BRFR Cake Stop 'breaking news' miscellany

[AuroraSaab]

Even then, all it needed was a leader with a backbone to point out that the referendum was a consultation not law, and that there was not a sufficiently decisive vote to warrant making such a vast and stupid move.

Whatever you feel about Brexit it was made clear the result was binding. All parties agreed this if I recall correctly. If it had gone the other way with the same narrow numbers nobody here would be calling for a re run or saying it wasn't a valid result. I'm sorry the post vote debacle ended with a hard Brexit but the blame for that lies with those who refused to support the softer options.

 

[Pblakeney]

Whatever you feel about Brexit it was made clear the result was binding. All parties agreed this if I recall correctly. If it had gone the other way with the same narrow numbers nobody here would be calling for a re run or saying it wasn't a valid result. I'm sorry the post vote debacle ended with a hard Brexit but the blame for that lies with those who refused to support the softer options.

I suspect you are wrong on the bold part.

 

[C R]

I suspect you are wrong on the bold part.

Indeed, in the evening of the referendum, when it seemed that remain had won by a narrow margin, Farage said that with a narrow margin win by remain things were by no means settled. Of course, the following morning when he had won by a whisker then brexit was the will of the people and no further discussion was possible.

 

[pinkbikini]

Indeed, in the evening of the referendum, when it seemed that remain had won by a narrow margin, Farage said that with a narrow margin win by remain things were by no means settled. Of course, the following morning when he had won by a whisker then brexit was the will of the people and no further discussion was possible.

Which is exactly why he’s viewed as a grifter by so many. Bull-headed intransigent oaf. A wrecking ball going in without a construction crew behind him. Posh-boy self-proclaimed ‘man of the people’. I wish the media would hold him to account more than they do.

 

[Stevo 666]

https://www.london.gov.uk/new-report-reveals-uk-economy-almost-ps140billion-smaller-because-brexit#:~:text=The UK has 1.8m,which Brexit did not occur.

The UK has 1.8 million fewer jobs than if Brexit had not happened. Admittedly Osborne was wrong about house prices and I think we narrowly avoided a recession but the economy was damaged (15% fewer exports and 18% fewer imports in around 2018). It certainly hasn't improved as a result. You will recall that the Covid19 pandemic muddied the waters somewhat. That said, things are not getting better.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd988p00z1no



There is no alleged. It was widely reported:

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...electoral-law-and-british-democracy-is-shaken

https://dpglaw.co.uk/electoral-commission-found-to-have-got-the-law-wrong-in-eu-referendum/

https://www.electoralcommission.org...ed-and-referred-police-breaking-electoral-law

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_unlawful_campaigning_in_the_2016_EU_referendum

How do you know how many jobs would exist if Brexit had not happened? That scenario has never existed so at best it is a guess, but you are presenting it as if it were fact.

Re: the alleged fraud, has anyone demonstrated that would have been enough to alter the result?

 

[icowden]

How do you know how many jobs would exist if Brexit had not happened? That scenario has never existed so at best it is a guess, but you are presenting it as if it were fact.

Well, I'm assuming that the people who did the research (Cambridge Econometrics) based the figures upon something rather than just plucking them out of thin air to annoy Brexiteers.

Here's some more of the detail:

There are 523,000 fewer jobs in construction nationwide, with 81,000 less in London under this scenario.
There are 388,000 fewer jobs in financial services nationwide, with 92,000 less in London under this scenario.
The average Briton is nearly £2,000 worse off, while the average Londoner is nearly £3,400 worse off as a result of Brexit.
UK real Gross Value Added (GVA)- a measure of the size of the economy- is approximately £140bn less in 2023 than it would have been had the UK opted to remain in the Customs Union and Single Market - a drop of six per cent. The capital’s real GVA is more than £30bn less in 2023 under this scenario.
This economic damage is set to increase should the UK retain its current relationship with Europe. For example, by 2035, the UK’s real GVA would be about £311 billion lower (10.1 per cent) than had it not left the EU. London’s real GVA would be about £63bn lower.

I think it revolves around lost business because companies don't want to come here when they can go to a European country and have many more benefits in easily reaching many more countries markets without tariffs and trade barriers. Just a guess.

Re: the alleged fraud, has anyone demonstrated that would have been enough to alter the result?

Doesn't matter. Fraud is fraud. It should have been re-done.

 

[PurplePenguin]

Breaking 2016 news.

 

[Pross]

To bring it up to date, Farage on the news this morning basically promising DOGE for local councils that Reform win in the local elections.

 

[AuroraSaab]

I suspect you are wrong on the bold part.

I did say 'on here', meaning on the forum not in general. If it had been a narrow win for Remain, pro EU folk on here wouldn't have suggested it wasn't a definitive enough result to proceed, or thought a re run in a couple of years was fairer.

 

[briantrumpet]

Haha, the curse of Trump: the Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre has lost his seat, as well as the election.

 

[Pblakeney]

I did say 'on here', meaning on the forum not in general. If it had been a narrow win for Remain, pro EU folk on here wouldn't have suggested it wasn't a definitive enough result to proceed, or thought a re run in a couple of years was fairer.

The Brexiteers would have though.

 

[briantrumpet]

I did say 'on here', meaning on the forum not in general. If it had been a narrow win for Remain, pro EU folk on here wouldn't have suggested it wasn't a definitive enough result to proceed, or thought a re run in a couple of years was fairer.

This is definitely not 'breaking news', but generally major constitutional changes, be that in a tiny charity or in a nation, need a supermajority for the change: it's not required to maintain the status quo. Cameron's hubris was in assuming 'remain' would win anyway (even if we ignore it was 'advisory only'), so the whole process was a mess (to put it mildly).

But we are where we are, so my interest is in how to undo the damage (which does need to consider how we got here, of course).

 

[PurplePenguin]

This is definitely not 'breaking news', but generally major constitutional changes, be that in a tiny charity or in a nation, need a supermajority for the change: it's not required to maintain the status quo. Cameron's hubris was in assuming 'remain' would win anyway (even if we ignore it was 'advisory only'), so the whole process was a mess (to put it mildly).

But we are where we are, so my interest is in how to undo the damage (which does need to consider how we got here, of course).

The Belfast/Good Friday Agreement does not need a super majority nor did the Scottish referendum. Which bit of damage are you trying to solve?

 

[First Aspect]

The Belfast/Good Friday Agreement does not need a super majority nor did the Scottish referendum. Which bit of damage are you trying to solve?

Struggling with the analogy between the Good Friday Agreement and Brexit, honestly.

And the Scottish referendum was, like Brexit, enormously decisive and damaging. The SNP were simultaneously arguing for a supermajority or 4 nations majority for Brexit, and against and such things in Scotland.

So what's your point again?

 

[AuroraSaab]

Cameron's hubris was in assuming 'remain' would win anyway (even if we ignore it was 'advisory only'), so the whole process was a mess (to put it mildly).

But we are where we are, so my interest is in how to undo the damage (which does need to consider how we got here, of course).

Well yes, it was taken as cut and dried and that backfired big style. Any attempts to soften the effects of Brexit didn't seem popular enough with anybody though. May's plan was dismissed, Corby was playing the long game we were told. There's a whole pile of reasons why we are where we are and if you genuinely want it all undone it will only happen in baby steps.
I don't think we'll ever be full members of the EU as we were previously, not in the EU's current form, not in my lifetime anyway. There might be accommodations on both sides but no rejoining in full.