Brexit visually represented

Rejoin has to happen but I suspect only when the next generation are the decision makers. Sadly, too many older people are frankly idiots when it comes to the EU. It's the 13 and 14 year old like my daughter and son who might be brave enough to make a difference.

England is Europe, Wales is Europe, Scotland is Europe, Northern Ireland is Europe and the combined UK is Europe.
 
Nero said:
England is Europe, Wales is Europe, Scotland is Europe, Northern Ireland is Europe and the combined UK is Europe.
Click to expand...

Didn’t know we also voted to leave Europe when did that happen.

The EU is not Europe but they want to be
 
dooderooni said:
I think a rejoin policy would be a vote loser unfortunately. Brexit is a cult to many and certain sections of the media would use it as a way to garner votes from a lot of politically naive voters. It is going to be hard enough to oust the Tories as it is, rejoin could be a real shot in the foot if not handled carefully.
Click to expand...
It only needs a 2% swing though and no remainer has changed their mind. Some brexiters have, plus loads of them have croaked since 2016 and I don't think new young voters will think much of the brexit **** show.
 
That's a super graphic - I am minded of Ye HyperLoop - super super graphics - LA to SF in minutes - 'undreds of miles per hour...in a vacuum. Graphics are brilliant loike that.
 
The solution is a simple one. To quote one Farage, N. "Why can't we be more like Norway?"

We synchronise our Customs regulations with the EU and rejoin the Single Market. As we can see from the graphic we would still not be part of the EU but would join EFTA (not sure if that necessitates signature to the Schengen Agreement?)
 
Muttley said:
The solution is a simple one. To quote one Farage, N. "Why can't we be more like Norway?"

We synchronise our Customs regulations with the EU and rejoin the Single Market. As we can see from the graphic we would still not be part of the EU but would join EFTA (not sure if that necessitates signature to the Schengen Agreement?)
Click to expand...
It necessitates the other EFTA members being willing to accept us, which is by no means a given.
 
There was a vote in Parliament for the Norway model but all the Conservatives/Unionists rejected it hence a majority of MPs.

This was part of the problem - the vote was to leave the EU - Switzerland and Norway are not in the EU to me that was what for voted or would have been acceptable. But the majority of MPs believed that was not leave. There was even a May deal that was voted down as not BREXIT enough.
 
Redwurzel said:
As discussed before - the ballot paper said remain or leave

To me if we had been a democracy there should have been another referendum on what sort of leave. Thats not second vote, but further clarification of the first vote
Click to expand...
or maybe the first vote should have defined what leave meant. The issue with the leave vs remain is that leave could mean many things and the people that voted for leave the EU but stay in customs union (which appeared to be the majority of them) had their vote stolen by hardline brexiters that wanted to burn down everything. That wasn't democracy in action, utilising peoples votes for something they didn't want, expect or vote for.

The reality is that around 49% of voters wanted us to stay in the EU, around 35% wanted to be out of the EU but remain in the customs union and 15% wanted us out of everything. The majority vote was for remain and on second choices it would have been even more on remain because many of those 'out of EU but in CU' voters would never ever have voted for a hard brexit.
 
I agree Hardline Brexiters were dominant in Parliament and this did not represent the majority of the UK voting population. Another example of over centralised Elites damaging the country. This country is plagued by them.
 
Redwurzel said:
I agree Hardline Brexiters were dominant in Parliament and this did not represent the majority of the UK voting population. Another example of over centralised Elites damaging the country. This country is plagued by them.
Click to expand...
They were nowhere near dominant otherwise it wouldn't have taken 5 years and 2 General Elections to get something through. They had a sizeable voting block in their own party. Remain was by far the dominant position in parliament. That was the problem, that parliament and the electorate were out of sync. Brexit at the referendum wasn't a partisan vote but once the result was decided the incumbent government had to enact it even though nobody that wanted to leave was in charge. It was only when Johnson took over that the leadership themselves actually wanted to leave. They then had to increase their majority significantly and then it was just party politics with people voting with their party instead of for what they actually wanted.

I think a lot of us would agree that if Labour was put in charge today, under the current Brexit regulations, that we would all be a lot better off. Attributing all of the blame on Brexit is ignoring the fact the current government are incompetent and they don't care about people. There are lots of things they said we could do if we weren't in the EU but they are no doing them out of choice/ideology.

There are a lot of huge things impacting everything that are impossible to ignore and Brexit is only one of them. Covid, Ukraine, Tory government and Brexit all at the same time. If we had Brexit, a Labour government and no pandemic/war then things would look very different. The Tories were failing us before any of those things so it isn't a "fair" comparison.
 
If we rejoin the EU we won't be able to take laundered money in London, and we will need to clean up our beaches which will cost the private utility companies too much.
Too late for Saltburn shell fish anyway.
We are turning into a wasteland.
 
Nano said:
They were nowhere near dominant otherwise it wouldn't have taken 5 years and 2 General Elections to get something through. They had a sizeable voting block in their own party. Remain was by far the dominant position in parliament.
Click to expand...
well that depends on the definition of brexit and remain. Which goes back to the fact the vote wasn't a democratic one because only one of the choices was fully defined, the other was a vague concept of 'not remain'. If we remember back to that shambles of a night where we had indicitive votes in teh commons, where no single solution was voted for by the majority Tory party, but they could block remain and a confirmation vote. The Tories agreed en masse that we would not remain but could not agree on what brexit meant. Which is the whole reason why the original public referendum was a farce, undemocratic and a scam.
 
Nano said:
I think a lot of us would agree that if Labour was put in charge today, under the current Brexit regulations, that we would all be a lot better off.
Click to expand...
agreed, but if single market access brexit was on the ballot paper it wouldn't have won, because it wouldn't have got the flagshaggers approval, and brexit couldn't have been sold as some new (and totally unobtainable fantasy) utopia.

Brexit is the problem, because there was a lack of clarity, and honesty over what brexit was. Now we know what that brexit was, a hardline brexit, then it isn't what many voted for, and the benefits espoused were unobtainable, thus brexit is the problem.
 
BoroMart said:
well that depends on the definition of brexit and remain. Which goes back to the fact the vote wasn't a democratic one because only one of the choices was fully defined, the other was a vague concept of 'not remain'. If we remember back to that shambles of a night where we had indicitive votes in teh commons, where no single solution was voted for by the majority Tory party, but they could block remain and a confirmation vote. The Tories agreed en masse that we would not remain but could not agree on what brexit meant. Which is the whole reason why the original public referendum was a farce, undemocratic and a scam.
Click to expand...
The choice was perfectly understood. It was Leave or Remain. It's a bit cliche now but Leave means Leave. Completely out. Start from scratch. How our relationship with the EU was defined should have been done from outside of the EU but instead we negotiated from being in the EU and on which bits we wanted to keep/lose. The whole thing was handled incredibly badly, incompetence from start to finish. All of that should have been (at least outlined) before the referendum and as a minimum before the Article was triggered. This is what the transition period was for. We wasted it deciding on whether we actually wanted to leave. I don't think 2 years is long enough still. Should probably be 5.

BoroMart said:
single market access
Click to expand...
I think this definition is where so much confusion has come from. Some of it is deliberate, from both sides, depending on what point they are trying to make. We used to be in the single market, now we have single market access. Access means we can trade with the single market. It doesn't mean we are in the single market.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top