Is it possible/feasible at some time in the future, like right now, to re-visit the Brexit vote?
With all the startled consternation expressed by surprisingly large segments of the public after the original vote and the intransigent political standoff in trying to get the thing planned and operative, is it worth the effort to have a public re-vote on the issue?
Y’all should be proud of what’s happening. In your Island Laboratory the world gets to watch the workings of an actual democracy (regards to Her Majesty) under needlessly self-inflicted political stress in all its gory details.
It’s nice to know that we yanks aren’t the only people in the world who insist on screwing ourselves over and over and trying to take the whole world down with us.
I do wish things would be otherwise but at least I don’t feel so alone anymore.
I don't think there is anything "good" about this situation and I hope you all can avoid punching each other in the nose.
The society trying to solve this problem is the same one that lacked the political suave to have avoided this mess in the first place. Can the institutions, having been thrown into a field of muck were every direction open is further into the muck, find a consensus on which path to take without popping people in the nose? Can you arrive at a lose-lose solution you can all agree with?
Can someone please explain some of the details of the Irish situation in this controversy? What are the issues there?
Ok. So now there is no plan yet Britain has got to be out by March something . Why? Who’s forcing this deadline?
Without a plan there will be great economic dishevel and gnashing of monetary teeth. Why? How so?
What are the issues with Britain just standing up on that March day, walking down the hall and out of the European building? Parking pass won’t get validated? How big a parking pass we talking about?
And if Britain and Ireland want to keep their (non)border free and open as it is now who is it that says they can’t do that? What would happen? Is Merkel going to put German troops on the Irish border?
What happens on that fateful March day that cannot be overcome by calm consideration by willing consenting adults?
Might, just might, the British electorate pull their collective heads out of their collective derrire and abandon this kerfuffle?
The deadline was set in law when Parliament voted for Brexit.
As I recall, in Her Majesty’s governments the Parliamant IS the law (within reason).
They made it. Now, change it. Choose some other date.
Exiting without a deal means that all arrangements with the EU are void - that covers a hell of a lot. Tariffs, entry, flights, data protection....
So what would stop either or both from obersving most of those conventions anyway?
The ones the whole Brexit thing is about can be decided in Parliament at their leisure without any European concerns.
They want bicycle seats of different than regulated EU sizes, they can have it.
The Irish border is a border with the EU. Since stoping the free movement of people was one of the reasons for Brexit it would be a bit silly to say it’s OK if people happen to come through Ireland. Likewise movement of goods (what’s the point of tariffs or regulations if importers can just avoid them?)
Heavens forbid two neighbors should make nice with each other. Reach an accommodation with the neighbor. Let the talks begin yet again and yet again for however long it takes. Ireland may not be Mexico but Brits don’t get to build a wall either.
referendum could be easily rigged by the choice of options
Very easily indeed, but with the whole world watching there is a larger constituency to be served. The question comes up who is doing what level of rigging and why? Britain is still a democracy (with respect, Your Majesty). Once the exact wording to be presented is made public (but not yet officially adopted) every political interest not involved in setting that wording will be howling as will the press, domestically, internationally, galactically.
I would think what will be settled on as the final language would not be allowed to get too far away from fair.
Neither seems that likely - there will be a No Confidence vote tomorrow, but May is expected to win.
If she falls, does it come crashing down to the point where Her Majesty dissolves the Parliament, beheads both the PM and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and calls for an election?
Are you sure that Her Majesty can't just behead her? I know Queenie Baby can't make the leave/remain decision herself (a stiff political thing that seems quite archaic) but she should be able to help things along for the good of the nation as all good monarchs should. A few heads on spikes posted on the north side of Tower Bridge I think would get the politicos' attention.
As I understand, Her Majesty has the power of Royal Prerogative which allows her to step in and change governments, select a Prime Minister of her own choosing regardless of the Parliament's makeup and vote. As Commander in Chief of the armed services she could seize the Parliament and the government buildings, make/break any foreign treaties she so happened to desire.
She could actually behead Theresa May and replace her. She could dissolve Parliament and appoint any person she chooses to be PM. She legally has such power.
So, yes, Her Majesty could try to influence the events, voice opinions on the matter and demand that Parliament work more collaboratively.
The problem is Her Majesty could only do something like this once and even then not completely. A major portion of British society, not just the political class, would backlash big time and put an end to The House of Windsor and the monarchy altogether in very short order if she tried. British society views the monarchy as a quaint ceremonial plaything they dress up as the embodiment of their national sovereignty. The Royal Prerogative may be a legal thing on paper but in reality it is a fiction. It is the "third rail" of the monarchy. Touch it and you die.
Let's face it. The Royals have a pretty good gig going on in Britain. Get political and risk alienating enough of the society to put an end to this most cushy of arrangements. Effectively, The Crown is barred from even voicing an opinion on such matters for fear of alienating large segments of her subjects. So, the Crown is told, rather pointedly, to stay in its role and do what its told, nothing more.