A Very British Revolution.
Seeing Cameron with stiff upper lip, facing the British press after the referendum results, I cannot get the image of Alec Guinness as Colonel Nicholson in Bridge over the River Kwai out of my mind.
Nicholson was endearingly wrong headed, and reliant on rules, regulations, and convention, sweeping the docile camp inhabitants before him with his plans to collaborate with the enemy. Only the na’er do wells and contrarians rebel and escape the camp – and the story ends as the camp commander, Saito, and Nicholson follow the trail of dynamite in dutiful fashion – and are blown to smithereens along with their precious bridge.
Juncker and Cameron will follow their own trail of dynamite. Corbyn too. They cannot help themselves.
Along with everyone else, I have been reading and re-reading Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty on European Union. The get-out clause.
1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.
We don’t have a constitution. Ipso, we don’t have a ‘constitutional requirement’.
Cameron holds the ‘Royal Prerogative’ by which he can declare war and sign international treaties, so presumably he could also revoke an international treaty. Since he has taken his ball and gone home, it is reasonable to ask who holds that power in his place?
I posed the question on Twitter yesterday ‘who is the deputy Prime Minister’. Nobody knew.
Scarcely surprising, since we don’t have one, nor have we since Clegg was tapped on the head by the electorate. Is it good enough for Cameron to simply say ‘I’m not doing it – ask the next guy’? What happens if Russia declares war on us – who has the Royal Prerogative finger on the nuclear button? Do we wait until October to decide if we can fire back? Crikey, Ted Heath could do a good sulk, but he never left the country in a state of flux like this.
2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention.
How? is the obvious question. There is nothing in the Treaty, and no ‘constitution’ to guide us as to how Juncker expects our message to get to him. Does Brenda pick up the phone? Do we lay a trail of dynamite to the gates of Strasbourg? Cameron is going to a European Council meeting next week – do you seriously think Juncker won’t ask him what he is going to do? How can he answer – ‘Out, but not yet’, ‘In, but only if we have another vote’, ‘Don’t know what my successor will do, or even who he will be, so can’t tell you’?
What about Scotland? The Scotland Act contains a clause which binds Scotland to act compatibly with EU law – the devolution in Wales and Northern Ireland contained similar strictures – even assuming that Cameron does hold a Royal Prerogative to speak for the Queen and renege on the Treaty of Lisbon, does he have the power to alter their law without their consent or at least consultation?
It is a ridiculous impasse. Cameron said that in the event of a ‘Leave’ vote ‘the British people would rightly expect’ negotiations to start ‘straight away’. We do so expect.
We also expect our Prime Minister to govern the country – not have a man sulk.
We have David Lammy declaring that a ‘democratic majority is nothing’ at all and should be ignored – ‘let’s have a second referendum ’til we get the answer we want’ and Corbyn’s spokesman declaring that even though his shadow cabinet don’t want to work with Corbyn, he remains leader of Labour because the ‘democratic vote of the majority’ mean everything.
Even the Greek government is less of a shambles than this.
- Lilith
June 26, 2016 at 2:36 pm -
We don’t seem to have anyone overseeing the economy either. George Osborne may still be in the library with a revolver.
- JohnM
June 26, 2016 at 2:43 pm -
Handgun possession is illegal. It’s a water pistol for a drip.
- The Blocked Dwarf
June 26, 2016 at 5:15 pm -
Handgun possession is illegal.
At this point should like to remind all the Brexiters among us that it was yUK.gov, not the evil empire of EU, that went to such great lengths to ensure only criminals had access to handguns. In many EU countries one can still own a hand gun, even after all the terrorist outrages of recent times. There are even countries in the EU where I can walk into a pub with a fag in my mouth and where they know their young women aren’t such air heads as British girls obviously are.
Yep, Blair drove a Leyland van through our Bill Of Rights, not the EU. And don’t get me started on the Smoking Ban.The EU ‘imprisoned’ us? I think most of the EU has watched us scrap all our civil rights and Common law and thought to themselves ‘Steady on..’ But it’s OK Ma, cos we can always unelected PMs….
- The Blocked Dwarf
June 26, 2016 at 5:16 pm -
Edit “unelect” no ‘ed’, Ed.
- Mr Ecks
June 27, 2016 at 8:34 am -
There is a world of difference between the people of Europe and the EU.
It can easily be seen that large areas of the continent ignore laws that don’t suit them.
In France–supposedly “strict” gun laws–if the coppers found that respectable businessman had an “illegal” gun in his desk draw then that would quietly forgotten.
Over here the Plod would piss their pants with joy at the arrest. A career boosting result all around.
EU dictat that does not suit will be ignored on the continent. Over here it is lapped up by the costumed thugs.
- The Blocked Dwarf
- The Blocked Dwarf
- Mrs Grimble
June 26, 2016 at 2:49 pm -
A revolver? A nosebag of white powder, more likely!
- JohnM
- JohnM
June 26, 2016 at 2:38 pm -
He didn’t have a man-sulk. Looking at his speech again it seems obvious he deliberately delayed exit in order to “devolve” responsibility for both EU and UK break-up to the next in line. Naturally, he knew that there would be nobody in a hurry to pick up a live grenade and juggle it. And there isn’t. Meanwhile, we are witness to a sickening amount of political infighting between persons who possess excessive ambition but little intelligence. Politically inbred to be stupid?
- Don Cox
June 26, 2016 at 5:37 pm -
Also, any negotiations started now would run into August. Better to wait until the French are back from their holidays.
And everyone needs time to think, and to take the whole thing calmly.
- Mudplugger
June 26, 2016 at 8:26 pm -
Probably shouldn’t start in Ramadan either then…….
- Mudplugger
- windsock
June 27, 2016 at 10:56 am -
Also, a Brexiteer has to be in charge of re-negotiations. If it started under Cameron, he would be accused of selling out the UK to the EU again. He may be repulsive, but Cameron is not stupid.
As for St BoZo, my guess is he really wanted to lose this, so he could like the valiant crusader on behalf of disaffected EUhating Tories and could ride to the rescue as the leader of a new unmodernised Tory party (let’s forget for the first year of his London Mayoralty he marched at the front of Gay Pride – he has). Now, he finds himself having to deal with the shit he threw in the fan.
- Don Cox
- Newmark
June 26, 2016 at 2:42 pm -
I was amused at Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell’s comment on the Andrew Neil show in relation to Corbyn – “Jeremy’s not going anywhere,”. An unfortunate choice of words.
- Michael Massey
June 26, 2016 at 5:10 pm -
Bit like clip I heard of Paddy Ashdown on radio re Jo Cook murder: “…It’s time to lower the tone of the debate..”
- Michael Massey
- The Blocked Dwarf
June 26, 2016 at 2:44 pm -
The German MSM’s ‘take’ on Cameron’s departure and reluctance to invoke ArtFiveOh is that he hopes that the Brexiters lack of any kind of coherent plan forward will take the shine off Bojo for Conference and mean he can pass on the mantel of PM to someone like May.
So ZDF last night (and bear in mind please, I’m just reporting what was said ).
- Richardofkent
July 1, 2016 at 5:48 am -
….and so it came to pass. Give that man a cigar.
- Richardofkent
- JohnM
June 26, 2016 at 2:46 pm -
Quite a problem for Labour. Corbyn was elected by Labour party members. Apparently the parliamentary Labour party is now in opposition to Labour party members. Mind you, since LabourLeave has now been shown to be a tory-financed Labour brexit movement, it could be said that any in LabourLeave should….LeaveLabour?
- windsock
June 27, 2016 at 11:00 am -
That is the problem. Blairism is dead to party members, but not to the Balirite MPs. Even Frank Field, on R4 on Friday said it was time for Blairites to realise they no longer had the answers. He thought Corbyn better underdtood the problems and issues and identified and articulated them – but was too useless to do anything about them (paraphrasing there).
- Ted Treen
June 27, 2016 at 2:16 pm -
If Bljirism is the answer, then it must have been an effin’ stupid question.
- Ted Treen
June 27, 2016 at 2:16 pm -
*Blairism…
- Ted Treen
- Ted Treen
- windsock
- JohnM
June 26, 2016 at 2:48 pm -
And I have just tweeted to Mr Juncker the UK formal article 50 request to leave, since we have no government anymore.
- Don Cox
June 26, 2016 at 3:18 pm -
A caretaker PM is still a PM.
There was an episode when the next PM was in the South of France and couldn’t get home for a week or two. The Duke of Wellington acted as PM and managed all the other ministries too. He spent each morning going round Whitehall giving clear instructions and making decisions. The British government has never worked so well since.
- Don Cox
June 26, 2016 at 3:19 pm -
How did the cruise go ?
- Carol42
June 26, 2016 at 3:34 pm -
We do live in exciting times! I can’t keep up. Hope you feel better soon. X
- JimS
June 26, 2016 at 4:04 pm -
Surely Cameron hasn’t actually resigned yet?
“Cameron is going to a European Council meeting next week – do you seriously think Juncker won’t ask him what he is going to do? How can he answer – ‘Out, but not yet’,”
Quite simple he will lie: Remember ‘cast-iron’ guarantee re. the Lisbon Treaty, increased EU budget payments that weren’t going to be paid, Turkey’s best mate – but they will never join, reform of the EU or he will campaign to leave. At any rate, like Peter of the Wolf fame, no-one will believe him.
- Don Cox
June 26, 2016 at 5:42 pm -
I think you are a bit confused about your wolf stories. It wasn’t Peter who cried “Wolf!”. Peter was the one who caught the wolf after it ate his duck.
- Don Cox
- Duncan Disorderly
June 26, 2016 at 4:06 pm -
The best part is that this will go on for years. We will all become experts in trade negotiations. Meanwhile, The Troubles will restart in Ulster. We will all be poorer. Well done everyone, you fucked your country!
- Bill Sticker
June 26, 2016 at 4:33 pm -
The ‘Troubles’ restarting? My poor information-lite person, Duncan. They never went away. Just because the IRA leadership (Sinn Fein) got parliamentary seats doesn’t mean there’s still not rioting and blowing stuff up in the six counties. It just means we’ve pulled the military out to stop them being the targets.
As for all being poorer. Only if you go sit on your hands and weep for the broken dream that is / was the EU. I think on Monday morning there will be a mildly hungover awakening and by Wednesday it’ll be business as usual.
- Duncan Disorderly
June 26, 2016 at 4:52 pm -
This is the reality of the situation Bill. We are genuinely in the shit.
https://mobile.twitter.com/sunny_hundal/status/747060565839839240- Uh
June 26, 2016 at 6:10 pm -
There is a sensible plan, it’s just that Vote Leave won’t (for now) adopt it.
http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=86117 - JuliaM
June 27, 2016 at 8:17 am
- Uh
- tdf
June 26, 2016 at 6:31 pm -
Duncan,
Ulster has nine counties, three in Eire and six in Northern Ireland. Not wishing to be a pedant but it’s a pet hate of mine.
- Duncan Disorderly
- Bill Sticker
- Michael McFadden
June 26, 2016 at 4:14 pm -
Excellent questions Anna! From my perspective at a bit of a distance here, it sounds as though, if Cameron wants to respect the wishes of the British people and if indeed he has the degree of power you’ve seemed to indicate, that he should:
(1) Send a communication to Brussels that the UK is withdrawing immediately from the EU in terms of accepting its aid/privileges or providing its aid/privileges other than as legally bound by agreements outside the EU treaty. The “immediately” could be softened by a “buffer zone” of anywhere from a week to six months in various areas (e.g. people on a slow boat to/from Lithuania who’d already paid for their tickets wouldn’t be expected to immediately turn sails homeward, a crop promised to be harvested and shipped in October to/from Italy would still be harvested/shipped to/from Italy at the old rate, etc.
(2) Draft a statement that legal/financial obligations without time elements between the UK and EU should be pretty much immediately considered void, although again some degree of good-faith buffer could be allowed and contracts negotiated under the old rules should be respected for a reasonable time period.
(3) Set about renegotiating whatever trade political arrangements might be necessary with the EU as a whole or with its individual member states where necessary.
(4) Cameron should, out of TRUE respect for the British people, and instead of piddling around with resignation speeches, take the writ he has been given and declare that the government will indeed respect the wishes of the electorate and immediately set about the above processes and quash any movements to invalidate the vote by any other process other than normally accepted British political rules.
I don’t understand the whole resignation of his post bit, unless he’s just doing it to cause trouble by making the “crisis” seem greater than it has to be. And I don’t understand the problem where there seems to be no “deputy” etc to step into his shoes? What happens if a PM dies in office? Surely there must be some mechanism for someone else to take their place where decisions need to be made, no?
OK… just thoughts from a Philadelphian here… mainly disturbed at the talk of people thinking about changing the rules (to 67/33 etc) after the game is over and the possibility that some sort of faked “popular demand” (this “2 million petition signer” thing sounds ridiculously huge for anything that would appear so quickly. Heck, if the Queen herself put out a petition that every citizen should be tax-free for the next year I doubt they could get that many valid signatures in 24-36 hours!
– MJM, A Connecticut Pennsylvanian in King Author’s (psst… I’m an author, it’s a pun, get it?) Court
- Bill Sticker
June 26, 2016 at 4:35 pm -
There were reports coming in that the actual real count of UK residents was more like 355,000, not two million plus. Another online poll disaster.
- The Blocked Dwarf
June 26, 2016 at 4:44 pm -
(this “2 million petition signer” thing sounds ridiculously huge for anything that would appear so quickly.
Actually it was started a while back by a leave campaigner! It appears to have been hi-jacked, the HoC is investigating atm. If it has been successfully hijacked then there will be some red faces in the HoC IT Dept. The whole point of the Petition Site was that any Petition result was genuine…cast iron…
Rather calls into question some past results I feel….
- Mr Ecks
June 27, 2016 at 8:39 am -
The petition was hacked by some lads from 4chan–the same online group who hacked the Man of The Year Award so it went to Kim Il Whatshisname, North Korean playboy.
If the anti-democrats are pinning their hopes on that they will have to think again.
- Peter Raite
June 27, 2016 at 12:13 pm -
All they managed to do was add a few tens of thousands of easily-spotted fake non-UK signatures. They’re too lazy to have added UK signatures – which require a UK postcode – in a way that wouldn’t have stuck out like an equally sore thumb.
- Mr Ecks
June 28, 2016 at 12:10 am -
Like the 40000 people who signed in the Borough of Westminster etc –when only 36000 voted in the last GE and 1000s of them were tory/ukip voters.
It is a massive fraud never mind a few thousand signature picked up from outside the UK.
- Peter Raite
June 28, 2016 at 10:50 am -
Votes which have now been removed, because they were so obviously faked. This is the saving grace with people who do this sort of thing – they’re fundamentally too lazy tio really work at being undetectable, and hence are easily detected.
- Peter Raite
- Mr Ecks
- Peter Raite
- Mr Ecks
- Don Cox
June 26, 2016 at 5:50 pm -
” Surely there must be some mechanism for someone else to take their place where decisions need to be made, no?”
Certainly there is. The Queen invites whoever she thinks is most likely to succeed to propose a government, which the House of Commons then votes on. If the proposed government loses the vote, she the invites somebody from another party to have a go.
While this is going on, there is of course intense discussion in the back rooms.
However, before Cameron resigns in October, the Conservatives will elect a new leader, who would normally be the first person the Queen asks to form a government.
A coalition is I think quite likely.
- Bill Sticker
- SteveT
June 26, 2016 at 5:08 pm -
The correct way to leave is to invoke article 50, but once that process is started we have just two short years to sort as much as we can. The short time-scale helps the EU as if nothing is agreed we get nothing and are out. Not good for either side but probably worse for us. At this point we are best doing as much to sort out want we actually are aiming for and some informal talks before starting the count down. We voted out of the EU, we didn’t vote for the new destination that still needs a lot of work. Given the short time scales I would think we would have to go for EFTA/EEA something like the Norway option and then continue to work from there.
Cameron hasn’t resigned he is still PM. There is a list of people to follow on temporarily until the house of commons elect a new prime minister, think the speaker is some where in there- Cascadian
June 26, 2016 at 5:39 pm -
“think the speaker is some where in there”……….that’s very reassuring.
Think it may be better if somebody does a Cromwell.
- JohnM
June 26, 2016 at 8:13 pm -
You need to get this right:
We are ALREADY in the EEA. When we depart the EU, we will need to join the EFTA to rejoin the EEA. This contains the same provisions as we have now. We pay contributions. We still apply the “four freedoms”. In short, we sign back into what some voted to get out of.
In fact, to negotiate better terms out of the EU but within the EFTA, we still need to be in the EFTA to negotiate. The whole process was designed to never be used.
Meanwhile Pandora is getting pissed-off that someone has opened her box and all the ills she kept hidden are wandering about being nasty to people. - Rossa
June 27, 2016 at 7:16 am -
You missed out an important bit SteveT. At the end of the two years the negotiated agreement to leave has to be ratified by all the other countries in the EU at that time.
It’s all very well invoking article 50 but who sets the terms of reference for the negotiations? A team has to be set up on both sides. Who will represent the other countries in the EU for their side? What happens when there are elections in France and Germany coming up which could change things. Do we start negotiations again?
Anyone who takes DC’s place will want their own mandate. Which means an early GE, possibly next year. David Miliband is reported to have suddenly come back to the UK. What if we did get a Labour Govt.? And they turn round and say sorry chaps, you voted for nothing. That was the fault of the Torys…..
- Ted Treen
June 27, 2016 at 2:22 pm -
That, unfortunately, is a frighteningly possible scenario. Time to invoke the spirit of Wat Tyler, perchance?
- Ted Treen
- Cascadian
- Cascadian
June 26, 2016 at 5:37 pm -
I am sure everything will become clear when SamCam decides what the camoron can and/or cannot do. As the camorons “legacy” is being evaluated it is obvious the conservative party (with yUK along for the ride) has been run solely for the benefit of her family’s political and economic benefit.
- Lottie Garonne
June 26, 2016 at 6:21 pm -
Anna
I don’t know what to do. I’m just little Lottie down here among strange and vindictive French people. I went down to the bakery this morning, and John Snowballs wasn’t there – nor were there any crying 6th formers. There really are no certainties any more.
That George Osborne so well-meaning and his poor wife, what with the whiplashes and nose-powdering she must be beside herself why did all these nasty Brexiteers have to go and ruin things when it was all going so well?
I had a socialist friend round for lunch and she said “I hear Osborne’s about to resign NOW LOOK WHAT THOSE BREXINAZIS HAVE DONE”. That puzzled me as only last week even though she’s a vegan pacifist she said he should be publicly hung and his entrails eaten by the Labour National Executive which would’ve been tricky anyway as none of them eat meat either.
Not only did UKIP murder that poor Jo Cox, but they’ve compounded the crime by showing what scumbigot racenazis they are. I feel it my duty to resign because everyone else is doing it…93 members of the Shadow Cabinet, Mr Cameldung himself and all those nice people who did such a great job of bringing home a piece of bacon rind in our time in April. But I don’t know whether to resign from the Liberal Democrats, the BBC or my post as Head of PR at HSBC. Do you know, until I took the job I thought Baron Green was on the Piccadilly line.
The Pound fell to parity with the Zimbabwean Remnimbi this morning and that can only do harm to lots of hardworking ordinary families who voted to Remain in all good faith. How let down they must all feel.
I was just listening to Radio Seven Dead, and they were saying that Osborne has come out as Georgina Osnée, a cross-dressing Belgian paedophile sometimes I wonder how these Brexiteer vandals can live with themselves to cause such heartache.
What should I do Anna? I voted with my wallet, and this is the thanks I get.
Sincerely
Lottie- Mudplugger
June 26, 2016 at 6:26 pm -
I’ll have some of what you’re having – must be good gear.
- The Blocked Dwarf
June 26, 2016 at 6:29 pm -
Good gear? Top Gear more like.
- The Blocked Dwarf
- Cascadian
June 26, 2016 at 7:32 pm -
Relax Lottie, we hear over the wires that Hilliary Clinton’s plaything David Milli is rushing to yUKs aid, (as is John Kerry, that global powerhouse negotiator fresh from pacifying the Syria) the conservatives in their lifelong quest to elect the one-true-socialist as leader are even now re-arranging the deckchairs on the TitanyUK to elect him leader of the LieCon coalition.
Britain is saved, South Shields once again gets proper representation, Boris the clown is stymied, the camoron clan are once again smiling, and that nice Herr Juncker is slapping his lips. Democracy has been averted, bureaucracy reigns supreme once again.
Good stuff that Lidl Merlot mixed with Anasthaxthing.
- Mudplugger
- Lottie Garonne
June 26, 2016 at 7:16 pm -
Lidl Lottie prefers Intermarché Malbec, how very dare you…..
- Rossa
June 27, 2016 at 7:19 am -
Mr Ward, your ‘aving a larf!
- Rossa
- Andrew Rosthorn
June 26, 2016 at 7:18 pm -
I did not expect that the lawyer in Anna Raccoon would dare to say we no constitutio.
On the British Library website Robert Blackburn (LLD, FRHistS) is Professor of Constitutional Law at King’s College London says: “in Britain we certainly say that we have a constitution, but it is one that exists in an abstract sense, comprising a host of diverse laws, practices and conventions that have evolved over a long period of time. The key landmark is the Bill of Rights (1689), which established the supremacy of Parliament over the Crown following the forcible replacement of King James II (r.1685–88) by William III (r.1689–1702) and Mary (r.1689–94) in the Glorious Revolution (1688). From a comparative perspective, we have what is known as an ‘unwritten constitution’, although some prefer to describe it as ‘uncodified’ on the basis that many of our laws of a constitutional nature are in fact written down in Acts of Parliament or law reports of court judgments. This aspect of the British constitution, its unwritten nature, is its most distinguishing characteristic.
See more on this at:
http://www.tribunemagazine.org/2016/06/the-runaway-train-is-rolling/- The Blocked Dwarf
June 26, 2016 at 8:13 pm -
I did not expect that the lawyer in Anna Raccoon would dare to say we no constitution
Here, let me help you down from that horse of too many hands.
It is clear to anyone but a pedant , that AR was referring to a ‘constitution’ such as most (if not all other?) EU countries have. In Germany , not just the entire country but every German State has it’s own written constitution.
Whether the British have an ‘unwritten’ or ‘uncodified’ one is something for legal scholars, fact is we don’t have anything comparable with other EU nations .
- Mudplugger
June 26, 2016 at 8:36 pm -
The view that “we don’t have anything comparable with other EU nations” may go some way to explaining why a majority finally worked that out and voted to leave a club with whom we have nothing in common.
It’s like being the lone teetotaller in the Bullingdon Club: you won’t understand them and they certainly won’t understand you, even if they ever wanted to. Better to leave them to their type of party and you get on with your own life.
- Andrew Rosthorn
June 26, 2016 at 8:59 pm -
Mudplugger, you’ll be getting with your own life in a gulag if you start ditching constitutions. Get it right. There is a British constitution. It says the last word lies with Parliament. Let them have the last word in these exceptional times. Fiat justitia, ruat caelum.
- tdf
June 26, 2016 at 9:23 pm -
So David Lammy’s proposal is not as crazy as might be assumed.
- Cascadian
June 27, 2016 at 1:29 am -
Good lord, when did the landlady start booking comedy acts?
So the COMMONS (ie elected commoners) are going to reject the will of the plebs, I would actually like to see that.
Venezuala here we come, stand aside for yUK. Stock up the toilet paper people, its kicking off.
- Cascadian
- tdf
- Andrew Rosthorn
- Mudplugger
- The Blocked Dwarf
- tdf
June 26, 2016 at 7:21 pm -
^ indeed, Britain has a constitution, just not a written one. That said, I can’t see that there’s a constitutional precedent for this precise situation?
- Don Cox
June 26, 2016 at 7:43 pm -
I think there were several times in the 19C when the Prime Minister no longer had the support of the country and the parties were divided, as now.
But the situation in the Labour Party is really quite odd.
- Andrew Rosthorn
June 26, 2016 at 7:49 pm -
This precise situation has not happened before. Referendums in Britain were non-existent before 1975. Nuclear war, ebola fever and invasion by aliens have all never happened. So the British constitution, temporarily invisible to the marvellous Ms Raccoon, provides for unexpected situations and suchlike to be dealt with by the duly-elected members of the House of Commons: “The principle of Parliamentary sovereignty means neither more nor less than this, namely, that Parliament thus defined has, under the English constitution, the right to make or unmake any law whatever; and, further, that no person or body is recognised by the law of England as having a right to override or set aside the legislation of Parliament. AV DICEY KC.
- tdf
June 26, 2016 at 9:21 pm -
In a sense, though, the reverse situation has happened, by which I mean that the UK has decades of institutional experience with decolonization. Now they get to apply it to themselves?
- tdf
- Don Cox
- Andrew Rosthorn
June 26, 2016 at 7:24 pm -
That should have read “I did not expect that the lawyer in Anna Raccoon would dare to say we have no constitution. The literal had a kind of weird sense like “Yes, we have no bananas” which may happen if you Brexiteers start interfering with our Irish reefer lorries coming from Cork. Like the EU, it’s a long story, and if, like the EU, it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”
- Stewart Cowan
June 26, 2016 at 7:27 pm -
I discovered something very interesting about that 2nd referendum petition. A big hoax to allow us another go at giving the ‘correct’ answer?
- JohnM
June 26, 2016 at 8:16 pm -
Look at the location on the bot…SW1A0AA
- Stewart Cowan
June 26, 2016 at 9:44 pm -
Looks like a memo might have gone around Westminster and Whitehall telling people to suspend work and spend all day inventing names and addresses. But did the petition people really study 45,000 entries from this one constituency and reject 30,000 of them as being verifiably fake? How long would this have taken?
- Stewart Cowan
June 27, 2016 at 1:12 am -
I see what you mean, John – bots. A comment just left on my blog explains all:
Millions of fake signatures have come via ‘4Chan’ from North Korea, Vatican City, etc., etc., yet the BBC is still telling us that 77,000 signatures have been removed, but the total has now exceeded three-and-a-half million signatures.
Apart from the ridiculous nature of the petition and that there were more signatures from London and Westminster than total votes cast in the constituency in last year’s general election, it was cleverly executed.
I noticed that areas with high student populations across the country has correspondingly high numbers of (supposed) signatories, although that might be because these extra signatures were genuine.
But thankfully, it seems to be a complete hoax that the Government will have to deal with somehow – presumably by discarding it, as we’ve already had the referendum.
- Peter Raite
June 27, 2016 at 12:29 pm -
It’s a bit more complicated than that. The total electorate in Cities of London and Westminster is just under 61 thousand, so the current tally of 16,874 is only 24% of them. Areas which voted heavily to Remain show more signature, but those that did not do not.
To can see the raw data broken down by country and – for the UK – Parliamentary constituency in this file, which you’ll need to open in MS-Notepad for a simialr basic text editor:
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215.json
Something like 98% of UK signatories have included a postcode.
- Stewart Cowan
June 27, 2016 at 1:19 pm -
So, nearly every signature is purported to have come from the UK? I’m not a computer geek, so I don’t know ‘4Chan’ managed it, although you can easily get millions of names and addresses on discs.
- Peter Raite
June 27, 2016 at 2:00 pm -
The problem is that there are 1.75 million postcodes covering 29 million individual addresses, and those address correlate to Parliamentary constituencies and Referendum reporting areas. To be truly undetectable they would have had to map postcodes to both constituencies and the actual Referendum results to get a set of postcodes that would be essentially random, but would still not obviously buck the trend of the real Referndum voting. We know 4Chan didn’t do this, because they openly boasted how easy it was to either sign as non-UK, or simply stick to a single postcode (SW1 0AA being the obvious candidate for “LOLZ”).
Even more to the point, the hackers could not possibly know where the valid votes were coming from, so they would always run the risk of using postcodes for that had alreay been used by genuine signatories, not to mention postcodes for non-residential addresses. Any obviously over-used postcodes could be checked further, cross-referencing the e-mail addresses and names supplied against the electoral register. A lot of this sort of checking can be done in a semi-automated manner that would quickly show up patterns of fraud.
- Stewart Cowan
June 27, 2016 at 2:11 pm -
So, barring an investigation of every signature, nobody can be sure how many are genuine?
(SW1 0AA being the obvious candidate for “LOLZ”).
LOL!
- Peter Raite
June 28, 2016 at 10:57 am -
It would actually be relatively easy to create some fairly simple algorithms to detect suspiscious voting patterns at postcode level. Just doing a random 10% of postcodes would demonstrate any significant level of fraud. The thing is that most people who would be inclined to sign almost certainly wouldn’t be inclined to vote twice, even if they could. I have a number of e-mail address, so could vote multiple times, but that would noticably “overload” my postcode. Since most of the e-mails are variations on my real name, they’d stick out, as well.
- Peter Raite
- Stewart Cowan
- Peter Raite
- Stewart Cowan
- Peter Raite
- Stewart Cowan
- Stewart Cowan
- Peter Raite
June 27, 2016 at 12:17 pm -
This merely demonstrates how easy it is to spot – and remove – lazily-executed fraud.
- JohnM
- tdf
June 26, 2016 at 9:45 pm -
Who cares? According to what we were told above, the referendum (let alone the petition demanding another one) has no constitutional validity and parliament can ignore/over-ride it.
- tdf
June 26, 2016 at 9:54 pm -
From Peter Sutherland’s Twitter:
Peter Sutherland @PDSutherlandUN Jun 25
The younger generation in UK has been sacrificed all because of distortion of facts & consequences. Somehow this result must be overturned.
863 retweets 708 likesComments I suspect that will not be popular among the majority of posters on this blog.
- Rossa
June 27, 2016 at 7:29 am -
The younger generations can have as much of a tantrum as they like. If they were that bothered why didn’t they turn out to vote? Or are they just miffed that ‘Mummy and Daddy’ know best! Only 45% of the youngest two age groups, that’s 18-35, that were registered to vote, actually voted either Remain or Leave. More than half didn’t bother or didn’t care.
- Rossa
- Andrew Rosthorn
June 26, 2016 at 10:16 pm -
The Financial Times legal blogger David Allen Green and David Lammy MP are saying that Brexit cannot happen without the MPs repealing the 1972 European Communities Act. The EU cannot make a move until someone in Westminster invokes Article 50. How will they find the MPs to vote to repeal the Act? Can they find a PM to invoke Article 50? Cameron is clearly refusing be that man and hit the Article 50 button. He is disappearing just like Eden after Suez.
- tdf
June 26, 2016 at 10:32 pm -
Ok. So with a clear parliamentary majority for Remain, I’d guess the MP’s are unlikely to vote for repeal of that Act. As I understand it even the Tories have a slim pro-Remain Majority. UKIP? They have one MP, who amusingly, hates Farage.
- Sean Coleman
June 26, 2016 at 10:52 pm -
I can’t do links but Peter Hitchens is worried that the longer the delay in leaving the less likely it will be. Remember, the big majority of maps, the BBC, big business, ‘serious’ journalists and the civil service are committed to Europe. From what I can see, the Facebook mob is hysterically so (it is hysterical about everything). If the process is dragged out (say by obsessing about Corbyn) then a thousand reasons can be found to wriggle out of it, perhaps starting with those people who, it is claimed, only voted Leave for a laugh and now bitterly regret it. As Hitchens tweeted to that Labour mp, using Brecht’s old joke, since the people have failed the elite we need to elect a new people.
- Sean Coleman
June 26, 2016 at 10:58 pm -
And if we leave Europe how are we ever going to save the planet from global warming?
- Don Cox
June 27, 2016 at 8:02 pm -
Not with wind farms, that’s for sure.
- Don Cox
- Sean Coleman
- tdf
June 26, 2016 at 10:58 pm -
Peter Hitchen’s column is always worth a read, but he hardly ever gets it right on political predictions (by his own admission, to be fair.) If he is going to make a fetish of ‘people’s democracy’ then he risks being called out on hypocrisy. For example, he regularly attacks the Good Friday Agreement in his columns even though it was democratically voted for on both sides of the border. He also is on the record as being against referendums full stop, being a believer in parliamentary supremacy, etc.
- Sean Coleman
June 26, 2016 at 11:14 pm -
Oh-oh, the ‘h’ word again! He has been consistent in his opposition to referendums (my preferred plural) precisely because of their constitutional implications. But let’s forget about PH and put it this way: if Remain had won would anyone still be talking about it? Of course not. It would be put to bed for ever. And the emotional outpourings from the vanquished are a sight to behold. It is Kristallnacht all over again. These are the experts, the people who live in the real world of the here and now, and not living back in some golden age (that of course, they chorus, never existed). They know best and are *rational*, so why are stupid people so pig-headed about accepting it?
- tdf
June 26, 2016 at 11:28 pm -
“if Remain had won would anyone still be talking about it? Of course not. It would be put to bed for ever.”
Given that Farage is on record as saying that if Remain got less than 52% then he would call for a second referendum, and given that the person who set up the petition demanding a new vote was apparently a Brexiter who feared his side were going to lose, my guess is that, yes, people would still be talking about it.
- Sean Coleman
June 27, 2016 at 12:27 am -
We will have to agree to disagree. When Ireland submitted to the same pressure and voted a second time on both Nice and Lisbon and voted the proper way there were no calls that I remember for yet another vote. There were no calls for reruns of the referendum to abolish the death penalty or for the one that allowed gay marriage (the greatest moment in Irish history until Brady’s goal on Wednesday). There are repeated calls to rerun the referendum outlawing abortion, however, but that is sure to be put right because the people made a mistake by voting the wrong way then too. So the rule is: if you vote the wrong way you get another chance to make amends, but if you vote the right way there is obviously no need. Everybody agrees that the people voted the wrong way on Thursday but maybe the rule does not apply to Britain.
- tdf
June 27, 2016 at 12:40 am -
Sean,
The comparison with the Irish votes on Nice and Lisbon is wrongheaded in my view, as both were votes on treaties and certainly not as dramatic as the Brexit/Remain vote. On principle, I do tend to agree that re-running referendums until ‘The Powers That Be’ get the ‘right’ result is not good. Perhaps referendums in general are not a great idea, who knows.
As for the referendum on gay marriage in Ireland, I would have thought the result was very clear, so I can’t concede that it is similar to the Brexit vote, where the margin of victory was by comparatively relatively slim. As a married friend of mine remarked at the time, if the gays want equal rights, who are we to deny them the misery of marriage (lol).
- Sean Coleman
June 27, 2016 at 12:56 am -
Just to be clear, before I turn in: should they rerun the referendum, or play for time and find a way of getting around it, or accept the result and leave the EU?
- tdf
June 27, 2016 at 1:02 am -
^ No idea. Would have thought the declines in currency for a country that has a negative surplus of trade doesn’t look good if they proceed with Brexit.
- Sean Coleman
June 27, 2016 at 10:46 am -
I thought that would be your reply. Your posts strongly suggest that you think Britain should remain despite the vote. Why don’t you state it plainly? Do you mind me asking if you see yourself as a ‘people person’? I’d be surprised if you were not.
- tdf
June 27, 2016 at 9:25 pm -
I think Parliament should ignore the popular vote, yes. As for your second question, I don’t know what you mean.
- Sean Coleman
June 27, 2016 at 11:20 pm -
Thanks. If Remain had won should Parliament have ignored that too?
- tdf
June 27, 2016 at 11:33 pm -
If Remain had won, then, yes, Parliament should have ignored that also.
As I understand it, popular vote referendums have no meaning in the British constitution and are at best only guiding.
- tdf
June 27, 2016 at 11:35 pm -
The troubling thing for Remainers (and I am a Remainer) is that were it not for the murder of Jo Cox, the Brexit vote would likely have been even higher – which is certainly suggestive of a popular mood of great discontent with ‘The Powers that Be’, be they in Westminster, Brussels or wherever.
- Sean Coleman
- tdf
- Sean Coleman
- tdf
- Eric
June 27, 2016 at 4:27 pm -
A referendum is not part of the democratic process when Parliament remains supreme.
I think the way around the notion of a second referendum with be a General election in 18 months to 2 years with a new PM and interested parties explaining their reasons for Brexit or Remain again and seeking a mandate either way.
- Sean Coleman
- tdf
- Sean Coleman
- tdf
- Eric
June 27, 2016 at 4:18 pm -
Even though I was admonished by the Good Landlady on twitter for saying that Parliament still had the final say on Brexit – Mam claimed it was the PM’s prerogative to be in or out of International Treaties , I thought this was odd.
Geoffrey Robertson QC has now confirmed that only Parliament can create a Brexit Act as Britain’s EU entry was established by an Act of Parliament..ergo..David Cameron has no legal power or indeed moral right to say a non-compulsory referendum will be acted upon. Nor has Boris Johnson if he becomes PM.
The most they can do is ask Parliament to confirm the results of the referendum and create that Brexit Act. But the majority of MPs of all parties are Remains. This raises pretty serious questions : we have a PM and MPs making fraudulent claims and especially David Cameron (that’s what you get for electing a PR Man !). I figure that’s why Cameron is clearing out and I suspect Boris, the likely next PM knows this which is why he is urging caution.The insistence that a non-compulsory referendum which has no legal standing ( but probably a moral one) must be enforced is, in a way perverting the process of Democracy where Parliament is supreme.
Of course politicians would be foolish to ignore the wishes of 17 million voters but over the coming months I perceive holes will be found in the entire process and a real constitutional crisis risks occurring.
I think this has a very long way to go yet. Brexit have won this battle but have they won the war?
- Eric
June 27, 2016 at 4:23 pm -
And I add- as Robertson points out that even if Parliament votes to create a Brexit Act the House of Lords still has a say. Acts passed by Parliament don’t always make it all the way through the system.
The triumphalism of the Brexit Mob are overshadowing the fatc that parties get elected to govern via Parliament but don’t always get to implement the policies they took to a General election. This referendum is no different given that it is basically a statement of what 17 million people want. But over 16 million people want something else.
This game isn’t over by a long shot.
- Rossa
June 27, 2016 at 5:38 pm -
The House of Commons is exactly that. Common people elected to represent the Common people. That is what this is all about. Our elected common representatives ignoring those common people who elected them. They ignore the common people at their peril. Regardless of all the shenanigans going on at the moment, there will be a new PM and a new leader of the opposition. Assuming nothing else gets in the way (though I’m expecting it will) at some point the new PM will have to go to the country (aka the common people) to get an electoral mandate as Gordon Brown had to.
The BBC says September for a new PM. Last year Parliament was dissolved on 30 March approx 6 weeks or so before the vote. We could have an early GE this year. However, I expect this to be kicked further into the long grass and Spring 2017 may be the earliest date for a GE.
In the meantime, moves are afoot in the EU to kick us out, so the above becomes irrelevant. Even if a GE does happen the terms of reference will have changed considerably in the next few months. The vote is only the first shot across the bow. Brexit is a process, not one event.
- Eric
June 28, 2016 at 6:22 am -
Agree but shouldn’t it be called the House of The Very Common?
But an MP will surely consider what’s at stake for the country and that the majority are not always right given that indeed 17 M voted Get Out Now but 16 mil voted the opposite. Certainly a majority in the referendum but not but not necessarily a majority when a lot of lazy sods didn’t vote. Of course how do you gauge the real wishes of the people is the problem.Another reason Britain should have compulsory voting as they do here in Oz which gets well over 93% turn out in all elections and with preferential voting usually results in a government the majority are happy with. But that won’t happen.
- The Blocked Dwarf
June 28, 2016 at 6:56 am -
when a lot of lazy sods didn’t vote.
I didn’t, and as the Polling Station was literally across the road from me it was nothing to do with my being lazy. I genuinely believe referendums to be , in general, a Bad Idea….and nothing this last month has convinced me otherwise. Infact if there is one lesson I hope the nation takes from this clusterf*ck then it , hopefully. will be that ‘No One Wins A Referendum’. Neither ‘In’ nor ‘Out’ nor democracy in general.
- Eric
June 28, 2016 at 1:21 pm -
I agree that referendums are not a good idea. But you were in the pub and couldn’t be bothered weren’t you? You don’t fool me.
Why does the UK, like the USA hold these things on a weekday? I have to vote in Melbourne this weekend in the General election but it’s always held on a Saturday and it becomes like a festive occasion at the poling booths. - Mudplugger
June 28, 2016 at 1:53 pm -
The one lesson from this referendum is that, unless the result can be absolutely 100% copper-bottomed guaranteed, we will never have another one – the public egg-on-face factor is too much for the egos of any career-politicians to bear.
Not voting in a referendum is inexcuseable: it’s far easier than a general election because it’s binary – on balance, you will always lean more towards one side rather than the other, the chances of genuinely being exactly in the middle are pretty remote. Even then, you could drag your sorry arse into the booth and scrawl “Can’t decide” across the ballot-paper, a far better outcome than ‘can’t be arsed’.
Anyone who chose not to vote has, in so doing, disqualified themselves from any future comment of theirs on the topic being considered valid, especially by those who took the trouble to express their own balanced opinions, whether ‘Remain’ or ‘Leave’ or spoilt.
- Eric
- The Blocked Dwarf
- Eric
- The Blocked Dwarf
June 27, 2016 at 7:37 pm -
the House of Lords still has a say.
not since 1912 (or ’13, I forget)….as the Fox Hunting Ban demonstrated. A ‘say’ yes but a ‘say’ that has nothing behind it.- Eric
June 28, 2016 at 1:18 pm -
Surely the House of Lords can reject a bill or send it back for changes. However does that apply when Parliament would be repealing an Act ?
How irresponsible was David Cameron saying that whatever the referendum decide it would occur when he has no such power. and Boris is now doing the same. Is there a constitutional crisis in the making?
- Eric
- Rossa
- Eric
- Sean Coleman
- tdf
June 26, 2016 at 11:25 pm -
Sean, I’ve always found it tiresome and pretentious to refer to the plural of referendum as ‘referenda’ in the English language.
I find the rest of your post a bit surprising, coming from an Irish person, and especially your dismissive reference to Remainers being cynical about a ‘golden age that never existed.’ Because, for most of the world, the Remainers you cite are basically right – it didn’t. I’m guessing you are old enough to remember the days when the ‘no blacks, no Pakis’ signs outside certain guesthouses in some of the more traditional districts of Britain used also to include the words ‘no Irish’?
- binao
June 26, 2016 at 11:31 pm -
Meanwhile Project Fear has been ramped up to try to condition to us accept that what we were offered and voted for was not deliverable.
But HMG offered us the choices; they weren’t demanded. DC even went so far as to confirm we’d be OK out, He only revealed he’d gone totally native when it was clear there was no credible deal to sell in support of remain.
This wasn’t an election, there was never a responsibility on the out campaigners to take on government responsibilities and make it work.
It follows that if Dave is deserting, he needs to go now, not at some time convenient to the party machine.
Nobody said this was going to be easy. Given that we cannot make the Commons do what we have chosen or want (no change there then) we may need to start kicking up.
This isn’t over.- Duncan Disorderly
June 27, 2016 at 5:45 am -
Project Fear is now Project Reality, binoa. Leave don’t have a plan beyond Walter Mitty fantasies.
- binao
June 27, 2016 at 7:25 am -
‘…is now Project Reality…’.
Well, Duncan D and others in a like vein.
I can well understand, and the voting showed there will be a lot of disapointment.
Carrying on with, even intensifying the negative campaigning in the hope of negating the expressed will can only be damaging for us all.
Uncertainty was always going to happen. There’s a lot a stake for the eu too.
Get used to it.
- binao
- Duncan Disorderly
- tdf
June 26, 2016 at 11:37 pm -
“This wasn’t an election, there was never a responsibility on the out campaigners to take on government responsibilities and make it work.”
Quite frankly, what utter bollocks. If you are proposing a major societal, governmental and constitutional change, then, yes, you absolutely and totally have a moral and ethical responsibility to spell out the expected, predicted, real world consequences. I would have some criticisms of the Scot Nats (I think their plan to join the Eurozone is wrong-headed, for example), but at least in 2014 they had an actual plan if they had won their vote.
- suffolkgirl
June 26, 2016 at 11:38 pm -
Yes for sure we have a constitution. Every lawyer ever qualified will have studied it at some point though most workaday ones as I was will have forgotten most of what they learnt as they made their living in much more mundane fields. However and fortunately there is a pool of expertise in this field, and what alarms me is the strong suspicion I have that the Brexit leaders have not consulted it at all. Nor do I feel that they have sized up the mass of legislation and treaties which will need to be repealed and replaced and come to any realistic assessment of how long that might take. They have promised that agriculture will be protected, but the task of moving from an EU system of subsidy to a British one is legally and technically a huge one, leaving out any consideration as to whether there will be enough in the Brexit savings pot to pay for it when it comes to be implemented. As I don’t want this to go belly up I hope that Johnson and Give do get the stay of execution they so clearly want.
- suffolkgirl
June 27, 2016 at 12:01 am -
I agree Binao that Cameron was totally irresponsible in offering up a referendum in the loose terms it was framed. However that can’t let the Brexiteers off the hook. If you go to the electorate promising lots of jam tomorrow then you should have had at least a plan as to how this could be achieved. I’d point out that both the detail of how the EU and the British constitution works were not hidden away in a secret hidey hole for the last 20 years, and the Brexit campaign has been lavishly funded in this campaign. Perhaps they should have spent some of that money on hiring their own experts to advise them. They do exist outside of the government civil service.
- Don Cox
June 27, 2016 at 8:10 pm -
I don’t think the Brexiteers promised more jam. What they promised was more democracy, and a lesser reduction in freedom.
It was never about money. It was about being ruled by unelected civil servants in Brussels. And being told to change British laws without being able to argue about it.
- Don Cox
- Nessie
June 27, 2016 at 12:12 am -
Oh don’t worry Anna. Cameron’s just waiting so Sturgeon can take the moral high ground and decide that Scotland is more important than the rest of us English plebs and vetos the referendum. It seems that if it’s wrong for the UK to drag the Scots out of the EU against their will, then this injustice can be corrected by dragging the UK back into the EU against its will. Who knew?
- The Blocked Dwarf
June 27, 2016 at 12:54 am -
This evening in Dwarf Hovel
The Bestes Frau In The Whole Wide World (translated out the original German): “Dwarfy-Pooh, what is that word you British use to describe a situation where no one has a clue what they are doing, where everyone is running around like ze headless chickens, everyone understands everything to mean something different and there is absolutely no plan going forwards?”Your Dwarf in Norfolk: ” We call that ‘a Clusterf*ck’.”
And on that comforting note I am off to my bed.
- Major Bonkers
June 27, 2016 at 10:24 am -
I call it, since 1992, ‘Her Majesty’s Government’; where no-one has any guiding principles at all, there is no disgrace in lying, no-one looks beyond the next day’s headlines, and a week is considered ‘long term’. Policy is made on the hoof, and flip-flops according to expediency. Two loyal claques in the House of Commons brayingly praise their own policies, and damn the other side’s, on the basis only of machine politics and patronage. Any politician with principles – Frank Field, John Redwood – is marginalised by their own party and referred to as some maverick weirdo.
We have had a succession of Prime Ministers in this country who have seen themselves as little more than flags, fluttering in the breeze of public opinion: middlemen, ‘triangulating’ policy on the basis only of their stupid political games.
My mother remembers a television interview with John Major when he became Prime Minister, and was asked for his vision of the country in five year’s time, and was completely speechless. Dave, when asked why he should be Prime Minister, apparently replied because he thought that he’d be good at it.
The epitaph of Dave’s Prime Ministerial career is that he presided over a doubling of the national debt and legislated to allow gay marriage. The one genuine achievement of his time in office – leaving the EU – he set his face against to such an extent that he spoke such risible nonsense that he destroyed his own credibility.
- Mudplugger
June 27, 2016 at 11:42 am -
You’re omitting Dave’s other major achievement in office the 5p carrier-bag – awesome record.
- Mudplugger
- Major Bonkers
- Rossa
June 27, 2016 at 7:43 am -
BoJo has set out his ‘vision’ in an OpEd for the DT last night. But no mention of how, let alone any mention of article 50. Smacks of Remain but we’ll pretend it’s Leave.
- Eric
June 27, 2016 at 11:15 am -
A Very “British” revolution that used a popular American film title, Independence Day as it’s theme. Says it all really. I reckon it was Very Rupert Murdoch Revolution.
- Peter Raite
June 27, 2016 at 12:33 pm -
A film with a German director. Heavy irony.
- Peter Raite
- windsock
June 27, 2016 at 11:17 am -
Also a quote from from Mr Garage before the referendum:
“But Brexit campaigner and Ukip leader Nigel Farage has suggested that he would fight for a second referendum if the Remain camp wins by just a narrow margin.
He told the Mirror: ”In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. If the Remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it.”
Do you think he still believes that?
- Peter Raite
June 27, 2016 at 12:42 pm -
Unlikely. It does highlight, though, what I’ve been saying (to anyone who will listen) for the last few days. Had the percentages been exactly reversed, we would now be in a period of the Leave side pressing for a) another referendum, and/or b) an attempt to get more concessions from the EU. As it is, with most Leavers rapidly back-peddling of everything they explicitly promised Brexit could or would give us, we will be left with what will be the worst of all worlds for both sides. The bottom lines is that the only way we can have access to the European free market is by adhering to EU standards, some sort of free movement, and/or payments. Ultimately all we will get is being able to say that we are sovereign in matters that relate solely to matters restricted to within the UK only (what’s left of it). There will be no post-EU dividend, no circumventing EU standards on products we make for the EU market, and essentially no change in net migration (half of which is non-EU, anyway).
- Mudplugger
June 27, 2016 at 3:49 pm -
No exporter is immune from the standards applicable in their target markets, this is not an EU issue, it’s real life, so that’s no problem, in or out of the EU, not even a valid scare-tactic.
If Brexit applies, we will be sovereign over all laws which apply in the UK, we will be sovereign over all taxes which apply in the UK, we will be sovereign over whatever trade arrangements we choose to make with any country in the world, particularly those in rapidly-growing sectors, rather than the rapidly-diminishing sector that is the EU. That’s the Brexit difference. More locally, we will have the sovereignty to decide whether any deal on offer with the EU is acceptable to us, if not we will have the power to reject it, with full recognition of any consequences (a country devoid of all future BMWs, Mercedes and VWs, Renaults, Peugeots, Fiats, Seats, Skodas ? – Hardly likely, do the maths, so let’s all grow up).
No-one can foretell what those sovereign laws, taxes or trade-deals will be, that’s fortune-telling, but the balance of voters in the referendum clearly believed that the power to self-define those facets is preferable to having them dictated by those we cannot dismiss if/when they do it badly. That’s why Leave won.- Peter Raite
June 28, 2016 at 11:02 am -
It’s a pity, then, that a major rallyign cry for leave was “cutting EU red tape,” when the reality is that the tape is always going to be there, uncut. It’s not even like the UK is going to have internals standards lower than EU ones. We’re not goignt o hear toaster manufacturers boasting that they can sell a cheaper product in the UK by omittign all the safety features that they put on the model for the EU market.
- Mudplugger
June 28, 2016 at 11:50 am -
Glad we cleared that up.
- Eddy
June 28, 2016 at 11:59 am -
Trading standards will remain but they are mostly the result of agreements at the international level. When we leave we will have a seat on all the international bodies. For the rest, we will have more freedom to pick and choose. The tobacco products directive would be a good candidate for being dumped.
- Mudplugger
- Eddy
June 28, 2016 at 11:56 am -
Well said.
- Peter Raite
- Mudplugger
- Peter Raite
- Sean Coleman
June 27, 2016 at 1:45 pm -
I suspect it will be just as hard to leave Europe as it was to escape from the Soviet Union. We might have to wait for the whole rotten edifice to collapse. The difference seems to be that the EU is more a prison of the mind.
- binao
June 27, 2016 at 10:02 pm -
I repeat: why does nobody speak of the 5 million or so jobs on the mainland that are dependent on exports of goods, produce & services to the UK?
Why promote ridiculous scare stories about risks to our economy while ignoring the much larger complementary risk to the eu?
Is there a tacit understanding that as with the ridiculous euro vanity project, a few million more people’s jobs are irrelevant?
If so, why would anyone want to be associated with an organisation, an ethic, and a robotic detachment from humanity & democracy that behaves so?
Just a view, but one that sustains my belief in out.- Don Cox
June 28, 2016 at 3:56 pm -
Farage mentioned those jobs in his speech, his point being that Free Trade ought to continue.
- Don Cox
- binao
- windsock
June 27, 2016 at 3:50 pm -
And what is the betting we’ll resolve everything when we go ahead and sign TTIP without EU (Hollande has said he will veto it in the EU)?
Or was that the plan all along?
I said it before, but I’ll say it again… Welcome to Airstrip One.
- The Blocked Dwarf
June 27, 2016 at 8:38 pm -
- windsock
June 27, 2016 at 8:51 pm -
You wish…
- windsock
- The Blocked Dwarf
- Cascadian
June 27, 2016 at 7:42 pm -
Newsflash-TWatson on behalf of the revolutionary liebour party has announced the new liebour leader will be Nicolas Maduro, TWatson was quoted thus: “It’s much easier that way, now we have no need of a shadow cabinet.”
In other news the newly trimmed down yUK modelled its AA bra, she said ” its much more comfortable than my previous AAA, with a bit of effort I think I can get down to a BB”
- tdf
June 27, 2016 at 9:27 pm -
So Tom Watson is a revolutionary Marxist? Lol, ok, I’ve heard it all now.
- Cascadian
June 28, 2016 at 2:31 am -
Well, encouraging fantasist “jounalists” and compo-seekers cannot be a 24-hour job even for the pie-eater general, tdf.
- tdf
June 28, 2016 at 8:00 pm -
Cascadian,
That may be so but I don’t think too many communists voted for the Iraq war and against the inquiry into it, as Watson did.
- Cascadian
June 28, 2016 at 9:48 pm -
Heckuva good try at diversion tdf, “I don’t think too many communists voted for the Iraq war “……………….then you are misinformed or ignorant.
http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/List_of_UK_MPs_who_voted_for_Iraq_War
Liebour MP’s
Bob Ainsworth-Former member of Trotskyist International Marxist Group.
Candy Atherton-Connected to UNISON and communist front CND.
Kevin Barron-Former member of Trotskyist Militant under Isaac Blank. Previous member of NUM and Arthur Scargill ally.
David Blunkett-Marxist-Leninist.
Stephen Byers-Former member of Trotskyist Militant under Isaac Blank.That’s just Liebour MP’s with a surname beginning with A or B. Need I continue?
Given the last 24 hours, are you sure that the liebour party is not a revolutionary party with one-man rule? Calling Nicolas Maduro, your expertise is wanted in yUK. Stock up on toilet paper people, it could be the new currency.
- tdf
June 28, 2016 at 10:03 pm -
Cascadian,
The rather odd link you have provided informs us, further down the page, that the MP Melanie Johnson of Welwyn Hatfield “promotes fluoridation of water supply. ”
…you will understand if I can’t take the link seriously. Or perhaps not.
- Cascadian
June 28, 2016 at 10:43 pm -
Agreed, slightly odd………but more odd than the revolutionary liebour party or TWatson? I think not.
- Cascadian
- tdf
- Cascadian
- tdf
- Cascadian
- tdf
June 27, 2016 at 10:47 pm -
Donald Tusk trolls England…
https://twitter.com/donaldtusk/status/747539443234512901
..and in doing so displays his lack of knowledge of things soccerball.
- Peter Raite
June 28, 2016 at 11:07 am
- Peter Raite
- The Blocked Dwarf
June 28, 2016 at 6:51 am -
If I hear one more MP banging on about ‘not ignoring the Will Of The People’ I shall be forced to have a “La Reine le veult” t-shirt made up.
- Major Bonkers
June 28, 2016 at 7:41 am -
Justine Greening proves my theory that our British lesbians are no match for the splendid foreign variety.
- tdf
June 28, 2016 at 8:01 pm -
Very naught, Major Bonkers. Incidentally, why are there so many gays in politics, and not just in left wing parties?
Not a homophobic question, but I’m genuinely curious.
{ 146 comments… read them below or add one }