Brexit, for once some facts.

[trex]

the small margin indicates that the choice is easily reversed in a future referendum or general election.
the brexit camp tries at all cost to avoid consulting the public views, either through polls or parliament debates because they don't think they can win debates or votes. To me, that is a clear indication that brexit will soon fail.

 

[Kudoscycles]

Derv.....I think that most of us suppliers don't want to increase prices even if our cost prices have risen by 18%.
As long as I am selling current stock bought at a 1.45 dollar v pound I am able to hold prices.
On new product I look at the actual increase in cost price and add same to the retail price,so that the actual profit is maintained rather than the percentage. This means in most cases that the percentage price increase is more like 10% than 18%
It softens the increase somewhat.
In the Guardian on-line comments I have seen a change of attitude to the form of Brexit,most now realise that hard Brexit will destroy us and as a good ol British compromise favour a soft Brexit,many are coming round to the thought of scrapping it completely.
The problem is I don't think the EU will give us a soft Brexit so it's going to be hard or stay.
Hammond was brave to stand up to Theresa May but other members of the cabinet are now siding with him including Rudd,Greening,Damian Green....these people were May supporters so there has obviously been a seismic shift in the cabinet. May must be concerned,she knows that hard Brexit will bring the country down and she will have an internal fight within the Tory's but no Brexit will bring her down....I think it will all unravel over the next few days,she must be tempted to sack Hammond but that would probably also bring her down.
It reminds me of an episode of Yes Minister....'Humphrey,I can't tell that to parliament.......but it's the truth PM.....I don't want the truth I just need something to get me out of this mess...tell them you have set up an enquiry....by the time it reports everyone will have forgotten about it '
KudosDave

 

[shemozzle999]

the small margin indicates that the choice is easily reversed in a future referendum or general election.
the brexit camp tries at all cost to avoid consulting the public views, either through polls or parliament debates because they don't think they can win debates or votes. To me, that is a clear indication that brexit will soon fail.

not an election but they can find a majority in a free to choose non political referendum

don't blame it on the politicians they only had 650 votes.

 

[trex]

...
they only had 650 votes.

inside or out of parliament, brexiters are clearly fearful of a second referendum. Johnson has already pointed out, brexit leads to economic shock (also clearly demonstrated by the devaluation of the Pound, a brexit tax) and likely break-up of the UK. Johnson knew this (at least as risks) and yet chose to play the nativist card. I don't have a problem with 'nativism' but it leads to xenophobia and these movements are dangers to modern systems of government.

 

[oldgroaner]

I ponder the obvious question: just what do the people who voted for Brexit now expect will happen to their dream?
Quite clearly just about everything they thought they were going to get is either unaffordable or simply impractical, not even over a period of years, as the only way we could begin to make our way would be to become as expert at running our affairs and investments in industry as Germany.
Is there a single person who actually believes that (while possible) is going to happen?
The greed of the investor class killed that notion when they put their money into China and the Far East.
And irony of ironies, German factories rely heavily on migrant labour.

 

[trex]

with hindsight, there should have been at least one second question in the last referendum, should the UK leave the Single Market.
Maybe it's time for a second referendum.

 

[tillson]

Just as a point of interest, if a second referendum was held and the result was the same, then what?

Would we then have a third referendum? A forth? Or what about a fifth?

Do we stop holding referendums when, eventually, we get a remain vote? How is that fair?

If this is going to be in any way revisited for a second decision, it has to be by way of general election. No other form of ballot is fair or credible under the circumstances that we now find ourselves in.

 

[mike killay]

Prime Ministers listen too much to voters, complains EU's Juncker

Prime Ministers must stop listening so much to their voters and instead act as “full time Europeans”, according to Jean-Claude Juncker.

Elected leaders are making life “difficult” because they spend too much time thinking about what they can get out of EU and kowtowing to public opinion, rather than working on “historic” projects such as the Euro, he said.

 

[derf]

Just as a point of interest, if a second referendum was held and the result was the same, then what?

Would we then have a third referendum? A forth? Or what about a fifth?

Do we stop holding referendums when, eventually, we get a remain vote? How is that fair?

If this is going to be in any way revisited for a second decision, it has to be by way of general election. No other form of ballot is fair or credible under the circumstances that we now find ourselves in.

just as a further point of interest, this wasn't the first referendum about EU membership. Why didn't we stop with the previous ones in favour of membership (instead of trying to use the country and its economy to try to help Cameron appease the tory right wing by having this further one)

 

[tillson]

just as a further point of interest, this wasn't the first referendum about EU membership. Why didn't we stop with the previous ones in favour of membership (instead of trying to use the country and its economy to try to help Cameron appease the tory right wing by having this further one)

Well I suppose what was voted for 40+ years ago is not the same thing as we have today.

So, I guess what you are saying is that this comes down to the frequency of subsequent referendums. Since the spacing between the first referendum and the latest, held in June, was 43 years, I think 16 weeks between the second and a proposed third is a bit too soon.

It still doesn't answer my question regarding what to do if another referendum returned the same result. What do we do in those circumstances?

As I say, I think the political parties need to nail their colours to the mast, state exactly where they stand on EU membership and what they intend to do if elected. Then call a general election.

My main concern is that May's heart isn't in BREXIT but she will unwillingly press on without enthusiasm because she thinks it will make her electable. That's not the right approach, we need someone fully committed to BREXIT.

 

[gray198]

just as a further point of interest, this wasn't the first referendum about EU membership. Why didn't we stop with the previous ones in favour of membership (instead of trying to use the country and its economy to try to help Cameron appease the tory right wing by having this further one)

Maybe it's because there has been such a transfer of powers since the last referendum when it was supposedly just about a common market. The politicians have been quick to say that any major transfer of powers would require a referendum, although there wasn't one regarding the last two major treaties. Maybe this was long overdue and our leaders knew it had to come. We are definitely going to feel some pain from it but nobody knows how much and maybe that saying ''no pain no gain '' may be applicable here. No matter how you try and distort the result a majority of the UK decided they wanted to leave the EU and remove the control they have over us. People will have voted that way for different reasons, as will the ones who voted to remain but if it's felt you can just ignore a democratic vote because the result is not to your liking, what's the point of voting. Please don't say we were lied to. We are lied to at every election. Please don't say they don't have a mandate. When has that ever stopped politicians. I know the ones that are posting on a regular basis on here don't like May and the conservatives. I am not overly fond, but I would like to know what the alternatives are. The EU has definitely done a lot of good for this country and we have been good for them, but they have tried to grow too fast and in the process caused a lot of problems. The time has come for a change. Question is. Are our politicians up to it after having the comfort blanket of the Eu for so long. I guess only time will tell

 

[flecc]

I don't remember any box requiring me to give a reason for my vote so how can you know why the leavers voted the way they did without asking all 17 million of them.

Given all the comments received from the public thoughout, one would have to be very dumb not to know that the major issues for Brexiters were getting back sovereignty and immigration control.

When questioned about the purpose of the desired sovereignty, it was quickly revealed that a major purpose was to control our borders. In other words, also about immigration.

Clearly immigration in various disguises was the overwhelming issue. The other sovereignty issue of being able to make our own laws was a rather distant runner up in comments.

That's how I know.
.

 

[anotherkiwi]

The EU grew too fast because the UK pushed for it for years. I wonder why? Would it have anything to do with weakening the influence of some of the other countries? Was it a mandate from Washington D.C.?

 

[derf]

Maybe it's because there has been such a transfer of powers since the last referendum when it was supposedly just about a common market. The politicians have been quick to say that any major transfer of powers would require a referendum, although there wasn't one regarding the last two major treaties. Maybe this was long overdue and our leaders knew it had to come. We are definitely going to feel some pain from it but nobody knows how much and maybe that saying ''no pain no gain '' may be applicable here. No matter how you try and distort the result a majority of the UK decided they wanted to leave the EU and remove the control they have over us. People will have voted that way for different reasons, as will the ones who voted to remain but if it's felt you can just ignore a democratic vote because the result is not to your liking, what's the point of voting. Please don't say we were lied to. We are lied to at every election. Please don't say they don't have a mandate. When has that ever stopped politicians. I know the ones that are posting on a regular basis on here don't like May and the conservatives. I am not overly fond, but I would like to know what the alternatives are. The EU has definitely done a lot of good for this country and we have been good for them, but they have tried to grow too fast and in the process caused a lot of problems. The time has come for a change. Question is. Are our politicians up to it after having the comfort blanket of the Eu for so long. I guess only time will tell

very broadly I sort of agree with some of what you say: some change to the relationship with the EU (who has done a very great deal for us) without leaving altogether would have been good. But that's not on offer anymore (Cameron failed to convince the public of that mandate). We've painted ourselves into a corner by appeasing a very right wing section of the electorate. The choice has become to leave the common market altogether or not. From the EU's perspective this is really just a waiting game, they hold all the cards (the UK has a snowball's chance in hell of surviving outside the common market, international investors know this, hence the devaluation of the pound as they sell sterling based assets and the BoE tries to shore things up). All the EU has to do is what Junckers did, which is to insist that it's leave altogether or not. Our current politicians (Boris, may etc) are not up to anything, with or without comfort blankets, or anything else. Most of all they are not up to making any kind of success of brexit (if that were possible, which it is not). the reality is that the pound will continue to devalue until this becomes unbearable via inflation and price rises after which there will be change to a more pro EU set of politicians.

 

[oldgroaner]

Well I suppose what was voted for 40+ years ago is not the same thing as we have today.

So, I guess what you are saying is that this comes down to the frequency of subsequent referendums. Since the spacing between the first referendum and the latest, held in June, was 43 years, I think 16 weeks between the second and a proposed third is a bit too soon.

It still doesn't answer my question regarding what to do if another referendum returned the same result. What do we do in those circumstances?

As I say, I think the political parties need to nail their colours to the mast, state exactly where they stand on EU membership and what they intend to do if elected. Then call a general election.

My main concern is that May's heart isn't in BREXIT but she will unwillingly press on without enthusiasm because she thinks it will make her electable. That's not the right approach, we need someone fully committed to BREXIT.

What for tillson? what the heck is the point?
We need to emulate Germany to survive. and we can't, we have neither the will, experience and expertise or the money.
Our industry (what there is of it) even assuming the foreigners don't leave,only accounts for 20% of our income, and the London financial swindles will fail if the EU decides not to play ball and promotes another in EU focus.
We cant afford to honour the following promises
Protect our borders
Control immigration
Quickly negotiate worthwhile trade deals, and in any case, selling what?
Lower Taxation as promised, nor even keep it at the present level.
Come on now tillson, the idea was splendid, but it won't work.
Sorry

 

[flecc]

The EU grew too fast because the UK pushed for it for years. I wonder why? Would it have anything to do with weakening the influence of some of the other countries? Was it a mandate from Washington D.C.?

Yes. The USA has always disliked the tendency of France to be opposed to US influence and was aware of how Poland was disposed to be very friendly towards the USA.

John Major's pushing very hard for the former eastern bloc countries to be allowed into the EU was I'm sure on behalf of the USA, all part of our so called "Special Relationship" and it's continuation.

Of course we've blown that now with the referendum outcome which the USA strongly disagrees with. In US eyes the only thing special about us now is that we've been very naughty and deserve to be punished for it. Watch this space.
.

 

[Kudoscycles]

Just as a point of interest, if a second referendum was held and the result was the same, then what?

Would we then have a third referendum? A forth? Or what about a fifth?

Do we stop holding referendums when, eventually, we get a remain vote? How is that fair?

If this is going to be in any way revisited for a second decision, it has to be by way of general election. No other form of ballot is fair or credible under the circumstances that we now find ourselves in.

Tillson...as Trex has said a second referendum should be specifically about the economy and in particular the single market.
To try to find some common ground here...I think most people would like the idea of making and controlling our own laws...but I think Cameron was offered that in his pre vote deal.
I would also be sympathetic to controlling migration,but the government already has the power to control non EU migration and seems hopeless at that,so why do we trust them to control EU migration after Brexit. All the time the farmers say they couldnt product fresh produce without the EU labour and Jeremy Hunt had admitted that we need the best immigrants for the NHS and Sadiq Khan has said that the city of London needs special immigration access for top immigrants....we are only talking 180,000 per annum,hehe.
If you put tariff barriers between the UK and EU you will destroy our EU exports,I have done years of trade shows in the EU and am angry to see all that work written off.
Lets be honest Boris's 350 million to the NHS was a lie,those who voted that EU contributions would go to the NHS will not believe that and probably vote remain. The tally of Hammonds and Mays promises to compensate the farmers,the universities,the car assemblers etc are starting to exceed the total £11bn we pay to the EU,at present
The problem with a GE is that May will package it to suit herself,just like this Great Repeal Act has been packaged.
We have sight now of hard Brexit (specifically leaving the single market and losing our bank passporting)....let people vote on the single market and if it destroys our economy then at least we have all voted on it.
I dont think anyone voted in the first referendum to make us poorer.
If May and Davis are directed to continue leaving the EU but stay in the single market,that is what Boris has been telling us we can have,so let him get off his ....exercise his negotiating skills and prove it !!!
KudosDave

 

[derf]

What for tillson? what the heck is the point?
We need to emulate Germany to survive. and we can't, we have neither the will, experience and expertise or the money.
Our industry (what there is of it) even assuming the foreigners don't leave,only accounts for 20% of our income, and the London financial swindles will fail if the EU decides not to play ball and promotes another in EU focus.
We cant afford to honour the following promises
Protect our borders
Control immigration
Quickly negotiate worthwhile trade deals, and in any case, selling what?
Lower Taxation as promised, nor even keep it at the present level.
Come on now tillson, the idea was splendid, but it won't work.
Sorry

we need to emulate Germany in a world that already has a Germany, China, Korea. perhaps brexit is an ethical option if we're prepared to take up our rightful place in the world, without our "financial services", relying on what we can produce, perhaps really the "Albania option" with the UK increasingly becoming a country with Albania's standards of living etc

 

[Kudoscycles]

Just as a point of interest, if a second referendum was held and the result was the same, then what?

Would we then have a third referendum? A forth? Or what about a fifth?

Do we stop holding referendums when, eventually, we get a remain vote? How is that fair?

If this is going to be in any way revisited for a second decision, it has to be by way of general election. No other form of ballot is fair or credible under the circumstances that we now find ourselves in.

Tillson,do I detect a softening of your attitude to the legitimacy of the first referendum,even on other forums I have noted that there are a large number of Bregeters(just love these new words) who feel they were conned especially by Boris about what they were voting for,or more particularly what they ended up with.
KudosDave

 

[trex]

Just as a point of interest, if a second referendum was held and the result was the same, then what?

Would we then have a third referendum? A forth? Or what about a fifth?

Do we stop holding referendums when, eventually, we get a remain vote? How is that fair?

If this is going to be in any way revisited for a second decision, it has to be by way of general election. No other form of ballot is fair or credible under the circumstances that we now find ourselves in.

our future is not determined by you and me, but by about 60% of the membership of the conservative party, some 82,000 people who hold the power to choose the PM who then decides on her own where we are heading.

Is this democracy? no, it's not, by any measure.

If the voters can't agree that parliament should decide on this issue then a new referendum is the best option.