General / Off-Topic Post Brexit: Petition for a new referendum

[Luniticisi]

Doubt it will be Shorter.
You have no Idea just how Extensive the Contracts are.

And you also Forget that neither Side can give in.

If UK Accepts the Regulations etc from EU which the EU WILL demand for Market Access. The UK would be Humiliated. And given that the Referendum alone is already Tearing UK Apart with Independence Movements Gaining Momentum all over the Country. This is just not something the UK would Survive.
The EU is the same. If they were to give UK Free Access to the Markets without the normal Regulations like Norway and Switzerland. The EU would be Humiliated. And all the Countries in which there is Anti EU Movements would Gain momentum to Leave as they get a good Deal outside EU without the Rules and Regulations.


With this Preset the Negotiations will likely Drag on very Long.
They could end up taking 10 Years or more.
Or even Worse the Negotiations could Break down and UK will be Forced out of the EU after 2 Years without a Deal at all.

You are absolutely right, and there is a clause that, if all parties agree, the negotiations can be extended .. we will have to see how it pans out.
It is an uncertain future that's for sure ..

 

[who?]

I am quite curious about how it's actually going to unfold though. The referendum isn't binding, it will - I believe - likely require a Parliamentary vote to invoke Article 50.

So how would the mostly pro-Remain Parliament vote to Leave? Does everyone vote in accordance with how their constituency voted in the referendum? Or do all MPs vote for invoking Article 50? Could we see more resignations, from pro-Remain MPs who don't want to vote to Leave?

 

[Javert]

Well they could technically Hold Votes until they end up on 60% or more in Favor of one Side.
To get a Clear Result.
52 vs 48 is not really a Clear Result after all.





That wont happen.
Article 50 has no Turn Back Clause.

Negotiations will only happen after Article 50 has been Enacted.
But once Article 50 has been Enacted there is no Turning back.
This Mechanic has been done especially to prevent that a Country Pulls a Leave and then if the Deals they get are not Good enough goes ahead saying. Oh we werent serious we want to stay after all.....

So there will be no Option to Validate a Negotiation Result.
Once Negotiations have Begun. UK is Guaranteed to be Out.

Firstly, a 3-4 month window has now been put in place for Tory party leadership change. During that window, various things can happen. One of those things can be the start of selling the idea of EFTA membership to the UK people. Closed doors talks about this can take place between the two sides. If they agree that this is the best path, Article 50 can be delayed / invoked accordingly with that in mind with a clear plan for transition to the new arrangement. They can argue that no referendum is required since no additional sovereignty has been ceded so no legal requirement to hold a referendum. Big question on this will be (as it has been all along) is to what extent free movement applies and membership fees.

Technically though, the referendum did not say "should we stop paying memberships fees and stop all immigration". It just said "Should the UK leave the European Union".

As regards the possibility of another referendum, Article 50 has not yet been triggered, and in a sense, article 50 is not relevant for the simple reason that any state could say "if you don't do x, y, z we will trigger article 50" without actually doing it. How is that different from what you describe?

You'll have to help me out here, I've seen documents that are claimed to be "Article 50" posted online which are just about less than page of writing, which incidentally seems very short and simple for what is alleged to be such a bureaucratic organization. Is that all there is to article 50? If so, I didn't see any statement that said that once article 50 is invoked, it can never be stopped under any circumstances.

 

[Becks]

Firstly, a 3-4 month window has now been put in place for Tory party leadership change. During that window, various things can happen. One of those things can be the start of selling the idea of EFTA membership to the UK people. Closed doors talks about this can take place between the two sides. If they agree that this is the best path, Article 50 can be delayed / invoked accordingly with that in mind with a clear plan for transition to the new arrangement. They can argue that no referendum is required since no additional sovereignty has been ceded so no legal requirement to hold a referendum. Big question on this will be (as it has been all along) is to what extent free movement applies and membership fees.

Technically though, the referendum did not say "should we stop paying memberships fees and stop all immigration". It just said "Should the UK leave the European Union".

As regards the possibility of another referendum, Article 50 has not yet been triggered, and in a sense, article 50 is not relevant for the simple reason that any state could say "if you don't do x, y, z we will trigger article 50" without actually doing it. How is that different from what you describe?

You'll have to help me out here, I've seen documents that are claimed to be "Article 50" posted online which are just about less than page of writing, which incidentally seems very short and simple for what is alleged to be such a bureaucratic organization. Is that all there is to article 50? If so, I didn't see any statement that said that once article 50 is invoked, it can never be stopped under any circumstances.

1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.

2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.

3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.

4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.

A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

5. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49.

Checked it myself, article 50 only has 5 paragraphs

And it's solely about leave negotiations.

Note how they say they say "taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union.". They're probably going to include some really really nasty conditions for the UK.

 

[Luniticisi]

I am quite curious about how it's actually going to unfold though. The referendum isn't binding, it will - I believe - likely require a Parliamentary vote to invoke Article 50.

So how would the mostly pro-Remain Parliament vote to Leave? Does everyone vote in accordance with how their constituency voted in the referendum? Or do all MPs vote for invoking Article 50? Could we see more resignations, from pro-Remain MPs who don't want to vote to Leave?

quite possibly, but David Cameron has said that he will submit Article 50 .. and has said that the vote should be respected and followed as the UK has voted. I'd say that it is inevitable that the UK leaves the EU .. but you are right.. it's gonna be interesting.

 

[Minonian]

The trade will cut back a lot during the next decade.

After a leave you would lose every trade agreement. Even the ones with non EU states since their negotiated over the EU. Except for the commonwealth but I know nearly nothing about it so I can't really discuss it.

What pretty much means immediate economical collapse, on the top of the current political upheaval. Ans since the EU don't want him to make the leaving procedure too long they are pretty much going to lose everything.

 

[Luniticisi]

What pretty much means immediate economical collapse, on the top of the current political upheaval. Ans since the EU don't want him to make the leaving procedure too long they are pretty much going to lose everything.

I seriously doubt this. Of course there is a possibility that something like this can happen .. but there is also a possibility, in my view a stronger one than losing everything, that the UK will ride out the storm and be just fine .. one thing the UK is good at is survival.

 

[Becks]

What pretty much means immediate economical collapse, on the top of the current political upheaval. Ans since the EU don't want him to make the leaving procedure too long they are pretty much going to lose everything.

I seriously doubt this. Of course there is a possibility that something like this can happen .. but there is also, in my view a stronger one than losing everything, that the UK will ride out the storm and be just fine .. one thing the UK is good at is survival.

It will be very bad but not that bad

But it will take a very long time until the UK is on the pre Brexit level again after the leave. There is so much stuff to do.

Like I already said, all your trade deals, except for the commonwealth stuff, which I don't really know anything about, will be terminated since they've been negotiated by and through the EU.

Edit: I guess your politicians will find a way to calm the EU down. The relationship was stained during the Brexit campaigns but you can't afford to lose the EU as a trading partner. After all they buy 43% of your exports and provide you with goods you can't produce yourself. And they're still the worlds biggest trading bloc directly in front of your door. It would be simply mad to not try and strike a deal with the EU afterwards to whatever conditions.

Prices in the UK are going to rise, the GDP will fall as the trade declines ... I guess the UK just entered the state "civil unrest"

 

[Remus]

Prices in the UK are going to rise, the GDP will fall as the trade declines ... I guess the UK just entered the state "civil unrest"

You are being nice, I thought that the "revolt" state had allready been reached.

You know, with London asking with for independence, the scotts having a new voting for independence, gibraltar seemingly being given to spain, etc...

 

[Lianachan]

I'll just take Scottish independence I think. I've wanted that all of my life, even before it ever seemed like a realistic aspiration.

 

[Minonian]

I seriously doubt this. Of course there is a possibility that something like this can happen .. but there is also a possibility, in my view a stronger one than losing everything, that the UK will ride out the storm and be just fine .. one thing the UK is good at is survival.

You guys also doubted there will be any consequence of the quitting. And here they are right on the middle of your face. Mark my word it will happen.

 

[Luniticisi]

You guys also doubted there will be any consequence of the quitting. And here they are right on the middle of your face. Mark my word it will happen.

anyone who thought there would be no consequences, or a drop in the economy after a vote like this were/are deluded.. it was inevitable .. you can't take a risk like this and expect not effect the economy .. that's the thing .. the UK has taken a risk and should be applauded for doing so .. if you don't take risks, you wont get change. You have to take a shot in order to hit something.

 

[Minonian]

anyone who thought there would be no consequences, or a drop in the economy after a vote like this were/are deluded.. it was inevitable .. you can't take a risk like this and expect not effect the economy .. that's the thing .. the UK has taken a risk and should be applauded for doing so .. if you don't take risks, you wont get change. You have to take a shot in order to hit something.

Yeah... The problem is no one said that from the brexites. they said there will be no consequence, and everything despite the facts early warning, and predictions is doomsaying.

Edit; They never said hey this is going to be hard, but we can make it. they said no danger at all. What means they are lied.

 

[Luniticisi]

Yeah... The problem is no one said that from the brexites. they said there will be no consequence, and everything despite the facts early warning, and predictions is doomsaying.

Edit; They never said hey this is going to be hard, but we can make it. they said no danger at all. What means they are lied.

Like I said, anyone who thought that there would be no consequences were idiots, it was inevitable . Everybody who voted had the same opportunity as I did to check their facts .. there is no excuse for people who prefer to be told what to think rather than finding out the facts themselves.

as to your edit, most politicians mislead.

 

[Minonian]

Like I said, anyone who thought that there would be no consequences were idiots, it was inevitable . Everybody who voted had the same opportunity as I did to check their facts .. there is no excuse for people who prefer to be told what to think rather than finding out the facts themselves.

as to your edit, most politicians mislead.

The problem is, if all you can hear is propaganda and lies there is no way to see, or check the facts. Not for the most of us, but we are very susceptible to fearmongering, and xenophobia, like they did. these are easy tools but disgusting ones. They are basically, play in to our mistrust, and fears.

Well, i say general caution is necessary, especially for the part of the EU but xenophobia, fearmongering and racism? Out of question!

 

[Luniticisi]

The problem is, if all you can hear is propaganda and lies there is no way to see, or check the facts. Not for the most of us, but we are very susceptible to fearmongering, and xenophobia, like they did. these are easy tools but disgusting ones. They are basically, play in to our mistrust, and fears.

Well, i say general caution is necessary, especially for the part of the EU but xenophobia, fearmongering and racism? Out of question!

Somehow, I managed it .. the fact is, if you can read, you can check facts .. and let me assure you that racists and xenophobes definitely voted on both sides of this vote.

 

[Arry]

Somehow, I managed it .. the fact is, if you can read, you can check facts .. and let me assure you that racists and xenophobes definitely voted on both sides of this vote.

This is a bit of an high minded attitude you have here. Agreed, anyone can check the facts, but not just anyone can find them or; most importantly. Know that these details, are in fact, the truth, or facts. Considering that a percentage of the public, genuinely want to believe their local polition, (a smaller percentage after this of course). The first question is; who do you believe? You know, that just because something, claims, to be independent, does not make it a fact.

 

[Minonian]

Somehow, I managed it .. the fact is, if you can read, you can check facts .. and let me assure you that racists and xenophobes definitely voted on both sides of this vote.

Well... This is how the world goes. Most of the people rather belíve the ones he follow instead of thinking. I don't like it. And this kind of leaders, and people the reason, why democracy sometimes a bad idea. Ok bad... Approach lets say instead rules are necessary, so as a leader who keep contact with the world, but can act outside of the so called box of democracy. Because to be entirely honest? The people not always know better. And neither the leader. so the democratic rules are necessary to keep in check the leader. This is a 2 way road i guess. And it must be.

 

[Luniticisi]

This is a bit of an high minded attitude you have here. Agreed, anyone can check the facts, but not just anyone can find them or; most importantly. Know that these details, are in fact, the truth, or facts. Considering that a percentage of the public, genuinely want to believe their local polition, (a smaller percentage after this of course). The first question is; who do you believe? You know, that just because something, claims, to be independent, does not make it a fact.

I agree to some some extent that my view could be seen as high minded, but on the other hand believing everything you are told is a fools road. I understand that some people need to be told their facts, and agree that the people stating these these facts should be telling the truth .. but the issue is, they don't. and people should be aware that they are not always told the truth and should look into the issue themselves.

 

[Arry]

I agree to some some extent that my view could be seen as high minded, but on the other hand believing everything you are told is a fools road. I understand that some people need to be told their facts, and agree that the people stating these these facts should be telling the truth .. but the issue is, they don't. and people should be aware that they are not always told the truth and should look into the issue themselves.

Liars don't have it tattooed on their foreheads. We can only know by finding out for ourselves, or possibly, being told by others. Strange thing is, politicians, are not allowed to publicly call each other liars, no matter how big the lie, being told.