How can it be a Brexit referendum if Britain have already exited? Without reading the article (can’t be arsed, truth be known) I assume this is with regards to rejoining the EU? If so, a fancy new name is needed.
There should be a referendum every 20 years/generation.
I don’t want another one, the first one was divisive enough and nothing else got done for five years afterwards.
I think that we should have two votes per referendum.
First one to see what everyone thinks.
Another one a month or so later which asks the question – ‘Are we sure we actually want to go through with this?’
It would probably save massive consequential economical and political decisions being decided on a mere few percent.
Who gives a fuck what a washed-up whiskey salesman thinks?
And the stupid people believed him wise.
As I remember, his whole libertarian spiel before everything started to go wrong with the Brexit that he negotiated was that each government needed the freedom to do whatsoever they liked irrespective of what previous government put in place. And now he wants to constrain future governments!
Pretty much every promise that Frost and the other Brexiteers made has turned out to be a lie.
Brexit has done an enormous amount of damage, and the supposed benefits aren’t materialising.
I’ve got a feeling that the public are going to be demanding a rethink a hell of a lot sooner than 2067…
> “The EU had 1973 to 2020 to show that UK membership was a good idea. 47 years. Let’s measure Brexit by that same standard.”
I’ve heard variations of this argument used before, and I’m always baffled with how anyone thinks it’s a good one.
The vote on the EU referendum took 47 years because it took that much time to galvanise support for one. It wasn’t as if we decided after the initial decision to join the EU “Okay lets giver it 47 years until we touch the issue again.”
Just seems like a rather childish thing.
Who’s this fuckwit kidding.
By 2067 we still won’t have fixed the withdrawal agreement he agreed, fucked up, tried to renegotiate and then ran away from.
Get, Brexit done^by^2067.
…..cunt
Won’t be necessary. Brexit will die a death by a thousand treaties.
I think 25 years is reasonable to think about having another referendum for these kind of huge constitutional changes. It took 4.5 years from vote to actually being out of the EU, plus a long time arguing over it beforehand, plus we still haven’t even implemented all of the withdrawal measures, so it takes up almost 10 years of people’s time and energy.
12 comments
How can it be a Brexit referendum if Britain have already exited? Without reading the article (can’t be arsed, truth be known) I assume this is with regards to rejoining the EU? If so, a fancy new name is needed.
There should be a referendum every 20 years/generation.
I don’t want another one, the first one was divisive enough and nothing else got done for five years afterwards.
I think that we should have two votes per referendum.
First one to see what everyone thinks.
Another one a month or so later which asks the question – ‘Are we sure we actually want to go through with this?’
It would probably save massive consequential economical and political decisions being decided on a mere few percent.
Who gives a fuck what a washed-up whiskey salesman thinks?
And the stupid people believed him wise.
As I remember, his whole libertarian spiel before everything started to go wrong with the Brexit that he negotiated was that each government needed the freedom to do whatsoever they liked irrespective of what previous government put in place. And now he wants to constrain future governments!
Curious behaviour.
For context: we’re due to make [first contact with the Vulcans in 2063](https://www.space.com/star-trek-first-contact-titan-books#:~:text=That%20pivotal%20date%20in%20%E2%80%9CStar,benevolent%20alien%20life%20exists%20elsewhere.). That’s how much things will have changed by 2067. 😂
Pretty much every promise that Frost and the other Brexiteers made has turned out to be a lie.
Brexit has done an enormous amount of damage, and the supposed benefits aren’t materialising.
I’ve got a feeling that the public are going to be demanding a rethink a hell of a lot sooner than 2067…
> “The EU had 1973 to 2020 to show that UK membership was a good idea. 47 years. Let’s measure Brexit by that same standard.”
I’ve heard variations of this argument used before, and I’m always baffled with how anyone thinks it’s a good one.
The vote on the EU referendum took 47 years because it took that much time to galvanise support for one. It wasn’t as if we decided after the initial decision to join the EU “Okay lets giver it 47 years until we touch the issue again.”
Just seems like a rather childish thing.
Who’s this fuckwit kidding.
By 2067 we still won’t have fixed the withdrawal agreement he agreed, fucked up, tried to renegotiate and then ran away from.
Get, Brexit done^by^2067.
…..cunt
Won’t be necessary. Brexit will die a death by a thousand treaties.
I think 25 years is reasonable to think about having another referendum for these kind of huge constitutional changes. It took 4.5 years from vote to actually being out of the EU, plus a long time arguing over it beforehand, plus we still haven’t even implemented all of the withdrawal measures, so it takes up almost 10 years of people’s time and energy.