Brexit thread - what happens next

[The_Abyss]

We were having a discussion at work today, on the back of the extraordinary week of leadership events for both Conservative and Labour. There wasn't really any conclusion so I'd be interested to hear what others think.

The discussion hinged around pressing the Article 50 button. Cameron clearly sidestepped that action himself, delaying Article 50 for the duration of the Conservative leadership contest and the remainder of his term as Prime Minister. The Conservative candidates have a range of views on EU membership but (I think) they've all said that they respect the referendum outcome.

We agreed that none are likely to initiate Article 50 the day after they become leader, as this would compromise Britain's negotiating position, and accept that by not triggering Article 50 they allow some 'soft' pre-negotiation to continue with the EU. But the question was: how long will the new leader be able to resist public pressure to trigger Article 50? What level of public pressure will there be, given the vote was close and there was such a vocal public reaction to it from the Remain camp?

And, could the situation come about where we are at the end of 2016, or longer, and we still have not triggered Article 50, are still seen to be 'negotiating', uncertainty has become the new certainty so everything's settled down, and everything's just calmed down?

Could a more level-headed, calmer mood see us negotiate to stay in the EU on improved terms, ignoring the referendum result but getting the same thing? Would public frustration at inaction supersede the normal apathy and would the mood kick off and force a trigger of Article 50?

 

[Jono8]

going to a good school and being 'well educated' is not synonymous with being intelligent though.

Never said it was!

 

[V F]

The whole of Westminster is a ridiculous state of affairs. People say the politicians don't represent them. We need a sunburnt skinhead chanting engerland to be our next PM.

Al Murray ran before...

 

[a1ex2001]

The media also demonise them since they are gaining enough support to be a threat to the major parties now.

A party who at the last election (the best opportunity they will likely ever have to be successful) won no seats, they have one mp bet everyone knows he is a Tory with a ukip hat on and if anyone else nige included ran for that seat against a.n.other Tory they would loose and you seriously think they are threatening the major parties in this country? If they exceed all expectation by miles they may just bloody the nose of a lib dem party in crisis!

 

[dowie]

and god forbid that they are well educated and went to good schools! Don't want people with a good education running things..

going to a good school and being 'well educated' is not synonymous with being intelligent though.

Quite, for example: Corbyn, well educated parents, went to a private school initially then a grammar school, so had plenty of opportunities but inspite of this privileged education ended up with two Es at A-Level! His brother on the other hand has a 1st class Physics degree from Imperial. Not very impressive for Corbyn.

At least Cameron, Osborne and Boris made the most of the education opportunities they'd been presented with (Boris wasn't as wealthy as the other two and got into Eton on an academic scholarship even)

 

[Greebo]

We were having a discussion at work today, on the back of the extraordinary week of leadership events for both Conservative and Labour. There wasn't really any conclusion so I'd be interested to hear what others think.

The discussion hinged around pressing the Article 50 button. Cameron clearly sidestepped that action himself, delaying Article 50 for the duration of the Conservative leadership contest and the remainder of his term as Prime Minister. The Conservative candidates have a range of views on EU membership but (I think) they've all said that they respect the referendum outcome.

We agreed that none are likely to initiate Article 50 the day after they become leader, as this would compromise Britain's negotiating position, and accept that by not triggering Article 50 they allow some 'soft' pre-negotiation to continue with the EU. But the question was: how long will the new leader be able to resist public pressure to trigger Article 50? What level of public pressure will there be, given the vote was close and there was such a vocal public reaction to it from the Remain camp?

And, could the situation come about where we are at the end of 2016, or longer, and we still have not triggered Article 50, are still seen to be 'negotiating', uncertainty has become the new certainty so everything's settled down, and everything's just calmed down?

Could a more level-headed, calmer mood see us negotiate to stay in the EU on improved terms, ignoring the referendum result but getting the same thing? Would public frustration at inaction supersede the normal apathy and would the mood kick off and force a trigger of Article 50?

Well both leading candidates have said they will not submit A50 until next year already.

 

[The_Abyss]

Well both leading candidates have said they will not submit A50 until next year already.

Really? Ok, none of us had picked up on that. So the situation we were pondering is more likely than we'd considered.

 

[Mauller]

A party who at the last election (the best opportunity they will likely ever have to be successful) won no seats, they have one mp bet everyone knows he is a Tory with a ukip hat on and if anyone else nige included ran for that seat against a.n.other Tory they would loose and you seriously think they are threatening the major parties in this country? If they exceed all expectation by miles they may just bloody the nose of a lib dem party in crisis!

Except ukip came second in quite a few of the constituency's they had MP's standing in, many being a close second. And took 12% of the overall vote. if we had a proper democratic election system with proportional representation then they would have had 50 - 70 MP's based on percentage of votes.

They had a massive upturn from any previous general election. And much of what i was saying is based upon what the main party's do. If they back out of enacting article 50 or keep unlimited freedom of movement, then UKIP will more than likely see a greater surge in support on top of what they are likely to gain at the next general election.

There are a lot of people turning away from the main three parties now.

I also believe one of the reasons they don't want to hold a general election is becasue they know a lot of people are likely to vote UKIP.

 

[n111ck]

Really? Ok, none of us had picked up on that. So the situation we were pondering is more likely than we'd considered.

I think the EU will back down eventually as immigration needs reforming regardless of Brexit and ultimately is the "principle of freedom of movement" really worth billions wiped off the worlds economy?

 

[dowie]

We were having a discussion at work today, on the back of the extraordinary week of leadership events for both Conservative and Labour. There wasn't really any conclusion so I'd be interested to hear what others think.

The discussion hinged around pressing the Article 50 button. Cameron clearly sidestepped that action himself, delaying Article 50 for the duration of the Conservative leadership contest and the remainder of his term as Prime Minister. The Conservative candidates have a range of views on EU membership but (I think) they've all said that they respect the referendum outcome.

We agreed that none are likely to initiate Article 50 the day after they become leader, as this would compromise Britain's negotiating position, and accept that by not triggering Article 50 they allow some 'soft' pre-negotiation to continue with the EU. But the question was: how long will the new leader be able to resist public pressure to trigger Article 50? What level of public pressure will there be, given the vote was close and there was such a vocal public reaction to it from the Remain camp?

And, could the situation come about where we are at the end of 2016, or longer, and we still have not triggered Article 50, are still seen to be 'negotiating', uncertainty has become the new certainty so everything's settled down, and everything's just calmed down?

Could a more level-headed, calmer mood see us negotiate to stay in the EU on improved terms, ignoring the referendum result but getting the same thing? Would public frustration at inaction supersede the normal apathy and would the mood kick off and force a trigger of Article 50?

They'll need to make it clear they are going to trigger it, I'm not sure they'd set a date on it per say but could certainly give a window in which it will be triggered. (Before the end of 2017 for example). They need a few months initially simply to allow the civil service to plan as they were previously under orders prior to the vote to not draw up plans for a brexit.

 

[Werewolf]

Perhaps I'm coloured in my view of them due to localised issues. UKIP is directly synonymous with EDL/BNP/NF/BF around here.

They're pretty close it around here from what I've seen.

Not all UKIP members are far right.
But the far right do seem to love them, and even UKIP candidates let the facade slip at times.

If the effect they had on British politics wasn't so poisonous they'd be a joke of a party, Farage complains about the Media playing them in a bad light when all the media have to do is report what has been said by it's candidates and senior membership.

 

[dowie]

petty backlash has started:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...mpaign-intimidation-Brussels-post-Brexit.html

British MEPs and officials are being subjected to intimidation and bullying in Brussels now the UK has decided to leave the European Union, MailOnline can reveal.
Last night, disgruntled Eurocrats were seen approaching British MEPs outside the parliament building, one passing a sarcastic note ‘congratulating’ them on Brexit. ‘Remain on your island! No pity!’ the note said.
Most of the aggression is directed towards Eurosceptic MEPs, but some has spilled over into outright anti-British sentiment.

[...]

British officials reported being thrown out of meetings unrelated to Brexit. One was ejected from a session discussing development projects in Ethiopia because he worked for a Eurosceptic MEP.
Speaking warily in the corridors of the European parliament, the official, who did not want to be named, said: ‘I left before there was any real unpleasantness. You probably don’t want to go to any bars with an English accent for the foreseeable future.’
In another incident, European colleagues sought to intimidate British officials by chanting, ‘leave, leave, leave’.
Some party leaders have warned their MEPs to ‘keep their heads down’ after minor scuffles on the Eurostar and outside EU buildings ‘could have turned nasty’.
You probably don’t want to go to any bars with an English accent for the foreseeable future
One official, who was abused by a Eurocrat on the train from London to Brussels, told MailOnline that the man launched a foul-mouthed rant after overhearing him speaking in English.
‘He was flicking his fingers in our faces and shouting, “you’re a ****ing disgrace”,’ the official said.

If only Maggie had stayed in power... we'd not have signed up to Maastricht in the first place, she was right regarding the euro:

 

[a1ex2001]

Except ukip came second in the majority of constituency's they had MP's standing in, many places being a close second. And took 12% of the overall vote. if we had a proper democratic election system with proportional representation then they would have had 50 - 70 MP's based on percentage of votes.

They had a massive upturn from any previous general election. And much of what i was saying is based upon what the main party's do. If they back out of enacting article 50 or keep unlimited freedom of movement, then UKIP will more than likely see a greater surge in support on top of what they are likely to gain at the next general election.

There are a lot of people turning away from the main three parties now.

I also believe one of the reasons they don't want to hold a general election is becasue they know a lot of people are likely to vote UKIP.

Assuming someone trigger article 50 before the next election then UKIP are lost there vote will trickle away and I really don't see how the next conservative leader can get away with not. If they stand purely on anti immigration, assuming freedom of movement remains in our brexit deal then they will move too far to the right and attract even more of the Looney fringe which will hurt them badly. The only real hope for them improving on the last outing is that nobody has the guys to invoke article 50 and then I think we have a constitutional crisis and all bets are off.

Don't forget the country rejected proportional representation in a referendum, you can't have your binding EU referendum and not accept the results of the others as equally binding!

 

[Mauller]

Don't forget the country rejected proportional representation in a referendum, you can't have your binding EU referendum and not accept the results of the others as equally binding!

The country has never voted for proportional representation, although that is what people want. That referendum on electroral reform was for The 'Alternative vote' system. Which is just FPTP but with you ranking who you wanted based on preference.

AV is not proportional representation. It is just a method of making people feel that their vote doesn't go to waste. So you could vote on a smaller party as a preference, but a larger party as a second option etc. Then if the smaller party didn't get enough votes there would be a recount and any second options from the smallest party would get taken into account and that party's runner eliminated. then the next in line till a clear winner was made.

 

[Gilly]

Edited my post before your reply, but what do they say about them in your area then?

They're a front for the rest. They're the almost reputable face of the nasty side of society. That's why they get labelled as the racists. Not only do their party members let the facade slip sometimes but they also represent that furthest right element that no-one else will touch. The lowest of the low.

If that's not how they wish to be seen and known then they're doing a very poor job of distancing themselves from it. Anything for votes it looks like from here.

The country has never voted for proportional representation, although that is what people want.

How can you know what the people want, if it's never been voted on?

 

[helmet]

Here's a guy who wrote a book in 2006 who is, in his own words "I'm against the EU, strongly against the €" who tells you just how mad we all are:

If you want to understand his extremely detailed dissection of why we are even here (and you leavers will love it because it was of course the exact reason you voted that way, wasn't it?)

 

[Trusty]

decent article to read.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-22/soros-wrong

 

[helmet]

decent article to read.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-22/soros-wrong

Somewhat, we run that because we don't actually make anything anymore.
What do we make? Put services aside, Wetherspoon chains? I've struggled for a long time to understand what we make.
Previous situations don't come close, we made something then.

 

[Trusty]

Somewhat, we run that because we don't actually make anything anymore.
What do we make? Put services aside, Wetherspoon chains? I've struggled for a long time to understand what we make.
Previous situations don't come close, we made something then.

Tangible items aren't the only export items though, services are as well and we do produce certain items, usually highly skilled, engineering & pharmaceuticals for example.

 

[a1ex2001]

The country has never voted for proportional representation, although that is what people want. That referendum on electroral reform was for The 'Alternative vote' system. Which is just FPTP but with you ranking who you wanted based on preference.

AV is not proportional representation. It is just a method of making people feel that their vote doesn't go to waste. So you could vote on a smaller party as a preference, but a larger party as a second option etc. Then if the smaller party didn't get enough votes there would be a recount and any second options from the smallest party would get taken into account and that party's runner eliminated. then the next in line till a clear winner was made.

Which is much closer to PR than what we have now and would have changed our electoral system considerably, could well have been a first step towards PR and reform of the lords but it was rejected by a very good majority. People have no appetite for electoral reform as they don't understand it and you can't blame imigrants to stir people up it wasn't even on the radar at the last election, UKIP have said post brexit they will campaign on an electoral reform ticket if they do there vote will collapse!