Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

A second referendum would be ideal, I do suspect that a good chunk of those who voted for Leave would just spoil their ballot paper as they feel betrayed. There was a recent trend in Brexiteer's spoiling their ballot papers in local elections if I recall correctly... not to sound judgemental, but the average Brexiteer isn't the sharpest tool in the toolbox.

The second referendum should have 3 options:

Remain,
Leave without a deal,
Leave with Johnson's deal.

I imagine this would be a majority win for Remain, which as an Englishman living in Ireland who voted Remain in the previous referendum suits me fine!

Tired Gardener wrote: »

A second referendum would be ideal, I do suspect that a good chunk of those who voted for Leave would just spoil their ballot paper as they feel betrayed. There was a recent trend in Brexiteer's spoiling their ballot papers in local elections if I recall correctly... not to sound judgemental, but the average Brexiteer isn't the sharpest tool in the toolbox.

The second referendum should have 3 options:

Remain,
Leave without a deal,
Leave with Johnson's deal.

I imagine this would be a majority win for Remain, which as an Englishman living in Ireland who voted Remain in the previous referendum suits me fine!

That would be great but its fantasy to think you'd engineer a scenario with 2 leave options. Recipe for chaos imho.

https://twitter.com/joannaccherry/status/1185629149500710912?s=09

Tired Gardener wrote: »

A second referendum would be ideal, I do suspect that a good chunk of those who voted for Leave would just spoil their ballot paper as they feel betrayed. There was a recent trend in Brexiteer's spoiling their ballot papers in local elections if I recall correctly... not to sound judgemental, but the average Brexiteer isn't the sharpest tool in the toolbox.

The second referendum should have 3 options:

Remain,
Leave without a deal,
Leave with Johnson's deal.

I imagine this would be a majority win for Remain, which as an Englishman living in Ireland who voted Remain in the previous referendum suits me fine!

There's no way 'leave without a deal' should be put forward as an option.

54and56

fr336 wrote: »

Sky News saying that one amendment put in front of house this week could be for a permanent customs union for all of UK. Which the DUP could back. And Boris would be screwed.

This would be the sweetest of sweetest outcomes. I can't see it really happening though but for sure the DUP will use it for maximum leverage.

liamtech

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

They need 2 votes though.

First on the deal and then on deal V remain. Rerunning the referendum without a clear line on what leave means is just the same thing again.

It needs to be clear that leave is this exact deal (or whatever or they eventually agree on, no deal ect.)

But there theres the Scotland situation to consider too. Do they stay in the union if its remain?

I agree, there should/could be two questions on the referendum, with the second only attaining meaning depending on the first

Do you still wish to leave the EU

Do u wish to leave with the deal, or a clean break No Deal Brexit

That would be the only way to properly ensure that the will of the electorate is clear - if you have 2 questions with the first being REMAIN/LEAVE - and the second being LEAVE DEAL/LEAVE NO DEAL

Easy to accomplish this

Also having 3 options on the ref is a terrible idea for the obvious reason it divides the leave vote - if remain got 40% with 30 for deal, 30 for no deal - remain wins - but the polarization continues

Water John

No Deal would not be on the ballot paper, They have a negotiated twice, WA that or Remain. The EU may wait a few days to see what develops in the HOC.
The Johnson Deal may be passed, a Ref or a GE. That would dictate the length. The length of the Ext is always in the gift of the EU.

robinph

J Mysterio wrote: »

RE the extension request...

HOC have still not voted on the WA.

Might it make sense for the EU to say, sorry, we will not entertain an extension untill you have voted on the agreement we literally just negotiated? They havent even tested it yet.

Saw some tweets yesterday from some MPs saying that the WA had actually been agreed on yesterday by default but it happened was lost amongst the confusion when Johnson saying he wouldn't send the letter.

Edit: Here :

Imreoir2

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1185835835859652608

Would SNP and Lib Dems support this?

I believe SNP policy would be to vote for the ammendment but against the overall deal.

Professor Genius

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1185835835859652608

Would SNP and Lib Dems support this?

Will the DUP ??? That’s the question !!

J Mysterio wrote: »

There's no way 'leave without a deal' should be put forward as an option.

While I loathe the notion of it, it is looking very likely to happen unless something major happens. Also splitting the Leave vote into the two camps based upon what the two factions are calling for gives them what they want, while also undermining any strength in numbers their vote has.

Capt'n Midnight

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

can i just say this though in relation to a 2nd ref.

can you imagine yourself having just voted for/against a certain referendum, election whatever, then to have some well intention-ed person tap you on the shoulder and tell you that you were misled, misinformed or just ignorant, and to try again.

in fairness how would you feel?

personally i think i would explode. all logic would be lost. emotion would take over.

Of the people who voted in the last referendum about one million have since died. And about two million people who didn't vote are now eligible.

So even if not a single person changed their vote from last time Remain would win now.

The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there.
- L. P. Hartley

The other difference is that some people may have changed their minds based on new information.

Like the way the economic outlook has changed from pre referendum promises of "easiest trade deals ever, unicorns for all" to "the crash will be worse than the last recession".

Water John

Unless you use a transferable vote, 3 options don't work. Say Remain gets 40% and the other two get 30% each. People in the UK aren't used to voting 1,2,3.

robinph wrote: »

Saw some tweets yesterday from some MPs saying that the WA had actually been agreed on yesterday by default but it happened was lost amongst the confusion when Johnson saying he wouldn't send the letter.

Edit: Here :

https://twitter.com/joannaccherry/status/1185629149500710912?s=09

That is... Mindblowing? I'm not quite sure what to make of it.

robinph wrote: »

Saw some tweets yesterday from some MPs saying that the WA had actually been agreed on yesterday by default but it happened was lost amongst the confusion when Johnson saying he wouldn't send the letter.

Edit: Here :

https://twitter.com/joannaccherry/status/1185629149500710912?s=09

Very interesting thread. From what i can gather the WA is on the statute book but hasnt fully been given approval yet. Bit beyond my pay grade to work out what that actually means in practice.

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Very interesting thread. From what i can gather the WA is on the statute book but hasnt fully been given approval yet. Bit beyond my pay grade to work out what that actually means in practice.

I suppose it means that if each piece of legislation required for the WA is passed through the house, then the WA is approved and ratified.

The issue is that Westminster thinks it can continue to amend everything, including the legislation underpinning the WA. That will surely not be the case.

Joe_ Public wrote: »

That would be great but its fantasy to think you'd engineer a scenario with 2 leave options. Recipe for chaos imho.

Seeing how split the Leave side are it makes more sense to give them more nuanced option to better fit their odd ideology.

We had Leave or Remain, which is too simplistic. Remain or Leave with Johnson's deal is again too simplistic.

Ideally the ballet should have four options, but Remain isn't split.

Given the situation the UK is in, with three camps emerging binary options aren't going to work. It will most likely not be a 3 option vote, but that isn't to say that it shouldn't be

Edit, also regarding it being a recipe for Chaos, the UK is already looking chaotic.

devnull

When you amend a bill, for the amendment to go through, you have to pass the whole bill (as amended).

If you don't, the amendment doesn't count, but this is only the first reading.

robinph

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Very interesting thread. From what i can gather the WA is on the statute book but hasnt fully been given approval yet. Bit beyond my pay grade to work out what that actually means in practice.

Which is the whole point of the Letwin amendment. It was MPs saying they would agree to the deal once all other legal obligations prior to actually leaving were completed. So unless the government deliberately trys not to do the other legal processes the WA is agreed just by virtue of the amendment having been voted on.

Our old pal Andrew Bridgen on marion finucane now. Not only will the uk be negotiating a very quick fta with the EU (the easiest deal in history?) they'll be doing it with the US as well (6 months he says. SIX MONTHS!)

Also says they'll walk away from EU if not geting want they want and withhold 39 bn. Guy is a troll, why do they keep bringing him on as a guest?

liamtech

BALLOT ONE

Do you wish to Leave the EU in line with the 2016 Referendum Result or would you prefer to remain

LEAVE []
Remain []

BALLOT TWO

Do You wish to Leave the EU with the Deal negotiated by Boris Johnson UK PM, or would you prefer to leave without a deal / Clean Break Brexit

With a Deal []
Without a Deal []

With the second ballot question only attaining meaning if the first passes with a Leave Win

its the only fair way top do it, if you want No Dealers to have a chance - but avoid splitting the Leave Vote, which would be unfair

Tired Gardener wrote: »

Seeing how split the Leave side are it makes more sense to give them more nuanced option to better fit their odd ideology.

We had Leave or Remain, which is too simplistic. Remain or Leave with Johnson's deal is again too simplistic.

Ideally the ballet should have four options, but Remain isn't split.

Given the situation the UK is in, with three camps emerging binary options aren't going to work. It will most likely not be a 3 option vote, but that isn't to say that it shouldn't be

Edit, also regarding it being a recipe for Chaos, the UK is already looking chaotic.

Its good to have these discussions about a second ref because its just not a simple process and needs to be very carefully calibrated imo. As things stand, if a second ref motion is passed, the legislation is going to be enacted by a johnson led government and theres going to be holy murder about it for certain. An analyst on sky yesterday said he thought with all the likely fighting over the terms it would be a year before we got there. That may be off, but i think he's right about the fuss it will cause. However its finally framed.

robinph

liamtech wrote: »

BALLOT ONE

Do you wish to Leave the EU in line with the 2016 Referendum Result or would you prefer to remain

LEAVE []
Remain []

BALLOT TWO

Do You wish to Leave the EU with the Deal negotiated by Boris Johnson UK PM, or would you prefer to leave without a deal / Clean Break Brexit

With a Deal []
Without a Deal []

With the second ballot question only attaining meaning if the first passes with a Leave Win

its the only fair way top do it, if you want No Dealers to have a chance - but avoid splitting the Leave Vote, which would be unfair

But ballot one is asking if you want to leave with unicorns or remain and that is not the current position. The 2016 option no longer exists.

liamtech

robinph wrote: »

But ballot one is asking if you want to leave with unicorns or remain and that is not the current position. The 2016 option no longer exists.

No its not - ballot one is confirmatory - it is asking - Do you still wanna leave y/n

The second question - which only comes into effect if Leave wins above- is asking deal - or no deal

I maintain its possible to do this , and its the only fair way

Oafley Jones

liamtech wrote: »

No its not - ballot one is confirmatory - it is asking - Do you still wanna leave y/n

The second question - which only comes into effect if Leave wins above- is asking deal - or no deal

I maintain its possible to do this , and its the only fair way

You’d never phrase it that way. You’re automatically skewing things.

Tea Shock

Only caught the last bit of it but sounds like Michael McDowell did a really good job of putting Andrew Bridgen in his place on the Marion Funnicsne show just now!

liamtech wrote: »

No its not - ballot one is confirmatory - it is asking - Do you still wanna leave y/n

The second question - which only comes into effect if Leave wins above- is asking deal - or no deal

I maintain its possible to do this , and its the only fair way

It does seem like a more plausible solution. If it did get to the second ballot, where would Remainers vote? Voting for the deal is not the same as voting to remain. So, we'd be in limbo, and feel that we haven't had a say in the future.

[Deleted User]

liamtech wrote: »

No its not - ballot one is confirmatory - it is asking - Do you still wanna leave y/n

The second question - which only comes into effect if Leave wins above- is asking deal - or no deal

I maintain its possible to do this , and its the only fair way

It would work better if the second question was rephrased

BALLOT TWO (only valid if leave is selected in ballot one)

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Our old pal Andrew Bridgen on marion finucane now. Not only will the uk be negotiating a very quick fta with the EU (the easiest deal in history?) they'll be doing it with the US as well (6 months he says. SIX MONTHS!)

Also says they'll walk away from EU if not geting want they want and withhold 39 bn. Guy is a troll, why do they keep bringing him on as a guest?

The 39B is resolved in the WA. So has nothing to do with subsequent trade negotiations. It won't be withheld.