make a democratic second vote, then the question should be :

How do you want to exit the EU ?

1. - with a deal
2. - without a deal  (no deal)

IMHO...

Edited April 14, 2019 by Pattaya46

[transam]

1 minute ago, Pattaya46 said:

Hi. I am not from UK - so not really concerned - but what you say seems very similar to Ms May's strategy: Make them vote again and again until the result is the one we want ! Doesn't seem very democratic to me... 

 

If you want make a democratic second vote, then the question should be :

How do you want to exit the EU ?

1. - with a deal
2. - without a deal  (no deal)

IMHO...

We had the vote.....We Brits go our own way.........

 

 

[tebee]

The Seven Mistakes That Led to the (Shameless Stupidity of) Brexit
How Britain Chose to Self-Destruct and Make Itself a Global Laughingstock

 

https://eand.co/the-seven-mistakes-that-led-to-the-shameless-stupidity-of-brexit-7fa9aaa59821

[transam]

10 minutes ago, tebee said:

The Seven Mistakes That Led to the (Shameless Stupidity of) Brexit
How Britain Chose to Self-Destruct and Make Itself a Global Laughingstock

 

https://eand.co/the-seven-mistakes-that-led-to-the-shameless-stupidity-of-brexit-7fa9aaa59821

Your own link......????

[welovesundaysatspace]

1 hour ago, billd766 said:

It actually IS achievable, but NOT under the current leadership

Another wet dream. Never would you be able to find someone stupid enough to take responsibility for a no-deal Brexit (let alone enough MPs to get it thorough parliament).

 

All those Brexiteers shouting “no deal” are comfortably standing on the sidelines. The smarter ones, JRM and his bully boys, understand it and therefore will keep standing on the sidelines. Then there are the fools and tools like Raab and Davis who actually might be stupid enough to signing up for the PM job just to end up in the very same situation May is in. Ultimately they would not take responsibility for a no-deal Brexit either. 

 

Regardless of the leadership, there is only this deal or no deal, and before being responsible for the consequences of a no-deal crash, every politician would rather accept an extension, a referendum, a GE, or a deal with the opposition.  

[stevenl]

15 minutes ago, transam said:

Your own link......????

Have anything to comment on the content?

[transam]

4 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Have anything to comment on the content?

No...

[sandyf]

3 hours ago, Just Weird said:

It's already been put to the people, in 2016! 

It's not just about a result, how the result is obtained has a lot to do with it. Never heard of a Stewards Enquiry or that athletes may have to return their medals?

 

There was a debate in 2002 and this is what David Davis had to say.

"We should not ask people to vote on a blank sheet of paper and tell them to trust us to fill in the details afterwards. For referendums to be fair and compatible with our parliamentary process, we need the electors to be as well informed as possible and to know exactly what they are voting for. Referendums need to be treated as an addition to the parliamentary process, not as a substitute for it."

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200203/cmhansrd/vo021126/debtext/21126-17.htm

 

MPs were probably nodding off at the time and are now paying the price. Where was the white paper prior to the referendum, we wouldn't be in this mess if the job had been done properly in the first place.

 

[sandyf]

Switzerland’s supreme court has overturned a nationwide referendum for the first time in the country’s modern history, on the grounds that the information given to voters was insufficient.

In a ruling that may resonate in Britain, where remain campaigners have long argued that voters in the 2016 Brexit referendum were not adequately informed, the court said incomplete detail and a lack of transparency had violated the freedom of the vote, which could now be re-run.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/apr/11/switzerland-court-overturns-referendum-as-voters-were-poorly-informed

[beautifulthailand99]

Even the most ardent Brexiteers will find it a push to keep their (synthetic) anger up for month after month.  Still they had their fun dreaming of chaos - of their mythical land of milk and honey whilst it lasted. Thank God that wiser heads have prevailed in the end. 

 

Edited April 14, 2019 by beautifulthailand99

[transam]

3 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Switzerland’s supreme court has overturned a nationwide referendum for the first time in the country’s modern history, on the grounds that the information given to voters was insufficient.

In a ruling that may resonate in Britain, where remain campaigners have long argued that voters in the 2016 Brexit referendum were not adequately informed, the court said incomplete detail and a lack of transparency had violated the freedom of the vote, which could now be re-run.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/apr/11/switzerland-court-overturns-referendum-as-voters-were-poorly-informed

Switzerland ain't the UK...The UK fights for freedom...

[beautifulthailand99]

4 hours ago, superal said:

For the life of me I cannot understand why anyone wants to be controlled by an outside agency such as the EU . I have spoken to many Europeans  who hate the EU for what it has done to their countries with immigration , unemployment , crime rates up , the changing face of their towns  being the main reasons . The folks who I talked to are willing a Brexit and hoping their will be a domino effect to other EU countries. However the voice of the UK public is often ignored by the politicians and there will come a time when peoples demonstrations will become prominent .  Hopefully as strong as the French but without the violence .   History will show the demise of EU countries customs , identity & traditions if this EU ogre is not restrained .  Europe was a much happier place 30 years ago but now is going down a dark road .

Don't worry rather like Somchai if you are at the bottom of the heap you will continue to be so whatever happens. Life is about making the most of the opportunities that comes your way and being positive wherever you can. Your 40s and 50s can be cruel times if you haven't made the right choices sadly. Maybe the folk you are talking to are a reflection of yourself ? Still blaming the EU/immigrants etc is the easy way out and helps the ruling class to get the ferrets fighting each other than those at the top - which is just how they like it. 

[vogie]

40 minutes ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

Even the most ardent Brexiteers will find it a push to keep their (synthetic) anger up for month after month.  Still they had their fun dreaming of chaos - of their mythical land of milk and honey whilst it lasted. Thank God that wiser heads have prevailed in the end

Are these the wiser heads to which you refer? This is not the end, nor is it the beginning of the end, or is it the end of the beginning or indeed the beguine the beguine.

 

[wilcopops]

8 hours ago, luckyluke said:

A contract is voidable if based on fraud or/and misleading information. 

 

Wonder if it applies to a referendum also.

 

I suppose it can be proven that both parties (Leavers-Remainers) were guilty of these practices. 

The Referendum was advisory so it didnt come under the strictest (normal) laws of voting, financing and campaigning, if it had been decided before it took place it would now be null and void.

The Brexiteers ringleaders almost certainly were banking on this.

[wilcopops]

54 minutes ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

Even the most ardent Brexiteers will find it a push to keep their (synthetic) anger up for month after month.  Still they had their fun dreaming of chaos - of their mythical land of milk and honey whilst it lasted. Thank God that wiser heads have prevailed in the end. 

 

I expect as we speak the BBC are hurriedly photoshopping Life on Earth to depict David Attenborough feeding a unicorn......

[vogie]

3 minutes ago, wilcopops said:

The Referendum was advisory so it didnt come under the strictest (normal) laws of voting, financing and campaigning, if it had been decided before it took place it would now be null and void.

The Brexiteers ringleaders almost certainly were banking on this.

So it was advisory, parliament decided to act on the advice they received from the British electorate by triggering article 50, by a huge huge majority.

 

[wilcopops]

43 minutes ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

immigration , unemployment , crime rates up , the changing face of their towns  being the main reasons

You have some incredibly prejudiced and misinformed friends.

Try some critical thinking for a change

[wilcopops]

1 minute ago, vogie said:

So it was advisory, parliament decided to act on the advice they received from the British electorate by triggering article 50, by a huge huge majority.

 

That is quite correct........it doesn't make it any less advisory....for once on this thread that is an indisputable fact.

[daveAustin]

On 4/12/2019 at 1:40 PM, geoffbezoz said:

Other then to a blind right wing Brexiteer it is obvious that only a second referendum will resolve the issue. 

Obvious only to your typical, prissy, toys-out-of-pram-when-I-don't-get-my-way loony lefty bent on making Britain a non-country. A referendum should only be used on the terms of a deal/no deal scenario. Just accept it and move on already. Mess with the decision, you'll stir a hornets nest and the country will forever be divided. Surely even the dippiest, most selfish of unpatriotic 'Brits' can see that?