O/T DDay for Brexit..well sort of...

[great_fire]

I bet Cameron didn't know this was going to turn into a class war, but the chattering classes in their London bubble have such contempt for the rest of the country and are so arrogant, perhaps it was inevitable.

[DaveyJohn]

I actually agree with you. The original binary vote would only be valid if it was clearly 'leave without a deal'. But most in the leave campaign went to great lengths to secure votes by saying that it would be easy, once we voted to leave to secure a trade deal with the EU. So x number of people voted to leave based on this being easy to be secured.

I think we can safely say that the 48% remainers would vote to remain. The question is how many of the 52% want to leave with no deal?

I suspect very strongly that more than 2% want to leave but only with a deal? Do you contest that? On what basis? We're meant to be a democracy. If we aim to be this, we need to frame democratic decisions with clarity. The original vote made no clear distinction between leave with deal and leave with no deal, and so we are ****ed for clarity. Its that simple.

So leave with no deal remains, democratically, a minority deal. Unless we can prove otherwise. By...a confirmation vote with clarity of choice on the vote this time?

Actually, personally, if rather just not do that. Id rather just the mps have free votes to establish the consensus on the most popular deal. If you don't trust the mps, then fine, put it back to the people. But don't just claim a victory that you aren't entitled to.

Sorry for the delay in response I had a family birthday minefield to negotiate through!

From my personal perspective, all this talk of easy trade deals that you are quoting is in reference to the deal we strike after we leave. I never once heard any mention in the build up to the referendum that we'd actually need a deal to leave? My interpretation was that the vote was to remain or leave. If we voted leave, we would leave, and then start to talk about the future after we'd left. The importance of securing any kind of leaving deal, which is totally different to the deals for the future, was never stated. If it was I genuinely missed it and I apologise for that.

So when you say in your post that "But most in the leave campaign went to great lengths to secure votes by saying that it would be easy, once we voted to leave to secure a trade deal with the EU. So x number of people voted to leave based on this being easy to be secured," I think you are mixing half truths. The trade deal comes AFTER we leave, not after the VOTE to leave? Or am I missing something? If I am, I'm happy to be educated.

Also, you haven't addressed my point about what Remain actually means to the 48% of Remainers? "I think we can safely say that the 48% remainers would vote to remain." What does that actually mean?

1. Remain and hope things stay as they are?
2. Remain but hope that the EU completely reforms (I've heard a lot of Remainers say "I know the EU needs reforming but I think we need to stay in." So if these reforms don't happen would that person want to change their mind? Have the EU even promised to reform?)
3. Remain and fully integrate with the Euro and Schengen?
4. Remain and hope we become part of the Federal Europe?
5. Remain because a load of "nice celebrities" say it's the right thing to do?
6. Remain because it means you can retire easier to Spain?

The notion that people on the Leave side are thick and don't know what they voted for can just as easily be spun on its head and applied to the Remain side. But the position adopted by the media and the Politicians is that the 48% of Remain voters are highly educated experts on the EU, whilst the 17 million who voted Leave are clueless imbeciles.

I'm genuinely curious to know what would be the point of a "soft Brexit?" Who would it actually benefit? If we still have to subscribe to so many EU rules in order to stay signed up to EU policies, then why would anyone want this? Surely it'd be easier to just vote Remain? Who are these people that want to Leave but Remain locked into all the EU rules? What is the point? No one has answered this. So for this reason, I'd say the majority of people who voted to Leave wanted the full works, not some soft "in name only version," because that is utterly pointless. I can't prove it though, because I don't have 17 million+ people on speed dial to ask, so if a second referendum is needed just to keep people who insist "No Deal Brexiteers are in the minority" happy, then so be it. But until such a vote happens, you have as much proof as I do about how many of the 17 million would want to go with No Deal, ie zero, apart from a few folk we know down the pub.

So lets have the vote, but please tell me what you would be arguing if "Leave with No Deal" won?

[MillerBill]

You are forgetting the information pack sent by the government that said to make it clear a vote to leave means leaving the single market, leaving the customs union, a end to freedom of movement and a end to the jurisdiction of the European court.

If that wasn’t clear I don’t know how much clearer they could have made it.

It is only the Remoaners who didn't understand what leave means.Apart from Caroline Flint and John Mann who have supported their constituents, none of other MPs in this area want to support the majority vote.Disgracefull !!!!!!!!!!!!!

[WanChaiMiller]

Daveyjohn - these are quotes from the 2 official leave websites.

Leave EU Website - "There are various trading models that could be explored, for example, a Norway-plus type model, or a looser Canada-style relationship."

Vote Leave Campaign Website - "We should negotiate a new UK-EU deal based on free trade and friendly cooperation."

Notice there is no mention of leaving with no deal.

[Exiletyke]

Daveyjohn - these are quotes from the 2 official leave websites.

Leave EU Website - "There are various trading models that could be explored, for example, a Norway-plus type model, or a looser Canada-style relationship."

Vote Leave Campaign Website - "We should negotiate a new UK-EU deal based on free trade and friendly cooperation."

Notice there is no mention of leaving with no deal.

Both those examples follow on after we have left

[great_fire]

The WA is a bad deal but better than we're going to get otherwise, and all because of the backstop which May herself asked for, isn't that the case of a Remainer deliberately sabotaging Brexit?

[ragingpup]

Sorry for the delay in response I had a family birthday minefield to negotiate through!

From my personal perspective, all this talk of easy trade deals that you are quoting is in reference to the deal we strike after we leave. I never once heard any mention in the build up to the referendum that we'd actually need a deal to leave? My interpretation was that the vote was to remain or leave. If we voted leave, we would leave, and then start to talk about the future after we'd left. The importance of securing any kind of leaving deal, which is totally different to the deals for the future, was never stated. If it was I genuinely missed it and I apologise for that.

So when you say in your post that "But most in the leave campaign went to great lengths to secure votes by saying that it would be easy, once we voted to leave to secure a trade deal with the EU. So x number of people voted to leave based on this being easy to be secured," I think you are mixing half truths. The trade deal comes AFTER we leave, not after the VOTE to leave? Or am I missing something? If I am, I'm happy to be educated.

Also, you haven't addressed my point about what Remain actually means to the 48% of Remainers? "I think we can safely say that the 48% remainers would vote to remain." What does that actually mean?

1. Remain and hope things stay as they are?
2. Remain but hope that the EU completely reforms (I've heard a lot of Remainers say "I know the EU needs reforming but I think we need to stay in." So if these reforms don't happen would that person want to change their mind? Have the EU even promised to reform?)
3. Remain and fully integrate with the Euro and Schengen?
4. Remain and hope we become part of the Federal Europe?
5. Remain because a load of "nice celebrities" say it's the right thing to do?
6. Remain because it means you can retire easier to Spain?

The notion that people on the Leave side are thick and don't know what they voted for can just as easily be spun on its head and applied to the Remain side. But the position adopted by the media and the Politicians is that the 48% of Remain voters are highly educated experts on the EU, whilst the 17 million who voted Leave are clueless imbeciles.

I'm genuinely curious to know what would be the point of a "soft Brexit?" Who would it actually benefit? If we still have to subscribe to so many EU rules in order to stay signed up to EU policies, then why would anyone want this? Surely it'd be easier to just vote Remain? Who are these people that want to Leave but Remain locked into all the EU rules? What is the point? No one has answered this. So for this reason, I'd say the majority of people who voted to Leave wanted the full works, not some soft "in name only version," because that is utterly pointless. I can't prove it though, because I don't have 17 million+ people on speed dial to ask, so if a second referendum is needed just to keep people who insist "No Deal Brexiteers are in the minority" happy, then so be it. But until such a vote happens, you have as much proof as I do about how many of the 17 million would want to go with No Deal, ie zero, apart from a few folk we know down the pub.

So lets have the vote, but please tell me what you would be arguing if "Leave with No Deal" won?

Good post Davey. I think that for many of us, the idea of the deal upon leaving (the WA) is that we wanted a clear outline of where we were going at the point of withdrawal - I completely agree that you can argue for that in the future trade agreement, but I think that many wanted a clear outline of what we were going towards. We have no such idea of this in the WA as it stands and that is why those of us that want to see put forward a common market based agreement want their say. It's not that I will refuse anything except such an agreement - I just want to see if there is a greater consensus for this than their is for May's deal or No Deal among our representatives. Likewise 2nd vote and any other option, including No Deal. That's why indicative votes are crucial in untying the knot.

I certainly know of Leave voters that are horrified by the idea of a No Deal. I don't recall any referendum discussions are arguments where leave politicians were eagerly talking down the chance of a deal. You can't simply crash out and then start negotiating a deal from scratch in the hope that all will be dandy - you need to leave with the WA and then negotiate from there.

I don't really get your point on Remain 'splits'. Again, there may have been confused remainers out there but all I know simply wanted to remain in the EU as it was. I don't see why you think these voters might have been split. Seems like rather strained logic to me.

The point of a soft Brexit? To keep as much of the friction free trade arrangements as we possibly can to minimise damage to our economy. Of course we would have to make compromises on this. I see why this would bother harder Brexiteers. But it's a trade that I would make.

You think that I am arguing for a 2nd vote. I'm not. I'm willing to go with what MPs arrive at as the largest consensus from the indicitive votes process. I don't think the 2nd vote has any better chance of getting through than No Deal. However, if we simply can't get anything through, and there is no clear consensus, you may be right to get a clear vote from the public to decide. I personally would leave it there after that, whoever wins. But you're right that many Brexiteers and Reamainers would carry on trying to get their way through. That's the main reason I don't want it to happen. I've just spent the weekend with my wife's familiy who are all going on about the petition, and what the chances are for revoking Brexit or at least another vote. I've been arguing against them on this. But if nothing else gets through, then it may still come to that.

[Exiletyke]

Was that on the ballot paper? No.

Lots of entities made lots of conflicting claims before and since.

"The day after we vote to leave we hold all the cards and we can choose the path we want." - Michael Gove (9 April 2016)

"There will continue to be free trade, and access to the single market." - Boris Johnson (26 June 2016)

"Getting out of the EU can be quick and easy – the UK holds most of the cards in any negotiation." - John Redwood (17 July 2016)

"The free trade agreement that we will have to do with the European Union should be one of the easiest in human history." - Liam Fox (20 July 2017)

Don't see anything conflicting in those examples

[Timbertop]

DaveyJohn. 100% agree with your post. Spot on. I can see why many fed up people,seeking something different, are rushing to join the revived Social Democrat Party. Read their "new declaration" on their official website. Got to agree with most of that statement.

[Exiletyke]

I could have sworn that the ballot said

LEAVE or
REMAIN

Tell me what were the other words I missed

Just for clarity