RobHawk Posted 27 March 2019 Posted 27 March 2019 We go again on Monday with another set of indicitive votes now knowing what today's result was. Today was always going to be stage 1 of the process and this faux shock that none have been accepted is ridiculous. The reason for a 2 step process is no one expected any of them to pass. But parliament in one day have got closer to agreeing something. Mays deal could only dream of getting 8 votes away from passing.
Guest Kopfkino Posted 27 March 2019 Posted 27 March 2019 Exactly the reason May kept kicking the can and produced a Political Declaration that continued to kick the can.
Carl the Llama Posted 27 March 2019 Posted 27 March 2019 Another day another shambles. Ditching the experts for the opinion of Greg and Judith in Lancashire has worked wonders
Guest MattP Posted 27 March 2019 Posted 27 March 2019 Just now, Mark_w said: Can we have another election yet? It's possible - problem is most in parliament don't really want that either
Grebfromgrebland Posted 27 March 2019 Posted 27 March 2019 Even if there was another election there's no party that stands for remain
Guest MattP Posted 27 March 2019 Posted 27 March 2019 2 minutes ago, Grebfromgrebland said: Even if there was another election there's no party that stands for remain SNP, Indy Group, Greens, Lib Dems and Plaid.
Beechey Posted 27 March 2019 Posted 27 March 2019 More Conservatives voted for CM2.0 than Customs Union or Second Referendum. Labour front bench apparently voted for it, but did not whip for it(had about 100 abstentions). I feel like it's still the option that allows for a majority, which I dont think any others will.
Guest MattP Posted 27 March 2019 Posted 27 March 2019 Just now, Beechey said: More Conservatives voted for CM2.0 than Customs Union or Second Referendum. Labour front bench apparently voted for it, but did not whip for it. I feel like it's still the option that allows for a majority, which I dont think any others will. Did you notice the DUP abstained from that vote as well?
Beechey Posted 27 March 2019 Posted 27 March 2019 4 minutes ago, MattP said: Did you notice the DUP abstained from that vote as well? Oh no I didn't see that, just learned 130 abstained actually. It's definitely the one that can win a majority if most of those who abstained turned out for it next time - Labour whip needed.
Guest MattP Posted 27 March 2019 Posted 27 March 2019 Maybe this could be the ballot paper for a second referendum... REMAIN (Euro, Schengen) REMAIN (EU Army) REMAIN (Associate) LEAVE Now see how ridiculous that is? That's how your idea looks to us.
Strokes Posted 27 March 2019 Posted 27 March 2019 1 minute ago, Beechey said: Please use commas. He is block capitals away from being a full blown gammon.
Captain... Posted 27 March 2019 Posted 27 March 2019 15 minutes ago, Strokes said: Why should remain be on the ballot when it’s already been defeated? Because it only needs 2% of leave voters to prefer remain to the options now on the table. Let’s consider May’s deal and no deal as the 2 options. Now the big sticking point in May’s deal is the backstop. That has a huge impact on NI where originally 350,000 voted leave in a 62% turnout. Do you think as many in NI would have voted leave knowing that it jeopardised peace and the open border with Ireland or their border with the rest of the UK. Knowing what Brexit means would change a lot of votes. Now if there was a deal on the table that didn’t jeopardise any of NI’s borders then the vote would probably be the same. I would imagine many NI brexiteers would want to leave the EU but would probably want to maintain their current borders more. So a choice between one or the other must be fair. If you put EFTA, Norway style agreement on the table then there is no need for remain, but until there is an option that doesn’t jeopardise the Irish borders that alone is a significant enough deviation from what was promised as a Brexit and what has been delivered that remain should still be on the ballot.
Strokes Posted 27 March 2019 Posted 27 March 2019 1 minute ago, Captain... said: Because it only needs 2% of leave voters to prefer remain to the options now on the table. Let’s consider May’s deal and no deal as the 2 options. Now the big sticking point in May’s deal is the backstop. That has a huge impact on NI where originally 350,000 voted leave in a 62% turnout. Do you think as many in NI would have voted leave knowing that it jeopardised peace and the open border with Ireland or their border with the rest of the UK. Knowing what Brexit means would change a lot of votes. Now if there was a deal on the table that didn’t jeopardise any of NI’s borders then the vote would probably be the same. I would imagine many NI brexiteers would want to leave the EU but would probably want to maintain their current borders more. So a choice between one or the other must be fair. If you put EFTA, Norway style agreement on the table then there is no need for remain, but until there is an option that doesn’t jeopardise the Irish borders that alone is a significant enough deviation from what was promised as a Brexit and what has been delivered that remain should still be on the ballot. Remain vs different versions of leave in a shoot out is not happening, are you all high?
Captain... Posted 27 March 2019 Posted 27 March 2019 5 minutes ago, Strokes said: Remain vs different versions of leave in a shoot out is not happening, are you all high? Whether it is happening or not doesn’t change my opinion that it should. If the terms of the deal result in just 2% switching from leave to remain, how is it not right to ask again? Why must we be bound to a deal that a majority do not want? How is that democracy?
Captain... Posted 27 March 2019 Posted 27 March 2019 2 minutes ago, Innovindil said: That isn't the point he and strokes are making, the point is there are different versions of remain. When we originally voted to join the eu, do you think the people at the time knew exactly what would happen? Did they get a say? Of course not. Which is why "remaining" might be an easy, reeeeeee answer, but it doesn't actually define what remaining in the eu will look like down the line. Isn’t there already something in place to say that any significant change to the terms of the EU will need a vote in the commons and could trigger a referendum?
Guest MattP Posted 27 March 2019 Posted 27 March 2019 3 minutes ago, Captain... said: Whether it is happening or not doesn’t change my opinion that it should. If the terms of the deal result in just 2% switching from leave to remain, how is it not right to ask again? Why must we be bound to a deal that a majority do not want? How is that democracy? Would the next vote to Remain come with the guarantee we are kept out of all the EU expansionist projects? If it's 52-48 Remain as well given you think that means we have to be asked again when would the third referendum be and what point do we stop having them?
Guest MattP Posted 27 March 2019 Posted 27 March 2019 3 minutes ago, Captain... said: Isn’t there already something in place to say that any significant change to the terms of the EU will need a vote in the commons and could trigger a referendum? Well that worked well with the Lisbon treaty.
Strokes Posted 27 March 2019 Posted 27 March 2019 1 minute ago, Captain... said: Whether it is happening or not doesn’t change my opinion that it should. It doesn’t change my opinion that it shouldn’t, If there is another referendum then it’s either leave vs remain. Or Types of leave pitted against each other. Anything else is an absolute affront to democracy. 1 minute ago, Captain... said: If the terms of the deal result in just 2% switching from leave to remain, how is it not right to ask again? We were never asked again after any of the treaties that have been signed either. So there is precedent. 1 minute ago, Captain... said: Why must we be bound to a deal that a majority do not want? How is that democracy? How many people wanted the Maastricht Treaty or the Lisbon treaty? Deals we have been and our bound too now.
Guest Kopfkino Posted 27 March 2019 Posted 27 March 2019 5 minutes ago, Captain... said: Isn’t there already something in place to say that any significant change to the terms of the EU will need a vote in the commons and could trigger a referendum? Well its been repealed now for the Withdrawal Act. But yeah European Union Act 2011 made it so quite a range of decisions needed approval by referendum before the Act of Parliament can be passed.
StanSP Posted 27 March 2019 Posted 27 March 2019 13 minutes ago, Strokes said: We are already leaving the European Union and parliament has the power to decide how. Glad we cleared all this mess up. Parliament aren't really deciding anything these days though
Strokes Posted 27 March 2019 Posted 27 March 2019 Just now, StanSP said: Parliament aren't really deciding anything these days though By not deciding we leave with no deal. They did vote and enshrine that into law (unless I’m mistaken), albeit a while back.
Captain... Posted 27 March 2019 Posted 27 March 2019 5 minutes ago, Strokes said: It doesn’t change my opinion that it shouldn’t, If there is another referendum then it’s either leave vs remain. Or Types of leave pitted against each other. Anything else is an absolute affront to democracy. We were never asked again after any of the treaties that have been signed either. So there is precedent. How many people wanted the Maastricht Treaty or the Lisbon treaty? Deals we have been and our bound too now. I’ll take a leave vs remain vote once the terms of the deal is agreed. Seeing as parliament are going round in circles I would also be happy with same set of indicative votes put to the public, or a series of votes with the least popular option removed until we have a majority. I am not saying remain vs May’s deal vs No deal most votes win as that would be an affront to democracy. There is a fair way of determining exactly what the country wants by referendum I don’t see why people are so opposed to it.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.