Let us start with the rhetoric. In January Theresa May said that “no deal is better than a bad deal”. When polls ask about that sentiment people generally agree with it. When Theresa May first made the statement, YouGov found 48% of people agreed that “no deal is better than a bad deal”, 17% thought a “bad deal was better than no deal” (34% agreed with neither or said don’t know). SkyData asked a similar question at the start of the month and found 74% of people thought no deal was better than a bad deal, 26% that any deal was better than no deal.

These two questions suggest that the Prime Minister has landed upon a message that chimes with the public, but we don’t know what respondents are thinking of as a “bad deal” or “no deal”, and whether they think a “no deal” is a good thing or just marginally less awful than a “bad deal”. More in depth questions asked around a “no deal” Brexit suggest it would not be widely welcomed.

Questions that have asked specifically about whether people see a “no deal” Brexit as good or bad have consistently shown a negative reaction. In ICM’s most recent poll they asked how people would react if “negotiations failed to reach agreement by Brexit Day, and the UK left the EU in a so-called ‘hard Brexit’?” 62% of people picked negative words, like worried (50%), confused (29%) and furious (24%), only 20% picked positive words like pleased (14%), proud (11%) or excited (11%).

YouGov asked if people thought it would be good or bad for Britain if we ended up leaving the EU without agreeing departure terms with the EU at all – 57% thought this would be bad, 10% thought it would be good for the country, 20% said neither. Survation asked a very similar question in June (but without a neither option) and found 58% thought it would be bad for Britain, 31% good for Britain.

Of course, this is somewhat missing the point. Given there is significant public support for the sort of Brexit that Theresa May has set out (of immigration controls *and* a trade deal with the EU), a “no deal” Brexit is unlikely to be seen as desirable by the public. It is more a case of whether it is seen as acceptable if negotiations for a better Brexit fall through.

Last week YouGov asked what the government should do if we get to the end of the two year negotiation period and the government have not managed to strike the sort of Brexit deal that Theresa May is seeking: 18% of people said we should stay in the EU after all, 17% that we should delay Britain’s departure in order to continue negotiations, 16% that Britain should accept some of the EU’s demands in order to reach a compromise, 32% that Britain should leave without a deal. Looking at those who voted to Leave in 2016 and those who voted Tory in 2017, a majority of both groups say Britain should leave without a deal rather than seek to delay Brexit or compromise with the EU.

Opinium’s last poll had a very similar question, but with slightly different options. They also asked what people thought should happen if we got to the end of the two year negotiation period without a deal – 15% said we should remain in the EU after all, 35% that we should have a transition deal while negotiations continued, 44% that we should leave without a deal. Again, a majority of Tory voters and Leave voters said that under those circumstances we should leave without a deal.

Summing it all up, a “no deal” Brexit is not something that the British public actually like the idea of – the majority tend to see it in negative terms or as being bad for Britain. However, placed in a position where negotiations for a better deal have failed, a sizeable minority of people (and a majority of Conservatives and Leave voters) would opt for a “no deal” Brexit. Put in that choice between a rock and a hard place, more people would opt for “no deal Brexit” than would opt for remaining in the EU, though a sizeable chunk would take the option of compromise or delay if offered.


1,441 Responses to “What the public think about a “No deal” Brexit”

1 26 27 28 29
  1. rachel

    I would suggest:

    a/ Join the party

    b/ Become friendly with someone who is an active Tory [that could be tricky….] and ask if you can borrow their rule book.

    c/ Ask Santa **

    [** Definitely best bet.]

  2. THEEXTERMINATINGDALEK

    Thanks !

    Got the message-you really don’t like ’em-male or female.

    Thats what elections are all about -but you will have to wait a while before Corbyn’s lot step forward.

  3. Pour revenir a now moutons, anent my “My view is that the whole sorry bunch should continue to be held to have collective responsibility for this failure, but of course for others, and given the push, preferably around April 2018, having reached a decisive point on Brexit from which the country can judge the outcome and move on.”

    At which point a C&S agreement with the LDs will lead Labour to putting a renewed referendum into their June GE manifesto, leading to the commission of Brexit to the realms of history, never to be repeated.

  4. @TREVOR WARNE
    Eh? Corbyn sacked 3 front bench for supporting Remain(ish) view:
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/29/jeremy-corbyn-sacks-three-frontbenchers-after-single-market-vote

    So he sacked three shadow cabinet ministers who voted against a three line whip.
    If he hadn’t he would of appeared very weak and shadow cabinet collective responsibility would be in the bin

  5. If DD puts the first/fatal dagger into May on the grounds that she has restricted his Brexit mandate would that make him leadership material and clear his path to #10 or would it take him out of the game?

    My guess is CON members would love it but there are a lot of big beasts on the Leave side that would challenge DD and that could get v.bl00dy.

    We’re a few days past Guy Fawkes but the plot thickens!

    Whoever takes over from May should do the following quickly IMHO (mostly after actually become leader of course!):
    1/ reach across chamber and get LAB and SNP involved in a national govt approach to Brexit (devo-max for Scotland)
    2/ use the get out of jail free card and drop DUP bung, possibly losing C+S of course
    3/ in order to get #1 adopt a Corbyn-lite domestic policy
    4/ agree the “meaningful vote” part of the Repeal Bill which would pave the way to a new ref and possibly GE in 2018
    5/ release any and all Brexit info, specifically the “min.deal” plans
    6/ Offer EU fully fleshed out “min.deal” and “fair deal” packages comfortably ahead of Dec EU Council meeting with clear understanding rejection of “fair deal” means we will start implementing “min.deal” with immediate effect

  6. Re: a potential yougov poll, what might be interesting is the right/wrong to leave question that they often ask in light of the recent ORB poll which showed a change from ‘we will be economically better off’ following Brexit having a net 8% lead in a survey done 30 Sept – 1 Oct to a net 3% deficit now.

    It is three weeks ago that a yougov poll had ‘wrong to leave’ taking the lead by 5 points, since then the evidence seems to be for a smaller ‘wrong to leave’ lead. Although the vote to leave wasn’t just made on economic grounds, it will be interesting to see if ‘wrong to leave’ manages to extend its lead at all. Obviously we are on our way out of the EU and one poll will not change that but be interesting to see if there is a shift.

  7. @ RACHEL – CON “rule book” is summed up here.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6kgS_AwuH0

    P.S. I think the new Unison “pat on back” vidoe is excellent. I hope it’s being streamed into #11!

  8. @TREVOR WARNE
    ‘…
    Whoever takes over from May should do the following quickly IMHO (mostly after actually become leader of course!):
    1/ reach across chamber and get LAB and SNP involved in a national govt approach to Brexit (devo-max for Scotland)’

    Now I know you are having a laugh, there is no way this would ever happen unless DD adopted Labour/SNP Policies whole sale, which I think is very unlikely

  9. An interesting set of Brexit predictions-allegedly based on informed discussion .

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/nov/09/brexit-deal-price-britain-hard-irish-border

  10. Difficult headlines for Carwyn Jones :

    “Carwyn Jones accused of playing politics over Carl Sargeant claims
    Family of sacked minister thought to have killed himself say Welsh leader put his own political survival ahead of ‘human tragedy’”

    G.

  11. This polling about right to leave or wrong to leave is essentially pointless and is quite the opposite of what remainers want. They bemoan a lack of informed debate and crave a new referendum in which all the arguments are properly put before the voters. And yet here rely on something that could turn in a second .
    if polling had been done in this way thought he second world war as to whether we ought to sue for peace i imagine that there would have been times when a majority would have said that this was the thing to do.In the dog days of brexit this is what one would expect.The incoming fire is relentless and heavy and unrelenting. it is almost as if there was a common purpose.
    The steadiness of TM under fire is surprising but gratifying. however the decapitation policy being persued by the political remain elite is a powerful one

  12. WB

    I always appreciate your posts – especially when you refer to the “Great Reform Acts” (plural. That there were three of them, one for each then polity in the UK is not generally known.

    John Pilgrim

    I appreciate yours too. Your reference to when armed resistance is appropriate was useful but, as you know Catalan Independistas have eschewed violence. Rather than backing them into a corner where retaliatory violence might occur, it would seem sensible for those states who have rational leadership (thus excluding the UK and USA) to pressure Spain to behave in a manner that befits an EU member.

    Of course, I agree with you that countries such as Iran, Saudi, China, are worse than Spain with regard to abusing human rights, but that does bring us back to the discussion on moral behaviours that was being had upthread.

    That Johnson is a dangerous, damaging and idiotic choice as Foreign Secretary is obvious from his behaviour. Normally, one would suggest that any PM appointing him in the first place was an indication of incompetence, and not sacking him a repetition of that flaw.

    English politics currently seems best paralleled by NI. Two parties required to work together in a power sharing agreement, but they can’t even agree on the simplest matters.

    In the English case, both of the “parties” are in the same Parliamentary Party!

  13. Alec

    re fishing

    Denmark recently published its assessment of the damage that would be caused within the Danish fishing industry by Brexit and a subsequent loss off access to that part of the Danish fleet which primarily fishes in UK waters.

    Herring and mackerel are still popular in Denmark it seems, unlike Scotland or England nowadays.

    It is suggested that no other appropriate sources for these exist, so without access to Scottish waters, the catch would have to be imported, and the government would need to take action to support the small section of the fleet that would be affected seriously.

    If such an analysis can be made, and published, by Denmark then it seems unlikely that no such analyses have been done by the UK.

    If they haven’t been done, the UK Government should resign because it is clearly incompetent.

    If they have, but are not being published, the UK Government should resign because it is clearly untrustworthy.

  14. Oldnat

    I thought David Hirst published “Brexit What next for U.K. Fisheries “ in July this year , which covers the likely impact of brexit on U.K. fishing and the Common Fisheries Policy, and the Fisheries Bill 2017.

  15. SThomas

    “if polling had been done in this way thought he second world war as to whether we ought to sue for peace i imagine that there would have been times when a majority would have said that this was the thing to do.”

    No.

  16. @Colin

    The consensus is that May is the worst leader the Tories could have apart from every alternative, and the Tories are in an appalling position that would only get worse if there was an election.

    The Brexit article is shrewd and I think likely to be significantly more right than wrong. All the fatheads wishing misfortune on Merkel and Macron fail to appreciate that it’s their need to move on from Brexit that is now our single greatest asset. We ought to be sucking up to the pair of them as they can grease the Brexit wheels very much to our advantage if it’s in their interests to do so. If we continue to act in a haughty and entitled way, their electorates will wish to see us punished and we will be.

  17. @Chris Riley

    Good points. Let’s hope the blonde one engages his brain before making pronouncements. Now is the time for diplomacy and compromise, and all parties will have a happy(ish) outcome – and still be friendly neighbours.

  18. Turk

    Which Ministry in the UK Government does David Hirst represent?

  19. norbold @ SThomas

    The better comparison would be the Vietnam War, where successive US Presidents were desperate to get out of the awful and unwinnable situation they had got themselves into, so told untruths to the American people and sacrificed millions of lives because of pride and an unwillingness to admit they were wrong.

    But, of course, the patriotism of the scoundrel dominated and polling continued to support the waste and destruction.

  20. It`s typical of the spinning by this paper that they should try to make their readers believe the Irish border issue was solved.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/09/brexit-talks-thrown-chaos-ireland-makes-fresh-border-demands/

    These new demands aren`t new to many on UKPR.

  21. @jonesinbangor

    Now is the time for diplomacy and compromise, and all parties will have a happy(ish) outcome – and still be friendly neighbours.

    This is clearly right, Seachange once told me that wise heads would prevail. The Guardian article says there will be a deal ‘of sorts’. So it should be reasonable to hope for it.

    My worries are a) with 27 countries and I am not sure how many veto capable institutions I feel that the EU has to be inflexible or risk a situation in which no decision can be taken b) we seem to be completely unclear about what we want and absolutely reluctant to tell the British people that they cannot have all that they want c) so instead of trying to exercise some leadership and prepare people for the compromises that have to be made we have fallen to wrangling, unearthing a variety of unsavoury scandals that damage all politicians and further erode any capacity for leadership that may exist and d) rather than face the realities of this situation too many people still delude themselves that given a bit of proper pride and macho self assertion the EU will just roll over and we will get what we want.

  22. Charles

    Not only all that, but the UK Government seem even less inclined to tell those UK citizens outwith GB what is intended (if anything) for them – yet that is one of the EU’s primary requirements that the Irish border issue is settled.

  23. Has anyone in the UK Government mentioned Gibraltar?

    To the extent that it is “responsible” in any sense, UK Ministers are responsible for the foreign affairs of the Overseas Crown Dependencies.

  24. Colin,
    “Difficult headlines for Carwyn Jones”

    from the news, sounded as though the procedures being criticised might be the same as standard ones in firms all over the UK.

    S Thomas,
    “This polling about right to leave or wrong to leave is essentially pointless and is quite the opposite of what remainers want. They bemoan a lack of informed debate and crave a new referendum in which all the arguments are properly put before the voters. And yet here rely on something that could turn in a second .
    if polling had been done in this way thought he second world war as to whether we ought to sue for peace i imagine that there would have been times when a majority would have said that this was the thing to do”

    It is not clear that the Uk made the right choice in the national interest in the wars with Germany. The outcome of those wars was the destruction of not only the British empire, but the whole concept of Empire as a means of government. Technicaly we won, in reality we lost heavily. So if you are saying, the Uk might end Brexit in huge debt with fallen national income and reduced world sovereignty, yes, I think this likely.

    There is a direct analogy on the question of outcome, because already polling is 6:1 against a no deal outcome. Can you see a way whereby the UK gets a deal with the EU equivalent to membership but without the elements you dislike? I can’t, and thats why I think your position is untenable.

    Many people still say they support Brexit, but are against the only outcome the Uk has the power to deliver. May has always understood this is the only outcome she is able to deliver, and I think you have agreed. Polling says however, this is opposed by the nation.

  25. Chris Rily,
    “The consensus is that May is the worst leader the Tories could have apart from every alternative, and the Tories are in an appalling position that would only get worse if there was an election.”

    I partly agree with this, but i think the best outcome for the tories would be to lose an election. Any loss would do, though I’m not sure whether it would be better for them to be clearly out of the loop, or to have a reversal of the current situation so as to have some influence through parliament. On the one hand this might allow them to score some points, but on the other would not get them off the hook of being forced to move towards remain.

    But I also think it unfair to describe May as ‘worst’. She is bound by the logic (or lunacy) of the political position. She was chosen because of that position.

    The new ministers suggest that somewhere in the tory party is a formal detailed pact between remain and leave whereby if a third rate leaver or remainer exits the cabinet, they must be replaced by someone of identical character. Again, this implies May has no real means of doing better and no one else would either in her position.

    Gordon Brown getting elder statesmanlike. Getting in points that Leave promises are undeliverable just before the tories have to do it.

  26. @Turk (and @Oldnat)

    “Brexit What next for U.K. Fisheries” is a research paper produced by the Commons Library. David Hirst has nothing to do with the UK government. This isn’t a government impact assessment, but a general overview of the possible outcomes.

    It does provide some food for thought though, as it points out that the only clear ‘win’ from Brexit is going to be control over the 200 mile UK EEZ, which is actually quite small. However, it also states that it will be unlikely that the UK could enforce complete exclusion of EU vessels from here, as maritime legal conventions require grandfathered fishing rights to be honoured, so any attempt to exclude everyone else would be open to a legal challenge. [This is why four other nations still have rights to fish within the UK’s 12 mile exclusive zone, for example].

    It also points out that in exerting control of our EEZ, we would find the UK fleet’s access to the EU27’s EEZ restricted, and it also points out that we export 80% of or catch to the EU.

    All in all, it seems a sensible document and should be read by anyone who thinks Brexit is going to be a bonaza for UK fishermen.

  27. Danny

    “Gordon Brown getting elder statesmanlike”

    He’s flogging his book, and getting lots of media coverage for saying things that “should happen” – which he could have (or at least tried to) implemented when in office.

    Very much a self-exculpatory exercise from someone who described himself as an “ex-politician” while he was still an MP.

  28. Oldnat,
    “He’s flogging his book”

    Gordon Brown getting elder statesmanlike

  29. Interesting listening to Heseltine’s comments on newsnight. He implied that there might yet be more mileage for a clear Remain policy by labour attracting away traditional conservative voters.

    The logic presumably being that while labour continue to prevaricate on where they stand, there is no point conservative remainers defecting to them.

  30. Alec

    Most HoC Library and SPICE papers are “sensible documents”, but they aren’t in “excruciating detail”.

    Almost always they provide a useful starting point, but the detailed examination of the different fishing sectors isn’t there (and I wouldn’t expect a HoC Library researcher to be able to do that on his own, anyway).

    I’ve only read a translation of a newspaper report of the Danish Government research, but it is (as you would expect it to be) a much more detailed analysis of precisely which parts of the industry would be adversely affected, and under which aspects of a final settlement.

    The article suggested (though didn’t spell out) that the other areas of Danish aquaculture would be minimally affected.

    Hopefully, somewhere on UKPR there is someone who is fluent in Danish, can access both the Danish and HoC reports, and give a comparison.

    It’s more likely, however, that any such person’s interest in fish will be whether they prefer cod or haddock fish fingers.

  31. Danny

    I can see the attraction for SLab if E&WLab take a more Remainer position, as it would help them gain votes from Unionist Remainers who voted Tory last time.

    Similarly I saw reference earlier to a report suggesting that the North of England would be much worse hit by Brexit than the South. If true, that could benefit Lab there.

    People, of course, never change their minds. They just (like Gordon Brown on the Iraq War) later whine that they were “lied to”. A fairly easy proposition to sell, I’d have thought.

  32. @Oldnat

    The BBC reported GB as acknowledging that one could not just say to people ‘you got it wrong’ but saying that if leavers were faced with the real prospect of a bad brexit but also offered a ‘game changer’ they might change their minds.

    I can’t see that this Is very relevant to what he may or may not have done in office. The question is what on earth would such a game changer be.

    No doubt other remarks or parts of his book try to put his side of things. it would be unrealistic to expect otherwise. But at least the proceeds of his book go to charity, and I am not sure that the same can be said of Blair or Cameron.

    Brown ended up very unpopular and he got things wrong. That said, I always felt that he did fight for things in which he believed and it seems to me that that is the case now.

  33. COLIN to me
    “Thanks ! Got the message-you really don’t like ’em-male or female.”

    On my first day of govt and political education a level at what used to be the grammar school in your part of the world, our teacher, a very Scottish former Army major of whom I became extremely fond and respected greatly, announced that his intention was to turn us into political eun*chs, and having started the course as a Tory like my folks, I did indeed end up politically homeless.

    These days I’d describe myself as generally ABT, but certainly not tribal labour. There are politicians on all sides who I respect even if I disagree with them, and many more that I don’t. If only parties were divided into reasonable people on one side and egotistical buffoons on the other I suspect that almost everyone here would come down on the same side.

    The changing of the guard seems always to be signalled by the noise and clatter of everything going wrong, day after day after day, and once a certain momentum is achieved there’s no going back.

  34. Should have been Scottish, don’t know where that”very” came from, like being a bit pregnant…

  35. I see the government is aiming to place an exact Brexit date in the withdrawal bill.

    Interesting development: not apparently designed to broker a compromise with its opponents.

    In fact, looks like another attempt to provoke parliament into revolt against the government, so as to ensure the bill is roundly defeated. For parliament to refuse to set a fixed date avoids the need for the government to vary the date. Directs blame expressed by leavers towards parliament instead of towards the tories.

  36. Latest yougov, not much change

    Labour on 43 per cent, up 1 point
    Conservatives unchanged on 40 per cent
    Lib Dems on 6 per cent, down 2 per cent.

    Perceptions of Mrs May’s qualities are also largely unchanged. Voters tend to think she is weak and indecisive, and are ambivalent when asked whether she is competent.

    The proportion of people who think she should stand down has fallen. Some 32 per cent think she should stand down now, 6 points down from a month ago when she delivered her disastrous conference speech, with 42 per cent saying she should remain, up 3 points.

    On the cabinet, 44 per cent of all voters think Mrs May should get rid of Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary; 26 per cent feel that she should keep him and 29 per cent don’t know.

  37. Stubbington (Fareham) result:

    LDEM: 55.2% (+32.4)
    CON: 35.8% (+6.1)
    UKIP: 5.4% (-37.9)
    LAB: 3.5% (-0.5)

    LDem GAIN from UKIP.

    Result from last night. As seen in most recent local elections, UKIP are not bothering to contest seats much. Those who support remaining in the EU seem to be registering protest votes and Lib Dems are winning seats with incredible increases in their vote shares.

    If you look back over the last few months local election results, there is definitely a move against parties who support leaving the EU. There is a large element of tactical voting, which i think also happened at the general election.

    Brexlt may be becoming more unpopular and as time goes by I can only see support for staying in the EU increasing. It will get to a situation which neither Government or Labour can ignore.

  38. OLD NAT
    “told untruths to the American people and sacrificed millions of lives because of pride and an unwillingness to admit they were wrong…..”But, of course, the patriotism of the scoundrel dominated and polling continued to support the waste and destruction.”
    and later, of Gordon Brown “whined that they were lied to”

    You vastly, take my word for it, in both cases underestimate both the scale and the pervasive character of the work of the US military intelligence machine, in determining the knowledgeand understanding of the American leadership in the pursuit and justification of armed conflict, and in suborning other channels of fact finding and communication – from infiltration of academic social sciences to investment in and management of publications and journalism.
    If I may take a single example from 1970, buying in the available research capacity at the Applied Scientific Research Centre of Thailand and attempting to take over university social science research at Bangkok for trails and community leadership studies and forestry research to determine the potential effectiveness of Agent Orange in clearing the canopy of forest areas of NE Thailand in expectation of an extention of ground fighting and bombing from Laos. This was in the aftermath of the exposing of a similar campaign, called Operation Camelot, in South America, defeated as it emerged by the resistance of the American Anthropological Association.

  39. OLD NAT and CHARLES
    A problem with American leadership is its tendency to abjure history and the literary record. Noone who had read the New Yorker journailst Bernard Fall’s “Hell in a Very Small Place” (which I recommend for your Christmas reading if you don’t know it) about Dien Bien Phu, could think that the Viet Minh would not inflict on an American ground army the same destruction they wrought on the French.
    It is about the best ever war journalism

  40. TW Nov 8th 6:09
    While Protestants have no need to repent as they only need to believe in Jesus to get to heaven.

    Mind, often Christians forget this part of the Bible:

    James 2,20
    But wilt thou knowe, O vaine man, that faith without workes is dead?

  41. @ R HUCKLE
    “Brexlt may be becoming more unpopular and as time goes by I can only see support for staying in the EU increasing. It will get to a situation which neither Government or Labour can ignore.”

    Hard Brexit: Economic disaster
    Staying in the EU: National humiliation

    Where we end up between those two extremes is all these negotiations are about, We clearly can’t “have our cake and it” and I’m sure TM & DD realises that.

    Clearly some elements like Liam Fox still believe in the Hard Brexit scenario, but most people just think chlorinated chicken on that one.

  42. PETE
    Interesting post. Do you think that demonstrating the results of hard work, such for example as driving a top Audi or BMW, indicate the belief or intention of the driver of going to heaven?

    Or, if it were at Nice, and the car was an open top Lamborghini with a couple of pretty girls in the back and the sun shining, would that constitute for him actually being in heaven?

    Or, this being the result of his hard work and entrepreneurial spirit, does he get both?

  43. JONESINBANGOR

    ” We clearly can’t “have our cake and it”

    Unless, as you suggest, we accept the humiliation and not give a toss about it. In which case you may have invented a new concept of “have our cake and suck it up”.

  44. YouGov/Times (Best PM):

    MAY 34 (+1)
    CORBYN 31 (-2)
    DK 35 (=)

    My guess is May is starting to pick up the sympathy vote and the old British tradition of supporting the underdog :)

    As NEILJ points out:

    LAB+LDEM (-1)
    CON (uc)

    Peak Corbyn, peak remain?

  45. @John Pilgrim – I am very interested in what you have to say about American intelligence. I am not sure that it is sufficient to exculpate Gordon Brown for his part in the Iraq war (one of Old Nat’s complaints against him).

    My own point was that GB might have said something wise even though he is GB and an older statesman. What I would like to know is what this game changer might be that might change the mind of British leave voters. Presumably it would have to be something that was good for Britain. And if so would we not need another game changer that would conciliate the EU? Otherwise they will think we re getting away with it.

    Having said that I think that an attempt to get something positive for both sides would be rally worth thinking about.

  46. @JONESINBANGOR

    Staying in the EU is not humiliating, but a sensible mature decision if that is what is decided. Perhaps the Government can obtain some incentives from the EU to stay in the EU. E.g freedom of movement changes that do not require a new EU treaty.

    If you remember back to the referendum campaign, some leave advocates suggested that a leave vote could be used to negotiate revised UK membership of the EU.

    Many that still support Brexit because they dislike the EU having any powers over how life in the UK is organised, are never going to change their minds. No matter how bad Brexit was for their familiies, they see the UK as an independent island nation. But I don’t believe these hardline Brexit supporters would have a majority in a second referendum. This is why I think it is essential to have a second referedum before Brexit date, to confirm exit from the EU or to revoke A.50 to remain in the EU.

    Yes the UK and EU might not have agreed any deal before this time next year, but i think it is important that the UK public have a binding Brexit vote, before we make a change that will affect genetations to come. By November 2018, we should have a clear idea of at least a transitional deal and an idea of what a future permanent deal with the EU would look like.

    The EU withdrawal bill is likely to be amended requiring an authorisation process for Brexit, so that it cannot happen automatically on 29th March 2019. This is likely to be a requirement for a Parliamentary vote of both houses, binding on Government and not a second referendum, but i still hope that a referendum might still be agreed. I don’t want to see Parliament overide the last referendum result. It needs to be a vote of the people.

  47. @ NIELJ – “reach across chamber and get LAB and SNP involved in a national govt approach to Brexit (devo-max for Scotland)”

    There are degress of reaching across the chamber and I fully expect the opposition parties to refuse.

    The idea is to call LAB’s bluff, pull them inside the Leave tent or force Corbyn into a Remain (or EEA+CU) position. May has been useless at putting Corbyn on the spot for how LAB would do Brexit differently (how much bill would they pay, would they cave in on rights of criminals, etc)

    For SNP, if you read all the Brexit info realised by DExEU you’ll see devo-max has been verbally offered – but as usual with CON absolutely no spin or effort to sell it to the public. SNP and SCON have a mutual enemy in Scotland and although they are far from friends my enemy’s enemy can provide temporary assistance. Ruth is being far too quiet IMHO. If SNP are offered devo-max (or in this case just ensure all relevant powers taken back from Brussels go to the devolved assemblies) then SNP+SCON can call that a win and both do well from it. No SCON or SNP will naturally chose the other party but both could bleed voters to SLAB.

    I’d add an extra
    7/ remove students from the immigration stats (which pretty much instantly means the absurd immigration target would be met)

  48. CHARLES
    Instict tells me that a game-changer is code for an initiative, poosible that of the EU, and based, I think, about changed policy on migration which would offer a way back.

1 26 27 28 29