The Windsor Framework, getting Brexit undone

[papasmurf]

I hate to break it to you Smurf but 68% of the electorate voted so bang goes another of your pointless ideas

Nick 68% of the electorate of 48 million did not, only 17 million did.

[Nick]

The point is the referendum should NEVER have taken place unless a 60% of the electorate rule had been put in place. That it was not is 100% David Cameron's fault.

I hate to break it to you Smurf but 68% of the electorate voted so bang goes another of your pointless ideas    

[Nick]

The remainers are those who did not believe the bullshine and lies from both sides. I would also point out there were 48 million people entitled to vote at the time of the referendum and no matter how anyone tries and spin it the 17million or so who voted leave are very much a minority of the electorate. Brexit has devastated the area where I live. I repeat yet again the ONLY reason I voted remain is because I knew the Tories would screw Brexit up, and they have.

The 16 million who voted remain are an even smaller minority as you've been told dozens of times. 

[Streetwalker]

After issuing Art50 the UK could have left immediately, the next day. There is a 2yr negotiating period after which you're out, but you didn't need to wiat the 2 years, nor did you have to look for extensions.
What do you think would have made the UK's position any stronger that it is currently. The EU is rules based, you want access A then you give W, you want B you give X, you want C you give Z etc.. Everyone outside the EU get's threated the same way, there are no special cases.
If your market is bigger then you will get different terms to a smaller country. The UK being members for decades knew this. They would have known the landing place long before talks started.Trying to blame one portion of society is divisive. That suits the disaster politics of the likes of Johnson, who told lie after lie after lie. Leading people to think that there was a land of unicorns, if you want to blame someone, then look to him, to Rabb, Braverman, Zahawi, Patel, Dorries, Kwarteng, Mogg, Cleverly, Truss, Eustice.... It's electing these special morons and letting them spin fables has done untold damage in the UK. On the outside looking in I think their is a belief that the UK negotiated pooly and with the right person in charge the UK can get a far better deal, poppycock.

I think we are agreed Gerry , the Tories should never have been let anywhere near Brexit talks . The people that voted Brexit were not exclusively the same as the ones who elected the Tories 

You are where you are, what you do now is your choice. You can go bat-shit brexit hardcore or you can look to open more trade in areas you want. Its a simple formula, if you want more you give more. The same can be said about the EU, it's the same formula. 

Id rather a have a deal that gives everyone a chance to do their stuff but would also be prepared for a hard Brexit if the terms are not agreeable . 

 This is also the case for any trade deal the UK strikes globally.

This is where we part company , no other trade deal would the other side be demanding we obey a raft of legistlation  overseen by their own courts . The UK will again be taking EU law overseen by the European council and enforced by the ECJ that apply solely to internal UK matters . Thats too high a price so a hard brexit it should be 

The tories of course have other ideas .

[Streetwalker]

My point is in countries where referenda are common a majority of the electorate (usually between 55% and 2/3rds) must vote be it yes or no.)

Indeed but they are not common here and as in most democracies the smallest of margins wins 

[GerryT]

Well I certainly wouldn't have played silly buggers with the EU for 7 years 
There was a case for repealing the communities act and leaving within a week and then sorting out the trade deal from outside the EU rather than from within it . Its my opinion that not only would we have had a stronger hand but that the EU would have been more aware of the need to complete a deal for its own economies within months not years .

After issuing Art50 the UK could have left immediately, the next day. There is a 2yr negotiating period after which you're out, but you didn't need to wiat the 2 years, nor did you have to look for extensions. 
What do you think would have made the UK's position any stronger that it is currently. The EU is rules based, you want access A then you give W, you want B you give X, you want C you give Z etc.. Everyone outside the EU get's threated the same way, there are no special cases. 
If your market is bigger then you will get different terms to a smaller country. The UK being members for decades knew this. They would have known the landing place long before talks started.

But of course you would have needed leavers in government to do that not remainers . Leavers would not worry to much now whether we had a deal or not , we voted leave to get away from the EU not to get tied up in more EU laws or more EU legistlation . 

Trying to blame one portion of society is divisive. That suits the disaster politics of the likes of Johnson, who told lie after lie after lie. Leading people to think that there was a land of unicorns, if you want to blame someone, then look to him, to Rabb, Braverman, Zahawi, Patel, Dorries, Kwarteng, Mogg, Cleverly, Truss, Eustice.... It's electing these special morons and letting them spin fables has done untold damage in the UK. On the outside looking in I think their is a belief that the UK negotiated pooly and with the right person in charge the UK can get a far better deal, poppycock. 

You are where you are, what you do now is your choice. You can go bat-shit brexit hardcore or you can look to open more trade in areas you want. Its a simple formula, if you want more you give more. The same can be said about the EU, it's the same formula. This is also the case for any trade deal the UK strikes globally.

[Streetwalker]

The only frustrating aspect is the blind belief that brexiteers have, it's either remainers fault for not having the sunny uplands, because they didn't get behind brexit or nothing to see, the UK is thriving and anything bad happening here is happening all over the globe.

Ignore the fact that the UK, once a leading G7 country economically is now the worst performing G7. Brexit is an additional problem, on top of other problems. Yes other countries have issues like the UK, but Brexit makes all that worse and where there are not problems, then Brexit itself is the problem.

As for the Windsor framework, what's the alternative, the EU were happy enough with the TCA agreement, it was the UK that pushed for changes and what we have is the result of those discussions. The more the UK wants in the form of concessions the more the UK ties itself back with the EU. Ask yourself why do UK leaders do that, why not walk away and do what every they want. Well, that's a question to the brexiteers on here, what would you do to "fix" brexit.

Well I certainly wouldn't have played silly buggers with the EU for 7 years 
There was a case for repealing the communities act and leaving within a week and then sorting out the trade deal from outside the EU rather than from within it . Its my opinion that not only would we have had a stronger hand but that the EU would have been more aware of the need to complete a deal for its own economies within months not years .

But of course you would have needed leavers in government to do that not remainers . Leavers would not worry to much now whether we had a deal or not , we voted leave to get away from the EU not to get tied up in more EU laws or more EU legistlation . 

[papasmurf]

All EU related referenda have been on a majority vote basis to date ,not of course that the EU always took notice of them . It was why Cameron stated that the vote would be binding and that there would not be a second vote .

What would have been the point in a lopsided vote ? Giving remain a two goal start and certain  victory would have just kept UKIP in the game ,the whole point of having the referendum in the first place was to take them out of it and silence his own eurosceptics.

You are right on one point though Papa , the Tories did make a dogs dinner of it .

My point is in countries where referenda are common a majority of the electorate (usually between 55% and 2/3rds) must vote be it yes or no.)

[Streetwalker]

The point is the referendum should NEVER have taken place unless a 60% of the electorate rule had been put in place. That it was not is 100% David Cameron's fault.

All EU related referenda have been on a majority vote basis to date ,not of course that the EU always took notice of them . It was why Cameron stated that the vote would be binding and that there would not be a second vote . 

What would have been the point in a lopsided vote ? Giving remain a two goal start and certain  victory would have just kept UKIP in the game ,the whole point of having the referendum in the first place was to take them out of it and silence his own eurosceptics.

You are right on one point though Papa , the Tories did make a dogs dinner of it .

[GerryT]

The only frustrating aspect is the blind belief that brexiteers have, it's either remainers fault for not having the sunny uplands, because they didn't get behind brexit or nothing to see, the UK is thriving and anything bad happening here is happening all over the globe.

Ignore the fact that the UK, once a leading G7 country economically is now the worst performing G7. Brexit is an additional problem, on top of other problems. Yes other countries have issues like the UK, but Brexit makes all that worse and where there are not problems, then Brexit itself is the problem.

As for the Windsor framework, what's the alternative, the EU were happy enough with the TCA agreement, it was the UK that pushed for changes and what we have is the result of those discussions. The more the UK wants in the form of concessions the more the UK ties itself back with the EU. Ask yourself why do UK leaders do that, why not walk away and do what every they want. Well, that's a question to the brexiteers on here, what would you do to "fix" brexit. 

[papasmurf]

While I agree the referendum could/should have been organised differently — ie, not enough care was taken to ensure that arguments and information from all interested formal parties could be verified — I'm not convinced that it is advisable to provide for:

a. a turn-out quorum (threshold, minimum percentage), because it assimilates voters who abstain to those who vote no;


b. an approval quorum (approval by a minimum percentage of registered voters), since it risks involving a difficult political situation if the draft is adopted by a simple majority lower than the necessary threshold


https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD(2007)008rev-cor-e

A required 60% of the electorate voting one way or the other in a referendums should be a requirement. (It is that or more in countries where referenda are frequent.) As it is Britain is heading towards being permanently fubarred because of 17 million people. 

[patman post]

The point is the referendum should NEVER have taken place unless a 60% of the electorate rule had been put in place. That it was not is 100% David Cameron's fault.

While I agree the referendum could/should have been organised differently — ie, not enough care was taken to ensure that arguments and information from all interested formal parties could be verified — I'm not convinced that it is advisable to provide for:

a. a turn-out quorum (threshold, minimum percentage), because it assimilates voters who abstain to those who vote no;


b. an approval quorum (approval by a minimum percentage of registered voters), since it risks involving a difficult political situation if the draft is adopted by a simple majority lower than the necessary threshold


https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD(2007)008rev-cor-e

[papasmurf]

Who's to know if those who did not vote would have altered the result if they had voted?

The point is the referendum should NEVER have taken place unless a 60% of the electorate rule had been put in place. That it was not is 100% David Cameron's fault.

[patman post]

The remainers are those who did not believe the bullshine and lies from both sides. I would also point out there were 48 million people entitled to vote at the time of the referendum and no matter how anyone tries and spin it the 17million or so who voted leave are very much a minority of the electorate. Brexit has devastated the area where I live. I repeat yet again the ONLY reason I voted remain is because I knew the Tories would screw Brexit up, and they have.

Who's to know if those who did not vote would have altered the result if they had voted?

No assumption should be made as to how non-voters would have voted — anyone entitled to vote who chooses not to, leaves whatever decision there is to others who did vote...

[papasmurf]

The problem Borky is that the remainers are remainers not because they think they know better but simply that they dont know .

The remainers are those who did not believe the bullshine and lies from both sides. I would also point out there were 48 million people entitled to vote at the time of the referendum and no matter how anyone tries and spin it the 17million or so who voted leave are very much a minority of the electorate. Brexit has devastated the area where I live. I repeat yet again the ONLY reason I voted remain is because I knew the Tories would screw Brexit up, and they have.