The Official "There will be no Brexit" Thread

[Old Greg]

I was referring to your assessment, not theirs. Call me old fashioned, but I think a Private Members Bill to nullify the result qualifies as, erm, a "shadowy force".

Anyway, we're probably not as far apart on this as you'd imagine. Anyone who thought this wouldn't result in a short-term crisis was deluded. All of the metrics that interest me are long-term.

Opposition Days exist as well. But as I said, it would need a GE to overturn this in practice.

[CretinWatcher]

All of the metrics that interest me are long-term.

Me too. Given what looks like a permanently weakened pound, which will certainly increase the UK's trade deficit if not its fiscal deficit, combined with reduced FDI (I think that's a reasonable assumption while access to the single market is negotiated) plus the UK's weak industrial base, and the declining state of its biggest industry, financial services - perhaps you can give me a plausible scenario for a good long-term outcome, before we become all 70s and need to call the IMF in.

[Old Greg]

I was referring to your assessment, not theirs. Call me old fashioned, but I think a Private Members Bill to nullify the result qualifies as, erm, a "shadowy force".

Anyway, we're probably not as far apart on this as you'd imagine. Anyone who thought this wouldn't result in a short-term crisis was deluded. All of the imperials that interest me are long-term.

FTFY, traitor!

[NotAllThere]

. I'd vote for them and I hate them.

I would. Only the referendum was my last vote for a while - my fifteen years are almost up.

... If they do as you suggest there would be Civil Unrest the likes of which would be unprecedented...

Oh look. Another fantasist.

Just because you would be outraged enough to become violent, the average Englishman will fire off angry emails to the Daily Mail.

[jamesbrown]

Me too. Given what looks like a permanently weakened pound, which will certainly increase the UK's trade deficit if not its fiscal deficit, combined with reduced FDI (I think that's a reasonable assumption while access to the single market is negotiated) plus the UK's weak industrial base, and the declining state of its biggest industry, financial services - perhaps you can give me a plausible scenario for a good long-term outcome, before we become all 70s and need to call the IMF in.

I've set out my arguments on here many times (feel free to search). A weakened pound carries both positives and negatives, including for FDI. However, in the short-term, the political vacuum (coupled with the prevailing bubble in many asset classes prior to the referendum) will constrain the extent to which any benefits are realised. I accept this. With large twin deficits and over-valued assets, there was inevitably going to be a short-term shock. In the long-term, very little has changed, once the uncertainty declines. Financial passporting is obviously important, but we haven't negotiated a settlement yet, and this narrow issue is dramatically outweighed by the broader pulls associated with London as a global financial centre (the idea that financial services could move en masse to other European capitals is laughable; it's also worth noting that regulation is increasingly global, and our departure will encourage innovation in new areas/markets as others decline). However, my primary concern is with the direction of travel in the EU and the implied (worsening) democratic deficit, as outlined in the Five Presidents' report. The EU has no long-term outcome other than full fiscal and political integration or full political and economic disintegration. Neither outcome is good for the UK.

[AtW]

Aye. Me too. I think a lot of the Remainers want to avert the disaster caused by the thickos and would vote for Lib Dems for that reason alone. Probably end up a hung parliament - what then?

Hung Parliament is acceptable...

[AtW]

Explain the process to me by which Article 50 gets "defeated". It's a decision for the Executive, not Parliament, as Hamface confirmed from the despatch box yesterday. What happens afterwards is a decision for Parliament, but we're then out, regardless, after two years (without the unanimous consent to delay from the other 27 member states).

It's too big of a decision to take for the Executive - Parliament's approval is best to cover their fat arses, and that approval won't get enough votes.

[Old Greg]

I would. Only the referendum was my last vote for a while - my fifteen years are almost up.

The Lib Dems speak (from Guardian):

Tim Farron, the Lib Dem leader, has vowed to fight the next general election, “which could be very soon”, on a pledge to stop Brexit.

Voters deserve the chance to rethink their decision, now the EU debate has moved from the abstract to the visceral, threatening jobs and living standards, he said on a visit to Brussels.

The MP said he respected the result, but it was perfectly legitimate to put the question to the British people at an election, because the country was out of control and the campaign had been fought on lies. He said:

I think it is right that in a general election we say to the British people that if you want to get out of the increasing economic mess that we find ourselves in, where we have lost control, [where] we are at the mercy of markets, people’s jobs are going, people’s livelihoods are being destroyed and we are not taking back control …. And the fact that the key tenets of the leave campaign are now proved to be lies … It would prove legitimate for the Liberal Democrats to go into the next election and say we offer you a chance to reconsider.

[jamesbrown]

It's too big of a decision to take for the Executive - Parliament's approval is best to cover their fat arses, and that approval won't get enough votes.

It isn't but, putting that aside, the only votes against will be the Lib Dems and the SNP (~60), because they can justify it with their electorates. Labour will mostly abstain if they know what's good for them. The Tories will be under a three-line whip if they want their party to survive.

I'm trying to look at this objectively, and I would've said exactly the same things, had the Brexiters started to whine after a Bremain result. I certainly don't deny that there are myriad constitutional issues raised by the vote, but the overriding factor will always be the referendum outcome itself. You only need to listen to Hamface (yesterday) and Gidiot (today). Their language on this is emphatic. Details aside, there is no practical scenario where the result is ignored, except on a GE manifesto that wins a majority (because there will be no second referendum). Personally, I doubt whether there will be a GE, although I'd like to see one.

[Old Greg]

It isn't but, putting that aside, the only votes against will be the Lib Dems and the SNP (~60), because they can justify it with their electorates. Labour will mostly abstain if they know what's good for them. The Tories will be under a three-line whip if they want their party to survive.

I'm trying to look at this objectively, and I would've said exactly the same things, had the Brexiters started to whine after a Bremain result. I certainly don't deny that there are myriad constitutional issues raised by the vote, but the overriding factor will always be the referendum outcome itself. You only need to listen to Hamface (yesterday) and Gidiot (today). Their language on this is emphatic. Details aside, there is no practical scenario where the result is ignored, except on a GE manifesto that wins a majority (because there will be no second referendum). Personally, I doubt whether there will be a GE, although I'd like to see one.

The other way it doesn't get triggered (and this is the EU modus operandi) is if the government kicks it down the road while interminable pre-Article 50 negotiations continue.