Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Gareth

General Discussions on Brexit

Recommended Posts

Rest assured I won't bring the idea back a second, third or even fourth time in an attempt to get it passed although I understand some believe that's quite acceptable.😀

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It now looks like we are probably heading for a long Brexit delay. It's now very nearly three years since the referendum that decided "the will of the people". How long between referendum and final settlement can there be for the last referendum to still remain a legitimate view of public opinion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Put it this way, if at 7am my kids state a desire for pizza for dinner then pizza is what they are going to get. Any attempt at changing their decision between the initial declaration and the delivery of the pizza will just lead to chaos and division. Once they have the pizza in front of them, however, then they are free to say that it was not exactly what they wanted or would have preferred a different combination of ingredients. If they subsequently wish to return to the pre-pizza days then they can express a desire to do so but must accept that life will clearly be more regulated with less freedom to chose. As pizza will at that point be off the munu permanently it might be replaced by a more unpalatable dish that they will be forced to accept as a compromise. But, if they in fact find the pizza to be exactly what they hoped for, then demand might spread through positive word of mouth. Ed. 😀 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Cabin-boy said:

Put it this way, if at 7am my kids state a desire for pizza for dinner then pizza is what they are going to get. Any attempt at changing their decision between the initial declaration and the delivery of the pizza will just lead to chaos and division. Once they have the pizza in front of them, however, then they are free to say that it was not exactly what they wanted or would have preferred a different combination of ingredients. If they subsequently wish to return to the pre-pizza days then they can express a desire to do so but must accept that life will clearly be more regulated with less freedom to chose. As pizza will at that point be off the munu permanently it might be replaced by a more unpalatable dish that they will be forced to accept as a compromise. But, if they in fact find the pizza to be exactly what they hoped for, then demand might spread through positive word of mouth. Ed. 😀 

But would pizza still be the only choice if they had expressed a wish for a pizza three or four years before the expected delivery date. As a responsible parent I would have thought if a change of heart was expressed especially if the change was for a more healthy option it might at the very least be discussed and put to a vote.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A change of heart is certainly possible but if the pizza has already started defrosting then it needs to be consumed. Equally, I think 12 hours is a reasonable time frame for people to know what they want and tastes don't change that fast. If you scale that up to the level of International politics then it's a generational issue and the gap between each decision widens.

If I get home tonight and discover a third Cabin-kid who says they don't like pizza (and who wasn't there this morning for the original vote) then too bad. This third kid will either have to eat the pizza and learn to like it or go and live with the Greek family down the road because the majority at the time of asking made a clear, democratic, decision and expected their choice to be enacted. Ed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe people didn't realise the implications of choosing pizza.  For example, it could be that choosing pizza for tonight binds them to only ever having pizza forever more.  And now that the implication is has emerged they wish to rerun the vote, so as to leave all future options open, even though it might mean going to bed hungry tonight. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course pizza comes in many different versions. When the Cabin-kids first decided on pizza did they all have the same type in mind? Surely it would be unfair to inflict the choice of one Cabin-kid on all of them without giving them the opportunity to change their mind.

When they find the type of pizza about to be inflicted on them might cause them very serious harm then they might consider it only fair that further thought should be given to their original perhaps ill informed decision.

Edited by G4rth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they made their choice based on a combination of gut feeling and indignation at always being told what to eat up to now. Of course they take full responsibility for the choice they made because at a certain age we trust them to know what they are doing. 

Once the decision to have pizza has been made the hard work really starts as there are so many types of pizza to choose from and compromise is the key. Despite a large preference for the basic no-frills pizza, that's more or less been taken off the menu so now there's a choice of bland 'pizza in name only' with a bitter aftertaste but no long-lasting side effects or deep pan with all the toppings that everyone insisted on adding that you might just regret the following morning.

If you still don't like any of the options then you can still reject the pizza entirely just before it's delivered, accept that you have wasted everyone's time and money, and watch someone else get your pizza instead. And then when your Greek neighbours tell you how good the pizza actually was you might regret the once in a lifetime chance you had to sample it. Ed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Cabin-boy said:

I think they made their choice based on a combination of gut feeling and indignation at always being told what to eat up to now. Of course they take full responsibility for the choice they made because at a certain age we trust them to know what they are doing. 

Once the decision to have pizza has been made the hard work really starts as there are so many types of pizza to choose from and compromise is the key. 

 

Indeed compromise is the key but it surely has to include the whole idea of the pizza especially when no one has any idea of the cost of the pizza or even how to buy it.

But things are never simple. One of the Cabin-kids have invited their friend Henri to tea. Henri is a diabetic with a cheese allagy. You can't give him pizza and you can't give him nothing. Like it or not you have to compromise on the original decision to buy pizza.

Edited by G4rth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, G4rth said:

Indeed compromise is the key but it surely has to include the whole idea of the pizza especially when no one has any idea of the cost of the pizza or even how to buy it.

But things are never simple. One of the Cabin-kids have invited their friend Henri to tea. Henri is a diabetic with a cheese allagy. You can't give him pizza and you can't give him nothing. Like it or not you have to compromise on the original decision to buy pizza.

Henri is a trouble-maker and a pain in the 'fesses' but we've got it covered. 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.thespruceeats.com/dairy-free-gluten-free-pizza-1001403&ved=2ahUKEwiI7KKn47bhAhXSxoUKHfcpCwkQFjAKegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw16KlXD7BFAh2Xtt9IHWcfi

Ed

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Cabin-boy said:

Henri a trouble-maker? His problems aren't his fault but it's good to know that be will be well catered for on his visits to the Cabin household.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But what if the bright red truck that went round with a picture of lovely pizza on the side taking orders turned up to deliver with no Pizza but just two blokes - a jovial tubby blonde wearing a routemaster badge and a nondescript scot - who had stopped speaking to each other. Neither of who know what to do with the  two bags of flour, a package of Walls 'taste like the real thing' sausages, some haggis, a dish of Eton Mess  and a book on French cookery they had with them?     

Edited by Millsy
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Millsy said:

But what if the bright red truck that went round with a picture of lovely pizza on the side taking orders turned up to deliver with no Pizza but just two blokes - a jovial tubby blonde wearing a routemaster badge and a nondescript scot - who had stopped speaking to each other. Neither of who know what to do with the  two bags of flour, a package of Walls 'taste like the real thing' sausages, some haggis, a dish of Eton Mess  and a book on French cookery they had with them?     

Trying to make pizza with a French cookbook will never end well. There are plenty of other pizza suppliers out there. Ed. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, G4rth said:

Henri a trouble-maker? His problems aren't his fault but it's good to know that be will be well catered for on his visits to the Cabin household.

The chances are that, along with his other problems, Henri also suffers from high blood pressure and all the stress of this pizza-choosing business finishes him off before the pizza is actually ready, thereby simplifying things enormously. Ed. 😀 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, G4rth said:

It now looks like we are probably heading for a long Brexit delay. It's now very nearly three years since the referendum that decided "the will of the people". How long between referendum and final settlement can there be for the last referendum to still remain a legitimate view of public opinion?

Interesting question.  Previous prededent would suggest 41 years.  However, that presupposes that the absence of any referendum (particularly on the Lisbon Treaty) to establish the will of the people for continuing involvement as the EEC morphed into the EU was legitimate.  Is that your position G4rth?

The way I see it, if it is accepted that 3 years on means the electoral mandate to leave has now expired, then it follows inevitably that the electoral mandate for our existing membership expired in 1978.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gareth said:

Interesting question.  Previous prededent would suggest 41 years.  However, that presupposes that the absence of any referendum (particularly on the Lisbon Treaty) to establish the will of the people for continuing involvement as the EEC morphed into the EU was legitimate.  Is that your position G4rth?

The way I see it, if it is accepted that 3 years on means the electoral mandate to leave has now expired, then it follows inevitably that the electoral mandate for our existing membership expired in 1978.

But you only ask the question when there is a reason for doing so. In 1978 there was no public pressure to revisit the earlier decision. It has really only been since the late 2000's that the question of EU membership has ever been anything other than an interest to a very small minority. There was very little difference in attitudes between the major or indeed minority parties.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, G4rth said:

But you only ask the question when there is a reason for doing so.

My point precisely.  I agree there was no reason for doing so in 1978.  And, as I've said before, there was also no reason for doing so in 2016.  But there WAS a reason for doing so in 2007.  As I've said previously, the time when we SHOULD have had a referendum was on the Lisbon Treaty.  That's when things fundamentally changed in the nature of the EU, and that was the time when, in your words (with which I agree) there was a reason for asking the question.  Had the question been asked then, there would have been no undercurrent strong enough to have necessitated Cameron's referendum in 2016.  The issue would have already (one way or the other, at the time when it was relevant to ask the question, and sufficiently recently) have been settled.  I've said before, as you know, and I still maintain, that the roots of why events have led to this current mess lie squarely in Tony Blair's failure to hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.  (And it must inevitably follow, from the line I quoted you on, that you must agree).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway - we’ve now got Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn teamed up.  What could go wrong?! 🤣

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure that the signing of the Lisbon treaty produced a clammer for a public vote. One can argue that it  should have been put to a vote but that was not by any means a main stream opinion. It was austerity that was the driver of English nationalism not the Lisbon treaty .

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So are you contending that “reason for asking” is a function of public clamour rather than fundamental change in arrangement?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Gareth said:

Anyway - we’ve now got Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn teamed up.  What could go wrong?! 🤣

Probably a better question would be what could go right? Or even just "what"?😂

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Gareth said:

So are you contending that “reason for asking” is a function of public clamour rather than fundamental change in arrangement?

Yes, if you asked the people every time anything changed then we would have every law passed put to a referendum. That would be disastrous.

 

Edited by G4rth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not against a second referendum being held, as long as it's not a rerun. For me, in or out has clearly been dealt with and should not come up again for a generation. If however the only way to solve the impasse in Parliament is to allow the public to have a say then that's fine and no-one can subsequently complain they were excluded from the process. A simple choice between the May/Corbyn deal and NO deal could be enough. If a third option is added then it gets more complicated and you might need a transferable vote system if we are to insist on a minimum 50. 1% for victory. Ed. 

Edited by Cabin-boy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cabin-boy said:

I'm not against a second referendum being held, as long as it's not a rerun. For me, in or out has clearly been dealt with and should not come up again for a generation. If however the only way to solve the impasse in Parliament is to allow the public to have a say then that's fine and no-one can subsequently complain they were excluded from the process. A simple choice between the May/Corbyn deal and NO deal could be enough. If a third option is added then it gets more complicated and you might need a transferable vote system if we are to insist on a minimum 50. 1% for victory. Ed. 

How about 3 options,

may/corbyn 

no deal

remain. 

 

If may/corbyn/ no have over 50% it tells us to proceed with leaving on the biggest scoring of those two options?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...