What next?

Ah yes Labaik but we want to go back to the good old days. Remember them, before all the employment protection which was forced on us by those unelected people in Brussels and before you were forced to eat straight bananas. Don't forget one of those terrible people drinks too much which is an excellent reason for leaving the EU. How could we possibly be better off when one of them drinks too much? Don't you understand the importance of one man's drinking against the future of our grandchildren?

The Andrew Marr programme about the history of the world a couple of nights ago was about the post war years in Britain, and we were in a terrible mess. We've only recently paid back the money we owed America and yet we're hell bent on committing economic suicide by leaving the EU.

The 2nd world war was won by America’s entry into the war.

The fact that we had allies or do all the Polish, Czech, Indian and all of the other empire forces have nothing to do with it.

Hitler made a catastrophic decision to invade Russia and delay invading the U.K.

We had the best Wartime leader it was possible to have in Winston Churchill.

We didn’t win the war alone and Brexit is a completely different kettle of fish.

Anyone who lived through the war and the financial aftermath should not be wishing that on their children, grandchildren or their great grandchildren.

I'm so sick of this Nationalistic fantasy-land image of Britain that so many Brexiteers hold.

Me too, Beammeupscottie.

The 'sick man of Europe', wasn't it?

Exactly I have friends who live on the northern Irish side of the border and the husband works in the republic and they are terrified. Let alone the memories of the troubles, what they lived through and the fight to get the good Friday agreement

I'm so sick of this Nationalistic fantasy-land image of Britain that so many Brexiteers hold. NOW, in the real world ,Britain counts for very little. And dont look to the USA to prop us up tradewise. Our only use to them is a military base to get to Europe, which would probably be damaged by Brexit, which is for dreamers not realists.

And what about Northern Ireland Lyndiloo? The people who possibly will be most affected by a 'no deal' voted to remain. You mention countries on the other side of the world. What about those whose lives will possibly be changed because of a 'no deal' that are just across The Irish Sea?

Yes Jack we will survive but under what conditions? You have 'lived a long time' as have most of us on here but do we really want to give our grandchildren a hard time? Do we want them to struggle? I don't.

I shared a tiny bedsit, cooked on 2 gas rings and shared a bathroom with people I didn't know in the 60s but I don't want that for my GC.

surrender??!!!

I have lived quite a long time and witnessed much, but nothing compared to what is happening now. For centuries Britain ran its own affairs with considerable success in fact often leading the rest of the world. Those under 50 have not known anything but life in the EU and so are afraid that Nanny is taking away their safety blanket. All the reasons batted back and forth, stay or leave don't amount to a hill of beans; life will go. People and nations will trade with each other as they always have done. Survival is a very strong instinct. Britain stood alone in 1940 and survived despite those who wanted then as now to surrender.

The Commission decides what MEPs vote on.

I know, it made a nice inflammatory soundbite to fool people with, didn't it. The reality is rather more complex.

Try reading this:

www.europarl.europa.eu/external/html/legislativeprocedure/default_en.htm

The European Commission prepares legislative proposals on its own initiative or at the request of other EU institutions or countries, or following a citizens' initiative, often after public consultations. The final proposal is forwarded simultaneously to the European Parliament, Council and national parliaments and, in some cases, to the Committee of the Regions and the Economic and Social Committee.

The ordinary procedure starts with the submission of a legislative proposal to the European Parliament and the Council.

The ordinary legislative procedure currently applies in 85 defined policy areas covering the majority of the EU's areas of competence
.
The "right of initiative" lies with the European Commission. It is responsible for submitting most legislative proposals. However, Parliament and Council may ask the Commission to submit proposals and in a few well-defined cases other institutions may come up with proposals.

Parliament (by a majority of its component Members) may ask the Commission to submit a proposal in cases where Parliament thinks EU legislation is needed to help implement the Treaties. If the Commission refuses to submit a proposal, it has to give an explanation.

The Council (acting by a simple majority) may request the Commission to undertake any studies ministers consider desirable for the attainment of common objectives, and to submit to it any appropriate proposals
.
In the following very specific cases, the Treaties allow the ordinary legislative procedure to be launched:

on the initiative of a quarter of the member states (judicial cooperation in criminal matters, police cooperation)

on a recommendation from the European Central Bank (certain articles of the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank)

at the request of the Court of Justice of the European Union (establishment of specialised courts attached to the General Court to hear and determine at first instance certain classes of action or proceeding brought in specific areas, certain provisions of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union)

at the request of the European Investment Bank

A Commission proposal may also follow a European Citizens' Initiative.

The Commission's proposal is the result of an extensive consultation process, which may be conducted in various ways (an obligatory impact assessment, reports by experts, consultation of national experts, international organisations and/or non-governmental organisations, consultation via Green and White Papers etc.).

A consultation process is also launched among the different Commission departments in order to ensure that all aspects of the matter in question are taken into account (inter-service consultation).

The Commission's proposal is usually adopted by the College of Commissioners on the basis of either a written procedure (no discussion among Commissioners) or an oral procedure (the dossier is discussed by the College of Commissioners) and is published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

The Commission submits its legislative proposal (normally for a regulation, directive or a decision) to the European Parliament and the Council, but also to all EU national parliaments and, where applicable, to the Committee of the Regions and the Economic and Social Committee.

etc.

They forget that they are appointed to represent the people in their constituency who voted for them

Well, they're not, actually. They are voted in to carry out the programme set out by their party in their manifesto. Their prime duty is to do what is best for the country. At the moment, for many MPs these two things conflict as they represent a party, but a party which has in its manifesto (along with many other things) something, Brexit, which these MPs believe will not be best for the country.

They are also in Parliament to represent all their constituents, not just the ones who voted for them. And a key part of democracy is consideration of minority views.

So our 'representation' by MPs is not a black and white thing. It's complex and people who take a simplistic view of it are not showing much understanding of how Parliamentary democracy works I'm afraid.

People who should know better, such as MPs, but who promulgate the 'MPs have to do what their voters tell them to do' line are being extremely economical with the truth. Or are ignorant themselves and shouldn't be in parliament.

Bobbynet1962
We vote for MEPs. We don't vote for the Commission. The Commission decides what MEPs vote on. Remainers insist that the Commission is like our Civil Service but it isn't. There is nothing directly comparable in our system but it is more like a more powerful House of Lords than our Civil Service.

There are problems in the EU with the constitution, excess bureaucracy and cost and this is an area in which Cameron could have asked for reform had he gone to speak to the EU prepared. The amount of waste is chronic and the ECB definitely needs serious reform.
If the EU had been prepared to acknowledge that these reforms were necessary, the vote may have been different. To be fair to the EU though, none of these things were put forward by Cameron and his administrative abilities seem to be non existent.

Leaving on WTO terms now seems a real possibility. One important question that no politicians are addressing is how long we would have to stay on those terms, what can be done to mitigate the impact, and how we can reduce the length of time we trade under them. There are many countries who are not in the EU or other trading blocs but are not dealing solely under WTO terms.

Couldn't agree more! They forget that they are appointed to represent the people in their constituency who voted for them and think themselves important.

endrel, I agree. Its so sad.

That was a very measured and reasoned post endre123. I read it all. Thank you for taking the time thinking it through and posting it. Truly.

I have 2 points to make:

We really DO have that £350 million (actually 390 now apparently) every week. Surely that would help mitigate some of the worst case scenarios/expensive transition expenses don’t you think?

And regarding more referenda - to quote Brenda from Bristol when she made us all laugh when she said ‘What? ANOTHER one?’. I thought our elected MP’s, government & esteemed Cabinet ministers (with the guidance of super intelligent civil servants) were supposed to guide us through the labyrinth of laws, treaties and decisions?

This is not meant to be a confrontational post in any way. It’s genuine puzzlement.

A common misconceptio, EU officials are elected, I voted in the EU elections didn’t you?
We’ve always had control of our borders. We’ve always had sovereignty, a veto on laws. There will never be an EU army (what’s so wrong with that though seeing the threats from Russia etc). I could go on but it’s all available to research - Google is your friend.

Very few on this forum seem to realize the reality of any negotiation, it is not a emotional argument it is a power play, with Brexit the EU hold far more power than we do.
They are only going to agree to terms that fall within their principles.

We can have a soft Brexit on terms similar to Norway, that will mean a customs union with every trade deal approved by EFTA and payments made to the EU as compensation. We are going to have to obey their rules even more than we do now, and we don’t get any say at all on how the EU develops, and I think that’s a bad deal.

Today the prospects seem to have moved away from no deal but the idea of a second vote is still being considered, even though the wrong result could put us back to square one, a big risk. ( as was the first vote)

Democracy is about being able to vote to have a say in our country but it's not all about one vote as some people who voted Leave seem to believe. If that was the case we would have been living under a dictatorship a long time ago!

In our independent/devolved countries we vote often we are used to democracy, if there was a referendum there was usually more than one. Overspending of election expenses, interference by foreign countries or huge lies are all issues that cancel out the vote. All happened in the referendum of 2016. It was also an advisory referendum which means the Govt simply asked if we wanted to stay or leave the EU. To take it further it needed to explain their plans, but that never happened. Theresa May cut out that part of the democratic process and went ahead to do Brexit by herself. And she has and is still doing it her way. The People have still not been consulted as we would have been expected under our democracy.

She is now looking as if she is preparing for a dictatorship. We must get used to voting often or we will lose our country. It is incredible to hear people saying they "voted in 2016 and said they wanted to Leave then" , No one knew the details then, there were false promises and huge lies about the EU. Many of those Leave voters have already lost their jobs/businesses at the threat of Brexit. Brexit was not project fear to them, it was a horrible reality.

The tragic thing about it all is when we leave the most vulnerable, the poorest are unlikely to survive the huge austerity expected, it will be like a financial crash. No one knows how long that will last, the longer it is the more it will affect. Food prices will soar, many sick people will not be able to get the medicines they need. This is not scaremongering, our depression n Britain after Brexit is talked about all over the world. But Brits don't want to talk about it!

We had a very special deal with the EU and we were a fairly prosperous country but what our MPs allowed to happen after an "advisory" vote is scandalous. Much is said about our education system, ppl thinking they had a "one off" vote which the Govt must respect shows they know little about out constitution and democracy.

The Leave campaign funded by foreign Govt (query Russia as Putin has been urging May along) promised everything and anything , most completely impossible. Lies. Hundreds of ukip swamped areas that ultimately voted leave at weekends, money no object campaign, They arranged postal votes in care homes, they asked ppl for a santa list of what they wanted after the country left because we would have all that extra money!

Of course it wasn't true so we see ppl today blaming the PM, blaming the EU because they are not going to get what they were promised. The fact is they were lied to, Farage lied, Gove lied, their Brexit never existed. The only people who would benefit from Brexit were billionaires.

But we all have to suffer from that one advisory vote. Those Leavers do not want more democracy want to hand over power to the far right which looks like stopping elections in future. Theresa May never respect democracy from the start, If she did she would have consulted us the people for our votes on the major changes she plans to do with Britain.

Then we get those people completely brain washed and saying they have "given their once and forever vote"., That is ridiculous, most of us vote lots for democracy, sometimes three times a year. But Farage and co has ingrained in these people their vote was forever.

Leave voters represent about a 33% of the electorate. Many have changed their minds and told their MPs they want to Remain so the percentage is really much smaller. But we have a situation now when most of the country is going to be ignored by the PM. She will ignore democracy again, be in contempt of Parliament again, to please the extreme Far Right in the Conservatives, the ERG.

So our country and our people have to be the victims of the failure of our MPs to INSIST on democracy by voting on better information, voting when a plan changes. Theresa May played a game with those who voted leave saying it was the "will of the people" (it was not, she got that out of Germany 1930s). Those ppl began to believe it further eroding our democracy. The Leave vote was not the will of Britain, it was what was engineered by very rich far right people all over the world to misuse our Parliamentary system to roll back the clock at least 70years.

Theresa May should have resigned with the monumental vote against her withdrawal doc two days ago, but she is still there. Which indicates she has possible bigger support from outside this country. Murdoch? Trump? Putin? She fears democracy, as it means it looks like she has operated outside our rules and laws the last two years. She has even challenged the Supreme Court and failed.

Her actions appear close to insanity but her one tool are those people who say in tv interviews "let her get on with it" or "I'm not getting the Brexit I want" ( that was a lie anyway) and the worse one of all, "why should I vote again, I voted in 2016! " To save our country we need to demand more votes and elections to keep our country British, and another referendum to find our exactly what our country wants

Momof3 Wed 16-Jan-19 17:48:11

" A lifetime experience of being a bricklayer does not mean you are qualified to understand complex issues of economics which is what the divorce from the U.K. is!"
---

So when I asked in response to a previous post of yours:-

"So referendums should never take place or only well educated people should have the right to vote? "

I take it from your answer it is indeed your believe only the educated / economists have the right to vote in referendums. Not sure how not to get to that conclusion , I apologise if I am mistaken.

If Members of Parliament for example were only permitted to come from an academic / economic background I think it would be a sad day and totally regressive and tantamount to being inverted snobbery or patronising .

Or is it only referendums that should be the domain of academics / economists not the plebiscite?

tickingbird
Re your comment at 12.01
I wouldn't have thought you a racist. I don't jump to conclusions and do understand what you mean. I've seen some of that kind of behaviour myself but thankfully, not where I live and you're right in saying that not everyone is like that.
I fear that it becomes awkward to write (on GN) of newcomers to this country as there is every likelihood that you will be shot down and the comment removed.
No-one in their right mind would want to see their home diminish in value due to antisocial behaviour, nor would anyone want to buy in an area which suffered the problems you describe.
I don't have answers and agreed, it's a difficult situation to live with.
Here's hoping that the living conditions you speak about, improve, and police get issued with some teeth with which to bite.

One could argue that the rules of Europe put us in a position where we cannot leave without such upheaval. We are unable to negotiate trade deals with anyone else til we leave which means we are automatically in a precarious situation.
Both sides, Remain or Brexit, are as bad as one another for shouting over the top of each other, portraying things in the best light to make their case. The Press also scaremonger on both sides. You can't believe a word politicians say because they are self-serving.
Never have I felt such despair about our Political System as I do today.

Hear hear Lindyloo from me.

I'm just so terribly sad about it all. I was so proud to be a European and fear I must now be seen as a little Englander. What is happening to the world? America has turned its back on Europe too and it's every man for himself.

I voted leave. Partially through concern at the direction things were going, both in Britain and Europe. Aside from the corruption and pandering to the multi-nationals, recent years have seen a great and worrying political polarisation in almost every member state of the EU. As an optimist I hoped that other countries would be able to follow our example and true cooperation between countries could replace this failed experiment. However , my fear was that we would not have the leaders with sufficient vision or desire to achieve this.

'Every step appears to be the unavoidable consequence of the preceding one. And in the end there beckons, more and more clearly, total annihilation.'