The Brexit Effect

Saying to another poster ‘don’t give me that nonsense’ is indeed rude Fleurpepper or at least is considered so by me, as I would never say that to somebody, even on a forum.
As far as the referendum was concerned it was as I said, one person one vote as usual, and it was not the fault of the voters if the government decided to agree in Parliament by majority voting to implement the result of an advisory referendum.
We are where we are regarding leaving the EU and must, as Sir Keir Starmer says, make the best we can of it.

As Maizie has correctly pointed out the fraudulent referendum of 2016 was won by lies, cheating and foreign interference.

The proven illegality was so serious that the result would have been annulled had the referendum had been mandatory but it was only advisory.

A responsible government would have taken note of that and that should have been the end of this brainless act of national self destruction.

I don't think David Cameron really wanted to have the vote to leave the EU. There was a lot of noise from Farage and the whole thing gained momentum so Cameron decided to go for the vote

I remember the Milliband chap on QT or some chat show and he wouldn't agree to a referendum.

But leaving the EU wasn't something they picked out of nowhere. There was a Referendum Party at one time shut 20 years ago. Eurosceptics have been around since we joined up!

I was disappointed with the result but I don't believe we're going back in any time soon.

Prentice

Saying to another poster ‘don’t give me that nonsense’ is indeed rude Fleurpepper or at least is considered so by me, as I would never say that to somebody, even on a forum.
As far as the referendum was concerned it was as I said, one person one vote as usual, and it was not the fault of the voters if the government decided to agree in Parliament by majority voting to implement the result of an advisory referendum.
We are where we are regarding leaving the EU and must, as Sir Keir Starmer says, make the best we can of it.

Well, I see your point. But it is nonsense, proven, again and again. That is the point many of us are making.

This, from the Financial Times, gives a very balanced view of Brexit. How other factors cannot be ignored, the pandemic, the war in Ukraine- but how Brexit is making the effects so so much worse for the UK, and that the effects will be long-term.

www.ft.com/video/91b8a350-5817-4b40-a5ea-c62ec832aa9c

Prentice

Your last paragraph is interesting NotSpaghetti and in fact I do wonder if Scotland is in the same position, being a divided country because of referendums.

Scotland is not a divided country because of referendums. If we are divided at all - which I do not agree with - its because around 50% of us think one way and 50% of us think another.

Even if we don't have another referendum in the near future, we'll still be split politically. Just like every other nation on earth. Not talking about it won't make it go away.

The plan, had the referendum gone the other way, was for a cross party group of people to implement the decision. Not what we got with Brexit, which was a group of overgrown schoolboys having a p***ing contest with each other, trying to show the EU how tough they were.

I wondered if the referendum to come in Scotland, whenever that time may be would greatly divide the country.
There is bound to be high emotion invested in this, just as there was with the Brexit referendum.
If people, the majority vote, decide to leave the UK, could there be anger? If the decision is to stay, will the politicians in Scotland let the matter rest, or keep on asking for more referendums? If so, is this fair to the population in Scotland, because it must be a divisive issue, it is bound to be.

I couldn’t put it better than this.

Prentice

I wondered if the referendum to come in Scotland, whenever that time may be would greatly divide the country.
There is bound to be high emotion invested in this, just as there was with the Brexit referendum.
If people, the majority vote, decide to leave the UK, could there be anger? If the decision is to stay, will the politicians in Scotland let the matter rest, or keep on asking for more referendums? If so, is this fair to the population in Scotland, because it must be a divisive issue, it is bound to be.

Yes, no, yes, yes.

I can talk about this topic for hours, but I don't want to divert the thread. ?

Yes, perhaps we should not talk about this on this thread.The subject just popped into my head, when reading about referendums.

I’m pretty sure the EU want us in the Customs Union - on their terms, there may well be sectors that are outside the agreement. There will ne no scope for cherry-picking it’s either in or out.

The problem I see, is getting an agreement before a referendum so that everyone knows what the deal is, last time we voted without any idea what the conditions were.

There would be no requirement for a referendum to join the SM and CU.

We try and very occasionally succeed to do these sort of deals with countries all over the world and all that happens is that you read in the newspapers that the deal has been done.

This is no different. The significance is that is the biggest trading block in the world - why wouldn’t you want to help British business this way?

Prentice

Your last paragraph is interesting NotSpaghetti and in fact I do wonder if Scotland is in the same position, being a divided country because of referendums.

I think it was tough over the referendum period but Scotland seems (from the outside at least) to have been healing better than the UK.
I think it will take 20 years to get over Brexit - the finances alone will have knock-on repercussions the economic abuse one generation feels is visited on them by another is substantial and adds to the negative feelings many young remain voters have to contend with.

If young families (mostly remain) are disproportionately affected by Brexit it will take longer to heal. At least Scotland is united against Brexit and can blame "others" for that disaster.

The economic forecast here is bleak. Guy Hands (a long-time Tory supporter and private-equity investor) on the radio this morning says we are going to need a bail-out from the IMF! He said we are again the sick man of Europe

Here's an article about the Radio 4 interview:

www.google.com/amp/s/www.cityam.com/terra-firma-boss-says-uk-may-need-bailout-from-imf-and-now-sick-man-of-europe-due-to-brexit-deal/%3famp=1

Sorry, I'm going to divert again...

It wasn't tough in Scotland over the referendum period. It was marvellous. Everyone was talking about Barnet Consequentials on the bus. In the queue for the ladies you could have an informed discussion about the nature of citizenship or membership of the EU. My side lost and we didn't riot, we must got on with it.

People will tell you how somebody was nasty to them because they were English, or that the nice couple they met on holiday are leaving Scotland because everybody hates them. And any Tory talking about independence will cite the "divisive referendum". You have to say "divisive", it seems to be a Unionist rule. My advice is, don't be taken in. It was democracy in action and anybody who doesn't want it to happen again because it was tough is either mistaken or mischievous.

Whitewavemark2

There would be no requirement for a referendum to join the SM and CU.

We try and very occasionally succeed to do these sort of deals with countries all over the world and all that happens is that you read in the newspapers that the deal has been done.

This is no different. The significance is that is the biggest trading block in the world - why wouldn’t you want to help British business this way?

The EEA is regulated by the EU, freedom of movement is part of the agreement, along with alignment of other regulations.
It’s the opposite of Brexit, EU membership without a vote.

I would like to think that at a stroke we could join, the lobby against that will be very strong.

Brexit ,for all its bad press, certainly did keep the promise to fund our NHS.

Katie59

Whitewavemark2

There would be no requirement for a referendum to join the SM and CU.

We try and very occasionally succeed to do these sort of deals with countries all over the world and all that happens is that you read in the newspapers that the deal has been done.

This is no different. The significance is that is the biggest trading block in the world - why wouldn’t you want to help British business this way?

The EEA is regulated by the EU, freedom of movement is part of the agreement, along with alignment of other regulations.
It’s the opposite of Brexit, EU membership without a vote.

I would like to think that at a stroke we could join, the lobby against that will be very strong.

Yes, but that is true of other trade agreements. One if the conditions that India wants is much more freedom for its citizens to come to the U.K.

Trade agreements come with conditions.

We won’t need a referendum.

India certainly has tough reciprocal entry restrictions with the UK because we choose to restrict their citizens entry. For goods they have high tariffs on all imports, this is an increasing issue with China.

Caleo

Brexit ,for all its bad press, certainly did keep the promise to fund our NHS.

You have to be joking...

Caleo

Brexit ,for all its bad press, certainly did keep the promise to fund our NHS.

Eh?

I would like to think that at a stroke we could join, the lobby against that will be very strong.

If Labour gain power with a good majority (which I'm sure they will, because Sunak's proposed austerity isn't going to enamour the electorate of him) what lobby would that be, Katie59?

Volver I’m glad it was wonderful in your part of Scotland, it wasn’t in mine …

My part of Scotland was the east coast from Buchan to Fife, Edinburgh, Perth, Inverness, Moray Firth. Guess you were somewhere else.

What Brexit, we’re still being unnecessarily lead by the nose by the EU in many aspects.

LadyGracie

What Brexit, we’re still being unnecessarily lead by the nose by the EU in many aspects.

Which ones? Can you be more explicit please?