What can we do to change the minds of decision makers and people in general to actually do something about preparing for the forthcoming economic/energy crises (the ones after this one!)?
When David Cameron delivered his resignation speech outside No 10 on Friday, he said he would leave the task of triggering article 50 of the Lisbon treaty – the untested procedure governing how an EU member state leaves the bloc – to his successor.
This has prompted much speculation – and a glimmer of hope – for those who want Britain to remain in the European Union. Cameron, they argue, had repeatedly said during the campaign that article 50 would be triggered immediately if Vote Leave were to win the Brexit referendum.
By not doing so, the theory is, and by handing the responsibility to whoever succeeds him, Cameron has handed the next prime minister a poisoned chalice. Given the dramatic reaction to Brexit – on world stock markets, on the foreign exchanges, in Scotland, across Europe – and with the enormity of the consequences of leaving the EU now plain, who will dare pull the trigger?
One consequence of this, as a below-the-line commenter argued on the Guardian website, is that Cameron has effectively snookered the Brexit camp: they may have won the referendum, but they cannot use the mandate they have been given because if they do so they will be seen to be knowingly condemning the UK to recession, breakup and years of pain.
John, what's you view on Tim Farron's comments today on not leaving/rejoining? Politically speaking, it seems the LibDems can tap into a popular vein here?
In fact, simply by having a leader and a plan (any plan) leaves them looking good today!
I don't know exactly what he has said beyond we should stand on a platform of rejoining. We have supported being parts of international organisations and it is therefore a coherent position.
It will, however, take Brexit campaigners to shift for us to not leave. It remains it is almost certainly the best option (not leaving).
The prospect of a parliamentary fightback against the result of the EU referendum gathered pace on Sunday, with pro-remain figures saying they would not “roll over and give up”.
Some are urging a second referendum after Brexit negotiations have taken place.
Lord Heseltine has pointed to the practicalities of an overwhelming majority in the House of Commons against leaving the EU. “There is a majority of something like 350 in the House of Commons broadly in favour of the European relationship,” he said.
3rdRock wrote:Some are urging a second referendum after Brexit negotiations have taken place.
I don't really see the objection of a second referendum in a couple of years when there's a clear, detailed plan of exactly what's on the table. In fact, why would anyone object to that?
They could risk a second referendum, and admit the first one was conducted under a banner of lies from both sides. That would be political suicide. UKIP would get a lot of seats in a following election, and since UKIP had many more votes than SNP, yet got only one MP, the SNP will be in shit creek too.
Cameron and his crew are arses, and deserve a fall from grace, as do all the remain MPs who once again are implying the electorate are not worth listening to. They will of course say how how intelligent they are at the next election.
Then they wonder why extremists get into power.
To become an extremist, hang around with people you agree with. Cass Sunstein
3rdRock wrote:Some are urging a second referendum after Brexit negotiations have taken place.
I don't really see the objection of a second referendum in a couple of years when there's a clear, detailed plan of exactly what's on the table. In fact, why would anyone object to that?
Why would anyone object to a re-match when they were told the first match would be decisive and they subsequently won it?
Are you seriously asking this question?
Apart from anything else, if people think there is going to be a second referendum after some negotiation, it becomes a completely different negotiation.
I have the dow at 17,400.75 at close of play on Friday. You are saying you are willing to bet USD 20 that it will close on Monday below 13965.
6138.69 was the FTSE100 close. You are saying that will be below: 5831.755.
I am happy to take on either or both bets. I think the markets had already priced in risk anyway.
UndercoverElephant wrote:Apart from anything else, if people think there is going to be a second referendum after some negotiation, it becomes a completely different negotiation.
There is, of course, the question as to what the alternative is. I personally think the EEA option which removes our power, but also only gets rid of the CFP and the CAP is probably from most people's point of view worse than the current arrangement.
3rdRock wrote:Some are urging a second referendum after Brexit negotiations have taken place.
I don't really see the objection of a second referendum in a couple of years when there's a clear, detailed plan of exactly what's on the table. In fact, why would anyone object to that?
Why would anyone object to a re-match when they were told the first match would be decisive and they subsequently won it?
This isn't a game. It's about what's best for the country. The situation might arise whereby the vast majority of the population (Leave and Remain voters alike) are unhappy with the what's on the table after negotiations have taken place. Or vast majority of the population (Leave and Remain voters alike) might be happy with it.
Surely it would be in everyone's interest to have another vote, when there's more confidence in what's being voted for?
Why would we want to adopt a deal in a couple years time that the vast majority weren't happy with?
