We can stay in the EU

[timshorts]

Oh I'm not claiming that we're not. Cameron opened up this deep wound, and let the genie out of the bottle, but the point of my ridiculously long post, is that I now believe that the percentage wanting to remain or favoring a soft brexit is increasing to well over 50%, and I believe the gap will continue to widen over the next 2 years.
The only thing that is likely to shift opinion back in favor of leave (IMO) is if Macron and Merkel start to behave like idiots and try bully us in negotiations, but unlike Mrs May and D. Davis, they're both far too pragmatic and intelligent to do that.

It was way over 50% in the first place. People that wanted to have a soft brexit only had the choice of remain or leave and the only way to get a soft brexit was to vote leave.
The hard brexiteers make up 60% of the noise but about 30% of the voters.

[Flatline]

Whoa the Okey Cokey!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7d8eMEzGWLk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[karatekid]

**** it, I say we go back in.

We haven't left yet .

[ClaretMoffitt]

We haven't left yet .

Okay, well thats good news

[jurek]

If we can have a referendum re. whether we wish to leave the EU
brought on by pressure from UKIP and Farage and the right wing of the Tory Party
I see no reason why, at some stage in the future, we can't have another referendum.
Most young people would wish to remain and may probably wish to return and they may
put pressure on a future government of the day to do so.

I wouldn't wish to bet what the outcome may be but I see no reason why not.

[Damo]

Labour didn't lose by quite as many as expected because they offered a soft Brexit.
It was all the free stuff that was on offer

[Devils_Advocate]

I voted for Labour because of some bullsh*t written on a big London bus. Official stats say this was a factor in at least 29% of the votes Labour received

[Paul Waine]

You really believe that?

I'll bet that if Labour carry on saying we must now have a soft Brexit, they'll get a decent majority at the next election. You just carry on believing the 48% no longer have say. I think you'll be in for a very nasty shock!

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... s-politics" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hi Spijed, did you hear Harriet Harman on R4 Today this morning. She was asked what the Labour approach was to Brexit. She said that Jeremy Corbyn, John McDonnell, Kier Starmer and Barry Gardiner all agreed on (1) UK was leaving the EU; (2) UK was leaving the single market and (3) UK was leaving the customs union. She said that Labour wanted access to the single market - but not membership.

I can't see where this differs from Conservative party approach to Brexit. TM also wants ability to trade with EU single market - I'm sure this is what "access" means.

How does Labour's "soft brexit" differ from Conservative's "hard brexit"? - adopting "hard" and "soft" definitions used by others, rather than my own.

And, if I can add: It's great that "Labour will always put jobs and the economy first." How does this differ from the Conservative party that has always been about the economy and, therefore, jobs and low unemployment/high employment?

[nil_desperandum]

Hi Spijed, did you hear Harriet Harman on R4 Today this morning. She was asked what the Labour approach was to Brexit. She said that Jeremy Corbyn, John McDonnell, Kier Starmer and Barry Gardiner all agreed on (1) UK was leaving the EU; (2) UK was leaving the single market and (3) UK was leaving the customs union. She said that Labour wanted access to the single market - but not membership.

I can't see where this differs from Conservative party approach to Brexit. TM also wants ability to trade with EU single market - I'm sure this is what "access" means.

How does Labour's "soft brexit" differ from Conservative's "hard brexit"? - adopting "hard" and "soft" definitions used by others, rather than my own.

And, if I can add: It's great that "Labour will always put jobs and the economy first." How does this differ from the Conservative party that has always been about the economy and, therefore, jobs and low unemployment/high employment?

Hi Paul,
I think that it might be that this is what the Labour manifesto clearly states, (see below), whereas there is no such undertaking in the Tory manifesto, and indeed this appears to be what the Scottish Tories are now pushing May for. (It's also what Sturgeon asked for for Scotalnd, and May refused to offer prior to calling the election.
"...... and replace it with fresh negotiating priorities that have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union – which are essential for maintaining industries, jobs and businesses in Britain. Labour will always put jobs and the economy first."
Whereas TM seems to have been putting migration ahead of the economy.

[Paul Waine]

I think that the situation is evolving all the time, and the demographics are changing too.
Young people now understand that if they had got themselves out to vote in the referendum then there wouldn't have been that 4% gap. They now know they can make a difference and you can be sure that as we continue to have elections and / or referenda they will turn out in greater numbers.
There are also an increasing number of people who are becoming concerned about the economic impact of Brexit, as they see prices rising, and start to look a little more at the true costs and benefits of EU membership. As time passes and the reality of our relative weakness in the Brexit negotiations becomes more apparent, there will be quite a few more who start to wonder whether they voted the right way.
People on low incomes are beginning to notice that prices are going up and that the cost of holidays is becoming horrendous; and it's a long time since people like Farage, Gove and Johnson told them how much better off they were going to be if they voted leave. (Most have already had to admit that they were conned about the £350 million for the NHS).
People are also beginning to see that contrary to what they were told, the EU is in fact pulling together and getting stronger and more confident as the months pass. The "populist" revolt that was going to bring down pro-EU parties / leaders all over Europe simply hasn't materialised, and with the likely re-election of Merkel, and the probable rejection of the anti-EU movt in Italy, the future for the UK looks a lot less promising outside the EU than was being portrayed even 2 months ago.
People are also increasingly alarmed at the prospect of us becoming reliant on Trump who is protectionist (and of course has many other issues).

The upshot of this was that a nervous and inadequate Prime Minister, (whose negotiating team have openly admitted that they haven't a clue what they are doing), asked for a mandate for her version of Brexit. It was firmly rejected.
She knows it, and is only in power because of the Scots Tories who are openly seeking a so-called "soft brexit", and the DUP, who also want free movement of goods and people across a soft Irish border. All the opposition parties are committed, to a greater or lesser degree, to retaining the benefits of access to the Single Market and Customs Union.
At the end of the day, MPs, (who of course don't want to lose their seats) will be increasingly taking soundings from their constituents, but the bottom line is that I expect the vast majority to respect the referendum result, and not oppose the final Brexit deal.
If things continue in the current direction of travel, I anticipate the government of the day, (and who knows what shape it will take in a couple of years time), will negotiate and agree to the softest of brexits, which will retain most of the benefits we currently have, in exchange for us paying the majority of what we currently pay into the budget. I further speculate that there might be a paragraph inserted at the end that will include the option of us "re-joining without penalty" should we opt to do so within a period of say 10 years. By this stage, one of the parties might stand on a 2nd referendum promise, (but only if as I have predicted the direction of travel in public opinion has shifted significantly in its favour).

Hi nil_d, my "like" because I appreciate your insightful and well argued analysis. There are points I don't think I'm fully aligned with, but that doesn't matter.

[Imploding Turtle]

Labour didn't lose by quite as many as expected because they offered a soft Brexit.
It was all the free stuff that was on offer

Yeah, because all people want beyond free education is free childcare and free parking at hospitals.

But keep repeating the same bullshit, Damo, I'm sure the people who will believe such a whine aren't already Tory voters. Honest.

[Sidney1st]

I've just read on this thread that people are just noticing an increase in the cost of living.

Good job it didn't rise before the referendum....
Oh wait, it did and pretty much always has done.

[Damo]

Yeah, because all people want beyond free education

Still find it funny that Labour's manifesto offers 30k to an 18 year old Etonian and **** all to an 18 year old sports direct employee.
How very progressive

[nil_desperandum]

Hi nil_d, my "like" because I appreciate your insightful and well argued analysis. There are points I don't think I'm fully aligned with, but that doesn't matter.

Thanks Paul.
I wouldn't expect anyone to be fully aligned with my posts, and this one in particular. It's highly speculative at best, but I do think that this is the direction of travel, and for all that is claimed about the dubious reasons for the "youth" vote, and their lack of experience, by some people on here, we all have to accept these young people will still be around and voting long after we are around to look back and say whether they were right or wrong.

[Paul Waine]

Hi Paul,
I think that it might be that this is what the Labour manifesto clearly states, (see below), whereas there is no such undertaking in the Tory manifesto, and indeed this appears to be what the Scottish Tories are now pushing May for. (It's also what Sturgeon asked for for Scotalnd, and May refused to offer prior to calling the election.
"...... and replace it with fresh negotiating priorities that have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union – which are essential for maintaining industries, jobs and businesses in Britain. Labour will always put jobs and the economy first."
Whereas TM seems to have been putting migration ahead of the economy.

Hi nil_d, can I be honest - I haven't read the Conservative manifesto, so I've no quotes from there.

But, in on Jan-17th "Theresa May set out the Plan for Britain, including the 12 priorities that the UK government will use to negotiate Brexit."
Number 8 was: Free trade with European markets
"That starts with our close friends and neighbours in Europe. So as a priority, we will pursue a bold and ambitious free trade agreement with the European Union.
This agreement should allow for the freest possible trade in goods and services between Britain and the EU’s member states. It should give British companies the maximum freedom to trade with and operate within European markets – and let European businesses do the same in Britain."

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/ ... -pm-speech" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I do wonder if arguing the difference between Labour's "access and benefits" and TM's "maximum freedom to trade..." are like the arguments about how many angels can fit on the point of a needle....

[CnBtruntru]

I always thought there may be a get out close in all of the posturing between the Eu and the UK, truthfully the EU do not want the UK to leave.

[nil_desperandum]

I've just read on this thread that people are just noticing an increase in the cost of living.

Good job it didn't rise before the referendum....
Oh wait, it did and pretty much always has done.

I think that if you actually look at the figures, you'll find that this isn't actually true. Both RPI and CPI had been falling consistently from 2011 till the middle of last year, and for a couple of years inflation was flat-lining around 0%. (In fact some economists said that this was a bad thing).
Whether coincidental or not inflation has been on the rise since the Brexit vote, and it is expected to reach 3.2 % later this year.
With the value of the pound taking a hit, the price of imports was bound to rise sooner or later.

[Paul Waine]

Thanks Paul.
I wouldn't expect anyone to be fully aligned with my posts, and this one in particular. It's highly speculative at best, but I do think that this is the direction of travel, and for all that is claimed about the dubious reasons for the "youth" vote, and their lack of experience, by some people on here, we all have to accept these young people will still be around and voting long after we are around to look back and say whether they were right or wrong.

I'm sure it's been mentioned already, as the youth get a bit more experience of life their political views will change. When I was at uni in the early 1970s for many the choice was being either a Stalinist Marxist or a Trotskyist Marxist - and wow, those guys did not like each other one bit. Truth is, none of them knew what they were talking about. And, I think it's always been thus. Was it Churchill who made similar comments a number of decades earlier?

We have got university fees wrong, they are too high. I argued this with a government minister in 2005 - at that time fees were £3,000 and grants were available towards living costs, depending on family earnings. The pressure on the students/graduates is (i) student debt; (ii) house prices and (iii) the government's proposals that they start saving for their pensions. That's too much financial pressure. And, I was making that point over 10 years ago - and before the "world financial crisis."

[nil_desperandum]

I always thought there may be a get out close in all of the posturing between the Eu and the UK, truthfully the EU do not want the UK to leave.

Of course they don't, but what some people don't get is that they cannot possibly give us a better deal than the one that everyone else in the EU currently has, otherwise they may as well just shut down the entire project. Ergo: the best deal we can hope for is the one we currently have, unless we can persuade the other 27 to sacrifice some of their principles and change their policies.

[Sidney1st]

Fair comment.

Prior to that though the cost of living has generally increased though, that's just a simple fact of life.
I know I pay more money for food items that are smaller than they were many years ago for example.
Supermarkets are very good at putting their prices up and then dropping them a little with a sign telling you that you can save money when really you aren't.
Fuel goes up and down all the time, but there are less decreases in prices then there are increases.

These things happened prior to the referendum, even during your stated dates and %'s.

[nil_desperandum]

Hi nil_d, can I be honest - I haven't read the Conservative manifesto, so I've no quotes from there.

But, in on Jan-17th "Theresa May set out the Plan for Britain, including the 12 priorities that the UK government will use to negotiate Brexit."
Number 8 was: Free trade with European markets
"That starts with our close friends and neighbours in Europe. So as a priority, we will pursue a bold and ambitious free trade agreement with the European Union.
This agreement should allow for the freest possible trade in goods and services between Britain and the EU’s member states. It should give British companies the maximum freedom to trade with and operate within European markets – and let European businesses do the same in Britain."

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/ ... -pm-speech" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I do wonder if arguing the difference between Labour's "access and benefits" and TM's "maximum freedom to trade..." are like the arguments about how many angels can fit on the point of a needle....

One point on which we can perhaps agree is that if the Tories and Labour are basically in agreement now over the Single Market, then the Labour Party are putting their message across much better. (But no surprises there at present!)

[nil_desperandum]

Fair comment.

Prior to that though the cost of living has generally increased though, that's just a simple fact of life.
I know I pay more money for food items that are smaller than they were many years ago for example.
Supermarkets are very good at putting their prices up and then dropping them a little with a sign telling you that you can save money when really you aren't.
Fuel goes up and down all the time, but there are less decreases in prices then there are increases.

These things happened prior to the referendum, even during your stated dates and %'s.

Perhaps I should have also added an acknowledgement that you are basically correct. Prices have always risen over the centuries, but it is the rate at which they rise that we should take into account, so if prices have been rising at an average of 1% then suddenly rise by 3% and stay at that level for a while, then it is significant, more especially if wages are hardly rising or are in some cases falling.

[Imploding Turtle]

Still find it funny that Labour's manifesto offers 30k to an 18 year old Etonian and **** all to an 18 year old sports direct employee.
How very progressive

This should be interesting, how?

[aggi]

I'm sure it's been mentioned already, as the youth get a bit more experience of life their political views will change. When I was at uni in the early 1970s for many the choice was being either a Stalinist Marxist or a Trotskyist Marxist - and wow, those guys did not like each other one bit. Truth is, none of them knew what they were talking about. And, I think it's always been thus. Was it Churchill who made similar comments a number of decades earlier? ."

It wasn't Churchill, that's apocryphal.

Interesting graphic on voting age and party they voted for from the lord Ashcroft polls


Although the proportion of Tory voters does increase by age it's not till 50+ that they overtake the Labour voters.

Maybe it is life experiences, maybe it is the higher reliance on print media and less ability to independently fact check (we can make sweeping generalisations either way). Maybe it's getting nearer retirement and not wanting what you've got "taken away".

[Imploding Turtle]

Tuesday night.

32 hours earlier.



But wait a minute, didn't you recently...

[If it be your will]

.

[Imploding Turtle]

Good memory makes it easy to find **** with a simple keyword search. Plus it's pretty easy to highlight and click 'search google'.

[Paul Waine]

It wasn't Churchill, that's apocryphal.

Interesting graphic on voting age and party they voted for from the lord Ashcroft polls


Although the proportion of Tory voters does increase by age it's not till 50+ that they overtake the Labour voters.

Maybe it is life experiences, maybe it is the higher reliance on print media and less ability to independently fact check (we can make sweeping generalisations either way). Maybe it's getting nearer retirement and not wanting what you've got "taken away".

What did this age group voting table look like 20 years ago - when Tony Blair won a big majority? By and large, the people who are 50+ today would have been 30+ in 1997. Is it fair to determine that voting preferences can change over time?

And, interesting to see the more granular age group voting distributions, but the top 5 bars (18-19 thru to 40-49) cover 32 years and the bottom 3 bars (50-59 thru 70+) cover 30+ years. Be interesting to see the proportions of electorate and numbers that voted thru these age groups.

[Paul Waine]

One point on which we can perhaps agree is that if the Tories and Labour are basically in agreement now over the Single Market, then the Labour Party are putting their message across much better. (But no surprises there at present!)

Can we deduce Labour getting their message thru from the similarity of their respective approaches to Brexit? TM's 12 points were put forward on 17-January. Labour Manifesto was published in mid-May.

I've got this feeling that the media (possibly both traditional and the new social stuff) hasn't reported TM's 12 points accurately if people haven't noticed the similarity of the two parties positions.

There's also a very clear statement in TM's 12 points about the position of EU citizens in the UK - and UK citizens in EU - but, this is another area that political commentators we claiming that EU citizens were being made insecure.

Interesting.

[Lancasterclaret]

I've come to a decision.

I'm going to ignore last years referendum, just like every leaver is ignoring last weeks election.

Its so much simpler when you just pretend what you don't want to hear doesn't exist.

[Paul Waine]

Perhaps I should have also added an acknowledgement that you are basically correct. Prices have always risen over the centuries, but it is the rate at which they rise that we should take into account, so if prices have been rising at an average of 1% then suddenly rise by 3% and stay at that level for a while, then it is significant, more especially if wages are hardly rising or are in some cases falling.

Hi nil_d, we are used to prices rising and prices have risen either by small amounts or larger amounts for many periods. But, there are also periods where prices have fallen. Constantly rising prices is not inevitable.

It is preferable for inflation to be under control. The UK has set a target for the Bank of England to manage interest rates so that inflation is maintained around 2%. (This is not easy or a precise science). High inflation will always damage economic growth and will harm the population. Negative inflation, when prices are falling, may be the result of weak economic conditions if it is the result of low demand. Though it may also be the result of technical progress or other market changes. Low cost airlines are an example of new competitors entering the travel market with a new business model. None of us would claim that the falling airfares is a bad thing.

[lovebeingaclaret]

**** it, I say we go back in.

Good idea for when Merkel has cherry picked the immigrants she wants to keep at least she'll have somewhere to place the ones she didn't.

[JohnMcGreal]

We're absolutely all over the gaff as a nation right now, and we still have no idea how we want to leave the EU, nearly 12 months on from voting for it and 3 months on from triggering Article 50.

The longer this shambles continues, the more likely it will be that we'll remain in the EU.

At this rate, we don't even seem to be able to leave because of our own incompetence. Not exactly a good sign if we're to 'stand on our own two feet' in the world in the near future.

[CrosspoolClarets]

I've come to a decision.

I'm going to ignore last years referendum, just like every leaver is ignoring last weeks election.

Its so much simpler when you just pretend what you don't want to hear doesn't exist.

I know that the analysis on the election will take a month or two (according to the true leader of our country, Prof John Curtis). Only then will we know for sure. If it turns out May did lose her majority due to soft Brexit desires, fair enough (though people change their minds as often as the wind changes direction).

My gut feel though is that IF UKIP vote collapsed by around 10% of the electorate, and IF half of those UKIP voters switched to Labour, what is more likely:
1) switching because they are old Labour voters who hate austerity and liked Corbyn's domestic policies?
2) switching because they hate hard Brexit so much they couldn't bring themself to vote Tory?

These are previous voters of the U.K. Independence Party - the clue is in the name.

So, if the roles were flipped and Tories were the soft Brexit party due to May being a Remainer, and Labour the hard Brexit party due to Corbyn being euro sceptic, do we expect those 5% to have voted Tory, which would have given May a big majority with nearly 50% of the vote and Corbyn just over 35%?

No, I think not. They got their referendum, won it, and now are back where they came from. The only issue of relevance is that Corbyn got folk out to vote. There were many messages from the electorate, but a soft Brexit wasn't one of them. I still hope for a full Brexit with continued high migration, which in my judgement is in most of our best interests.

[nil_desperandum]

There were many messages from the electorate, but a soft Brexit wasn't one of them. I still hope for a full Brexit with continued high migration, which in my judgement is in most of our best interests.

Who knows for certain?, but I think it's v difficult to argue with the point that there is most likely a significant majority who would prefer a softer brexit than a hard one.
This is pretty much based on arithmetic.
52 to 48 is a very slender majority, and since people voted for brexit for all sorts of reasons we can deduce that at least 2% of the voters voted leave in the anticipation of a soft landing.
I would imagine that currently the percentage of leave voters favoring a so-called "soft brexit", would be significantly greater than that 2 % gap, and then add on to this the number of people who have joined the electoral roll since brexit, who (according to all surveys), would vote overwhelmingly to remain in the EU.
I don't think anyone can argue that the entire 52% voted for the "hard brexit" model, though I agree it is impossible to quantify. The only way would be to have another vote, which no one wants at present.

[Caballo]

I know that the analysis on the election will take a month or two (according to the true leader of our country, Prof John Curtis). Only then will we know for sure. If it turns out May did lose her majority due to soft Brexit desires, fair enough (though people change their minds as often as the wind changes direction).

My gut feel though is that IF UKIP vote collapsed by around 10% of the electorate, and IF half of those UKIP voters switched to Labour, what is more likely:
1) switching because they are old Labour voters who hate austerity and liked Corbyn's domestic policies?
2) switching because they hate hard Brexit so much they couldn't bring themself to vote Tory?

.

3) switching because Labour said in their manifesto that Brexit was still on if they won, allowing them to choose 1)

[CrosspoolClarets]

Who knows for certain?, but I think it's v difficult to argue with the point that there is most likely a significant majority who would prefer a softer brexit than a hard one.
This is pretty much based on arithmetic.
52 to 48 is a very slender majority, and since people voted for brexit for all sorts of reasons we can deduce that at least 2% of the voters voted leave in the anticipation of a soft landing.
I would imagine that currently the percentage of leave voters favoring a so-called "soft brexit", would be significantly greater than that 2 % gap, and then add on to this the number of people who have joined the electoral roll since brexit, who (according to all surveys), would vote overwhelmingly to remain in the EU.
I don't think anyone can argue that the entire 52% voted for the "hard brexit" model, though I agree it is impossible to quantify. The only way would be to have another vote, which no one wants at present.

I generally agree with that, although I remain unclear as to what a hard or soft Brexit now means. The ability to form free trade deals with other countries would be hard, but keeping EU migration high would be soft (both my preferences). We could conceivably do both, just probably not from within the customs union.

I'd also say that many remain voters now want a "full" Brexit, they know that being stuck in limbo is bad economically. So that shifts the 52/48 argument a bit, but again, they wouldn't call their view hard, just full.

We'll end up with something between what most people view as hard or soft, and politicians will all claim they have won.

[Lancasterclaret]

End of the day, the political parties will work out what is more likely to keep them in power.

Thats very unlikely to be a hard brexit, then unlikely to be a decision to remain in the EU, then more likely to be a soft brexit, to something known as "we ****** up, but the population is split, and we know this won't work for all, but it might just work for most brexit".

I need a suitable acroynm for that, so I'm going for "wasitworthitexit"

[nil_desperandum]

We'll end up with something between what most people view as hard or soft, and politicians will all claim they have won.

That's what generally happens, but the only problem is that the EU has been a toxic topic within the Tory party for decades, and it's hard to imagine the likes of Bill Cash claiming a victory, and of course Farage wouldn't accept it. This is what has been so ironic about the likes of IDS, Redwood, Cash and Farage condemning those who have questioned and challenged the referendum result. They will never give up on this, and if the Tory party is to manage to reach some form of consensus on a soft brexit, it will have to be without them.
(Before someone points out that the Labour party have also been divided on the issue over the years, yes they have, but it's not been such a toxic topic for them and has been well down their list of priorities for a number of years.)

[Pstotto]

Here's what I say: Everyone else has screwed the election, so I might as well join in.

Election Special.jpg (167.2 KiB) Viewed 2488 times

[Woodleyclaret]

Why when we all voted to leave.
It's like Rovers fans demanding a recount on their points tally for last season.
Out means out we need to get on with it and stop stalling

[Lancasterclaret]

Only if you woke up from a coma this week, or are claretandy or Nigel Farage I think.

I'd complain about democracy if I was you, its what Brexiteers are doing on twitter. My Irony filter crashed some time ago due to that sadly.

[nil_desperandum]

Why when we all voted to leave.
It's like Rovers fans demanding a recount on their points tally for last season.
Out means out we need to get on with it and stop stalling

It's not really a day for political debate, but it should be pointed out that we didn't all vote to leave. In fact it was very close in percentage terms.
And secondly, it's quite difficult to get on with it, when the party in "power" really don't know what they are trying to achieve, have pretty much lost their authority and direction, and have no vision for the future. Following today's horrific incident, I think it's inevitable that there will have to be another pause.
The first one was caused by calling an unnecessary Gen Election - which has raised more questions than it resolved, and now we've got further uncertainty because of talks with the DUP.
As a result of the tragic fire, it now looks as though the Queen's Speech will have to be delayed again, and Brexit talks might have to be put on hold. We're in a bit of a mess tbh, and a bit of a pause for reflection and to get the right team together is probably the best - indeed only - option.
The EU team have been ready and waiting to open talks for months, it would be crazy for us to just drift into negotiations without knowing exactly what we are trying to achieve, and having cross party support for it.

[Mala591]

Very useful review of the EU single market, customs union etc

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36083664" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I think just being a member of the customs union might be the best brexit option.

[Devils_Advocate]

I have heard from official sources that behind the scenes talks are happening with some key Conservative MPs about the possibility of cancelling Brexit and remaining in the EU

Its along way from being a done deal but watch this space

[Imploding Turtle]

.

This wasn't rhetorical. Please explain "your" thinking.
http://www.uptheclarets.com/messageboar ... 54#p425897" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Imploding Turtle]

I have heard from official sources that behind the scenes talks are happening with some key Conservative MPs about the possibility of cancelling Brexit and remaining in the EU

Its along way from being a done deal but watch this space

You're almost certainly talking ****.

[Quicknick]

German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble said today that if Britain changed its mind on Brexit, the door would be open for it to remain in the EU.

On that, President Macron says: "The door is always open of course. No negotiation of Brexit has been finalised."

He says as things stand, the British people have decided they want to leave, but "there's still the possibility of reopening" the issue if that changes.

And with that, the press conference ends and the two leaders head off to the Stade de France for the football friendly.
BBC


Referendum anyone?

Yes. The result would be an overwhelming 'remain'.

[FulledgeClaret]

Nothing written in stone, but I think that there's a general understanding that if at some point during negotiations we determined that we no longer wanted to leave, we could just continue as we are. Nothing has changed since the referendum, and the other EU leaders would know that we wouldn't negotiate on the Euro.

Looks like it may not be as you were on the same terms. talk of new terms that would include loss of the rebate and possibly taking the euro amongst others. changing our mind could be more damaging than leaving with no deal.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 90886.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[dsr]

I have heard from official sources that behind the scenes talks are happening with some key Conservative MPs about the possibility of cancelling Brexit and remaining in the EU

Its along way from being a done deal but watch this space

Which official sources? And are all the MPs called Kenneth Clark?