DS Forums

 
 

Respecting the 48 per cent


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-12-2016, 00:40
andykn
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 37,581
Had we voted to stay in the EU by 52 to 48 we would have stayed in the EU.
The rest of the EU would have taken it as notification that the British Government no longer had a mandate to stall, negotiate opt-outs and generally be a pain as they had been for the last 40 years. They would have seen it as the end of British resistance to further integration and continued on their path with renewed vigour.
That is patently untrue as to even get elected Cameron had to promise to negotiate further opt outs.

This sounds just like another Turkey will join the EU the day after the referendum flimflam.
andykn is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 08-12-2016, 00:42
andykn
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 37,581
They were all part of the new deal that was being voted on anyway. How on earth can they be a compromise with the Leave position?
I have no idea what you're on about. What was part off the "new deal"? The Euro? Seriously?
andykn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2016, 00:43
andykn
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 37,581
I have yet to hear how the Leave side would have been afforded any compromise if the vote had gone the other way. Would we have partially come out, repatriated more powers than agreed by Cameron, had greater restrictions than negotiated on FOM?
We would have not integrated further.
andykn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2016, 00:54
thenetworkbabe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,231
I keep hearing from the Remain camp that we must respect the wishes of the 48 per cent who wanted to remain in the EU.

I have still to find anyone who will tell me how that would have worked had the result of the referendum been reversed. How would the wishes of the 48 per cent who wanted to leave the EU have been respected in those circumstances?

Would it have meant withdrawing to the EEA, for example?
Like most of the noise coming from Labour and the Liberals its nonsensical. At least till the 48% become the 52% - and probably till its 60-40 Rejoin - which will take someway into the 2020's.

The reality of the referendum is that

You have to leave the EU
You have to establsih some form of national immigration control - which doesn't necessarily mean reductions in numbers.
You probably need to restore your ability at some point to make your own trade treaties
You have to remove European court jurisdiction.

Beyond that, the plan is blindingly obvious - take the best economic deal you can get .

The only sense that you can Leave, and meet the demands of the Remainers, is to reject the total isolationist, xenophobic, rightwing, view, to cut all ties.

But May isn't going to try for that anyway

And if we do end up there , it will be because thats all the Europeans wll give us.
thenetworkbabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2016, 08:44
clinch
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,626
Now is the time for smugness. Enjoy it.

The country is split down the middle. When the damage starts to be truly done, the loathing will increase.

That so many couldn't give two figs about the unity of the country just reveals their utter arrogance. It will come back to bite them on the arse, be of no doubt.
The country is split on this issue and many others whether in our out of the EU. Why do you think we would be any less split by ignoring the will of the majority and remaining in?
clinch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2016, 09:44
Talma
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,176
We would have not integrated further.
You can't guarantee what a future government would or wouldn't agree to.
Talma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2016, 09:51
eggchen
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,599
Really? Try this?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cl-HTQVWgAE5oEG.jpg
And some genuine tweets:
... how long till enough old people die to erase #Brexit majority? Has anyone worked that out?
What's sad is that old people who will mostly die in the next 2-5 minutes had such a big impact on a future they will never see.
#Brexit: Proof that old racist people can burn everything down and then die before it really has anything to do with them.
Dear old people who voted brexit to "Get My Country Back". You can die now, your job is done, the young are f*d. Don't let us detain you
thanks for screwing us over, old people. we won't forget when it's time to choose which care home you'll die in
Young people big on ideals but low on life experience have always been the same, and have always had the same contempt for seniors. C'est la vie.
eggchen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2016, 10:00
Hazy Davy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 239
That is patently untrue as to even get elected Cameron had to promise to negotiate further opt outs.

This sounds just like another Turkey will join the EU the day after the referendum flimflam.
It certainly wasn't meant to be. I do thing had we voted to remain even by a margin of one vote such is the Commission's way of thinking about democracy that they would have taken it as a green light to carry on as before but with the British view that they need opt outs because the British public wouldn't wear it as nullified. They would have seen it as support for their project, both the political and economic elements.

I was largely agreeing with the opening poster that if remain had won there would be next to no concessions to the leave voters. This would be because the other 27 countries would not see the need to make such concessions.
Hazy Davy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2016, 10:04
Ash_M1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Love The Beeb! PROUD Remoaner!
Posts: 11,229
Funny that nobody incorporated the wants and wishes of those who didn't want to be in the EU. 100% didn't vote to remain in 75 and there was no compromise deal then.

What makes you and the other disgruntled remainers so special now.
The fact that there hasn't been further integration on the part of the UK means we have had constant compromise since.

It was right to go in in '75, it is right to continue a very close relationship with the EU going forward for the benefit of jobs, trade and the prosperity of the nation.
Ash_M1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2016, 10:08
Ash_M1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Love The Beeb! PROUD Remoaner!
Posts: 11,229
I have yet to hear how the Leave side would have been afforded any compromise if the vote had gone the other way. Would we have partially come out, repatriated more powers than agreed by Cameron, had greater restrictions than negotiated on FOM?
All this 'if the vote had gone the other way' business is irrelevant. Not sure why Leavers are continually trotting out this one. Regardless really of what Leavers think, the future of our country is at stake. We must get this right for the benefit of all of us. The country mustn't be left to Brexit Extremists who, frankly, want to bring the country down.
Ash_M1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2016, 10:47
MARTYM8
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 40,361
Young people big on ideals but low on life experience have always been the same, and have always had the same contempt for seniors. C'est la vie.
It was be comforting to these supposedly young progressive liberal types that they align with Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Ryanair and the IMF to support staying in an institution that by its policies including the Euro has created mass youth unemployment across much of Europe.

Perhaps they need they need their own little bubble like 'progressive Americans' are planning. Let's just put a bubble over Islington and Camden and they can all move there!

https://youtu.be/vKOb-kmOgpI
MARTYM8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2016, 10:53
alan29
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 20,498
It was be comforting to these supposedly young progressive liberal types that they align with Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Ryanair and the IMF to support staying in an institution that by its policies including the Euro has created mass youth unemployment across much of Europe.
So its not multinationals moving labour to where its cheapest then?
And its not European companies importing products because home grown is dearer?
And its not the market for low-skilled jobs shrivelling to nothing because of the changing nature of work?
Its all the fault of the eurocrats.
You live and learn.
I'm sure the UK will be able to hold back the deluge single-handed.
alan29 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2016, 11:54
Blairdennon
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 12,766
We would have not integrated further.
We voted on whether to stay in the EU with Cameron's new deal which included not integrating further, no Euro, limitations on benefits etc etc or to leave. Remainers voted for the new deal, Leavers voted no to the new deal. I am asking what compromise would have been given to Leavers if they had lost. No further integration, no Euro, limitations on benefits were what Remain voted for so that would not have been a compromise that would just have been Remain having their way. Compromise means giving Leavers something, everyone says they would have got something, what was that?
Blairdennon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2016, 12:00
Blairdennon
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 12,766
All this 'if the vote had gone the other way' business is irrelevant. Not sure why Leavers are continually trotting out this one. Regardless really of what Leavers think, the future of our country is at stake. We must get this right for the benefit of all of us. The country mustn't be left to Brexit Extremists who, frankly, want to bring the country down.
Of course it is irrelevant but not when many Remainers trot out the line that if the vote had gone the other way there would have been compromise. I have yet to hear how in any meaningful way?
Blairdennon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2016, 12:08
blueblade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,237
A majority of eligible voters DID NOT back brexit.
A majority of eligible voters do not back any given elected government either. How should they be "respected"?
blueblade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2016, 13:01
andykn
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 37,581
Of course it is irrelevant but not when many Remainers trot out the line that if the vote had gone the other way there would have been compromise. I have yet to hear how in any meaningful way?
You already have the compromise, no Schengen, no Euro, and all the other opt-outs.
andykn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2016, 13:03
allaorta
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 18,881
The fact that there hasn't been further integration on the part of the UK means we have had constant compromise since.

It was right to go in in '75, it is right to continue a very close relationship with the EU going forward for the benefit of jobs, trade and the prosperity of the nation.
We didn't "go in" in 1975, we were already in.
allaorta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2016, 13:07
trunkster
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,968
I have yet to hear how the Leave side would have been afforded any compromise if the vote had gone the other way. Would we have partially come out, repatriated more powers than agreed by Cameron, had greater restrictions than negotiated on FOM?
Because Remain couldn't offer any compromise over something they had no say in or control over - see the pathetic "deal" offered to Cameron earlier on in the year.
trunkster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2016, 13:10
Jayceef1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Kent
Posts: 3,055
We didn't "go in" in 1975, we were already in.
It should also be remembered that back in that day information was much harder to come by (no internet or social media etc.). People were also much more trustful of what we were told by politicians. Nowadays we have much more knowledge of events and are much more questioning of politicians and can make much more informed judgements on major decisions such as this.
Jayceef1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2016, 13:27
allaorta
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 18,881
It should also be remembered that back in that day information was much harder to come by (no internet or social media etc.). People were also much more trustful of what we were told by politicians. Nowadays we have much more knowledge of events and are much more questioning of politicians and can make much more informed judgements on major decisions such as this.
1975 was the moment to get consent to remain. We'd not long changed governments, we'd been through the three day week and we weren't the happiest nation in the world.

On top of that, Wilson had considerable EEC dissent within his own party and need to sort it out; what better way than a referendum?

Not that it changed much, we continued to have problems well into the eighties and we still have problems in 2016, huge problems.
allaorta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2016, 13:32
Hazy Davy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 239
Of course it is irrelevant but not when many Remainers trot out the line that if the vote had gone the other way there would have been compromise. I have yet to hear how in any meaningful way?
There wouldn't have been new compromise in any meaningful way. Any compromise would require agreement with the other 27 which they would not see the need to give. They don't want to change the rules of their club. So the UK government would not be able to give meaningful concessions even if it wanted to.

But that doesn't mean that there shouldn't be compromise as leave won. Leave voted for a system where the Government maybe able to give concessions as its negotiating a new relationship between the UK and rEU rather than trying to change the internal rules of the EU club.

From 24th June everything started to change. We are no longer leavers and remainers. We are people in a country that needs a new relationship with our neighbour. That neighbour not being 27 countries separately but the EU as the EU states only negotiate commercial relationships as a bloc.

What relationship we try to get should depend on what we believe is in our best interests which, as we all have different personal interests, has to be done by Government. If they get it mostly wrong they risk getting kicked out at the next election.

But its about what's in the interest of all of us not just those who voted in a particular way on 23 June. That poll may give strong indications of what type of relationship people would like and the Government has to try to find a way forward that best fits for 100% of those that voted (and even those that didn't vote - although its probably safe to assume that most of those don't care much either way).

The idea that we voted one way and so we should get everything we want died on 24th June as its no longer about staying or leaving, its about what the new relationship should be.
Hazy Davy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2016, 13:41
Alrightmate
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,796
The views of the people who voted to leave certainly weren't respected by many of those who voted remain before the result came in. They were accused of being thick, uneducated, racist, and xenophobic. And some of them are still at it right now.

So how can any of those people demand their views to be respected when they are far from showing respect to the people who voted leave?

I'll give respect if people deserve it, that's just the way I am. But I don't see how anyone can make demands of me to show them respect when I've been called racist and all manner of horrible names just because my opinions didn't accord with their own.

Most people will get an automatic respect from me. But I think that the remain people whose views I will respect won't be the ones who are literally demanding for people to have respect for their views. Some of those views are just plain toxic and divisive and I refuse to respect the views of those people who have expressed those views. The people who voted remain who are quite decent and reasonable and just didn't happen to see things the same way I did don't even have to ask for my respect.
Alrightmate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2016, 14:10
Payne by name
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London
Posts: 2,533
We would have not integrated further.
How do you know that?
Payne by name is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2016, 16:38
Blairdennon
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 12,766
You already have the compromise, no Schengen, no Euro, and all the other opt-outs.
??? That is what you voted for to Remain, if you won that is what you would have. How would compromise be reached with the Leave position which did not want to accept any of that.
The Tories had already won an election on the basis that the EU was not working for us with the existing opt outs.
Blairdennon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2016, 16:53
Blairdennon
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 12,766
There wouldn't have been new compromise in any meaningful way. Any compromise would require agreement with the other 27 which they would not see the need to give. They don't want to change the rules of their club. So the UK government would not be able to give meaningful concessions even if it wanted to.

But that doesn't mean that there shouldn't be compromise as leave won. Leave voted for a system where the Government maybe able to give concessions as its negotiating a new relationship between the UK and rEU rather than trying to change the internal rules of the EU club.

From 24th June everything started to change. We are no longer leavers and remainers. We are people in a country that needs a new relationship with our neighbour. That neighbour not being 27 countries separately but the EU as the EU states only negotiate commercial relationships as a bloc.

What relationship we try to get should depend on what we believe is in our best interests which, as we all have different personal interests, has to be done by Government. If they get it mostly wrong they risk getting kicked out at the next election.

But its about what's in the interest of all of us not just those who voted in a particular way on 23 June. That poll may give strong indications of what type of relationship people would like and the Government has to try to find a way forward that best fits for 100% of those that voted (and even those that didn't vote - although its probably safe to assume that most of those don't care much either way).

The idea that we voted one way and so we should get everything we want died on 24th June as its no longer about staying or leaving, its about what the new relationship should be.
So no compromise with the Leave position then if Remain had won, not only unwilling but also unable without agreement from 27 other countries which it is widely believed would not be forthcoming as regards concessions. At least we got there in the end.

I agree the government have to get it right, I am not averse to compromise however some seem to think that compromise is basically accepting all that Remain wanted.
We have already accepted in a general election that the EU was not working in our interests, if 'Leaving' means just accepting Cameron's deal without EU membership it will be an interesting general election in 2020. If it means accepting less than Cameron's deal then that is what the country has already rejected twice in a general election and in a referendum.
Blairdennon is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:41.