Those that have experience with import/ export, production, world trade, economics ALL (with the very small exception of some discredited) have the same opinion on what would happen with the various different leave options. No nobody knows for sure what will happen, but we have a very good idea. Enough of an idea to show a hard brexit is an awful idea. We also strongly think, based on our experience (and I include myself here because of my experience) that remaining is the best deal.
No one has said it would not be a smooth transition once we left the EU, as you confirm no one really knows how much impact it will have. But we all agree that trade between the UK/EU is important even if it is on the decline between the EU/UK. I'm confident enough to know that a trade deal will be worked out between the EU/UK even if we leave without a WA
No but in these situations you listen to experts opinions. And when all the experts are telling you the same thing, you listen. You don't listen to those of the 'elite' with vested interests, those who lie with no factual backup, those with a history of appaling management of govenment departments or those who claim to be one of the people when they are ex investment bankers, flying around in private jets.
I have zero faith in the current govenment to negotiate anything.
What about the 60 odd other trade deals with other countries outside of the EU. How long will those take?
Yes the people voted to leave, by a tiny margin
The vote was not fair
We don't believe the bus made a massive difference, but it was a clear lie - a small part of the entire vote leave campaign.
It was only ever non-binding
It was found out after the result, after Art50 had been implemented that one side cheated and had a significant effect on the result
Yep just like when we joined, it was part of the 1970 Tories manifesto we would negotiate to enter the ECC under the guise of prior consultation with the people either by a general election or a referendum. Heath even declared that it would be wrong if any Government contemplated joining the EEC were to take this step without `the full hearted consent of Parliament and people' by the way he never did. Opinion polls at the time in 1972 show a majority were against joining the EEC and parliament only passed the vote to join in the second reading by 8 votes.
No not just like when we joined. There wasn't whoesale fraud, there wasn't a non-binding referendum. There has been nearly 50 years for people to vote for a political party to leave then, they never did in enough numbers to do anything about it. Because it was our in interest and remains in our interest to be part of it.
Democracy does not stand still. If people change their minds, if options change then it is perfectly valid and fair to go back to the population to ask for a clarification vote.
Yeah your right people can change there minds, but that doesn't mean it gives parliament the right to continue to hold referendums until the electorate achieve a result that majority of parliament want
What is not right, and completely undemocratic is unelected persons visiting far right MPs in other countries, trying to persuade them not to allow an extenstion to article 50. That is treasonus if anything is.
Context is everything here, common people have a right to express there opinion to elected officials (unless your from North Korea )
We differ on what is acceptable then. Which actually sums up the entire debate.
We look down at those that still are only able after all this time to spout the lies and mis-truths spoken by leading Brexiteers. So many people have no answer to the question 'what EU laws are you most looking forward to losing'. This is not an opinion it is established fact. All you have to do is read documents freely available online to find out what the truth is. If people are unable to do this, or unwilling then I have no respect for their opinion.
To the majority of those who want to leave its not about individual laws that we look forward to losing, its about making laws without outside influence and regaining full sovereign control to parliament and our legal system.
In a letter from Lord Kilmuir to Edward Heath it showed that Sovereignty would be lost in 3 way,
"Adherence to the Treaty of Rome would, in my opinion, affect our sovereignty in three ways:-
Parliament would be required to surrender some of its functions to the organs of the community, The Crown would be called on to transfer part of its treaty-making power to those organs of the community, and Our courts of law would sacrifice some degree of independence by becoming subordinate in certain respects to the European Court of Justice."
'Full sovereignty'. Sorry I just don't buy that we ever gave it up. I have no problem with the current setup of the EU and European Court of Justice. I think the UK has shown itself in the last few years to have a wholey ineffective parliament, appaling election processes and an outdated voting system.
UK decided not to implement existing EU law when new countries joined the EU, or put restrictions on those who cannot support themselves.
That was due to the mass migration from new member states post 2004 when the UK, ROI and Sweden did not place any restrictions on freedom of movement, unlike most countries in the EU placed market restrictions
Yes that's exactly what I mean't. The UK could have done so, and should have done so = not the fault of the EU.
But you completely miss exactly what we get back from it. Did you see the map of the UK and the regions that will loose funding from the EU when / if we leave? Did you then compare this with the paltry amount the UK govenment said it would put in it's place?
Those area's in theory will not lose any funding which the EU provides, as the net proportion of funding is less than the membership contributions from the UK. once we have left its up to government how to allocate those funds
Yes exactly my point. The current UK govenment is not prepared to match those previous levels because they don't give a crap about those areas of the country. Those areas are primarily leave voting, with much lower income levels and standards of living - they will be hit the hardest. They have no idea what is about to happen.
This is the entire problem with Brexiteers arguement. It's just that, an opinion. Because every single time you post opinions they can be shown by fact to be wrong. The entire leave vote is based on lies, misunderstandings and feelings. If you had a single fact that was exactly that, factual then I'd look at it and if it was true I'd agree. But that has never happened.
Opinion's are like arsehole's everyone got one
Some are opinions, some are facts. I don't believe my side of the argument is opinion based, I believe it is fact based.