EU referendum...THE RESULT...and aftermath...

The scots will want a referendum every two years until sturgeon gets what she wants. A childless persom would never receive my vote.

Jockland, Laaandan, Kernow.....let 'em all go!

If the rules state 2 years then we have 2 years. Can't make it up as they go. Tis the French again. Nuke 'em.

I am sure the EU gravy train will continue at the same rate for a good few years yet, at our expense naturally.

TigerTony twat comment, nuke 'em - really?

Pat... I'm guessing he's slightly exaggerating?

Elias wrote:

The scots will want a referendum every two years until sturgeon gets what she wants. A childless persom would never receive my vote.

What a very odd comment. What's someone having no children got to do with anything?

Anyway, during the last referendum, the Scots voted to stay within the UK. One of the reasons for this was that the UK remained as part of the EU. Now we have had the vote to leave that materially changes the circumstances, particularly with the difference in voting in England and Scotland. There are already a number of Scots who voted to stay in the UK last time, saying they would change their vote should there be a new referendum.

I don't blame them at all. Why should they be forced out if it's something they want to stay in?

As for their entry into the EU as a single country they would already be well ahead of the current applicants, Serbia, Turkey etc, all of whom have significant human rights issues, as well as economic issues to address. Scotland is also considered to be a separate economic region by the EU (as are Cornwall and Wales) for the receipt of Regional Development aid. I think their entry as a separate country wouldn't be a problem.

As for Nicola Sturgeon, in terms of party leaders around at the moment, I think she is by far and away the best of the bunch. (I'm not Scottish by the way)

PlymptonPilgrim wrote:

Elias wrote:

The scots will want a referendum every two years until sturgeon gets what she wants. A childless persom would never receive my vote.

What a very odd comment. What's someone having no children got to do with anything?

Anyway, during the last referendum, the Scots voted to stay within the UK. One of the reasons for this was that the UK remained as part of the EU. Now we have had the vote to leave that materially changes the circumstances, particularly with the difference in voting in England and Scotland. There are already a number of Scots who voted to stay in the UK last time, saying they would change their vote should there be a new referendum.

I don't blame them at all. Why should they be forced out if it's something they want to stay in?

As for their entry into the EU as a single country they would already be well ahead of the current applicants, Serbia, Turkey etc, all of whom have significant human rights issues, as well as economic issues to address. Scotland is also considered to be a separate economic region by the EU (as are Cornwall and Wales) for the receipt of Regional Development aid. I think their entry as a separate country wouldn't be a problem.

As for Nicola Sturgeon, in terms of party leaders around at the moment, I think she is by far and away the best of the bunch. (I'm not Scottish by the way)

I'm watching her on ITV at the moment and quite agree with what you say.

A face to die for.....literally. And if the Sweaties were that concerned with staying in the EU why was the turnout so low north of the border?

What we're witnessing atm is a bad case of sour grapes from the losers. How thoroughly un British

she does tend to do what she says she will, as does the SNP in general. I vote SNP because I could never vote Tory and local Labour in Scotland is myopic and corrupt.

Alec Salmond made himself look a Cnut over this IMO, he cant wait to get away from Britain but loves to be part of Europe? Makes him sound a bit xenophobic to me.

Les Miserable wrote:

A face to die for.....literally. And if the Sweaties were that concerned with staying in the EU why was the turnout so low north of the border?

What we're witnessing atm is a bad case of sour grapes from the losers. How thoroughly un British

You'd think the winners would be shouting from the rooftops though. Where is Boris?

Hugh Watt wrote:

Les Miserable wrote:

A face to die for.....literally. And if the Sweaties were that concerned with staying in the EU why was the turnout so low north of the border?

What we're witnessing atm is a bad case of sour grapes from the losers. How thoroughly un British

You'd think the winners would be shouting from the rooftops though. Where is Boris?

Are you sad he's not crowing about it in the red tops? I'd rather he got on with the job of what comes next and out manoeuvring the anti democracy element of our government. Any MP trying to change this result will get noticed.

Popcorn Pig wrote:

A Prime Minister resigned. The £ plummeted. The FTSE 100 lost significant ground. But then the £ rallied past February levels, and the FTSE closed on a weekly high: 2.4% up on last Friday, its best performance in 4 months. President Obama decided we wouldn't be at the 'back of the queue' after all and that our 'special relationship' was still strong. The French President confirmed the Le Touquet agreement would stay in place. The President of the European Commission stated Brexit negotiations would be 'orderly' and stressed the UK would continue to be a 'close partner' of the EU. A big bank denied reports it would shift 2,000 staff overseas. The CBI, vehemently anti-Brexit during the referendum campaign, stated British business was resilient and would adapt. Several countries outside the EU stated they wished to begin bi-lateral trade talks with the UK immediately. If this was the predicted apocalypse, well, it was a very British one. It was all over by teatime. Not a bad first day of freedom.

I agree. Apart from the initial turmoil, nothing seems to have changed. Infact, I expect the markets to recover even more.

"But you said it would be much worse" I hear you cry. Well, yes I did. But.........  There is a major event which was part of my thinking which has not happened.

I expected Article 50 to be presented later this week. That, it transpires, will not happen.

So, since the referendum, apart from the political fallout in Westminster, what has changed? Nothing really. We are still in the EU and things are progressing as normal. Therefore, I think that things will get back to normal.

The turmoil I predicted will, IMO, only happen when we invoke Article 50. When will that happen? Who knows? Maybe it will never happen!!

It is quite clear that the Leave campaign have no plan going forward and that many people who voted "Leave" are now upset and confused by the "misunderstandings" that have been pointed out. Remain also has no plan B!

I also believe that nothing will happen about Article 50 until the Labour and Tory parties sort things out. There may even be a General Election to follow. How long will that take?

There are also opinions being expressed that the Scottish, NI and/or Welsh "parliaments" could veto any Westminster Brexit decision.

I do like the fact that the referendum result has shaken Westminter up. I hope that as a result, we get a new type of open and honest politician (one that can answer a yes no question with one word!).

I also hope that this "process" will contain facts about the EU membership, facts about any potential Leave scenario, and clear facts about each side's manifesto going forward.

I know that the referendum delivered a result but I'm not happy that it was based on lies and scare tactics. Maybe the outcome will result in a change for the better in Westminster.

As for the EU question, I'd like that to be discussed properly and not include the shortcomings of Westminster.

Interesting times ahead............

Rickler wrote:

Pat...  I'm guessing he's slightly exaggerating?

One hopes so, however it's not the first time Mr 'Funny' has called for entire countries to be nuked....

What do you think of this "theory"....

Here's a thing posted by somebody named teebs on the Guardian website as a "below the line" comment.

"If Boris Johnson looked downbeat yesterday, that is because he realises that he has lost.

"Perhaps many Brexiters do not realise it yet, but they have actually lost, and it is all down to one man: David Cameron.

"With one fell swoop yesterday at 9:15 am, Cameron effectively annulled the referendum result, and simultaneously destroyed the political careers of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and leading Brexiters who cost him so much anguish, not to mention his premiership.

"How?

"Throughout the campaign, Cameron had repeatedly said that a vote for leave would lead to triggering Article 50 straight away. Whether implicitly or explicitly, the image was clear: he would be giving that notice under Article 50 the morning after a vote to leave. Whether that was scaremongering or not is a bit moot now but, in the midst of the sentimental nautical references of his speech yesterday, he quietly abandoned that position and handed the responsibility over to his successor.

"And as the day wore on, the enormity of that step started to sink in: the markets, Sterling, Scotland, the Irish border, the Gibraltar border, the frontier at Calais, the need to continue compliance with all EU regulations for a free market, re-issuing passports, Brits abroad, EU citizens in Britain, the mountain of legistlation to be torn up and rewritten ... the list grew and grew.

"The referendum result is not binding. It is advisory. Parliament is not bound to commit itself in that same direction.

"The Conservative party election that Cameron triggered will now have one question looming over it: will you, if elected as party leader, trigger the notice under Article 50?

"Who will want to have the responsibility of all those ramifications and consequences on his/her head and shoulders?

"Boris Johnson knew this yesterday, when he emerged subdued from his home and was even more subdued at the press conference. He has been out-maneouvered and check-mated.

"If he runs for leadership of the party, and then fails to follow through on triggering Article 50, then he is finished. If he does not run and effectively abandons the field, then he is finished. If he runs, wins and pulls the UK out of the EU, then it will all be over - Scotland will break away, there will be upheaval in Ireland, a recession ... broken trade agreements. Then he is also finished. Boris Johnson knows all of this. When he acts like the dumb blond it is just that: an act.

"The Brexit leaders now have a result that they cannot use. For them, leadership of the Tory party has become a poison chalice.

"When Boris Johnson said there was no need to trigger Article 50 straight away, what he really meant to say was "never". When Michael Gove went on and on about "informal negotiations" ... why? why not the formal ones straight away? ... he also meant not triggering the formal departure. They both know what a formal demarche would mean: an irreversible step that neither of them is prepared to take.

"All that remains is for someone to have the guts to stand up and say that Brexit is unachievable in reality without an enormous amount of pain and destruction, that cannot be borne. And David Cameron has put the onus of making that statement on the heads of the people who led the Brexit campaign."

Whatever else the current situation is, and I don't mind admitting that I hate it, it is certainly interesting!

If you want to vote for our next PM the only way to do it will be as a Tory Party member.

Dr Liam Fox MP has just said that the Tory leadership contest should take place after their party conference.

Apparently you will need to have been a member of the Conservative Party for 3 months to vote in a Leadership contest.

Today is 26th June and in 3 months time it will be 26th September.

The Conservative Party conference is scheduled for 2nd October.

PlymptonPilgrim wrote:

Elias wrote:

The scots will want a referendum every two years until sturgeon gets what she wants. A childless persom would never receive my vote.

What a very odd comment. What's someone having no children got to do with anything?

Anyway, during the last referendum, the Scots voted to stay within the UK. One of the reasons for this was that the UK remained as part of the EU. Now we have had the vote to leave that materially changes the circumstances, particularly with the difference in voting in England and Scotland. There are already a number of Scots who voted to stay in the UK last time, saying they would change their vote should there be a new referendum.

I don't blame them at all. Why should they be forced out if it's something they want to stay in?

As for their entry into the EU as a single country they would already be well ahead of the current applicants, Serbia, Turkey etc, all of whom have significant human rights issues, as well as economic issues to address. Scotland is also considered to be a separate economic region by the EU (as are Cornwall and Wales) for the receipt of Regional Development aid. I think their entry as a separate country wouldn't be a problem.

As for Nicola Sturgeon, in terms of party leaders around at the moment, I think she is by far and away the best of the bunch. (I'm not Scottish by the way)

I don't understand the vitriol towards her. She is leader of the SNP and leads them with force and clarity. The best party leader in the UK for her members.

Moist_Von_Lipwig wrote:

I know that the referendum delivered a result but I'm not happy that it was based on lies and scare tactics.

Are you for real? Did you not think that the remain campaign was totally based on a doomsday scenario?

Les Miserable wrote:

Moist_Von_Lipwig wrote:

I know that the referendum delivered a result but I'm not happy that it was based on lies and scare tactics.

Are you for real? Did you not think that the remain campaign was totally based on a doomsday scenario?

Haven't I said that above??

Maybe I should have been more clear.....

I'm not happy that it was based on lies (Remain also but mainly Brexit) and scare tactics (Brexit also but mainly Remain).

Plus I've tried to explain in a previous post the reason (IMO) for any "doomesday scenario" not actually happening (yet).

Not an odd view at all.

PatDunne wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Pat...  I'm guessing he's slightly exaggerating?

One hopes so, however it's not the first time Mr 'Funny' has called for entire countries to be nuked....

Be careful Pat, G Spot will be along in a minute to defend the alternative view.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

If you want to vote for our next PM the only way to do it will be as a Tory Party member.

Dr Liam Fox MP has just said that the Tory leadership contest should take place after their party conference.

Apparently you will need to have been a member of the Conservative Party for 3 months to vote in a Leadership contest.

Today is 26th June and in 3 months time it will be 26th September.

The Conservative Party conference is scheduled for 2nd October.

So what your clearly proposing is anyone not happy with the result joins the Tory party to try to get a divisive leader sympathetic with your minority wishes elected ? Someone like Anna Soubry no doubt.
In the process ignoring the democratic wishes of the electorate & further destabilizing a nation about to go through a period of great change.
And you consider yourself to be educated ? dear oh dear...

Before you come back & say "where have I said that", your implication is very clear. It's your style.

Also, to save you the trouble, [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

If you want to vote for our next PM the only way to do it will be as a Tory Party member.

Dr Liam Fox MP has just said that the Tory leadership contest should take place after their party conference.

Apparently you will need to have been a member of the Conservative Party for 3 months to vote in a Leadership contest.

Today is 26th June and in 3 months time it will be 26th September.

The Conservative Party conference is scheduled for 2nd October.

Isn't that a good thing as far as they are concerned? Shorely the longstanding members should decide? A little bit like ATDers only being able to vote in a election if they were members at the time the election was called, and then only if they had a certain number of posts.

The alternative way would be to have thousands of people rushing to belatedly join a political party purely to get 'their' man in.