OT. The futures Bright, the Futures Brexit!!!

[Ram59]

Our second biggest export to the eu is pharmaceuticals. This must be a plus factor in our negotiations, if the eu wish to play hard ball with our exports, the pharmaceuticals would have to be included and unlike other products, cannot be sourced elsewhere.

[macstheman]

Whilst I have great sympathy and, indeed, empathy for your point of view rA (which you have stated consistently and elequently) I have to take issue with one point, namely, that the outcome was only advisory and not binding! Now your argument may in fact be right but one has to question it's validity in the scenario presented.
I stayed up to watch the outcome of the vote on telly and the first comment made after the polls closed was 'We're are leaving the EU'!. This statement was based on exit polls and proved to be correct! Now during the ensuing debate the Leavers were ecstatic and the Remainers were well upset. I cannot recall anyone on the various panels mentioning 'its only advisory', they were all convinced that we were leaving! Now I and my family and our friends often chatted about the referendum prior to it being held and I cannot recall any of us thinking it was other than 'a decision', indeed from observations it seems that families and friends often fell out over who was going to vote which way!! Next morning the papers were only talking about the fact that a leave vote had won.
What I am saying is this referendum was held on the basis that a huge majority of the country believed that the result was binding. As such a contract was made between the populace and the referendum that declared the outcome binding!! Anything else is morally bereft even if yours and millions of others concerns may come out of a genuine worry for this great country and the future. The vote should stand and be enforced without delay but with passion and commonsense!! It is the only outcome that can support and strengthen our democracy, anything else makes a mockery of hundreds of years of the freedom we have fought long and hard to preserve!! If we can't entrust the people to make a decision through the ballot box then we might as well seek out a dictator to tell us what to do!!

[roger_ramjet]

[QUOTE=Mangara: Roger...for someone who voted 'Remain' you can't half adopt some strange stances....[/QUOTE]

My point it that the referendum is history. We cannot keep reinventing it because some people don't like the outcome, whatever that outcome might be. More voted out than didn't, so we have to suck up and get on with it: be it with a 37% vote an 84% vote or whatever.

I am not entirely comfortable with the outcome (specifically because of the reasons put forward justifying the out vote: ie immigration and Little Britainers) but, as Gaspode said, nothing upsets the economy more than uncertainty. The people have spoken and the parliament, also there because those same people spoke (albeit a few less of them), should not perpetuate the prevarification by needing to ratify the people's vote. A decision has been made and we have to get on with it, not let objectors to that decision think of more and more reasons to adopt a different course because they didn't like the result.

It makes us as a country look foolhardy, indecisive and afraid to make a decision. We are rapidly becoming a laughing stock in the eyes of Europe and Rest of the World and giving up precious negotiation positions by prevaricating instead of getting on with it. That is why my stance may seem confusing to you: I may not agree with the decision but I dont want us to make the scenario even worse. A decision has been made, we are just making our position more and more untenable by not accepting it.

Its like the 16 year old boyfriend and girlfriend contemplating *** for the first time. It may seem a bit of a daunting prospect before you get started, but it wont make it any easier by delaying it or wondering all the time if you made the right decision and maybe not to.

For Nottingham readers of the preceding paragraph, please insert the number 13 instead of 16.....

[roger_ramjet]

[QUOTE=Mangara: Roger...for someone who voted 'Remain' you can't half adopt some strange stances....[/QUOTE]

My point it that the referendum is history. We cannot keep reinventing it because some people don't like the outcome, whatever that outcome might be. More voted out than didn't, so we have to suck up and get on with it: be it with a 37% vote an 84% vote or whatever.

I am not entirely comfortable with the outcome (specifically because of the reasons put forward justifying the out vote: ie immigration and Little Britainers) but, as Gaspode said, nothing upsets the economy more than uncertainty. The people have spoken and the parliament, also there because those same people spoke (albeit a few less of them), should not perpetuate the prevarification by needing to ratify the people's vote. A decision has been made and we have to get on with it, not let objectors to that decision think of more and more reasons to adopt a different course because they didn't like the result.

It makes us as a country look foolhardy, indecisive and afraid to make a decision. We are rapidly becoming a laughing stock in the eyes of Europe and Rest of the World and giving up precious negotiation positions by prevaricating instead of getting on with it. That is why my stance may seem confusing to you: I may not agree with the decision but I dont want us to make the scenario even worse. A decision has been made, we are just making our position more and more untenable by not accepting it.

Its like the 16 year old boyfriend and girlfriend contemplating *** for the first time. It may seem a bit of a daunting prospect before you get started, but it wont make it any easier by delaying it or wondering all the time if you made the right decision and maybe not to.

For Nottingham readers of the preceding paragraph, please insert the number 13 instead of 16.....

[ramAnag]

Thanks for that mac. Tbh I don't think it was unknown that the referendum was only advisory. Maybe the complacency that was certainly apparent within the 'Remain' campaign ran deeper than we thought, but as far as I understand it, Referenda are invariably 'advisory', possibly to take account of precisely such circumstances as we have here...a desperately close result won by a minority 'majority' of not much more than a third.
As far as 'trusting people at the ballot box' is concerned. That's essential, imo, as far as choosing a Party/Government of preference is concerned, but beyond that...do you feel fully equipped to work through all the economic complexities of EU membership? I know I don't and we're relatively intelligent. There is something truly bizarre and ironic about the 'Leave' campaign citing the 'Sovereignty of Parliament' as a reason for voting 'Out' and then bleating over the fact that the High Court has effectively had to restore that same sovereignty.

Rog, the country has been a 'laughing stock' since June 23rd when Europe collectively realised...'Christ, the Brits have actually allowed themselves to be conned by Farage - a man who can't even get himself elected to their Houses of Parliament', followed by the Johnson/Gove, May/that other woman whose name I can't even remember, blood letting and the totally meaningless and inane 'Brexit means Brexit' speech.
Frankly I can't remember a time in my half century of political consciousness when I have been more appalled by the standard of those that represent us with Johnson and Abbott and Corbyn and Gove exemplifying, in impartial terms, the way in which standards have deteriorated.
Having said that, one thing I know is...no bad decision was ever made better simply by sticking with it and if yesterday's decision leads to a reappraisal then I'll welcome it.

[macstheman]

We'll have to disagree on the status of the Referendum, I still believe that 90+% of the public considered it binding, I certainly did. To be honest I'm not into voting to 'advise' governments, it's bad enough listening to their crap enclosed in their manifestos! They always come up with an excuse to not implement 80% of their pre-election spiel, but to ask nearly 50 mill voters to advise them is tripe, there is no point in such a scenario, if that was the case the turnout would be so low as to be a meaningless waste of public money. For something as important as this it can only be a vote for action! I still believe that the electorate voted for 'decision', everything about the event - the face to face shoot outs on telly, the name calling, the language of various newspapers and other media made it 'real'!! The public went to the polling stations for a 'real' scenario not for a practise match. That's my opinion and I would suggest that of the majority of the public.

[DCFCArmy]

They've rigged the US elections to hand it to Hillary Clinton, and they've well and truly shafted us with this brexit rubbish

All rigged and it makes me sick.

[mistaram]

I could name a few on here who would never mention the word advisory if remain had won

[swaledale]

My point it that the referendum is history. We cannot keep reinventing it because some people don't like the outcome, whatever that outcome might be. More voted out than didn't, so we have to suck up and get on with it: be it with a 37% vote an 84% vote or whatever.

I am not entirely comfortable with the outcome (specifically because of the reasons put forward justifying the out vote: ie immigration and Little Britainers) but, as Gaspode said, nothing upsets the economy more than uncertainty. The people have spoken and the parliament, also there because those same people spoke (albeit a few less of them), should not perpetuate the prevarification by needing to ratify the people's vote. A decision has been made and we have to get on with it, not let objectors to that decision think of more and more reasons to adopt a different course because they didn't like the result.

It makes us as a country look foolhardy, indecisive and afraid to make a decision. We are rapidly becoming a laughing stock in the eyes of Europe and Rest of the World and giving up precious negotiation positions by prevaricating instead of getting on with it. That is why my stance may seem confusing to you: I may not agree with the decision but I dont want us to make the scenario even worse. A decision has been made, we are just making our position more and more untenable by not accepting it.

Its like the 16 year old boyfriend and girlfriend contemplating *** for the first time. It may seem a bit of a daunting prospect before you get started, but it wont make it any easier by delaying it or wondering all the time if you made the right decision and maybe not to.

For Nottingham readers of the preceding paragraph, please insert the number 13 instead of 16.....

Your missing the point, this is an important constitutional issue, which is there to ensure that the democratically elected sovereign parliament makes the decision not a small executive - Ive read some *******s in the media today, media i might add owned by rich elite non tax paying individuals which beggars belief - the High Courts decision is to stop the abuse of power which May would be doing if she triggers article 50 without parliament having a vote on it.

Anag your barking up the wrong tree on the 37% issue, there was a majority vote for Brexit and i don't have an issue with that - other than the misguided reasons and falsehoods which people believed when voting that way, but hey ho, I raised that in response to the assertion that the vote was "the will of the British people" when clearly it was the will of the 37% who voted to leave which factually is not the same!

Another fact which brexits conveniently ignore or forget is that the referendum was in or out of the EU, nowehre on the ballot paper or in any other document was it specified on what terms we would leave the EU or what the deal would be - in fact Farage and his ilk were silent on that matter.

So some voted to control immigration, others voted because they believed £350 million (as printed on leaflets and that bus) would be paid into the NHS, others to stop immigrants getting jobs which apparently they were taking off UK workers, others so they can catch as much fish as they want without quotas, many because they wanted the Uk sovereig parliament to make the decisions and not the EU and so the list goes on.

Parliament must have a say on the terms and negotiations for Brexit. It is such an irony and a laugh to see prominent brexit people frothing over the thought that Parliament will have a say..bloody priceless!

[ramAnag]

As you'd expect I agree with much of that Swale...para' 2 apart.
Not sure why you think I'm 'barking up the wrong tree' on the 37% issue when we appear to actually agree. You say 37% does not reflect the 'will of the British people' which is exactly what I've been saying since the end of June. You raise the 'misguided reasons and falsehoods' which I've also been drawing attention to throughout this four month long 'debate'. That only leaves the 'majority vote for Brexit' that you apparently don't have 'an issue with'. Have to admit I do...not with the maths...I accept that 'Leave' got half of 1% more than 'Remain' but given the lies and deceit which dominated the campaign that is not good conclusive enough to form the basis of a decision of this magnitude and 37% can never represent a majority decision when there are only two, wholly inadequate, choices.