politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why we should look closely at the precise wording of second re
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why we should look closely at the precise wording of second referendum polling questions
VERSION ONE:Once the negotiations between Britain and the European Union over a Brexit deal have been completed, do you think there should or should not be a public vote on whether Britain accepts the deal or remains in the EU after all?
Comments
-
First. My final say on the matter.0
-
Second, like Remain. 'Nuff said.0
-
Número tres.
Doesn't this just show the UK electorate's (probably increasing) distaste for actually voting?0 -
There's only one way I can see a way to a fresh referendum and that's if tertiaryreferendite MPs execute an ambush on a bill on the transitional deal. It's possible, but unlikely.0
-
On Brexit polling this result doesn't surprise me at all on the Irish border issue.
https://twitter.com/SamuelMarcLowe/status/983287241157079040
The whole report is worth a read. My main takeaway on the Irish Border question is that people still cling to the myth that the UK will have an independent trade policy pre or post Brexit. If it's not going to happen, it's not worth trading off for.
The problem with Brexit polling generally, and indeed with the referendum itself, is that there is no evaluation of costs for each option. If you ask the question, "Would you prefer you and your family potentially to lose their jobs, or would you prefer a soft Irish border", you would probably get a different answer. It would be seen as a leading question of course.0 -
There will be no referendum with a binary question of take deal or stay in as now.
0 -
Or a massive shift in public opinion - though that is, of course, extremely unlikely.AlastairMeeks said:There's only one way I can see a way to a fresh referendum and that's if tertiaryreferendite MPs execute an ambush on a bill on the transitional deal. It's possible, but unlikely.
0 -
Remainers: The public should have a final say
The Public: How?
Remainers: .....er, a vote...
The Public:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3PKE8uTSp80 -
Has it been decided if it's the EU or ROI that will pay to build their border ?FF43 said:On Brexit polling this result doesn't surprise me at all on the Irish border issue.
https://twitter.com/SamuelMarcLowe/status/983287241157079040
The whole report is worth a read. My main takeaway on the Irish Border question is that people still cling to the myth that the UK will have an independent trade policy pre or post Brexit. If it's not going to happen, it's not worth trading off for.
The problem with Brexit polling generally, and indeed with the referendum itself, is that there is no evaluation of costs for each option. If you ask the question, "Would you prefer you and your family potentially to lose their jobs, or would you prefer a soft Irish border", you would probably get a different answer. It would be seen as a leading question of course.
0 -
https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/should-there-be-a-second-referendum-on-britains-membership-of-the-eu-once-we-know-the-terms-the-government-has-negotiated/?removedNigelb said:
Or a massive shift in public opinion - though that is, of course, extremely unlikely.AlastairMeeks said:There's only one way I can see a way to a fresh referendum and that's if tertiaryreferendite MPs execute an ambush on a bill on the transitional deal. It's possible, but unlikely.
0 -
Mr. Flashman (deceased), probably not. But it's not impossible.0
-
Clearly there should be a referendum about whether or not to have a second referendum.
However, given the first referendum result was to leave, any second referendum can only be between different sorts of leave ie on the terms agreed in negotiations or on WTO terms.
0 -
If Syria, Brexit, Corbyn etc etc is getting too much for you, there's always the new ruby kitkat to chase down:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nestle-kitkat/nestle-to-launch-ruby-chocolate-kitkat-in-europe-and-americas-idUSKBN1HH0YO?utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_content=5acc8fd704d30135440589a3&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter0 -
The Irish issue survey question is puzzling. I don't understand it.FF43 said:On Brexit polling this result doesn't surprise me at all on the Irish border issue.
https://twitter.com/SamuelMarcLowe/status/983287241157079040
The whole report is worth a read. My main takeaway on the Irish Border question is that people still cling to the myth that the UK will have an independent trade policy pre or post Brexit. If it's not going to happen, it's not worth trading off for.
The problem with Brexit polling generally, and indeed with the referendum itself, is that there is no evaluation of costs for each option. If you ask the question, "Would you prefer you and your family potentially to lose their jobs, or would you prefer a soft Irish border", you would probably get a different answer. It would be seen as a leading question of course.
What does an independent trade policy look like?
What does a soft Irish border look like?
How can I evaluate the variables?
At least I could decide the Leave/Remain issue on emotions.
0 -
Hard Left candidate in the running for marginal Pudsey. Supported by the usual suspects:
https://www.theredroar.com/2018/03/swp-links-and-foul-mouthed-twitter-tirades-derail-frontrunners-bid-for-top-labour-target-seat-of-pudsey/0 -
If there was a second referendum then two questions arise. What would the government's recommended position be? Would Theresa allow ministers to campaign against that recommended position? (If Theresa recommended staying in, then watching the Tory neo-Leavers turn on a sixpence would be a hoot.)0
-
Mr. Dawning, if it were In/Out, the Government could not, I suspect, have a settled view. May herself was/is for staying in but if she recommends that then it looks like she may not respect the first vote and/or is not committed to negotiating in good faith.
If it's just Deal/No Deal, obviously they'd recommend the Deal.0 -
Fits the stereotype, marxist, SWP, sends kids to top private school so must have more than a few Bob....rottenborough said:Hard Left candidate in the running for marginal Pudsey. Supported by the usual suspects:
https://www.theredroar.com/2018/03/swp-links-and-foul-mouthed-twitter-tirades-derail-frontrunners-bid-for-top-labour-target-seat-of-pudsey/0 -
AlastairMeeks said:
There's only one way I can see a way to a fresh referendum and that's if tertiaryreferendite MPs execute an ambush on a bill on the transitional deal. It's possible, but unlikely.
What would a tertiary referendum be about? Best of three?
0 -
She wouldn't recommend staying in - or if she did, she'd be No Confidenced.Stark_Dawning said:If there was a second referendum then two questions arise. What would the government's recommended position be? Would Theresa allow ministers to campaign against that recommended position? (If Theresa recommended staying in, then watching the Tory neo-Leavers turn on a sixpence would be a hoot.)
But it's all hypothetical: there won't be a second referendum.
The interesting question politically is not what would happen if one is granted; it's what will the fallout be when one isn't.0 -
This might be a cynical way of seeing this, but given that Conservative voters of 2017 split 21/63 against even the "final say" version, and in an adversarial democracy, the Government first keeps its own voters sweet (if it wants to get re-elected), it ain't happening.
Not unless that number shifted to a great degree, and the overall figure was strongly pro-final say. And we're running out of time for that very rapidly.0 -
Surely 43rd?FF43 said:First. My final say on the matter.
0 -
The primary one was in 1975 I guess.David_Evershed said:AlastairMeeks said:There's only one way I can see a way to a fresh referendum and that's if tertiaryreferendite MPs execute an ambush on a bill on the transitional deal. It's possible, but unlikely.
What would a tertiary referendum be about? Best of three?0 -
Most mainland Brits don't care about NI at all. Any future border is just a detail of that.FF43 said:On Brexit polling this result doesn't surprise me at all on the Irish border issue.
https://twitter.com/SamuelMarcLowe/status/983287241157079040
The whole report is worth a read. My main takeaway on the Irish Border question is that people still cling to the myth that the UK will have an independent trade policy pre or post Brexit. If it's not going to happen, it's not worth trading off for.
The problem with Brexit polling generally, and indeed with the referendum itself, is that there is no evaluation of costs for each option. If you ask the question, "Would you prefer you and your family potentially to lose their jobs, or would you prefer a soft Irish border", you would probably get a different answer. It would be seen as a leading question of course.0 -
Hmm. Yet another believer in a total state, yet mysteriously sends her kids to a private school.FrancisUrquhart said:
Fits the stereotype, marxist, SWP, sends kids to top private school so must have more than a few Bob....rottenborough said:Hard Left candidate in the running for marginal Pudsey. Supported by the usual suspects:
https://www.theredroar.com/2018/03/swp-links-and-foul-mouthed-twitter-tirades-derail-frontrunners-bid-for-top-labour-target-seat-of-pudsey/0 -
I spent the weekend visiting my 20 year old daughter in Groningen in Holland where she is having an Erasmus year. It was delightful. What surprised me was that she volunteered that having studied EU law in some detail from a continental perspective, having been taught how it is made and what its objectives are she would now vote Leave. She voted remain at the time of the referendum and really had very little time for her dad's views (nothing wrong in that of course). Her view was that if people knew more about it they would like it less.
Of course this is a classic PB anecdote and I don't doubt that many others could tell stories of fervent leavers who have now changed their mind. What I think is fairly clear is that there has been very little change in the overall position as found in both the referendum and the election where 43% voted for a party completely committed to delivering Brexit (even if they were seriously unclear as to how) and 41% to a party at least notionally committed to respecting the vote, even if many of the members were unhappy about it. 7% voted for a party wanting a second referendum. Its just not going to happen.
Remainers really need to accept this and focus on achieving as soft a Brexit as possible with continued regulatory alignment, a customs union that looks suspiciously like the Customs Union, priority for EU citizens in immigration, a FTA which looks very like Single Market membership, the UK opting in to various EU bodies and paying subscriptions for their maintenance etc. It seems to me that that is what May is offering but the devil will be in the detail and remainers should be engaged to tweak that deal rather than sitting on the sidelines in the huff. I don't think that there is any chance of us rejoining the EU in the next 20 years but if they get this sort of deal it really wouldn't be that difficult (apart from joining the Euro).
But then, MRDA doesn't it?0 -
Whether to have a referendum about whether to have a referendum about whether to have a referendum.David_Evershed said:AlastairMeeks said:There's only one way I can see a way to a fresh referendum and that's if tertiaryreferendite MPs execute an ambush on a bill on the transitional deal. It's possible, but unlikely.
What would a tertiary referendum be about? Best of three?0 -
As there's not going to be another referendum it doesn't matter.0
-
So there is a plurality who oppose the public being given a fibal.vote on the deal but a plurality want the public to get the final say.
The public will of course get the final say at the next general election anyway when they can vote Labour, LD, UKIP etc if they oppose the final deal the government has agreed with the EU. What is clear from this poll is there is no appetite for a second EU referendum
0 -
May I qualify that? A massive shift is in my opinion very likely, but only after we have left the EU.Nigelb said:
Or a massive shift in public opinion - though that is, of course, extremely unlikely.AlastairMeeks said:There's only one way I can see a way to a fresh referendum and that's if tertiaryreferendite MPs execute an ambush on a bill on the transitional deal. It's possible, but unlikely.
0 -
Do you think that Mrs May would survive the uproar if her proposed deal amounts to a transparent BINO. It would sure then beg the question of what is the point in leaving at all?DavidL said:I spent the weekend visiting my 20 year old daughter in Groningen in Holland where she is having an Erasmus year. It was delightful. What surprised me was that she volunteered that having studied EU law in some detail from a continental perspective, having been taught how it is made and what its objectives are she would now vote Leave. She voted remain at the time of the referendum and really had very little time for her dad's views (nothing wrong in that of course). Her view was that if people knew more about it they would like it less.
Of course this is a classic PB anecdote and I don't doubt that many others could tell stories of fervent leavers who have now changed their mind. What I think is fairly clear is that there has been very little change in the overall position as found in both the referendum and the election where 43% voted for a party completely committed to delivering Brexit (even if they were seriously unclear as to how) and 41% to a party at least notionally committed to respecting the vote, even if many of the members were unhappy about it. 7% voted for a party wanting a second referendum. Its just not going to happen.
Remainers really need to accept this and focus on achieving as soft a Brexit as possible with continued regulatory alignment, a customs union that looks suspiciously like the Customs Union, priority for EU citizens in immigration, a FTA which looks very like Single Market membership, the UK opting in to various EU bodies and paying subscriptions for their maintenance etc. It seems to me that that is what May is offering but the devil will be in the detail and remainers should be engaged to tweak that deal rather than sitting on the sidelines in the huff. I don't think that there is any chance of us rejoining the EU in the next 20 years but if they get this sort of deal it really wouldn't be that difficult (apart from joining the Euro).
But then, MRDA doesn't it?0 -
We're also running out to put the legal framework in place for a referendum. To hold one before March 29, you need the campaign to take place, which requires registered Yes and No (or whatever) campaigns, which requires them to be formed and approved by the Electoral Commission, which requires legislation to be in place to kick-start it all, which requires a Bill to be introduced and passed through parliament.Andy_Cooke said:This might be a cynical way of seeing this, but given that Conservative voters of 2017 split 21/63 against even the "final say" version, and in an adversarial democracy, the Government first keeps its own voters sweet (if it wants to get re-elected), it ain't happening.
Not unless that number shifted to a great degree, and the overall figure was strongly pro-final say. And we're running out of time for that very rapidly.
Given that it'd be foolish to hold a referendum with no time to sort out the fallout should the people give the 'wrong' result, we're probably pretty close to the deadline for when a bill could reasonably be introduced to allow time for all the stages.
Leave aside that were such legislation going through, it'd make negotiations with the EU much harder.0 -
How could she? The deal we've negotiated is rubbish because the EU negotiated in bad faith. So we'd better stay'david_herdson said:
She wouldn't recommend staying in - or if she did, she'd be No Confidenced.Stark_Dawning said:If there was a second referendum then two questions arise. What would the government's recommended position be? Would Theresa allow ministers to campaign against that recommended position? (If Theresa recommended staying in, then watching the Tory neo-Leavers turn on a sixpence would be a hoot.)
0 -
The only circumstances I can envisage there being a second referendum is if the whole EU deal collapsed in acrimony and we were left facing economic disarray. Surely no government would risk the leap-in-the-dark, buccaneering-spirit, it'll-all-turn-out-right-in-the-wash approach. The political consequences would be too awful and they'd wrangle a second referendum to get them off the hook.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Dawning, if it were In/Out, the Government could not, I suspect, have a settled view. May herself was/is for staying in but if she recommends that then it looks like she may not respect the first vote and/or is not committed to negotiating in good faith.
If it's just Deal/No Deal, obviously they'd recommend the Deal.0 -
A lot of us didn't have any appetite for the first bloody one.HYUFD said:So there is a plurality who oppose the public being given a fibal.vote on the deal but a plurality want the public to get the final say.
The public will of course get the final say at the next general election anyway when they can vote Labour, LD, UKIP etc if they oppose the final deal the government has agreed with the EU. What is clear from this poll is there is no appetite for a second EU referendum0 -
Your daughter is a wise woman.DavidL said:I spent the weekend visiting my 20 year old daughter in Groningen in Holland where she is having an Erasmus year. It was delightful. What surprised me was that she volunteered that having studied EU law in some detail from a continental perspective, having been taught how it is made and what its objectives are she would now vote Leave. She voted remain at the time of the referendum and really had very little time for her dad's views (nothing wrong in that of course). Her view was that if people knew more about it they would like it less.
Of course this is a classic PB anecdote and I don't doubt that many others could tell stories of fervent leavers who have now changed their mind. What I think is fairly clear is that there has been very little change in the overall position as found in both the referendum and the election where 43% voted for a party completely committed to delivering Brexit (even if they were seriously unclear as to how) and 41% to a party at least notionally committed to respecting the vote, even if many of the members were unhappy about it. 7% voted for a party wanting a second referendum. Its just not going to happen.
Remainers really need to accept this and focus on achieving as soft a Brexit as possible with continued regulatory alignment, a customs union that looks suspiciously like the Customs Union, priority for EU citizens in immigration, a FTA which looks very like Single Market membership, the UK opting in to various EU bodies and paying subscriptions for their maintenance etc. It seems to me that that is what May is offering but the devil will be in the detail and remainers should be engaged to tweak that deal rather than sitting on the sidelines in the huff. I don't think that there is any chance of us rejoining the EU in the next 20 years but if they get this sort of deal it really wouldn't be that difficult (apart from joining the Euro).
But then, MRDA doesn't it?0 -
I don't wildly disagree with that... bit too late, though.Peter_the_Punter said:
May I qualify that? A massive shift is in my opinion very likely, but only after we have left the EU.Nigelb said:
Or a massive shift in public opinion - though that is, of course, extremely unlikely.AlastairMeeks said:There's only one way I can see a way to a fresh referendum and that's if tertiaryreferendite MPs execute an ambush on a bill on the transitional deal. It's possible, but unlikely.
0 -
The Tories won a majority in 2015 though on a promise to hold the first EU referendumRecidivist said:
A lot of us didn't have any appetite for the first bloody one.HYUFD said:So there is a plurality who oppose the public being given a fibal.vote on the deal but a plurality want the public to get the final say.
The public will of course get the final say at the next general election anyway when they can vote Labour, LD, UKIP etc if they oppose the final deal the government has agreed with the EU. What is clear from this poll is there is no appetite for a second EU referendum0 -
The Tories have racked up 6 consecutive poll leads according to Wikipedia, and have led in 8 of the last 10 surveys.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#20180 -
I suspect @DavidL is correct, but the Deal is very likely to not be agreed pre Brexit, and most likely not before the end of Transition, as 2.5 years for such a complex trade deal is a very tall order. So any vote, whether Parliamentary or plebiscite is both a long way off, and most significantly post Brexit.PeterC said:
Do you think that Mrs May would survive the uproar if her proposed deal amounts to a transparent BINO. It would sure then beg the question of what is the point in leaving at all?DavidL said:I spent the weekend visiting my 20 year old daughter in Groningen in Holland where she is having an Erasmus year. It was delightful. What surprised me was that she volunteered that having studied EU law in some detail from a continental perspective, having been taught how it is made and what its objectives are she would now vote Leave. She voted remain at the time of the referendum and really had very little time for her dad's views (nothing wrong in that of course). Her view was that if people knew more about it they would like it less.
Of course this is a classic PB anecdote and I don't doubt that many others could tell stories of fervent leavers who have now changed their mind. What I think is fairly clear is that there has been very little change in the overall position as found in both the referendum and the election where 43% voted for a party completely committed to delivering Brexit (even if they were seriously unclear as to how) and 41% to a party at least notionally committed to respecting the vote, even if many of the members were unhappy about it. 7% voted for a party wanting a second referendum. Its just not going to happen.
Remainers really need to accept this and focus on achieving as soft a Brexit as possible with continued regulatory alignment, a customs union that looks suspiciously like the Customs Union, priority for EU citizens in immigration, a FTA which looks very like Single Market membership, the UK opting in to various EU bodies and paying subscriptions for their maintenance etc. It seems to me that that is what May is offering but the devil will be in the detail and remainers should be engaged to tweak that deal rather than sitting on the sidelines in the huff. I don't think that there is any chance of us rejoining the EU in the next 20 years but if they get this sort of deal it really wouldn't be that difficult (apart from joining the Euro).
But then, MRDA doesn't it?
0 -
We voted to leave. Suck it up, losers and get over it.PeterC said:Do you think that Mrs May would survive the uproar if her proposed deal amounts to a transparent BINO. It would sure then beg the question of what is the point in leaving at all?
There isn't any other real reason to leave the EU, but as far as it goes it's a good one. "Suck it up losers" isn't policy, nor is it helpful in determining what actually replaces EU membership. Given Brexit will definitely damage the UK, damage limitation would seem to be the way to go.0 -
Interesting to see the huge difference a small change in language can make to a poll, and a perfect illustration of why they shouldn’t be taken too seriously at this stage. It will be more useful to see polling once we have a deal outlined, with more straightforward questions.
I can’t see a second referendum unless the deal is appalingly one-sided in the EU’s favour, and the government either don’t think they can sell it or defeat an amendment forcing a plebiscite on the Noel Edmonds question.0 -
Though in practice, under @DavidL's scenario, we will be tied into EU Law in many aspects because of Pseudo CU and SM, while no longer having a say via Commission or EP in drafting those laws.Casino_Royale said:
Your daughter is a wise woman.DavidL said:I spent the weekend visiting my 20 year old daughter in Groningen in Holland where she is having an Erasmus year. It was delightful. What surprised me was that she volunteered that having studied EU law in some detail from a continental perspective, having been taught how it is made and what its objectives are she would now vote Leave. She voted remain at the time of the referendum and really had very little time for her dad's views (nothing wrong in that of course). Her view was that if people knew more about it they would like it less.
Of course this is a classic PB anecdote and I don't doubt that many others could tell stories of fervent leavers who have now changed their mind. What I think is fairly clear is that there has been very little change in the overall position as found in both the referendum and the election where 43% voted for a party completely committed to delivering Brexit (even if they were seriously unclear as to how) and 41% to a party at least notionally committed to respecting the vote, even if many of the members were unhappy about it. 7% voted for a party wanting a second referendum. Its just not going to happen.
Remainers really need to accept this and focus on achieving as soft a Brexit as possible with continued regulatory alignment, a customs union that looks suspiciously like the Customs Union, priority for EU citizens in immigration, a FTA which looks very like Single Market membership, the UK opting in to various EU bodies and paying subscriptions for their maintenance etc. It seems to me that that is what May is offering but the devil will be in the detail and remainers should be engaged to tweak that deal rather than sitting on the sidelines in the huff. I don't think that there is any chance of us rejoining the EU in the next 20 years but if they get this sort of deal it really wouldn't be that difficult (apart from joining the Euro).
But then, MRDA doesn't it?0 -
The Tories won the 2015 on the record of the Coalition Government, in particular on the popular Lib Dem policies which they appropriated to themselves, even though they opposed them in government. The promise to hold a referendum was popular only among Tory chauvinists.HYUFD said:
The Tories won a majority in 2015 though on a promise to hold the first EU referendumRecidivist said:
A lot of us didn't have any appetite for the first bloody one.HYUFD said:So there is a plurality who oppose the public being given a fibal.vote on the deal but a plurality want the public to get the final say.
The public will of course get the final say at the next general election anyway when they can vote Labour, LD, UKIP etc if they oppose the final deal the government has agreed with the EU. What is clear from this poll is there is no appetite for a second EU referendum0 -
It won't be BINO, that requires staying in the single market and customs union and leaving free movement in place.PeterC said:
Do you think that Mrs May would survive the uproar if her proposed deal amounts to a transparent BINO. It would sure then beg the question of what is the point in leaving at all?DavidL said:I spent the weekend visiting my 20 year old daughter in Groningen in Holland where she is having an Erasmus year. It was delightful. What surprised me was that she volunteered that having studied EU law in some detail from a continental perspective, having been taught how it is made and what its objectives are she would now vote Leave. She voted remain at the time of the referendum and really had very little time for her dad's views (nothing wrong in that of course). Her view was that if people knew more about it they would like it less.
Of course this is a classic PB anecdote and I don't doubt that many others could tell stories of fervent leavers who have now changed their mind. What I think is fairly clear is that there has been very little change in the overall position as found in both the referendum and the election where 43% voted for a party completely committed to delivering Brexit (even if they were seriously unclear as to how) and 41% to a party at least notionally committed to respecting the vote, even if many of the members were unhappy about it. 7% voted for a party wanting a second referendum. Its just not going to happen.
Remainers really need to accept this and focus on achieving as soft a Brexit as possible with continued regulatory alignment, a customs union that looks suspiciously like the Customs Union, priority for EU citizens in immigration, a FTA which looks very like Single Market membership, the UK opting in to various EU bodies and paying subscriptions for their maintenance etc. It seems to me that that is what May is offering but the devil will be in the detail and remainers should be engaged to tweak that deal rather than sitting on the sidelines in the huff. I don't think that there is any chance of us rejoining the EU in the next 20 years but if they get this sort of deal it really wouldn't be that difficult (apart from joining the Euro).
But then, MRDA doesn't it?
Though it may well not be WTO terms either given May's commitment to a Canada style FTA with the EU0 -
I'll be very interested to see the next Survation and Ipsos MORI polls.AndyJS said:The Tories have racked up 6 consecutive poll leads according to Wikipedia, and have led in 8 of the last 10 surveys.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#20180 -
That poll is a false choice given May agreed in December the UK would ensure enough regulatory alignment with the EU to avoid a hard border in Ireland while still leaving the Customs UnionFF43 said:On Brexit polling this result doesn't surprise me at all on the Irish border issue.
https://twitter.com/SamuelMarcLowe/status/983287241157079040
The whole report is worth a read. My main takeaway on the Irish Border question is that people still cling to the myth that the UK will have an independent trade policy pre or post Brexit. If it's not going to happen, it's not worth trading off for.
The problem with Brexit polling generally, and indeed with the referendum itself, is that there is no evaluation of costs for each option. If you ask the question, "Would you prefer you and your family potentially to lose their jobs, or would you prefer a soft Irish border", you would probably get a different answer. It would be seen as a leading question of course.0 -
Yes, of course, and it illustrates the folly of Government by referendum. Public Opinion is volatile, sound government requires steadiness and consistency.Nigelb said:
I don't wildly disagree with that... bit too late, though.Peter_the_Punter said:
May I qualify that? A massive shift is in my opinion very likely, but only after we have left the EU.Nigelb said:
Or a massive shift in public opinion - though that is, of course, extremely unlikely.AlastairMeeks said:There's only one way I can see a way to a fresh referendum and that's if tertiaryreferendite MPs execute an ambush on a bill on the transitional deal. It's possible, but unlikely.
0 -
Theresa should call a surprise election so she can Crush the Saboteurs!AndyJS said:The Tories have racked up 6 consecutive poll leads according to Wikipedia, and have led in 8 of the last 10 surveys.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#20180 -
It was in the Tory manifesto and kept a number of Tory voters from defecting to UKIPPClipp said:
The Tories won the 2015 on the record of the Coalition Government, in particular on the popular Lib Dem policies which they appropriated to themselves, even though they opposed them in government. The promise to hold a referendum was popular only among Tory chauvinists.HYUFD said:
The Tories won a majority in 2015 though on a promise to hold the first EU referendumRecidivist said:
A lot of us didn't have any appetite for the first bloody one.HYUFD said:So there is a plurality who oppose the public being given a fibal.vote on the deal but a plurality want the public to get the final say.
The public will of course get the final say at the next general election anyway when they can vote Labour, LD, UKIP etc if they oppose the final deal the government has agreed with the EU. What is clear from this poll is there is no appetite for a second EU referendum0 -
Given the poll lead is roughly the same as the 2017 general election result of course she won't as there would be no changeFoxy said:
Theresa should call a surprise election so she can Crush the Saboteurs!AndyJS said:The Tories have racked up 6 consecutive poll leads according to Wikipedia, and have led in 8 of the last 10 surveys.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#20180 -
Once we are in transition there will be no way back. Remain will be out of the picture and the choice will only be Deal or No Deal. Perhaps anti-Brexit campaigners would be better off advocating an extension to A50 (n preference to transition) rather than shouting from the sidelines as they are at present.Foxy said:
I suspect @DavidL is correct, but the Deal is very likely to not be agreed pre Brexit, and most likely not before the end of Transition, as 2.5 years for such a complex trade deal is a very tall order. So any vote, whether Parliamentary or plebiscite is both a long way off, and most significantly post Brexit.PeterC said:
Do you think that Mrs May would survive the uproar if her proposed deal amounts to a transparent BINO. It would sure then beg the question of what is the point in leaving at all?DavidL said:I spent the weekend visiting my 20 year old daughter in Groningen in Holland where she is having an Erasmus year. It was delightful. What surprised me was that she volunteered that having studied EU law in some detail from a continental perspective, having been taught how it is made and what its objectives are she would now vote Leave. She voted remain at the time of the referendum and really had very little time for her dad's views (nothing wrong in that of course). Her view was that if people knew more about it they would like it less.
Of course this is a classic PB anecdote and I don't doubt that many others could tell stories of fervent leavers who have now changed their mind. What I think is fairly clear is that there has been very little change in the overall position as found in both the referendum and the election where 43% voted for a party completely committed to delivering Brexit (even if they were seriously unclear as to how) and 41% to a party at least notionally committed to respecting the vote, even if many of the members were unhappy about it. 7% voted for a party wanting a second referendum. Its just not going to happen.
Remainers really need to accept this and focus on achieving as soft a Brexit as possible with continued regulatory alignment, a customs union that looks suspiciously like the Customs Union, priority for EU citizens in immigration, a FTA which looks very like Single Market membership, the UK opting in to various EU bodies and paying subscriptions for their maintenance etc. It seems to me that that is what May is offering but the devil will be in the detail and remainers should be engaged to tweak that deal rather than sitting on the sidelines in the huff. I don't think that there is any chance of us rejoining the EU in the next 20 years but if they get this sort of deal it really wouldn't be that difficult (apart from joining the Euro).
But then, MRDA doesn't it?0 -
Jack of Kent blog on the Brexit Mandate:
http://jackofkent.com/2018/04/what-is-the-scope-of-the-brexit-mandate-and-when-will-it-be-discharged/0 -
Sweet baby Jesus, is there nobody in the Department for Exiting the European Union who can give David Davis a briefing on Irish politics? Not a full, in-depth, Donegal-to-Kerry briefing; just the basics will do. And if there isn’t anyone at DEXEU who could do this, perhaps some kind soul at the Northern Ireland office could pop over to give Davis a quick tutorial?
The Times reports this morning that this kind of briefing is urgently needed. Of course the paper doesn’t quite put it like that but this is the inescapable conclusion to be drawn from Davis’s own remarks at a conference in London yesterday. According to our gallant bulldog, the question of Brexit and the Irish border is being complicated by the Irish government. You see:
“We had a change of government, south of the border, and with quite a strong influence from Sinn Féin, and that had an impact in terms of the approach”
This, an audience member pointed out helpfully, was not actually true. There has been no change of government, merely a change of Taoiseach. Undeterred by mere facts, Davis blustered on:
“Well you had a change of leader or a change in taoiseach. They’ve [Sinn Féin] been playing a strong political role which they haven’t done historically, that I hadn’t foreseen”
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/04/how-dare-david-davis-blame-sinn-fein-for-the-irish-border-mess/0 -
He doesn't know what he's talking about, he writes Mandates from referendums (correct plural…)CarlottaVance said:Jack of Kent blog on the Brexit Mandate:
http://jackofkent.com/2018/04/what-is-the-scope-of-the-brexit-mandate-and-when-will-it-be-discharged/
If he can talk such arrant nonsense we can ignore the rest of his piece.0 -
-
Yes, particularly if the remainers get behind her and support her. The vast majority of people don't know or care about the details. They want an out and leave it to the government to work out what the best out is. Some Brexiteers will be unhappy but then, that's their natural state isn't it?PeterC said:
Do you think that Mrs May would survive the uproar if her proposed deal amounts to a transparent BINO. It would sure then beg the question of what is the point in leaving at all?DavidL said:I spent the weekend visiting my 20 year old daughter in Groningen in Holland where she is having an Erasmus year. It was delightful. What surprised me was that she volunteered that having studied EU law in some detail from a continental perspective, having been taught how it is made and what its objectives are she would now vote Leave. She voted remain at the time of the referendum and really had very little time for her dad's views (nothing wrong in that of course). Her view was that if people knew more about it they would like it less.
Of course this is a classic PB anecdote and I don't doubt that many others could tell stories of fervent leavers who have now changed their mind. What I think is fairly clear is that there has been very little change in the overall position as found in both the referendum and the election where 43% voted for a party completely committed to delivering Brexit (even if they were seriously unclear as to how) and 41% to a party at least notionally committed to respecting the vote, even if many of the members were unhappy about it. 7% voted for a party wanting a second referendum. Its just not going to happen.
Remainers really need to accept this and focus on achieving as soft a Brexit as possible with continued regulatory alignment, a customs union that looks suspiciously like the Customs Union, priority for EU citizens in immigration, a FTA which looks very like Single Market membership, the UK opting in to various EU bodies and paying subscriptions for their maintenance etc. It seems to me that that is what May is offering but the devil will be in the detail and remainers should be engaged to tweak that deal rather than sitting on the sidelines in the huff. I don't think that there is any chance of us rejoining the EU in the next 20 years but if they get this sort of deal it really wouldn't be that difficult (apart from joining the Euro).
But then, MRDA doesn't it?0 -
Will Bazza have resigned/been sacked by the end of the day?TGOHF said:
0 -
True. I don't think that will be sustainable in the long run but I think it is a sensible first step out the door.Foxy said:
Though in practice, under @DavidL's scenario, we will be tied into EU Law in many aspects because of Pseudo CU and SM, while no longer having a say via Commission or EP in drafting those laws.Casino_Royale said:
Your daughter is a wise woman.DavidL said:I spent the weekend visiting my 20 year old daughter in Groningen in Holland where she is having an Erasmus year. It was delightful. What surprised me was that she volunteered that having studied EU law in some detail from a continental perspective, having been taught how it is made and what its objectives are she would now vote Leave. She voted remain at the time of the referendum and really had very little time for her dad's views (nothing wrong in that of course). Her view was that if people knew more about it they would like it less.
Of course this is a classic PB anecdote and I don't doubt that many others could tell stories of fervent leavers who have now changed their mind. What I think is fairly clear is that there has been very little change in the overall position as found in both the referendum and the election where 43% voted for a party completely committed to delivering Brexit (even if they were seriously unclear as to how) and 41% to a party at least notionally committed to respecting the vote, even if many of the members were unhappy about it. 7% voted for a party wanting a second referendum. Its just not going to happen.
Remainers really need to accept this and focus on achieving as soft a Brexit as possible with continued regulatory alignment, a customs union that looks suspiciously like the Customs Union, priority for EU citizens in immigration, a FTA which looks very like Single Market membership, the UK opting in to various EU bodies and paying subscriptions for their maintenance etc. It seems to me that that is what May is offering but the devil will be in the detail and remainers should be engaged to tweak that deal rather than sitting on the sidelines in the huff. I don't think that there is any chance of us rejoining the EU in the next 20 years but if they get this sort of deal it really wouldn't be that difficult (apart from joining the Euro).
But then, MRDA doesn't it?0 -
Top trolling from DD - LV now has to be seen to either stand up to SF or capitulate to them.TheScreamingEagles said:Sweet baby Jesus, is there nobody in the Department for Exiting the European Union who can give David Davis a briefing on Irish politics? Not a full, in-depth, Donegal-to-Kerry briefing; just the basics will do. And if there isn’t anyone at DEXEU who could do this, perhaps some kind soul at the Northern Ireland office could pop over to give Davis a quick tutorial?
The Times reports this morning that this kind of briefing is urgently needed. Of course the paper doesn’t quite put it like that but this is the inescapable conclusion to be drawn from Davis’s own remarks at a conference in London yesterday. According to our gallant bulldog, the question of Brexit and the Irish border is being complicated by the Irish government. You see:
“We had a change of government, south of the border, and with quite a strong influence from Sinn Féin, and that had an impact in terms of the approach”
This, an audience member pointed out helpfully, was not actually true. There has been no change of government, merely a change of Taoiseach. Undeterred by mere facts, Davis blustered on:
“Well you had a change of leader or a change in taoiseach. They’ve [Sinn Féin] been playing a strong political role which they haven’t done historically, that I hadn’t foreseen”
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/04/how-dare-david-davis-blame-sinn-fein-for-the-irish-border-mess/
The Irish border issue is only an issue for the Irish govt - wish they would hurry up and decide if they will build their border or not. The Uk isn’t interested in building one whatever they decide.0 -
I agree with your comment that it is unsustainable, which is why none of this is sensible. But there we go ....DavidL said:
True. I don't think that will be sustainable in the long run but I think it is a sensible first step out the door.Foxy said:
Though in practice, under @DavidL's scenario, we will be tied into EU Law in many aspects because of Pseudo CU and SM, while no longer having a say via Commission or EP in drafting those laws.Casino_Royale said:
Your daughter is a wise woman.DavidL said:I spent the weekend visiting my 20 year old daughter in Groningen in Holland where she is having an Erasmus year. It was delightful. What surprised me was that she volunteered that having studied EU law in some detail from a continental perspective, having been taught how it is made and what its objectives are she would now vote Leave. She voted remain at the time of the referendum and really had very little time for her dad's views (nothing wrong in that of course). Her view was that if people knew more about it they would like it less.
Of course this is a classic PB anecdote and I don't doubt that many others could tell stories of fervent leavers who have now changed their mind. What I think is fairly clear is that there has been very little change in the overall position as found in both the referendum and the election where 43% voted for a party completely committed to delivering Brexit (even if they were seriously unclear as to how) and 41% to a party at least notionally committed to respecting the vote, even if many of the members were unhappy about it. 7% voted for a party wanting a second referendum. Its just not going to happen.
Remainers really need to accept this and focus on achieving as soft a Brexit as possible with continued regulatory alignment, a customs union that looks suspiciously like the Customs Union, priority for EU citizens in immigration, a FTA which looks very like Single Market membership, the UK opting in to various EU bodies and paying subscriptions for their maintenance etc. It seems to me that that is what May is offering but the devil will be in the detail and remainers should be engaged to tweak that deal rather than sitting on the sidelines in the huff. I don't think that there is any chance of us rejoining the EU in the next 20 years but if they get this sort of deal it really wouldn't be that difficult (apart from joining the Euro).
But then, MRDA doesn't it?0 -
Yup, that’s why the issue is annoying the hell out of the EU - we have no intention of doing anything with regard to a border, but their rules insist on a proper hard border with fences, checkpoints and customs as there are with every other EU/non-EU land border.TGOHF said:
Top trolling from DD - LV now has to be seen to either stand up to SF or capitulate to them.TheScreamingEagles said:Sweet baby Jesus, is there nobody in the Department for Exiting the European Union who can give David Davis a briefing on Irish politics? Not a full, in-depth, Donegal-to-Kerry briefing; just the basics will do. And if there isn’t anyone at DEXEU who could do this, perhaps some kind soul at the Northern Ireland office could pop over to give Davis a quick tutorial?
The Times reports this morning that this kind of briefing is urgently needed. Of course the paper doesn’t quite put it like that but this is the inescapable conclusion to be drawn from Davis’s own remarks at a conference in London yesterday. According to our gallant bulldog, the question of Brexit and the Irish border is being complicated by the Irish government. You see:
“We had a change of government, south of the border, and with quite a strong influence from Sinn Féin, and that had an impact in terms of the approach”
This, an audience member pointed out helpfully, was not actually true. There has been no change of government, merely a change of Taoiseach. Undeterred by mere facts, Davis blustered on:
“Well you had a change of leader or a change in taoiseach. They’ve [Sinn Féin] been playing a strong political role which they haven’t done historically, that I hadn’t foreseen”
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/04/how-dare-david-davis-blame-sinn-fein-for-the-irish-border-mess/
The Irish border issue is only an issue for the Irish govt - wish they would hurry up and decide if they will build their border or not. The Uk isn’t interested in building one whatever they decide.0 -
There will be no second referendum.
There will be two intra-transitional deal manifestos outlining what Out will look like under Cons or Lab.
It will be very messy and likely irrelevant what Lab’s vision is if Jeremy still leads the party.0 -
Once we are out we can decide and redecide how close we want to be to the EU. That will depend on things completely out of our control such as how it develops without our involvement. This deal that people are obsessing on will be no more than a staging post. There will continue to be many of these as there have been over the last 26 years.FF43 said:
I agree with your comment that it is unsustainable, which is why none of this is sensible. But there we go ....DavidL said:
True. I don't think that will be sustainable in the long run but I think it is a sensible first step out the door.Foxy said:
Though in practice, under @DavidL's scenario, we will be tied into EU Law in many aspects because of Pseudo CU and SM, while no longer having a say via Commission or EP in drafting those laws.Casino_Royale said:
Your daughter is a wise woman.DavidL said:
0 -
Question regarding tonight's clash between Man City and Liverpool, with Liverpool going to City with a 3-0 lead.
I believe the Away Goals rule applies both after 90 minutes and after extra time is that correct?
EG if after 90 minutes City win 4-1 (4-4 on aggregate) then Liverpool progress, there is no extra time.
If after 90 minutes City win 3-0 then it goes to extra time. If both teams score 1 each in extra time (4-4 AET on aggregate) then Liverpool progress.
Penalties only if tie still 3-3 on aggregate after extra time.
So essentially if Liverpool score at all tonight then there won't be penalties, and if they score in 90 minutes there won't be extra time. Is that correct?0 -
Exactly so. But Irish problems have a habit of feeding into tensions that exist elsewhere in the British Isles. I suspect this one will too.Rhubarb said:
Most mainland Brits don't care about NI at all. Any future border is just a detail of that.FF43 said:On Brexit polling this result doesn't surprise me at all on the Irish border issue.
https://twitter.com/SamuelMarcLowe/status/983287241157079040
The whole report is worth a read. My main takeaway on the Irish Border question is that people still cling to the myth that the UK will have an independent trade policy pre or post Brexit. If it's not going to happen, it's not worth trading off for.
The problem with Brexit polling generally, and indeed with the referendum itself, is that there is no evaluation of costs for each option. If you ask the question, "Would you prefer you and your family potentially to lose their jobs, or would you prefer a soft Irish border", you would probably get a different answer. It would be seen as a leading question of course.0 -
I see Barry Gardiner has come over all Roger Mellie.0
-
Welsh Independence Party set to sweep the board at next GE ?FF43 said:
Exactly so. But Irish problems have a habit of feeding into tensions that exist elsewhere in the British Isles. I suspect this one will too.Rhubarb said:
Most mainland Brits don't care about NI at all. Any future border is just a detail of that.FF43 said:On Brexit polling this result doesn't surprise me at all on the Irish border issue.
https://twitter.com/SamuelMarcLowe/status/983287241157079040
The whole report is worth a read. My main takeaway on the Irish Border question is that people still cling to the myth that the UK will have an independent trade policy pre or post Brexit. If it's not going to happen, it's not worth trading off for.
The problem with Brexit polling generally, and indeed with the referendum itself, is that there is no evaluation of costs for each option. If you ask the question, "Would you prefer you and your family potentially to lose their jobs, or would you prefer a soft Irish border", you would probably get a different answer. It would be seen as a leading question of course.
LV is dithering - DD right to call him out.0 -
Yes, easily. Look at what unpalatable compromises have been made so far - money being the biggest and now forgotten, but customs union NI border backstops, immigration registration in transition, fisheries etc. For Mrs May not to survive, there has to be a single point, and single concession where Jacob Rees Mogg decides to bring her down over it. And all that would risk is Corbyn in number 10 and Brexit totally derailed. So he can whinge about disappointment, modest deals all he likes, but the only way to secure Brexit is to vote for whatever deal the Government comes up with, however rubbish. And May knows it.PeterC said:
Do you think that Mrs May would survive the uproar if her proposed deal amounts to a transparent BINO. It would sure then beg the question of what is the point in leaving at all?DavidL said:I spent the weekend visiting my 20 year old daughter in Groningen in Holland where she is having an Erasmus year. It was delightful. What surprised me was that she volunteered that having studied EU law in some detail from a continental perspective, having been taught how it is made and what its objectives are she would now vote Leave. She voted remain at the time of the referendum and really had very little time for her dad's views (nothing wrong in that of course). Her view was that if people knew more about it they would like it less.
Of course this is a classic PB anecdote and I don't doubt that many others could tell stories of fervent leavers who have now changed their mind. What I think is fairly clear is that there has been very little change in the overall position as found in both the referendum and the election where 43% voted for a party completely committed to delivering Brexit (even if they were seriously unclear as to how) and 41% to a party at least notionally committed to respecting the vote, even if many of the members were unhappy about it. 7% voted for a party wanting a second referendum. Its just not going to happen.
Remainers really need to accept this and focus on achieving as soft a Brexit as possible with continued regulatory alignment, a customs union that looks suspiciously like the Customs Union, priority for EU citizens in immigration, a FTA which looks very like Single Market membership, the UK opting in to various EU bodies and paying subscriptions for their maintenance etc. It seems to me that that is what May is offering but the devil will be in the detail and remainers should be engaged to tweak that deal rather than sitting on the sidelines in the huff. I don't think that there is any chance of us rejoining the EU in the next 20 years but if they get this sort of deal it really wouldn't be that difficult (apart from joining the Euro).
But then, MRDA doesn't it?
It's been an object lesson in salami-slicing epic backsliding.0 -
Apart from the ridiculousness of a Fine Gael politician ever taking instructions from Sinn Féin, I have yet to find an Irish person who chooses the UK line on the Irish border to that of their own government.The real question is why David Davis feels a political need to blame the Irish for the contradictions of their own policy. It's very similar to Tony Blair blaming the French for his decision to invade Iraq.TheScreamingEagles said:Sweet baby Jesus, is there nobody in the Department for Exiting the European Union who can give David Davis a briefing on Irish politics? Not a full, in-depth, Donegal-to-Kerry briefing; just the basics will do. And if there isn’t anyone at DEXEU who could do this, perhaps some kind soul at the Northern Ireland office could pop over to give Davis a quick tutorial?
The Times reports this morning that this kind of briefing is urgently needed. Of course the paper doesn’t quite put it like that but this is the inescapable conclusion to be drawn from Davis’s own remarks at a conference in London yesterday. According to our gallant bulldog, the question of Brexit and the Irish border is being complicated by the Irish government. You see:
“We had a change of government, south of the border, and with quite a strong influence from Sinn Féin, and that had an impact in terms of the approach”
This, an audience member pointed out helpfully, was not actually true. There has been no change of government, merely a change of Taoiseach. Undeterred by mere facts, Davis blustered on:
“Well you had a change of leader or a change in taoiseach. They’ve [Sinn Féin] been playing a strong political role which they haven’t done historically, that I hadn’t foreseen”
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/04/how-dare-david-davis-blame-sinn-fein-for-the-irish-border-mess/0 -
Yes. 3-0 is only scoreline that gives extra time.Philip_Thompson said:Question regarding tonight's clash between Man City and Liverpool, with Liverpool going to City with a 3-0 lead.
I believe the Away Goals rule applies both after 90 minutes and after extra time is that correct?
EG if after 90 minutes City win 4-1 (4-4 on aggregate) then Liverpool progress, there is no extra time.
If after 90 minutes City win 3-0 then it goes to extra time. If both teams score 1 each in extra time (4-4 AET on aggregate) then Liverpool progress.
Penalties only if tie still 3-3 on aggregate after extra time.
So essentially if Liverpool score at all tonight then there won't be penalties, and if they score in 90 minutes there won't be extra time. Is that correct?
I have £2 on 5-1 and also on 6-1.
0 -
It's not the Uk's fault that Ireland is continuing in a trade cartel - the ROI either need to find a solution or build a wall.FF43 said:
Apart from the ridiculousness of a Fine Gael politician ever taking instructions from Sinn Féin, I have yet to find an Irish person who chooses the UK line on the Irish border to that of their own government.The real question is why David Davis feels a political need to blame the Irish for the contradictions of their own policy. It's very similar to Tony Blair blaming the French for his decision to invade Iraq.TheScreamingEagles said:Sweet baby Jesus, is there nobody in the Department for Exiting the European Union who can give David Davis a briefing on Irish politics? Not a full, in-depth, Donegal-to-Kerry briefing; just the basics will do. And if there isn’t anyone at DEXEU who could do this, perhaps some kind soul at the Northern Ireland office could pop over to give Davis a quick tutorial?
The Times reports this morning that this kind of briefing is urgently needed. Of course the paper doesn’t quite put it like that but this is the inescapable conclusion to be drawn from Davis’s own remarks at a conference in London yesterday. According to our gallant bulldog, the question of Brexit and the Irish border is being complicated by the Irish government. You see:
“We had a change of government, south of the border, and with quite a strong influence from Sinn Féin, and that had an impact in terms of the approach”
This, an audience member pointed out helpfully, was not actually true. There has been no change of government, merely a change of Taoiseach. Undeterred by mere facts, Davis blustered on:
“Well you had a change of leader or a change in taoiseach. They’ve [Sinn Féin] been playing a strong political role which they haven’t done historically, that I hadn’t foreseen”
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/04/how-dare-david-davis-blame-sinn-fein-for-the-irish-border-mess/
0 -
He's writing in English not Latin....TheScreamingEagles said:
He doesn't know what he's talking about, he writes Mandates from referendums (correct plural…)CarlottaVance said:Jack of Kent blog on the Brexit Mandate:
http://jackofkent.com/2018/04/what-is-the-scope-of-the-brexit-mandate-and-when-will-it-be-discharged/
If he can talk such arrant nonsense we can ignore the rest of his piece.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/07/why-the-plural-of-referendum-must-be-referendums/0 -
The conundrum, though, is that any practical outcome for the UK involves the UK being plugged into the EU system on its terms. We can either be a member of that organisation helping to shape direction or we can be outside doing what we are told. The latter is unsustainable, as we have discussed. We could just sod off, but that isn't sustainable either.DavidL said:
Once we are out we can decide and redecide how close we want to be to the EU. That will depend on things completely out of our control such as how it develops without our involvement. This deal that people are obsessing on will be no more than a staging post. There will continue to be many of these as there have been over the last 26 years.FF43 said:
I agree with your comment that it is unsustainable, which is why none of this is sensible. But there we go ....DavidL said:
True. I don't think that will be sustainable in the long run but I think it is a sensible first step out the door.Foxy said:
Though in practice, under @DavidL's scenario, we will be tied into EU Law in many aspects because of Pseudo CU and SM, while no longer having a say via Commission or EP in drafting those laws.Casino_Royale said:
Your daughter is a wise woman.DavidL said:
There is a massive contradiction here, which is why Brexit isn't sensible at all.0 -
I don't give balanced summaries, only brutally accurate onesYorkcity said: 0 -
It isn’t nearly as black and white as you make out, and you reveal your own biases in arguing it is so.FF43 said:
The conundrum, though, is that there is no practical outcome for the UK that doesn't involve the UK plugged into the EU on its terms. We can either be a member of that organisation helping to shape direction or we can be outside doing what we are told. The latter is unsustainable, as we have discussed. We could just sod off, but that isn't sustainable either we will need to come back to the EU.DavidL said:
Once we are out we can decide and redecide how close we want to be to the EU. That will depend on things completely out of our control such as how it develops without our involvement. This deal that people are obsessing on will be no more than a staging post. There will continue to be many of these as there have been over the last 26 years.FF43 said:
I agree with your comment that it is unsustainable, which is why none of this is sensible. But there we go ....DavidL said:
True. I don't think that will be sustainable in the long run but I think it is a sensible first step out the door.Foxy said:
Though in practice, under @DavidL's scenario, we will be tied into EU Law in many aspects because of Pseudo CU and SM, while no longer having a say via Commission or EP in drafting those laws.Casino_Royale said:
Your daughter is a wise woman.DavidL said:
There is a massive contradiction here, which is why Brexit isn't sensible at all.
The EU need to show there is no better deal than full membership. The UK need to achieve a meaningful repatriation of powers. In that there is a lot of wiggle room.0 -
Barnett, language, EVEL (tho' less so now) and devolution have been issues for decades. Mainland apathy to NI (and the other home nations slowly increasing apathy towards each other) is a reflection of that, not a cause.FF43 said:
Exactly so. But Irish problems have a habit of feeding into tensions that exist elsewhere in the British Isles. I suspect this one will too.Rhubarb said:
Most mainland Brits don't care about NI at all. Any future border is just a detail of that.FF43 said:On Brexit polling this result doesn't surprise me at all on the Irish border issue.
https://twitter.com/SamuelMarcLowe/status/983287241157079040
The whole report is worth a read. My main takeaway on the Irish Border question is that people still cling to the myth that the UK will have an independent trade policy pre or post Brexit. If it's not going to happen, it's not worth trading off for.
The problem with Brexit polling generally, and indeed with the referendum itself, is that there is no evaluation of costs for each option. If you ask the question, "Would you prefer you and your family potentially to lose their jobs, or would you prefer a soft Irish border", you would probably get a different answer. It would be seen as a leading question of course.0 -
Perhaps it was May's 'very cunning' plan to call a general election to lose her majority but keep enough seats to stay PM so that Mogg et al could not rebel too much over the Brexit deal without risking a Corbyn government and so she can blame her limitations on giving concessions to the Republic of Ireland on the DUP!tpfkar said:
Yes, easily. Look at what unpalatable compromises have been made so far - money being the biggest and now forgotten, but customs union NI border backstops, immigration registration in transition, fisheries etc. For Mrs May not to survive, there has to be a single point, and single concession where Jacob Rees Mogg decides to bring her down over it. And all that would risk is Corbyn in number 10 and Brexit totally derailed. So he can whinge about disappointment, modest deals all he likes, but the only way to secure Brexit is to vote for whatever deal the Government comes up with, however rubbish. And May knows it.PeterC said:
Do you think that Mrs May would survive the uproar if her proposed deal amounts to a transparent BINO. It would sure then beg the question of what is the point in leaving at all?DavidL said:I spent the weekend visiting my 20 year old daughter in Groningen in Holland where she is having an Erasmus year. It was delightful. What surprised me was that she volunteered that having studied EU law in some detail from a continental perspective, having been taught how it is made and what its objectives are she would now vote Leave. She voted remain at the time of the referendum and really had very little time for her dad's views (nothing wrong in that of course). Her view was that if people knew more about it they would like it less.
Of course this is a classic PB anecdote and I don't doubt that many others could tell stories of fervent leavers who have now changed their mind. What I think is fairly clear is that there has been very little change in the overall position as found in both the referendum and the election where 43% voted for a party completely committed to delivering Brexit (even if they were seriously unclear as to how) and 41% to a party at least notionally committed to respecting the vote, even if many of the members were unhappy about it. 7% voted for a party wanting a second referendum. Its just not going to happen.
Remainers really need to accept this and focus on achieving as soft a Brexit as possible with continued regulatory alignment, a customs union that looks suspiciously like
But then, MRDA doesn't it?
It's been an object lesson in salami-slicing epic backsliding.0 -
It would be fair to say that Sinn Fein have been instrumental in exercising political pressure in Eire on the Taoiseach over NI & Brexit.TheScreamingEagles said:Sweet baby Jesus, is there nobody in the Department for Exiting the European Union who can give David Davis a briefing on Irish politics? Not a full, in-depth, Donegal-to-Kerry briefing; just the basics will do. And if there isn’t anyone at DEXEU who could do this, perhaps some kind soul at the Northern Ireland office could pop over to give Davis a quick tutorial?
The Times reports this morning that this kind of briefing is urgently needed. Of course the paper doesn’t quite put it like that but this is the inescapable conclusion to be drawn from Davis’s own remarks at a conference in London yesterday. According to our gallant bulldog, the question of Brexit and the Irish border is being complicated by the Irish government. You see:
“We had a change of government, south of the border, and with quite a strong influence from Sinn Féin, and that had an impact in terms of the approach”
This, an audience member pointed out helpfully, was not actually true. There has been no change of government, merely a change of Taoiseach. Undeterred by mere facts, Davis blustered on:
“Well you had a change of leader or a change in taoiseach. They’ve [Sinn Féin] been playing a strong political role which they haven’t done historically, that I hadn’t foreseen”
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/04/how-dare-david-davis-blame-sinn-fein-for-the-irish-border-mess/0 -
Fair enough. It's not black and white. I expect BINO to be sustained, precisely because of the contradiction I outlined. People will, I suspect, accept the EU telling the UK what to do over not having a viable set of trade relationships or the embarrassment of returning to the EU. If all three available options are "unsustainable" something has to give.Casino_Royale said:
It isn’t nearly as black and white as you make out, and you reveal your own biases in arguing it is so.FF43 said:
The conundrum, though, is that there is no practical outcome for the UK that doesn't involve the UK plugged into the EU on its terms. We can either be a member of that organisation helping to shape direction or we can be outside doing what we are told. The latter is unsustainable, as we have discussed. We could just sod off, but that isn't sustainable either we will need to come back to the EU.DavidL said:
Once we are out we can decide and redecide how close we want to be to the EU. That will depend on things completely out of our control such as how it develops without our involvement. This deal that people are obsessing on will be no more than a staging post. There will continue to be many of these as there have been over the last 26 years.FF43 said:
I agree with your comment that it is unsustainable, which is why none of this is sensible. But there we go ....DavidL said:
True. I don't think that will be sustainable in the long run but I think it is a sensible first step out the door.Foxy said:
Though in practice, under @DavidL's scenario, we will be tied into EU Law in many aspects because of Pseudo CU and SM, while no longer having a say via Commission or EP in drafting those laws.Casino_Royale said:
Your daughter is a wise woman.DavidL said:
There is a massive contradiction here, which is why Brexit isn't sensible at all.
The EU need to show there is no better deal than full membership. The UK need to achieve a meaningful repatriation of powers. In that there is a lot of wiggle room.
It still isn't sensible however.0 -
I am not sure. What is certainly the case is that Brexit is a gift for Sinn Féin. They reckon it's doing more for their cause than decades of violence.Casino_Royale said:
It would be fair to say that Sinn Fein have been instrumental in exercising political pressure in Eire on the Taoiseach over NI & Brexit.TheScreamingEagles said:Sweet baby Jesus, is there nobody in the Department for Exiting the European Union who can give David Davis a briefing on Irish politics? Not a full, in-depth, Donegal-to-Kerry briefing; just the basics will do. And if there isn’t anyone at DEXEU who could do this, perhaps some kind soul at the Northern Ireland office could pop over to give Davis a quick tutorial?
The Times reports this morning that this kind of briefing is urgently needed. Of course the paper doesn’t quite put it like that but this is the inescapable conclusion to be drawn from Davis’s own remarks at a conference in London yesterday. According to our gallant bulldog, the question of Brexit and the Irish border is being complicated by the Irish government. You see:
“We had a change of government, south of the border, and with quite a strong influence from Sinn Féin, and that had an impact in terms of the approach”
This, an audience member pointed out helpfully, was not actually true. There has been no change of government, merely a change of Taoiseach. Undeterred by mere facts, Davis blustered on:
“Well you had a change of leader or a change in taoiseach. They’ve [Sinn Féin] been playing a strong political role which they haven’t done historically, that I hadn’t foreseen”
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/04/how-dare-david-davis-blame-sinn-fein-for-the-irish-border-mess/0 -
A FTA will not be BINO, that requires permanent single market membership and customs union membershipFF43 said:
Fair enough. It's not black and white. I expect BINO to be sustained, precisely because of the contradiction I outlined. People will, I suspect, accept the EU telling the UK what to do over not having a viable set of trade relationships or the embarrassment of returning to the EU. If all three available options are "unsustainable" something has to give.Casino_Royale said:
It isn’t nearly as black and white as you make out, and you reveal your own biases in arguing it is so.FF43 said:
The conundrum, though, is that there is no practical outcome for the UK that doesn't involve the UK plugged into the EU on its terms. We can either be a member of that organisation helping to shape direction or we can be outside doing what we are told. The latter is unsustainable, as we have discussed. We could just sod off, but that isn't sustainable either we will need to come back to the EU.DavidL said:
Once we are out we can decide and redecide how close we want to be to the EU. That will depend on things completely out of our control such as how it develops without our involvement. This deal that people are obsessing on will be no more than a staging post. There will continue to be many of these as there have been over the last 26 years.FF43 said:
I agree with your comment that it is unsustainable, which is why none of this is sensible. But there we go ....DavidL said:
True. I don't think that will be sustainable in the long run but I think it is a sensible first step out the door.Foxy said:
Though in practice, under @DavidL's scenario, we will be tied into EU Law in many aspects because of Pseudo CU and SM, while no longer having a say via Commission or EP in drafting those laws.Casino_Royale said:
Your daughter is a wise woman.DavidL said:
There is a massive contradiction here, which is why Brexit isn't sensible at all.
The EU need to show there is no better deal than full membership. The UK need to achieve a meaningful repatriation of powers. In that there is a lot of wiggle room.
It still isn't sensible however.0 -
In goods, yes, but the Government is going for more detachment on services.Foxy said:
Though in practice, under @DavidL's scenario, we will be tied into EU Law in many aspects because of Pseudo CU and SM, while no longer having a say via Commission or EP in drafting those laws.Casino_Royale said:
Your daughter is a wise woman.DavidL said:I spent the weekend visiting my 20 year old daughter in Groningen in Holland where she is having an Erasmus year. It was delightful. What surprised me was that she volunteered that having studied EU law in some detail from a continental perspective, having been taught how it is made and what its objectives are she would now vote Leave. She voted remain at the time of the referendum and really had very little time for her dad's views (nothing wrong in that of course). Her view was that if people knew more about it they would like it less.
Of course this is a classic PB anecdote and I don't doubt that many others could tell stories of fervent leavers who have now changed their mind. What I think is fairly clear is that there has been very little change in the overall position as found in both the referendum and the election where 43% voted for a party completely committed to delivering Brexit (even if they were seriously unclear as to how) and 41% to a party at least notionally committed to respecting the vote, even if many of the members were unhappy about it. 7% voted for a party wanting a second referendum. Its just not going to happen.
Remainers really need to accept this and focus on achieving as soft a Brexit as possible with continued regulatory alignment, a customs union that looks suspiciously like the Customs Union, priority for EU citizens in immigration, a FTA which looks very like Single Market membership, the UK opting in to various EU bodies and paying subscriptions for their maintenance etc. It seems to me that that is what May is offering but the devil will be in the detail and remainers should be engaged to tweak that deal rather than sitting on the sidelines in the huff. I don't think that there is any chance of us rejoining the EU in the next 20 years but if they get this sort of deal it really wouldn't be that difficult (apart from joining the Euro).
But then, MRDA doesn't it?0 -
Better to let the ship sink first then salvage what you can from the wreckage. There’s no point Remain supporters getting involved yet. Leave supporters are as yet unready to accept their own complicity in xenophobic lies and in any case would simply accuse Remain supporters of seeking to sabotage Brexit.DavidL said:I spent the weekend visiting my 20 year old daughter in Groningen in Holland where she is having an Erasmus year. It was delightful. What surprised me was that she volunteered that having studied EU law in some detail from a continental perspective, having been taught how it is made and what its objectives are she would now vote Leave. She voted remain at the time of the referendum and really had very little time for her dad's views (nothing wrong in that of course). Her view was that if people knew more about it they would like it less.
Of course this is a classic PB anecdote and I don't doubt that many others could tell stories of fervent leavers who have now changed their mind. What I think is fairly clear is that there has been very little change in the overall position as found in both the referendum and the election where 43% voted for a party completely committed to delivering Brexit (even if they were seriously unclear as to how) and 41% to a party at least notionally committed to respecting the vote, even if many of the members were unhappy about it. 7% voted for a party wanting a second referendum. Its just not going to happen.
Remainers really need to accept this and focus on achieving as soft a Brexit as possible with continued regulatory alignment, a customs union that looks suspiciously like the Customs Union, priority for EU citizens in immigration, a FTA which looks very like Single Market membership, the UK opting in to various EU bodies and paying subscriptions for their maintenance etc. It seems to me that that is what May is offering but the devil will be in the detail and remainers should be engaged to tweak that deal rather than sitting on the sidelines in the huff. I don't think that there is any chance of us rejoining the EU in the next 20 years but if they get this sort of deal it really wouldn't be that difficult (apart from joining the Euro).
But then, MRDA doesn't it?0 -
I would agree with that .FIFA , should reallocate the tournament in England banning Russia.That would send the correct signal.Will never happen though.rottenborough said:0 -
Quite, Mr HYUDF. Which is why we now have a UKIP-DUP government.HYUFD said:
It was in the Tory manifesto and kept a number of Tory voters from defecting to UKIPPClipp said:The Tories won the 2015 on the record of the Coalition Government, in particular on the popular Lib Dem policies which they appropriated to themselves, even though they opposed them in government. The promise to hold a referendum was popular only among Tory chauvinists.
0 -
Isn’t that the point, though?david_herdson said:
We're also running out to put the legal framework in place for a referendum. To hold one before March 29, you need the campaign to take place, which requires registered Yes and No (or whatever) campaigns, which requires them to be formed and approved by the Electoral Commission, which requires legislation to be in place to kick-start it all, which requires a Bill to be introduced and passed through parliament.Andy_Cooke said:This might be a cynical way of seeing this, but given that Conservative voters of 2017 split 21/63 against even the "final say" version, and in an adversarial democracy, the Government first keeps its own voters sweet (if it wants to get re-elected), it ain't happening.
Not unless that number shifted to a great degree, and the overall figure was strongly pro-final say. And we're running out of time for that very rapidly.
Given that it'd be foolish to hold a referendum with no time to sort out the fallout should the people give the 'wrong' result, we're probably pretty close to the deadline for when a bill could reasonably be introduced to allow time for all the stages.
Leave aside that were such legislation going through, it'd make negotiations with the EU much harder.
Get the legislation going now, help deliver a crap deal from the EU then it’s much easier to sting Leave in the 2nd ref.0 -
The problem with a second referendum is there is simply no time. We are leaving next March. We don't hold elections and referenda over the winter so realistically it would have to be in October 2018. Will a deal even be ready to vote on by then? Parliament would need to be working on the enabling legislation now and I see no sign of that happening.
Also May is never going to agree to a second referendum. If she lost, she would have to resign like Cameron did. Parliament cannot force the executive to hold a referendum.
My view remains that there will be a deal "fudged brexit", which will go to parliament. While some of the hardcore brexiteers and remainers will moan, the deal will be comfortably approved and life will go on.0 -
0
-
If it is, it’s yet to show up in any border poll I’ve seen.FF43 said:
I am not sure. What is certainly the case is that Brexit is a gift for Sinn Féin. They reckon it's doing more for their cause than decades of violence.Casino_Royale said:
It would be fair to say that Sinn Fein have been instrumental in exercising political pressure in Eire on the Taoiseach over NI & Brexit.TheScreamingEagles said:Sweet baby Jesus, is there nobody in the Department for Exiting the European Union who can give David Davis a briefing on Irish politics? Not a full, in-depth, Donegal-to-Kerry briefing; just the basics will do. And if there isn’t anyone at DEXEU who could do this, perhaps some kind soul at the Northern Ireland office could pop over to give Davis a quick tutorial?
The Times reports this morning that this kind of briefing is urgently needed. Of course the paper doesn’t quite put it like that but this is the inescapable conclusion to be drawn from Davis’s own remarks at a conference in London yesterday. According to our gallant bulldog, the question of Brexit and the Irish border is being complicated by the Irish government. You see:
“We had a change of government, south of the border, and with quite a strong influence from Sinn Féin, and that had an impact in terms of the approach”
This, an audience member pointed out helpfully, was not actually true. There has been no change of government, merely a change of Taoiseach. Undeterred by mere facts, Davis blustered on:
“Well you had a change of leader or a change in taoiseach. They’ve [Sinn Féin] been playing a strong political role which they haven’t done historically, that I hadn’t foreseen”
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/04/how-dare-david-davis-blame-sinn-fein-for-the-irish-border-mess/0 -
Though May is not going straight to WTO terms either so it is more in betweenPClipp said:
Quite, Mr HYUDF. Which is why we now have a UKIP-DUP government.HYUFD said:
It was in the Tory manifesto and kept a number of Tory voters from defecting to UKIPPClipp said:The Tories won the 2015 on the record of the Coalition Government, in particular on the popular Lib Dem policies which they appropriated to themselves, even though they opposed them in government. The promise to hold a referendum was popular only among Tory chauvinists.
0 -
USA didn't qualify - can't see a boycott being brewed up by Germany, Spain and England (via the Uk)Yorkcity said:
I would agree with that .FIFA , should reallocate the tournament in England banning Russia.That would send the correct signal.Will never happen though.rottenborough said:
No chance.0 -
The only reason I'm not going to quote David Cameron's famous dictum is that Trump was a twat long before Twitter was around.rottenborough said:Donald's awake and annoyed:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/9836628685403463710 -
FTA isn't BINO. It's the "not having a viable set of trade relationships" option that I talked about. It's possible the UK government will aim to go down this route although it has done nothing to effect any of it so far. It's going to hit a lot of vested interests along the way and there will be some very undesirable consequences if it does. In my view if does attempt this route it will backtrack in time. I don't see we will end up there. The government needs to put this issue to bed without it being an outright disaster. Casino R would say my sense of realism is my "confirmation bias", I guess.HYUFD said:
A FTA will not be BINO, that requires permanent single market membership and customs union membershipFF43 said:
Fair enough. It's not black and white. I expect BINO to be sustained, precisely because of the contradiction I outlined. People will, I suspect, accept the EU telling the UK what to do over not having a viable set of trade relationships or the embarrassment of returning to the EU. If all three available options are "unsustainable" something has to give.Casino_Royale said:
It isn’t nearly as black and white as you make out, and you reveal your own biases in arguing it is so.FF43 said:
The conundrum, though, is that there is no practical outcome for the UK that doesn't involve the UK plugged into the EU on its terms. We can either be a member of that organisation helping to shape direction or we can be outside doing what we are told. The latter is unsustainable, as we have discussed. We could just sod off, but that isn't sustainable either we will need to come back to the EU.
There is a massive contradiction here, which is why Brexit isn't sensible at all.
The EU need to show there is no better deal than full membership. The UK need to achieve a meaningful repatriation of powers. In that there is a lot of wiggle room.
It still isn't sensible however.0 -
The question for, or about, the President is this. If the Russians really do have dirt on the Donald, and it's not just a series of unfortunate loans, then how does that affect Syria?rottenborough said:Donald's awake and annoyed:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/9836628685403463710
