Brexit thread - what happens next

do_ron_ron · 26 Jun 2016 at 12:32

dowie said:
and they won't...

this whole 'it isn't legally binding' nonsense is again delusional rubbish, we've voted out and we're leaving that much is simple

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...ng-brexit-lisbon-cameron-sovereign-parliament

A Leave paper

http://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...g-what-Article-50-legal-process-Britain-leave

http://www.theweek.co.uk/eu-referendum/73775/is-the-eu-referendum-result-legally-binding

You should read up a bit before posting nonsense.

Caged · 26 Jun 2016 at 12:33

dowie said:
perhaps jobs and local industry were more important to some people than some shiny new football pitches and bits of other local infrastructure spending

I dunno JSA + nice football pitch and new motorway vs still having a successful local fishing industry, steel plant etc.. or not having wages driven down so much thanks to the cheap availability of migrant EU workers (of course the middle class Guardian readers have told them several times that it is very racist of them to complain about that)

I don't think it was an either/or option though. If the EU hadn't bought the shiny things then it's not like post-1970s governments would have been supporting industry in the area and guaranteeing higher salaries.

Edrof · 26 Jun 2016 at 12:34

ColdAsIce said:
Was the article from the Guardian posted earlier?

Guardian Article

Really don't know what the hell the people of Wales were thinking :|

Whether you're Remain or Leave, it should be easy to see that article is laden with bias. It takes one source (conjecture by a local woman) and applies it to an entire population. Stop believing what's written in newspapers!

Vtec9k · 26 Jun 2016 at 12:34

String said:
That would be like Wales blocking Scottish independence if that particular referendum had actually went her way.

She's lost the plot.

Irony....

Why shouldn't a country, within in a larger bloc, be able to veto legislation that is deemed harmful?

Leavers - "we need to leave the EU because they bully us"
Leavers - "we want to bully Scotland, why are they not just taking it?!"

dowie · 26 Jun 2016 at 12:35

the_r_sole said:
Having just watched an interview with her all she has said is that she doesn't have any answers at the moment because we are in uncharted territory - she was asked directly about the Westminster government requiring the permission of the scottish parliament to remove them from the EU and she did say she thought it looked like this permission was required and she would have to advise her party to vote whichever way was in the interest of their electorate - fairly straightforward tbh

Fair enough... they ought to have a second referendum given what has just changed... though I think it is perhaps a bit overconfident to assume that everyone puts the EU ahead of the UK

If they do vote to leave then so be it, maybe they should link up with Northern and the Republic of Ireland and slip into the EU that way if blocked by Spain

In fact given the anti democratic stance of the Spanish I really do hope their country gets split apart by the Catalonians and Basque regions after they turn into the next Greece

estebanrey · 26 Jun 2016 at 12:35

anticonscience said:
Sturgeon needs to **** off.

This is reaching comic levels of stupid now.

She's starting to remind me of Cercei from Game Of Thrones, going madder by the day fully unaware she doesn't have anywhere near the power she thinks she does. I can imagine when Article 50 is about to be invoked she'll be walking around Holyrood screaming "BURN THEM ALL, BURN THEM ALL"

Harlequin · 26 Jun 2016 at 12:35

I think we can assume the house will be quite packed tomorrow and be rather noisy!

Werewolf · 26 Jun 2016 at 12:36

Mauller said:
I don't see It being impartial due to the demonisation in the media towards any kind of anti eu sentiment. It has happened for the past two decades if not longer, while many things have been overlooked from the main parties. Etc

Erm much of the Media IS anti EU, just in case you've missed ever seeing the Sun, Mirror, Express, Daily mail for example.
I seem to remember a lot of headlines about "silly EU laws" or "EU bans.." when in reality the laws made sense when you actually read or knew anything of the background, and the "ban" was often nothing of the sort, or at the most guidance on making something more efficient/better so the ban on high power vacuum cleaners was really rules to push manufacturers to stop putting highly inefficient motors in them (I know I'd prefer a vacuum that had an 800 watt motor and cost an extra fiver than one that had a 2kw one and put out an extra 1100 watts in noise and heat).

The likes of the broadcast media had to be far more impartial and actually try to stick to reporting facts and what people said, so if Farage was saying something as fact they had to put someone on who could respond to it.
Whilst if Farage or UKIP were making idiots of themselves (again) they just reported that, in the same way they report about Labour and Conservative politicians making fools of themselves.
It's hardly the likes of the BBC or ITV's fault if UKIP has so many "characters" who can't work out that certain things don't go down well with the bulk of the public.

Sankari · 26 Jun 2016 at 12:36

Nate--IRL-- said:
I wouldn't have that I'm afraid, you could contact them and ask?

Nate

I'm challenging the assertion that they even exist. Do you have evidence for this?

Gilly · 26 Jun 2016 at 12:37

Mauller said:
I don't see It being impartial due to the demonisation in the media towards any kind of anti eu sentiment. It has happened for the past two decades if not longer, while many things have been overlooked from the main parties. Etc

I know how strongly you feel about it, but perhaps it isn't demonisation in the media, it's just deserved negativity? There are many facets on which the public were misled and they happen to be the core tenets of the reasons to vote Leave it would seem.

dowie · 26 Jun 2016 at 12:38

Caged said:
I don't think it was an either/or option though. If the EU hadn't bought the shiny things then it's not like post-1970s governments would have been supporting industry in the area and guaranteeing higher salaries.

I never mentioned anything about guaranteeing salaries.

Fact is if you're living in for example Cornwall and can watch some Spanish factory fishing vessel with a quota three time that of your local fleet sat off the coast while your town now has high unemployment then you're probably going to have rather negative thoughts of the EU

having the Guardian remind you that some EU money was used to build a few things locally (as per that article about Wales)is rather moot as you'd probably take having your local industry back over some EU cash being spent on infrastructure

ColdAsIce · 26 Jun 2016 at 12:39

dowie said:
perhaps jobs and local industry were more important to some people than some shiny new football pitches and bits of other local infrastructure spending

I dunno JSA + nice football pitch and new motorway vs still having a successful local fishing industry, steel plant etc.. or not having wages driven down so much thanks to the cheap availability of migrant EU workers (of course the middle class Guardian readers have told them several times that it is very racist of them to complain about that)

Our Government haven't got a stellar record of protecting industry and steel in particular do they?

Harlequin · 26 Jun 2016 at 12:40

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/heath-knew-policy-would-kill-fish-fleet-1-634422

SECRET papers, released today, have revealed how the Scottish fishing fleet was betrayed by the government 30 years ago to enable Britain to sign up to the controversial Common Fisheries Policy.

Prime Minister Edward Heath’s officials estimated that up to half the fishermen in Scottish waters - then 4,000 men - could lose their jobs, but the decision was taken to go ahead with plans to sign up because it was believed that the benefits to English and Welsh fishermen would outweigh the disadvantages in Scotland.

again check the date - not a recent article!

Nate--IRL-- · 26 Jun 2016 at 12:40

Evangelion said:
I'm challenging the assertion that they even exist. Do you have evidence for this?

Uh...yes... in the link you just quoted.

Nate

dowie · 26 Jun 2016 at 12:41

ColdAsIce said:
Our Government haven't got a stellar record of protecting industry and steel in particular do they?

what do you mean by that though?

again I'm not talking about guaranteeing salaries

protecting against cheap Chinese steel, having control of our own fisheries etc.. inherently protect those industries

Jokester · 26 Jun 2016 at 12:42

dowie said:
I never mentioned anything about guaranteeing salaries.

Fact is if you're living in for example Cornwall and can watch some Spanish factory fishing vessel with a quota three time that of your local fleet sat off the coast while your town now has high unemployment then you're probably going to have rather negative thoughts of the EU

having the Guardian remind you that some EU money was used to build a few things locally (as per that article about Wales)is rather moot as you'd probably take having your local industry back over some EU cash being spent on infrastructure

Indeed. It's the same as the Highlands, had millions spent on it - but it just looks like it went on building roads (by non-Highland businesses no doubt) and then stuck up some "Funded by the EU" signs.

do_ron_ron · 26 Jun 2016 at 12:42

estebanrey said:
I can't see it, even most hardened former remain campaigners are all pretty saying they accept the result. The ones saying the result should be ignored are tiny by comparison.

Even if every MP votes for what their constituency voted (so areas that voted remain have their MP vote to ignore the result and leave area MPs vote for it to be enacted) it would still pass.

Which is why I think they will kick it into the long grass and hold back on getting the thing started and then wait to see is any deal can be made. It is obvious that nobody in Govt. really expected this result and will fudging taking any action as long as possible.

Yamahahahahaha · 26 Jun 2016 at 12:44

do_ron_ron said:
Which is why I think they will kick it into the long grass and hold back on getting the thing started and then wait to see is any deal can be made. It is obvious that nobody in Govt. really expected this result and will fudging taking any action as long as possible.

Cameron has torpedoed Boris into looking like a massive hypocrite by not going forward with leave or going forward with leave and all the issues that holds. You've got to laugh.

Caged · 26 Jun 2016 at 12:45

dowie said:
I never mentioned anything about guaranteeing salaries.

Fact is if you're living in for example Cornwall and can watch some Spanish factory fishing vessel with a quota three time that of your local fleet sat off the coast while your town now has high unemployment then you're probably going to have rather negative thoughts of the EU

having the Guardian remind you that some EU money was used to build a few things locally (as per that article about Wales)is rather moot as you'd probably take having your local industry back over some EU cash being spent on infrastructure

The EU cash was spent because the areas became so deprived as a result of losing the industry and successive governments not really countering that. If people have voted because they want their industry back then they will be quite disappointed I imagine.

Dirk Diggler · 26 Jun 2016 at 12:45

Vtec9k said:
Irony....

Why shouldn't a country, within in a larger bloc, be able to veto legislation that is deemed harmful?

Leavers - "we need to leave the EU because they bully us"
Leavers - "we want to bully Scotland, why are they not just taking it?!"

Don't be ridiculous, if that had happened after a yes vote in Scotland there would have been hell on. She is a shameless hypocrite.

A democratic vote took place, and she should respect it.