Brexit - the Deal or No Deal poll

Brexit - Deal or No Deal?

  • Deal

    Votes: 28 27.7%
  • No Deal

    Votes: 51 50.5%
  • Call in the Donald

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Call in Noel Edmonds

    Votes: 4 4.0%
  • I don't care anymore

    Votes: 18 17.8%

  • Total voters
    101

Peterdev

Active member
Mark Carney is the prophesy of doom....inflation 25% and unemployment accelerating. I thought he suggested this a couple of years. Sounds just a little wide of the mark....although he is pro EU
 

Gary Baldi

Well-known member
Mark Carney is the prophesy of doom....inflation 25% and unemployment accelerating. I thought he suggested this a couple of years. Sounds just a little wide of the mark....although he is pro EU
I did see some journalists commenting that after his last advice of the apocalypse for just voting out, a lot of people would ignore what he is saying now. Project Fear 3.0 was the phrase used.

What would be fair to say is, we don't know what will happen, and after last time, we found that our economy is more resilient that we thought it would be, but it is highly likely we'll see a stagnation in growth, higher inflation etc etc.
 
I'm sorry, but just parroting 'Project Fear' every time anyone says there might be some negative effects when we leave is not adding anything useful to the discussion (not aimed at you GB, at those in the public eye).

We are leaving a trading organisation and not joining another one. We do twice the amount of business with the countries in that organisation as we do with anyone else (the US). Anyone who thinks that signing a couple of trade deals with (tiny by comparison) growing economies who are distant geographically will make up the shortfall is lining in cloud cuckoo land.

Mark Carney was NOT forecasting what will happen. His job is to stress test the UK banking system by seeing if it could withstand a range of POSSIBLE future scenarios. All the way from the best possible set of circumstances to the worst. To berate him for doing exactly that is simply political posturing of the worst kind - if he didn't do it, he would be negligent.
 
Carney and advisers were scenario planning. The government's own assumptions are that GDP will decline by 3.9% (can't remember over what period). Yet people are asking why a Canadian is interfering in our business (not on here), they're saying Teresa May is a remainer and is not committed to Brexit, they're referring to 'remoaners' when they mean the minority of remainers who are actually moaning, and they make rather silly reference to 'Project Fear' when, in fact, both sides in the referendum played that game. Meanwhile, some remainers are confusing the issue by referring to a 'second referendum' without explaining it will be a how we leave vote, not another in/out vote. You can understand why Brexit fatigue is setting in.
 

Gary Baldi

Well-known member
The issue with "Project Fear" is they effectively cried wolf before (Scotland, 2015 election, Brexit), so depending on where you sit, Carney has little credibility left because the worst case scenario didn't happen. Especially when the BoE and OBR have really struggled to get any sort of projections right in the past few years.

With an arch Remain Chancellor (and a Remain Bureaucracy), you can look, and depending on your point of view, say the PoV is not entirely unbiased. I think Carney is an efficient leader as was proved in his time in Canada, but his projections or whatever haven't really been the greatest.

Essentially we are left wishing on a star.
 
This is becoming hilarious! So if parliament fails to back May's plan, MPs will have a free vote on the direction of travel.

One of the options available is likely to be no Brexit. Confusion reigns. Will all MPs vote the way the majority of their electors did? Doubtful. Could MPs reverse 'the will of the people'? Possibly. An 'affront to democracy'? Depends on your view point. MPs are elected to make decisions on our behalf. Impossible for them to reflect the views of every individual elector, and how does an MP know how many constituents want in or out NOW, rather than at the time of the referendum?

David Cameron has a lot to answer for. Chickens coming home to roost and all that ....
 
Last edited:

Yellow River

Active member
2018-19 shirt sponsor for Jamie Hanson
Seems to me if Parliament is sovereign (which it should be) then national referendums are a complete waste of time, effort and money.

Particularly if you have a remain PM, a remain Chancellor, and 75%? (guess on my part) of MPs who voted remain.

Remember “This is your decision. The Government will implement what you decide”

How do square that circle?

And yes the arrogance and sense of entitlement from Cameron is astounding, but not surprising.
 

Gary Baldi

Well-known member
This is becoming hilarious! So if parliament fails to back May's plan, MPs will have a free vote on the direction of travel.

One of the options available is likely to be no Brexit. Confusion reigns. Will all MPs vote the way the majority of their electors did? Doubtful. Could MPs reverse 'the will of the people'? Possibly. An 'affront to democracy'? Depends on your view point. MPs are elected to make decisions on our behalf. Impossible for them to reflect the views of every individual elector, and how does an MP know how many constituents want in or out NOW, rather than at the time of the referendum?

David Cameron has a lot to answer for. Chickens coming home to roost and all that ....
I think the Maybot has cooked her goose. The legal advice has been blown open, and while I understand her desire to push it through, she's too stubborn to realise it's as toxic as staying or going.

I am concerned about how toxic this could become. The top could be about to blow off the whole thing and I am worried about where this could end up.
 
I am concerned about how toxic this could become. The top could be about to blow off the whole thing and I am worried about where this could end up.
I agree with you on this. Those in power have managed to get us into a situation where there is no good outcome and I can foresee trouble (of the financial, social and 'in the streets' types) happening whatever they eventually cobble together.
 

Yellow River

Active member
2018-19 shirt sponsor for Jamie Hanson
I think a second referendum or whatever you want to call it would be the most divisive and potentially toxic of the possible outcomes to this sorry saga.

How that anger would manifest itself? Difficult to say. Disturbances in large provincial towns? Would be worse in the warm, summer evenings for sure, but look at the French kicking off over fuel duty.
 
As far as I understand it (and I am really not sure I do!), the options - of which some are much more likely than others - are:

Accept May's Chequers deal. Will apparently satisfy nobody and the permanence of the 'backstop/Irish border' problem will be a sticking point for many. However it is at least some sort of compromise that gives a way forward and offers a 2 year transitional period. Is this the least bad of a set of bad options?

Reject the Chequers deal and try to renegotiate with the EU. I don't think anyone is convinced that the EU (who are negotiating from a condition of strength) will budge substantially - they certainly CANNOT give us excellent terms or there will be a flood of other EU countries leaving on the same terms. The 'Norway' and 'Canada' options are often touted, but - since those deals involve sticking to EU regulations - leavers don't like them.

Reject the Chequers deal and 'just leave' in March. I have really not heard any convincing argument that persuades me that this will be anything other than a financial (and therefore social) disaster. A trade deal with Botswana or Canada isn't going to make up any significant portion of the difference and trade with Europe will be gridlocked with no free movement of goods, import duties, VAT etc etc. A significant percentage of multinational manufacturing and financial services will leave to go to Europe to mitigate that and other barriers. Oh and we would end up with either Boris or Rees-Mogg as PM, who would get rid of the minimum wage, workers rights etc as soon as they could because our only chance would be to be cheaper than other nations in a race to the bottom. Blimey.

Have another referendum. Would be hugely divisive - and what on earth would the question(s) be? Will enough people have enough enthusiasm to inform themselves what any options might entail?

Let MPs decide on a 'no whip' conscience basis. We all know that Parliament is 'remain' in majority. If the MPs decided that remaining was in the best interests of the country (and apparently we could just change our minds about article 50), that would put Parliament at odds with the result of the referendum.

Are there any other options, realistic or not?

(Personally I wish the stupid referendum hadn't happened in the first place, but we are where we are.)
 
Let MPs decide on a 'no whip' conscience basis. We all know that Parliament is 'remain' in majority. If the MPs decided that remaining was in the best interests of the country (and apparently we could just change our minds about article 50), that would put Parliament at odds with the result of the referendum.
This certainly seems the most likely option. We know May doesn't have enough votes in the house at this stage to get her deal through, and with only days remaining it's difficult to see big business or public sentiment influencing enough MPs to change their minds.

At least a subsequent free vote for MPs will likely avoid what would be a disastrous 'no deal', but the free vote may well overturn the 2016 referendum result and mean Brexit is abandoned, which will obviously displease those Britons who still support 'leave'.
 

Yellow River

Active member
2018-19 shirt sponsor for Jamie Hanson
As far as I understand it a lot of leavers would be ok with a Canada+++ deal, remainers don’t like it because it would be quite a clean Brexit. The Norway option is Brexit in name only.

The back stop appears to be the main sticking point for many leavers in the May deal. If that could be resolved to the satisfaction of the Brexiteers & DUPs then May’s deal might be a goer. But it’s understandably such a red line for those MPs that it’s the EU who would have to concede some ground.

I really think another referendum/vote would be a hugely divisive campaign and very damaging for trust in politics & democracy in this country. Could take a generation for that trust to return.
 
Top Bottom