Should the UK arrange a second referendum for Brexit?

[Bosanquet]

People do not understand simple economics. Any money invested in poorer economies within the EU, also helps the UK as it allows the markets in the countries to develop. In return, UK makes money off those areas by selling their products and services. Is it so difficult to understand?

As a British citizen, one of the greatest advantages I've had are the ability to study in France and work in Germany. IT has added so much more to my experiences. Imagine taking that away from the next generation.

Exactly right.
My son has just started studying engineering at Edinburgh Uni. He hopes to specialise in alternative energy & green technology. I advised him to learn German since some of the best work is available there, Denmark, Holland etc. He is doing that. However if there is a hard brexit then he will have very few opportunities to go & work or even get work experience placements in those places.
Brexit will be a disaster for his generation. There needs to be a final vote on the deal.

 

[Thulsa]

Kindly read my question 2 properly ..... the forecasts were for just voting out.

Where are you Eagle? Still waiting for a Brexiteer response to my questions. Or are you waiting for the latest Daily Mail spread to copy and paste?

 

[IMMY69]

Where are you Eagle? Still waiting for a Brexiteer response to my questions. Or are you waiting for the latest Daily Mail spread to copy and paste?

Don’t hold your breath...
They insult people by calling them Remoaners and then disappear when asked to answer valid questions.

 

[Thulsa]

Don’t hold your breath...
They insult people by calling them Remoaners and then disappear when asked to answer valid questions.

What’s tragic is that if you look at the profile of Brexit majority regions, they are the ones that stand to lose the most from a no deal outcome.

 

[gazza619]

You got to love the media. They sold us Brexit 1. And now they are trying to sell Brexit 2.

EU is a mess. The media has now created this hype that the world will end with Brexit.

 

[IMMY69]

What’s tragic is that if you look at the profile of Brexit majority regions, they are the ones that stand to lose the most from a no deal outcome.

Yes that’s irony in all this.

 

[Eagle_Eye]

Patting each other on the back and yet no one bothers to answer simple questions....

Let's do some fact finding first... and put it out on the table where different figures came from and who lied... all in good time, everything can be discussed.

 

[Eagle_Eye]

You got to love the media. They sold us Brexit 1. And now they are trying to sell Brexit 2.

EU is a mess. The media has now created this hype that the world will end with Brexit.

the media is on an orchestrated campaign to drown out brexit voices. Look at QT as an example... you will have 4 remainers on the panel ganging up on 1 brexiteer.... this is a consistent theme now.

 

[Eagle_Eye]

Patting each other on the back and yet no one bothers to answer simple questions....

Let's do some fact finding first... and put it out on the table where different figures came from and who lied... all in good time, everything can be discussed.

The answer to Q2... cannot be partly, it's either a yes or no. Either those treasury forecasts and emergency measures came true or they didn't.

 

[Eagle_Eye]

Don’t hold your breath...
They insult people by calling them Remoaners and then disappear when asked to answer valid questions.

how long are you going to hide behind others? 2 Qs, fairly straight forward. Just the facts, please no commentary.

 

[Sidilicious]

how long are you going to hide behind others? 2 Qs, fairly straight forward. Just the facts, please no commentary.

You'll find that those questions were perfectly well answered, with a good bit of explanation. It seems like you have chosen to ignore those because it makes your argument weak.

 

[Eagle_Eye]

You'll find that those questions were perfectly well answered, with a good bit of explanation. It seems like you have chosen to ignore those because it makes your argument weak.

With respect, they have not been answered other than try to obfuscate on the crux of the questions.

If Q1 was answered fully, we will then know where the 350 million came from.

If Q2 was answered as it should, we can then find out who told blatant lies about the consequences for the economy just for voting brexit. It's a clear yes or no. It either happened or it didn't. There is no in between.

 

[IMMY69]

Absolute thinking...

Say no more

 

[Eagle_Eye]

Absolute thinking...

Say no more

carry on hiding behind others...

 

[Thulsa]

With respect, they have not been answered other than try to obfuscate on the crux of the questions.

If Q1 was answered fully, we will then know where the 350 million came from.

If Q2 was answered as it should, we can then find out who told blatant lies about the consequences for the economy just for voting brexit. It's a clear yes or no. It either happened or it didn't. There is no in between.

I will try and lower myself to your intellect so here goes:

1) The side of a bus, Nigel Farage’s rear end - take your pick - it was a made up number from the Brexit camp and I cannot verify the accuracy of a fabricated number; and

2) If anyone believed just by voting all the impacts would come to pass, they are as thick as the average Brexiteer. So in that simple minded Brexit view, which you are keen to focus on, no - they were wrong.

There we have it - a binary response. Now - respond to my two questions I put to you.

 

[Eagle_Eye]

I will try and lower myself to your intellect so here goes:

1) The side of a bus, Nigel Farage’s rear end - take your pick - it was a made up number from the Brexit camp and I cannot verify the accuracy of a fabricated number; and

2) If anyone believed just by voting all the impacts would come to pass, they are as thick as the average Brexiteer. So in that simple minded Brexit view, which you are keen to focus on, no - they were wrong.

There we have it - a binary response. Now - respond to my two questions I put to you.

Can we agree to cut the purile digs? It serves no purposes other than an ugly exchange.

1) just give me the figures for how much UK allocates to EU down to net.

2) So you agree the remain establishment outright lied to scare people in voting to remain? The very establishment now being in charge of delivering brexit.

Hold your horses, we will get to your questions too. Let's establish some basic lies first, it will cone in handy going forward.

 

[IMMY69]

Can we agree to cut the purile digs? It serves no purposes other than an ugly exchange.

1) just give me the figures for how much UK allocates to EU down to net.

2) So you agree the remain establishment outright lied to scare people in voting to remain? The very establishment now being in charge of delivering brexit.

Hold your horses, we will get to your questions too. Let's establish some basic lies first, it will cone in handy going forward.

This debate is not going anywhere.
As it is the season of goodwil why don’t you show some by educating the ones that fell for the lies buy spelling them out for us?

Otherwise we’re just going round in circles.

 

[James]

“Should” there be a second referendum? In my view, no.

Leave took the referendum in 2016 on both popular vote (narrowly) and constituencies won (very convincingly). This should have been enough, and should have led to a clean and favourable exit for Britain.

But the government has negotiated with the EU atrociously. May’s deal is poor.

No Deal meanwhile would not be ideal at all.

So although there “should” not be a second ballot, it’s probably the only viable route given everything that has happened.

It now feels like the best option would be a 2nd referendum where we choose May’s Deal, No Deal, Renegotiate, or Remain.

 

[Thulsa]

“Should” there be a second referendum? In my view, no.

Leave took the referendum in 2016 on both popular vote (narrowly) and constituencies won (very convincingly). This should have been enough, and should have led to a clean and favourable exit for Britain.

But the government has negotiated with the EU atrociously. May’s deal is poor.

No Deal meanwhile would not be ideal at all.

So although there “should” not be a second ballot, it’s probably the only viable route given everything that has happened.

It now feels like the best option would be a 2nd referendum where we choose May’s Deal, No Deal, Renegotiate, or Remain.

The whole campaign, both camps, was a farce - both sides producing nothing but fear mongering and falsehoods. The subsequent parties, both Tories and the opposition are also woeful. It takes quite the skill set to negotiate trade deals and there is nobody serving in politics that has experience in doing so.

What is clear Is that there is no way Brexit can be delivered in the way it was pitched because what was pitched is nonsense.

 

[MenInG]

Seems to be a stalemate!

 

[Markhor]

Recent scaremongering about refugees crossing the Channel just weeks before the Brexit deal vote couldn't possibly be a coincidence.

 

[Stewie]

Just like the US elections where mostly non college educated people who got brainwashed by the populist rhetoric voted Trump in, Brexit was mainlyvoted for, i suspect by the majority of the limited or zero college educated people. Both countries will regret these decisions.. ��

 

[Sidilicious]

Just like the US elections where mostly non college educated people who got brainwashed by the populist rhetoric voted Trump in, Brexit was mainlyvoted for, i suspect by the majority of the limited or zero college educated people. Both countries will regret these decisions.. ��

Well, a lot of what Trump can be overturned in a couple of years by good governance. There will be some impact, but I doubt it will be significant over a long run.

But a Brexit cannot just be overturned. Once Brexit happens, even if the UK tries to get back into the EU at a later and even if EU accept that, the UK will not be given the same deal they have right now. All signs are that the economy will struggle. So, either way once Brexit happens its only a downward trajectory for the UK.

There is another point - one on a global scale. Lately, the populist rhetoric has been gaining a lot of drive in the last half a decade or so. Even countries where the populists have not won the elections, they have made it very close to power (France, Austria etc). I would like to hope this is just a cycle, because if this continues, we could have another fascist party come into powers or worse another hitler type situation.

 

[The Viper]

PM urges Conservative MPs to back demand to replace Brexit backstop

Tories in the House of Commons are being ordered to rally behind a Brexiteer proposal to alter the PM's withdrawal agreement.

Theresa May has urged Conservative MPs to support a demand for the controversial backstop in her Brexit deal to be replaced with "alternative arrangements".

The prime minister has asked Tory MPs to back the position during a series of Brexit votes in the House of Commons on Tuesday.

As she seeks to put pressure on the EU over altering the backstop, Mrs May will whip her party's MPs to support the proposal being spearheaded by senior backbencher Sir Graham Brady.

Brussels has so far consistently ruled out reopening talks over the terms of the UK's exit deal.

The prime minister revealed her move in an emergency meeting of Conservative MPs in parliament on
Monday night.

The backstop is an insurance policy to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland if such a scenario isn't averted in a future EU-UK trade relationship.

It is part of the deal Mrs May negotiated with Brussels last year.
But the backstop is deeply unpopular with a significant number of MPs who fear it will leave the UK following EU rules for an indefinite period, as well as splitting Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK.

The opposition to the backstop helped contribute to the House of Commons overwhelmingly rejecting the prime minister's EU agreement earlier this month.

Following that defeat, Mrs May will set out her next steps on Brexit in the House of Commons on Tuesday.

Various factions of MPs will use this opportunity to alter the course of Brexit by tabling amendments to what the prime minister presents.

One of those, tabled by Sir Graham, calls for MPs to support Mrs May's withdrawal agreement but only if the backstop arrangement is "replaced with alternative arrangements to avoid a hard border".

Fellow Tory Brexiteers have withdrawn their own similar amendments, including ones calling for the removal or time-limiting of the backstop, in order to clear space for Sir Graham's to pass.

It has been suggested a show of support by MPs for Sir Graham's proposal could boost Mrs May's negotiating clout with Brussels, in the face of the EU's stance that no other Brexit deal is possible.

House of Commons Speaker John Bercow will decide which of the tabled amendments will be debated and put to a vote on Tuesday.

Conservative Party chairman Brandon Lewis told Sky News: "The withdrawal agreement showed what parliament doesn't like. We've got to get very clear with the EU around what parliament will support.

"That vote tomorrow does give parliament an opportunity to do just that."

He added Sir Graham's amendment "gives the prime minister the chance to have the backing... that parliament will support a deal to leave the EU, as we promised we would do, if the backstop situation is dealt with".

Mr Lewis described this as a "very strong, powerful message for the prime minister to take out to Europe".

However, the prime minister's hopes of securing a show of support from MPs suffered a blow even before she made her pitch to Conservative MPs.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, the chair of the European Research Group (ERG) of eurosceptic Conservative MPs, said there was "no move to support" Sir Graham's amendment among his fellow Brexiteers, despite their opposition to the backstop.

He said: "The Graham Brady amendment gives conditional approval, so that is an issue.

"It doesn't say what it [the backstop] would be replaced with.

"And Graham has said he could live with a protocol rather than changes to the [withdrawal agreement] text, whereas from our point of view there needs to be changes to the text."

Despite the ERG not rallying behind his amendment, Sir Graham was bullish about his chances of attracting support from across the House of Commons.

He told Sky News: "My aim is to try and construct a coalition here that brings in most, if not all, Conservative MPs, brings the DUP back to support this, and also brings on some of the more moderate Labour MPs who recognise that we ought to be implementing the result of the referendum.

"What I've done is table this amendment which seeks to take away the single biggest impediment that stopped Conservative colleagues from supporting the withdrawal agreement."

During Monday night's meeting, former foreign secretary Boris Johnson - a critic of the prime minister's Brexit deal - is said to have asked Mrs May's what changes she would be looking for from the EU.

"We won't know unless you support us - get behind us and find out," Mrs May is said to have replied, to cheers from MPs.

https://news.sky.com/story/pm-urges...-brexit-backstop-11620722?dcmp=snt-sf-twitter

 

[Donal Cozzie]

So May, after spending two years supporting and backing a backstop, is now whipping her MP's, two months before Brexit Day, to vote to scrap the backstop, even though it has been said thousands of times by the EU that the deal is done and that a backstop is absolutely necessary.

This is continuing to get more and more insane. The cowardice of May at the moment is beyond belief. It is clear as day that the ERG and DUP do not want a deal, its been clear for months, whatever minute hope she has of getting a deal through Parliament and agreed with with the EU lies in ditching the ERG/DUP entirely and opting for something that Corbyn, who quite clearly wants Brexit in some form, might support.

Just baffling that after two freaking years of being told, time and time and time again, that a backstop is absolutely necessary in NI, we are now right back to square one arguing that none is needed at all, let alone the temporary nonsense of the past two months.

 

[The Viper]

Brexit: MPs reject move to delay departure date

MPs have voted against a proposal to delay Brexit in order to prevent the UK leaving without a deal.

The amendment had been put forward by Labour MP Yvette Cooper, but was rejected by 23 votes.

MPs are voting on changes to Theresa May's Brexit plan before she seeks a re-negotiation of it with the EU.

The prime minister has urged MPs to back another amendment that would propose "alternative arrangements" to the controversial Irish backstop plan.

The backstop is is the insurance policy in Mrs May's plan to prevent checks on goods and people returning to the Northern Ireland border, which some MPs fear could leave the UK tied to the EU's rules indefinitely.

It was a key part in seeing her original Brexit deal voted down in Parliament by an historic margin earlier in January.

Mrs May said she knew there was a "limited appetite" in the EU for changes to the deal, but she believed she could "secure" it.

She had phone calls with key EU leaders throughout the day ahead of the Commons votes and has already spoken to the President of the European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker and the Irish Taoiseach (Prime Minister) Leo Varadkar.

But the EU has said it will not re-open negotiations and change the legal text agreed with the UK PM.

MPs are currently voting on an amendment put forward by Tory MP Caroline Spelman and Labour MP Jack Dromey with the aim of preventing a no deal Brexit.

Three amendments - tabled by Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, the SNP's Westminster leader Ian Blackford and Tory backbencher Dominic Grieve - had already been voted down by the House. You can read the detail of all the amendments here.

Mr Corbyn's amendment was voted down by 327 votes to 296, Mr Blackford's only saw 39 votes of support, compared to 327 votes against, and Mr Grieve, who wanted MPs to be given six days to debate Brexit alternatives, lost by 321 votes to 301.

This was followed by Ms Cooper's, which lost by 321 votes to 298, and one by Labour MP Rachel Reeves - also trying to postpone Brexit - which lost by 322 votes to 290.

There are two more amendments to be tabled that could be voted on - including one from Tory MP Sir Graham Brady, calling for an "alternative" to the Irish backstop, which Tory MPs have been ordered to back.

Mrs May earlier appealed for the backing of the "Brady" amendment, saying it would "give the mandate I need to negotiate with Brussels an arrangement that commands a majority in this House - not a further exchange of letters, but a significant and legally binding change to the withdrawal agreement".

Nigel Dodds, the Westminster leader of the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) - whose MPs Mrs May's government relies on to win key votes - welcomed the announcement, saying: "From day one... we rejected the backstop and argued for legally binding change within the withdrawal agreement."

And the pro-Leave European Research Group, led by Jacob Rees-Mogg, has said it will vote in favour of Sir Graham's amendment.

If MPs back Sir Graham's amendment, it could pave the way for a plan known as the "Malthouse Compromise".

Engineered by both Leavers and Remainers, the proposal includes extending the transition period for a year and protecting EU citizens' rights, instead of using the backstop.

Mrs May also promised MPs the votes on Tuesday would not be the last chance for them to express their views over Brexit.

She said that if no new deal is reached by 13 February, she will make a statement to Parliament that day and table an amendable motion for debate the following day, re-opening discussions on how to move forward with Brexit.

EU 'unlikely to entertain changes'

The excitable interventions we're witnessing in Parliament will convince EU leaders even more deeply that MPs are still very divided over Brexit and that now is not the decisive moment for Brussels to budge.

The EU wants to avoid an endless process of Theresa May shuttling to and from Brussels, getting a tweak or two, returning to Parliament, having the deal still rejected, coming back to Brussels and so on.

It's right to think the EU sometimes insists one thing, then does something rather different.

But the Irish backstop is a hugely sensitive issue, painfully co-negotiated over months with UK negotiators and almost impossible to fudge (as the EU prefers to do in difficult situations).

EU leaders are unlikely to touch the conditions of the backstop until a no-deal Brexit is well and truly staring them in the face. And even then they are unlikely to entertain changes unless Dublin is on board.

We're nowhere near there yet, if we ever get there.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-polit...inkname=news_central&ns_campaign=bbc_breaking

 

[James]

2nd Referendum is effectively dead in the water now, because Leave date has been confirmed by Parliament as 29th March after the various amendments were rejected, and it would be absolutely impossible for a national vote to be mobilised in a matter of weeks.

Of course this undeniable reality hasn’t stopped the usual suspects Chuka Umunna, Luciana Berger and Caroline Lucas parroting away on social media about the so-called “People’s Vote”.

 

[Yukio]

I think people were not informed in full regarding the possible consequences of it all. I see a lot of people who changed their mind with time and if there was a second vote I guess results would be different. My friends for example want to leave UK because of Brexit but there is no more cheap property on the French Riviera https://tranio.com/france/cote_d_azur/ as it was 3 years ago. so now they are stuck... either to stay in UK and see what is going to happen or to pay more and move out.

 

[Rana]

I think they need to. A huge amount of casual Londoners did not vote thinking that the vast majority of the UK will vote remain. A second vote will most likely have remain win

 

[Robert]

2nd Referendum is effectively dead in the water now, because Leave date has been confirmed by Parliament as 29th March after the various amendments were rejected, and it would be absolutely impossible for a national vote to be mobilised in a matter of weeks.

Of course this undeniable reality hasn’t stopped the usual suspects Chuka Umunna, Luciana Berger and Caroline Lucas parroting away on social media about the so-called “People’s Vote”.

Those are three MPs whom I believe care about the British people - not making money like the disaster capitalist ERG, or putting ideas ahead of people like disaster socialist Corbyn.

Looks like A50 could be extended now, so more time to get PeoplesVote set up.

 

[IMMY69]

Those are three MPs whom I believe care about the British people - not making money like the disaster capitalist ERG, or putting ideas ahead of people like disaster socialist Corbyn.

Looks like A50 could be extended now, so more time to get PeoplesVote set up.

Someone told me 6-8 months ago that this is all a game being played and that a people's vote will happen again. I didn't believe it then but now I'm not so sure. The stance that May, a staunch remainer, has been taking with respect to not ruling out no deal now seems a little suspicious to me.

I am for another people's vote and actually think it is the Democratic thing to do rather then undemocratic, which is was most brexiteers call it. However, I didn't actually think it would happen but now with each passing day I think it's more likely .

 

[Robert]

Labour finally backs PeoplesVote.

I suppose it took the haemorrhage of members and MPs to persuade The Absolute Boy.

 

[James]

Looks like we might get one now.

If it passes the Commons.

 

[MenInG]

EU leaders must give their chief negotiator the mandate to revise the UK's withdrawal agreement, otherwise a no-deal Brexit is "coming down the tracks", the Brexit secretary has said.

Writing in the Mail on Sunday, Stephen Barclay said "political realities" had changed after May's European elections.

New MEPs were elected in 61% of seats, he said, marking a "fundamental shift".

He called on EU leaders to allow Michel Barnier to negotiate in a way that finds "common ground" with the UK.

Brussels has consistently insisted that the withdrawal agreement - one of two main elements of Theresa May's Brexit deal, which was resoundingly rejected by MPs - cannot be renegotiated.

Mr Barclay said Mr Barnier had told him in their discussion last week that he is bound by the instructions given to him by the European Commission and leaders of member states.

But the change in the EU Parliament means there is a need for the EU to alter its approach, Mr Barclay said.

"Mr Barnier needs to urge EU leaders to consider this if they too want an agreement, to enable him to negotiate in a way that finds common ground with the UK. Otherwise, no deal is coming down the tracks," he said.

By contrast, Boris Johnson's appointment as prime minister strengthened the UK's mandate to leave on 31 October, he said.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson has ramped up his rhetoric over his desire to take the UK out of the EU by 31 October, as part of his "do or die" commitment.

He has clashed with EU leaders over his demands to remove the Irish backstop - which prevents a hard border if the UK and EU fail to agree a long-term trade deal - from the withdrawal agreement.

Irish Taoiseach Leo Varadkar told Mr Johnson this week "the backstop was necessary as a consequence of decisions taken in the UK".

But Mr Barclay said the backstop could mean people in Northern Ireland having EU rules "foisted on them" indefinitely to preserve the open border.

He rejected the UK staying in the customs union and the single market as a solution, saying the border issue should be resolved in future talks on the long-term trading agreement with the EU.

"There is simply no chance of any deal being passed that includes the anti-democratic backstop. This is the reality that the EU has to face," he said.

Speaking last month, Mr Barnier said demands to eliminate the backstop were "unacceptable" and Mr Johnson's approach to Brexit was "rather combative".

bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49223319

 

[warcry]

unpopular opinion: such decisions are not meant to be made by the general public, and are NOT to be decided by referendum.

Qualified Economists and foreign policymakers should be able to do a cost benefit analysis, and determine if leaving the EU is profitable to the UK or not.