Brexit thread - what happens next

[Gilly]

The referendum thread was possibly the busiest thread we've ever had over such an extended period. That's not just the weight of posts but the amount of moderation required too.

I recognise that this is an emotive time and subject. Many people are annoyed, many are elated. This is not a sport result that people are annoyed about for a short time but then their team plays again and wins and they can move on. This is people's futures. They are worried for their careers and pensions, remaining employed at all, their families, etc. It's an uncertain time whichever side of the fence you were on for the referendum.

Please bear all of this in mind along with the members charter whilst posting. The decision, for good or ill, has been made. What happens now and next is the discussion to be had. Above all please remember that you must respect each other. If you cannot post in a respectful manner toward your fellow posters, regardless of their opinions, please refrain from posting at all.

 

[Gilly]

Keep it civil everyone, and then we won't need to issue infractions and suspensions.

There's no reason we can't discuss it like adults

 

[Gilly]

The post vote thread was just closed by the Mods. Why did you think it appropriate to start another thread on the exact same subject?

This is more about the next chapter. This is the aftermath thread and discussions on what is next. The last one was all about the referendum itself and continuing the arguments was only going to end up in more suspensions and fallouts.

Happy to let this one continue if we can remain respectful

 

[Gilly]

Why would there be more issues if you worked for a multi national company? Surely there would be less? I work for a multi national and if I wanted to move I'd just look on the internal job board. I'm sending this post from a lovely sunny bar on the west coast of the US where I'm working for a couple of weeks but I wouldn't want to live here permanently.

And talking as someone who did move to another country for some years and could easily move again if I wanted I wondered which country you would consider moving to and why? Surely there is more to emigrating than being embarrassed about a referendum?

I think he was saying it would be easier...

 

[Gilly]

Still waiting for a list of the positives out of this vote. I haven't seen any from anyone yet. What's the good news from this? I can only see the bad, let's have something upbeat that I can cling to

 

[Gilly]

The good news is we have are country back to take control of it the way we want to and maybe turn in back to what is was 10 years ago ! I don't like my town being a mini Europe ! because that is the problem , Britain has lost its identity , I don't know about you but I don't even go in to my shopping centre anymore because I don't understand anyone. that is never a good thing, its wrong and its sad that this has happened.

There are no positives here. 'Taking are country back' isn't a thing. It was never taken from us.

Is this really all that can be said in favour of leaving?

We have our country back!

Rule Britannia, taking our country back, independence day, sticking it Brussels bureaucrats and all that noise.

Other stuff!

So it would seem

 

[Gilly]

the fact you cannot see past the fact that these unelected men and women dictate to people living here or anywhere is not enough, what more do you need?

Unelected people are intrinsically involved in the governing of this state and will continue to do whilever the country exists in its current form. Why does the location of their desk make any difference to you?

 

[Gilly]

Fixed it for you.

So let's change it then, and say 'a plan for prosperity' whether that be continued or new.

Just any plan at all, really.

 

[Gilly]

His argument isn't the strongest TBH, but it's worrying that you can't see the distinction he is trying to make.

Politicians in the UK don't have to take the views of 27 other countries into account when making decisions, they can (theoretically) do what is best for the UK.

I get that, but that's exactly the problem for many of the areas voting out. Wales, Yorkshire and Cornwall received money directly from the EU but feel alienated from London.

What value is there for these areas in an out vote?

it does not nor would i condone it do you?

I don't understand your response. You were saying that unelected people in the Brussells making decisions was the problem, I was merely stating that there are unelected people in the UK doing the same. Their desk is just in a different location. If you don't think that's right, then I missed your point somewhere?

 

[Gilly]

Not being into politics I only heard about article50 after the results so had not anticipated such a long transition. My immediate thought was, since it will be so long and drawn out, how easy it will be for all the promises to be forgotten and that extra money we will supposably be saving to conveniently stay hidden.

What extra money? Can you be a bit more specific?

Is this related to the £350m?

 

[Gilly]

What I hadn't realised was that the petition for a 2nd referendum was actually started by a Leave campaigner

That made me laugh. Then I saw an update to it where he was backtracking on his call for the rules to be changed to be >75% voting and a majority of those people in excess of 60%

His backtracking is shameful.

The idea of a 2nd referendum is stupid. It goes against all we stand for.

 

[Gilly]

Actually, whatever happens next, I'd like to see a judicial review of both campaigns. It's clear that lies, fear and misinformation abounded. Many of us were clear on that even before we went to vote. Anyone found to have been deliberately misleading voters should be held to account.

 

[Gilly]

Like the fear-mongering of the remain campaign? World war three? The CBI and big businesses saying the country would crash and burn once the 'Leave' vote was announced, then backtracked and said things would carry on as normal? etc.

Erm, yes. Did you gloss over the fact that I said both sides?

 

[Gilly]

You've skipped over reading some words in your rush to have a go at someone who voted Remain.

Politicians being held accountable for their actions?

Somehow I don't think we'll be seeing that.

I'm not saying that I think we'll see it, I'm just saying that I'd like to.

Manifestos and pledges are not legally binding. You can't trust a promise from a politician, even if it's inscribed on a stone tablet

So intentionally misleading people is ok, or it's not ok but we should just allow it to happen?

 

[Gilly]

The house of lords nor the royal family have as much power as you think, the house of commons has the most power over matters that concern the country.

That was true of the EU too.

You seem to have missed my response to you

 

[Gilly]

There was a lawyer on the TV who said the amount of laws that need changed would be far, far beyond the capabilities of any Govt over two years. What will happen is that all European law will remain in place until such time as we know what is happening and then these laws will be adjusted or not.

I'm far from an expert on law, I had assumed they'd change over time utilising individual case law and precedent rather than a whole re-write of our laws.

Yes, the word being 'was'. The EU is already vying for tighter integration, even pushing to remove the ability of countries to legally leave under EU law.

The UK's veto power will only last for so long, the EU is already pushing to remove countries ability to Veto legislation by instigating majority rule on all matters. They are already doing it in regards to trade deals and will no doubt extend it in the future.

I only said was as we've decided to leave the EU, meaning it will have the same or less power in future.

Are we agreed that you made a mistake in your response to my post showing a desire for a judicial review? We can move on then unless you'd have a problem with both sides being reviewed? If that's the case, what is the problem with it?

 

[Gilly]

Clearly the latter.

We know that both sides outright lied in the referendum campaign. They did so because they knew they had complete impunity. Frankly, it's expected.

This is why I laugh when we rank high on anti-corruption measures. How is a political class that will lie to the electorate blatantly and routinely, anything other than corrupt?

Of course it's not OK. But what can you or I do about it? We aren't offered a choice between liers and honest politicians. They will all lie when it suits them. They will all break their manifestos and pledges as soon as they find it favourable.

None of them will ever deliver what they promise, so we keep voting in the other guys, who do exactly the same thing. What choice is that?

My thinking was thus; we are in a brave new world of politics now, for good or ill. A judicial review that holds liars and cheats (on both sides before I'm accused of attacking the Leave campaign again) to account may also have a positive impact on that element of politics.

If they know they can be called to account for lying or intentionally misleading voters perhaps that will be minimised in future.

I can't see it happening, but has there ever been a better time for it?

It would have to be. Otherwise they'd have to bypass parliament in order to Process,repeal,re-enact/re-affirm the vast swathes of ex-EU laws.

Lawyers will be happy though

Nate

It would have to be re-written, or it would have to be case law/precedent?

 

[Gilly]

No problem with a judicial review as long as it is fair, but unfortunately in these things i can see the leave camp being hit harder than the remain camp, even when the remain camp made the claims i said, such as world war three etc.

The media is still demonising the leave camp and people who voted leave, so i don't see the review being equal and impartial.

Then there is also the matters of blatant lying from the remain camp which will no doubt be looked over such as the position of turkey negotiations. etc.

Oh, I fully agree that leave would be hit worse, because in my opinion they were much worse, but that doesn't mean it would necessarily be unfair.

Not sure why you think any blatant lying would be overlooked though, when that's exactly what they should be looking for.

 

[Gilly]

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.

 

[Gilly]

The petition was made in May, but don't let that stop you

...and by a Leave campaigner, who funnily enough has since backtracked.