Advertisement


Would you support a second referendum?

  • YES

    Votes: 6 75.0%
  • NO

    Votes: 2 25.0%

  • Total voters
    8

Aviador

Administrator
Staff member
I've upgraded to support F4A!
Jan 12, 2009
12,255
3,153
323
HEAD OFFICE
Thread starter Admin #201
May could of course throw it "back to the people" with a second referendum. It could be her joker card to fight off the internal rebels.
 

Advertisement


Jerry

Moderator
Staff member
I've upgraded to support F4A!
Jun 1, 2016
6,887
3,376
323
37
Cardiff
Moderator #202
She could but it would be a massive risk as even now i think the vote would be completely unpredictable.
 

TheLocalYokel

Administrator
Staff member
Jan 14, 2009
11,061
4,446
243
Wurzel Country
Admin #203
May could of course throw it "back to the people" with a second referendum. It could be her joker card to fight off the internal rebels.
I have little sympathy with Theresa May as she partly got herself into the position in which she now finds herself by her crass decision to call a general election after which she lost a reasonable working majority and now has to rely on the DUP which also further complicates the Irish dimension of Brexit.

However, the one person who must take all the blame for the desperately serious situation in which the country finds itself is David Cameron. He allowed the In/Out referendum because he didn't think for a minute that the country would opt to leave the EU. His reasoning was purely political. He thought that a vote from the British public to remain in the EU would silence the Euro-sceptic wing of his party for the duration of his premiership. Well, that worked well, didn't it?

What is criminal in my view is that Cameron clearly gave no thought to the ramifications of a Leave vote when he allowed the referendum. We are now all aware of what it means.

May with her general election decision and Cameron with his referendum decision exhibited the most appalling judgement and they have both led this country's government. I had little confidence in him and I have none in her when it comes to judgement. The snag is I can't see any current leader of any of the political parties who would be any better. It's a sad reflection on the quality of our political leaders.
 

Jerry

Moderator
Staff member
I've upgraded to support F4A!
Jun 1, 2016
6,887
3,376
323
37
Cardiff
Moderator #204
I personally think it goes further back than that to Blair and Brown not holding any votes over the Lisbon treaty or even joining the Euro and Schengen. People in the UK have never had to make any decisions about the EU before and many would've had a lack of knowledge about it and it's institutions and daily workings. It may be a reflection of our education system in that politics isn't taught in schools in the UK or at least when my generation and before were in school.
 

Aviador

Administrator
Staff member
I've upgraded to support F4A!
Jan 12, 2009
12,255
3,153
323
HEAD OFFICE
Thread starter Admin #205
I have little sympathy with Theresa May as she partly got herself into the position in which she now finds herself by her crass decision to call a general election after which she lost a reasonable working majority and now has to rely on the DUP which also further complicates the Irish dimension of Brexit.

However, the one person who must take all the blame for the desperately serious situation in which the country finds itself is David Cameron. He allowed the In/Out referendum because he didn't think for a minute that the country would opt to leave the EU. His reasoning was purely political. He thought that a vote from the British public to remain in the EU would silence the Euro-sceptic wing of his party for the duration of his premiership. Well, that worked well, didn't it?

What is criminal in my view is that Cameron clearly gave no thought to the ramifications of a Leave vote when he allowed the referendum. We are now all aware of what it means.

May with her general election decision and Cameron with his referendum decision exhibited the most appalling judgement and they have both led this country's government. I had little confidence in him and I have none in her when it comes to judgement. The snag is I can't see any current leader of any of the political parties who would be any better. It's a sad reflection on the quality of our political leaders.
I personally think it goes further back than that to Blair and Brown not holding any votes over the Lisbon treaty or even joining the Euro and Schengen. People in the UK have never had to make any decisions about the EU before and many would've had a lack of knowledge about it and it's institutions and daily workings. It may be a reflection of our education system in that politics isn't taught in schools in the UK or at least when my generation and before were in school.
I totally agree.

Personally I believe this is all part of a bigger plan by Theresa May and very cleverly instigated too. Leaving the final proposal until the eleventh hour in the Brexit talks makes it virtually impossible for Brexiteer hardliners or Parliament to make any substantial changes. She has previously insisted Parliament will have a say on the final deal. A hard Brexit would see us leave the EU with no Parliamentary vote and without any kind of partnership with the EU of any kind. Theresa May's plan is the only way Brexit can be carried through whilst keeping the United Kingdom united without causing further political instability in Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK. The Brexit referendum was always dubious from the word go. The principle of "leaving the EU" sounded appealing to many people for a number of reasons but nobody really knew the full extent of what it meant as there was far more to consider than what was originally thought.
 

Jerry

Moderator
Staff member
I've upgraded to support F4A!
Jun 1, 2016
6,887
3,376
323
37
Cardiff
Moderator #206
I totally agree with.

Personally I believe this is all part of a bigger plan by Theresa May and very cleverly instigated too. Leaving the final proposal until the eleventh hour in the Brexit talks makes it virtually impossible for Brexiteer hardliners or Parliament to make any substantial changes. She has previously insisted Parliament will have a say on the final deal. A hard Brexit would see us leave the EU with no Parliamentary vote and without any kind of partnership with the EU of any kind. Theresa May's plan is the only way Brexit can be carried through whilst keeping the United Kingdom united without causing further political instability in Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK. The Brexit referendum was always dubious from the word go. The principle of "leaving the EU" sounded appealing to many people for a number of reasons but nobody really knew the full extent of what it meant as there was far more to consider than what was originally thought.
I think what it might do is keep the UK as a close partner with the EU while maybe giving the UK enough latitude to sign new deals with countries like the US but also be able to join things like the Trans Pacific Partnership which would give the UK trade a deal with Australia, Canada and New Zealand and countries like Japan and Singapore. Online also i think it's been suggested that EU citizens will get a special rights so essentially maybe a different form of free movement! It does seem that technically brexit will happen but in reality we'll still be in a close partnership with the EU. That's asuming of course the EU agrees to it!
 

aviatorconcorde

Well-Known Member
Feb 1, 2018
417
315
63
South East Wales
I personally think it goes further back than that to Blair and Brown not holding any votes over the Lisbon treaty or even joining the Euro and Schengen. People in the UK have never had to make any decisions about the EU before and many would've had a lack of knowledge about it and it's institutions and daily workings. It may be a reflection of our education system in that politics isn't taught in schools in the UK or at least when my generation and before were in school.
Spot on Jerry. John ‘Danger’ Major started forcing stuff through followed by Tories in a red tie called Mr Brown and Mr Blair.

I’m all for a common trading market (which what it started out as and what it should of stayed as) and cooperating on things such as security, sharing intelligence and the environment, but the EU comes with way too much unnecessary baggage like the ECJ and the European Commission, Parliament, Council...Seriously, do we really need all 3 of those?
 
Last edited:

TheLocalYokel

Administrator
Staff member
Jan 14, 2009
11,061
4,446
243
Wurzel Country
Admin #208
I’m all for a common trading market (which what it started out as and what it should of stayed as) and cooperating on things such as security, sharing intelligence and the environment, but the EU comes with way too much unnecessary baggage like the ECJ and the European Commission, Parliament, Council...Seriously, do we really need all 3 of those?
Britain voted to join the EEC (European Economic Community) in 1973 along with Ireland and Denmark which brought the total membership at that time to nine countries. I remember the arguments very well. Prime Minister Edward Heath was a devoted Europhile and when the Conservatives took over from the Labour Government in 1970 much of his energy was focused on getting the UK into the Common Market as the EEC was popularly called then - despite the horrendous industrial problems at home during the term of the Heath government. Charles de Gaulle, an implacable opponent of British entry into the EEC, had died by then so that obstacle had been removed.

Those of us who voted to join the EEC in 1973 thought we were voting to join a 'club' of marketeers which at that time we were, broadly. It seemed that Britain would be better off in this market place of nations rather than outside. Few British voters then foresaw that the Common Market would evolve into something approaching a federal state which in many ways is what the EU has become. Some senior members would like to go further along this road.

A 'soft' Brexit will inevitably mean the UK being tied so closely to the EU that it will have to comply with much of the EU's diktats without having any say in their formulation or interpretation. de Gaulle's main objection to British entry was his view that the British people were divided on the subject - roll forward nearly half a century and it might be said that the late French President was extremely prescient in this. He suggested an associate membership for Britain - something that many Brexiteers believe will be the case with a soft Brexit.

Even the watered down Brexit of the May cabinet will face intense scrutiny by the EU countries and further concessions will inevitably have to be made. It has long been apparent that simply walking away from the EU and ploughing our own furrow is impossible so compromises are inevitable.

I'm beginning to alter my view that the referendum result should be regarded as sacrosanct. Many of those who voted to Leave seem to have believed that leaving would be a simple matter. Now that we are all aware of the intense difficulties I'm starting to think the British electorate should be asked again - not in the form of a referendum because any wording would be next to impossible to get right and with the lesson of the first referendum firmly in mind what will it achieve anyway? I think a general election should be called. The main parties can then decide whether they want membership of the EU to be one of the major planks, perhaps the major plank, of their manifestos. If they are all in favour of remaining they will amost certainly have different emphases to put before the voters.
 

paully

Well-Known Member
Jan 22, 2018
206
272
63
66
Dewsbury
The problem with that general Election Yokel, is you would have a Prime Minister who is a remainer pretending to be a leaver and a leader of the opposition who is a leaver (of many years standing) pretending to be a remainer, so no further forward. But when you have a situation, as apertained, where EU Governments simply ignore Brussels ruling when it doesn`t suit them and the EU turn a blind eye in the interests of unity. Then you have the UK who enforce every diktat with ruthless efficency, regardless. It is little suprise that the first time you have a vote on it, Brexit is the result.
 

TheLocalYokel

Administrator
Staff member
Jan 14, 2009
11,061
4,446
243
Wurzel Country
Admin #210
She might not be Conservative leader for too much longer. If there is a challenge and she is ousted there is a strong body of 'informed' opinion that changing prime minister once without a general election is acceptable, doing so twice would be difficult to countenance. The snag is - who is there of any stature to replace May? And she won't go down in history as one of the country's most able PMs. The other political parties are equally bereft of high level talent but we are where we are. Someone has to run the country.

At the time of the referendum I had no strong views either way as to the outcome.
 

Jerry

Moderator
Staff member
I've upgraded to support F4A!
Jun 1, 2016
6,887
3,376
323
37
Cardiff
Moderator #211
I think the problem with having a general election over Brexit is that it will invariably involve a lot more than just Brexit. May tried to get a mandate for Brexit in the last election and a lot of it became about social care and other stuff. Brexit is an issue that can only be voted on in a referendum. The problem with that is you could end up with parties calling for one every 4 to 5 years if they don't like the way the vote goes and things change. A bit like the SNP with Scottish independence! Lol
 

TheLocalYokel

Administrator
Staff member
Jan 14, 2009
11,061
4,446
243
Wurzel Country
Admin #212
I think the problem with having a general election over Brexit is that it will invariably involve a lot more than just Brexit. May tried to get a mandate for Brexit in the last election and a lot of it became about social care and other stuff. Brexit is an issue that can only be voted on in a referendum. The problem with that is you could end up with parties calling for one every 4 to 5 years if they don't like the way the vote goes and things change. A bit like the SNP with Scottish independence! Lol
It's true which is why I am only very reluctantly coming to the view that the referendum result whould be set aside. It goes against what I believe is one of the corner stones of a democracy, ie respecting the decision of voters. However, with the country's future in turmoil is this the time to loosen that corner stone for once given the situation in which the country finds itself?

As for general elections, the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 decrees that Westminster parliaments shall last five years but there are two exceptions that can trigger a general election earlier than five years:

If the House of Commons votes that it has no confidence in the government or if two-thirds of the House of Commons membership resolves that there should be an early general election.
 

Aviador

Administrator
Staff member
I've upgraded to support F4A!
Jan 12, 2009
12,255
3,153
323
HEAD OFFICE
Thread starter Admin #213
In a similar way to how you might view a political part here in the UK. If you were a member of the Labour, LibDems or Conservatives there would still be elements of each party you wont particularly like and you wish they would change. My view on the EU has been the same. We should have worked towards mending the broken bits as not all of it is broken.
 

aviatorconcorde

Well-Known Member
Feb 1, 2018
417
315
63
South East Wales
In a similar way to how you might view a political part here in the UK. If you were a member of the Labour, LibDems or Conservatives there would still be elements of each party you wont particularly like and you wish they would change. My view on the EU has been the same. We should have worked towards mending the broken bits as not all of it is broken.
I can totally see and understand your point Aviador and to begin with I was a remainer thinking the same trail of thought as yourself. However, Cameron did try to change the terms of our membership which didn’t happen. This is when I realised there is probably too much (German) influence consolidated on the continent and would be very difficult to re work things from Britain which is arguably the most different out of all the European countries which the exception of ROI. I also asked myself where the EU would be in 20 years time considering the rate of change we have seen over the last 25 years with Lisbon and Maastricht, when i finally took the decision to vote leave about a month before polling day.

If I had to sum it up, things were moving too fast for me with no option to put the brakes on.

On a lighter not, it’s amusing how things can change by family mind My grandmother (as late in life as she is bless her) backed remain, along with dad and another uncle and his wife. While myself, my mother and a lot of my other relatives backed leave.
 

TheLocalYokel

Administrator
Staff member
Jan 14, 2009
11,061
4,446
243
Wurzel Country
Admin #215
I can totally see and understand your point Aviador and to begin with I was a remainer thinking the same trail of thought as yourself. However, Cameron did try to change the terms of our membership which didn’t happen. This is when I realised there is probably too much (German) influence consolidated on the continent and would be very difficult to re work things from Britain which is arguably the most different out of all the European countries which the exception of ROI. I also asked myself where the EU would be in 20 years time considering the rate of change we have seen over the last 25 years with Lisbon and Maastricht, when i finally took the decision to vote leave about a month before polling day.

If I had to sum it up, things were moving too fast for me with no option to put the brakes on.

On a lighter not, it’s amusing how things can change by family mind My grandmother (as late in life as she is bless her) backed remain, along with dad and another uncle and his wife. While myself, my mother and a lot of my other relatives backed leave.
I think it was a generalisation that the elderly were responsible for the Leave vote with your 'evidence' yet another indication this was not so. One of our grandsons (21 years of age) voted to leave.

I know a number of people of 60 and above who say they voted Remain.
 

Aviador

Administrator
Staff member
I've upgraded to support F4A!
Jan 12, 2009
12,255
3,153
323
HEAD OFFICE
Thread starter Admin #216
I think it was a generalisation that the elderly were responsible for the Leave vote with your 'evidence' yet another indication this was not so. One of our grandsons (21 years of age) voted to leave.

I know a number of people of 60 and above who say they voted Remain.
 

TheLocalYokel

Administrator
Staff member
Jan 14, 2009
11,061
4,446
243
Wurzel Country
Admin #217
These are the percentages of how people voted within the varous age ranges not the percentage of the total vote by age.

There are 2-3 times as many people in the country between 18 and 60 compared with those above that age so the percentage figures must take account of that. Even with 60% of the older age group voting to Leave, it still took a substantial number of younger voters to do the same to arrive at the near 52% share of the vote that Leave acquired.
 

Advertisement


Top Bottom