Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramrod
Indeed. We get one chance at this, let's do it right!
......and I do wish that the remoaners would stop trying to undermine things. You lost! Deal with it! Move on FFS!
|
This is both a new and exciting point of view, so as per I'll defer to Ian Hislop.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uyyOyoeqKfM
I can say with confidence there is absolutely no way that if the result were reversed there wouldn't be people continuing to make the argument to leave... as is their right.
As far as having one chance to do it and doing it right, beyond leaving the EU we seem to be no closer to knowing what it is we're actually doing. The Government, specifically referring to David Davis' abysmal performance in the Commons yesterday, alongside his being shot down over his determination to leave the single market and the farce over a points-based immigration system, something the head of Migration Watch said was a dumb idea I might add, indicate they have no idea yet either.
---------- Post added at 23:08 ---------- Previous post was at 22:54 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh
Funnily enough, it's the more rabid Brexiteers who are clamouring for a rapid result...
|
I'm finding myself increasingly clamouring for, well, something.
The excuses about giving away the negotiating position are absurd. There isn't a negotiating position yet, and in all honesty it's likely they'll spend months allegedly listening to stakeholders, then take whatever course is most politically expedient and doesn't threaten party funding.
Happy to be proven wrong however I very much doubt this will be done the right way, I suspect it will, at least initially, be done in the way considered most likely to win votes.
Maybe we should return control over important constitutional issues to the Queen. With this one we've ended up with a referendum that's being used as an example of how not to do one and a government not prepared to implement it.
Quote:
“This report shows without a shadow of a doubt just how dire the EU referendum debate really was. There were glaring democratic deficiencies in the run-up to the vote, with the public feeling totally ill-informed. Both sides were viewed as highly negative by voters, while the top-down, personality-based nature of the debate failed to address major policies and issues, leaving the public in the dark.
“It offered a stark contrast to the vibrant, well-informed, grassroots conversation of the Scottish independence vote – a referendum that left a lasting legacy of on-going public participation in politics and public life.
“From a campaign period that was too short to foster a decent debate, to the fact that misleading claims could be made with total impunity, there are so many lessons to be learned – and this report lays out both the facts and the way forward.
“Now that the dust is starting to settle after the EU referendum, we need a complete rethink about the role of referendums in the UK. They are becoming more common, but the piecemeal nature of the how, when and why they’re done means we could simply end up jumping from referendum to referendum at the whim of politicians.
“It’s time for a root and branch review of referendums, learning the lessons of the EU campaign to make sure the mistakes that were made in terms of regulation, tone and conduct are never repeated. Let’s make sure that future referendums guarantee the lively and well-informed discussion that voters deserve.”
|