Comments by "Nigel Johnson" (@nigeljohnson9820) on "EU reacts to the rejection of May's deal | #TheCube" video.

The UK government has no mandate from the UK people to withdraw it's article 50 application. Any suggestion from the EU that the UK government should ignore the referendum result would be deeply damaging to the EU's democratic credentials. It would make a mockery of the EU parliamentary elections as the EU would be seen as a completely undemocratic organisation. It would be equivalent to demanding that the UK turn into a dictatorship.
10
He may want that to happen, but the MPs do not have a mandate from the UK people to stop a no deal brexit. If the MPs attempt to withdraw the article 50 application without a second referendum mandate, they would be turning the UK into a dictatorship. That alone would make the UK ineligible to be a member of the EU.
3
@rsrs8632 wrong, the referendum supercedes the election vote. The referendum was a single issue vote, where every vote counts. This can certainly not be said about a general election, where many votes had no effect and some candidates were elected with a smaller margin that that of the referendum. Not only that, parliament has previously voted the brexit decision into law, setting the leave date. Both parties had manifestos that recognised the brexit result. MPs would be lying to the people if they now fail to support brexit. Only a second referendum would give parliament the mandate to revoke the article 50 application. That is dmocracy you don't have to like it, it is just the way it is.
3
If the UK some how gets a second referendum, the question must include the option for a no deal brexit. There is no point in the referendum offering Mrs May's deal in place of the no deal option, since parliament has already rejected it as a bad deal. What the referendum cannot offer is the choice between remaining and what has been shown to be a bad deal, that would be clear gerrymandering to fix the referendum result in favour of remain. Essentially a second referendum must give the same choice as last time. It should be noted that a second referendum opens the door to a third at a later date and given the EU's latest "good idea" that of allowing majority voting on EU taxation, the UK population might want a third referendum, if the second gives a vote to remain.
3
@rsrs8632 wrong again, parliament overwhelming voted to implement the result of the referendum. It would need to withdraw that vote, effectively showing that the parliament no longer respects democracy. If nothing else the MP will suffer in the next election.
2
@PatricioVUnter you are trying to spin the meaning of democracy to suit your own agenda. A majority vote by the people in a single issue referendum can only be interpreted as democracy in action. It is certainly more democratic to what normally passes as democracy in the UK, where the first past the post, two party system disenfranchising most voters and rigs the system. I assume that you also support the unelected house of lords which is a relic of the feudal system.
2
SMEGY 89 wrong, the ECJ has ruled that until the brexit date, the UK has the right to unilaterally withdraw the article 50 application as if it never happened. To extend the article 50 deadline requires the agreement of all 27 remaining EU members.
2
@rsrs8632 so you accept that MPs are corrupt and democracy in the UK is an illusion. If the UK follows the example of other frustrated and disenfranchised electorates in Europe, the UK will vote for an extreme right wing party. Expect a resurgence in the fortunes of UKIP or some new right wing party. The chaos you mention is manufacture by the political elite. Parliament did not vote down brexit, it voted down the backstop which was clearly a trap to keep the UK in the customs union which is not brexit.
1
@rsrs8632 if you had bother to listen to the parliamentary debate, you will know that the bill would have most likely passed if it were not for the backstop, so they voted against the backstop. As for what is going on in parliament now, it may be politics but it is not democracy, but it is corruption. I have just watched the EU parliamentary debate that resulted from yesterday's vote in the UK. What is clear, is they still do not understand why the referendum resulted in brexit. They were even patting Barnier on the back saying what a good job he had done. Either the EU wanted the deal to be rejected or they like to reward failure. The EU position is verging on madness, since they want a change in the result, but without and changes in what generated the current position. The EU has been consistently wrong in estimating the growth of opposition to it. UKIP was a spent political force, but if the UK fail to achieve brexit, it, or a right wing equivalent, will emerge with significant support. That is what is happening in other EU member states. It is reminiscent of trying to close an overfilled suit case, press down one corner and another pops open.
1
@rsrs8632 I am inclined to agree with this analysis. But remainers must understand that the UK simply cannot afford to remain inside the EU,both financially and politically. The latter because, nothing appears to be able to derail the EU from its federal super state project. The former because the UK is on a downward path to debt and bankruptcy. Only, leaving will allow the UK the freedom to reform its economy. In fact leaving will force such a reform. Any argument that this could have been done within the EU is clearly nonsense, since we have had forty plus years to do so.
1
@rsrs8632 the UK economy must become more self sufficient, reducing its dependence on imports. It must regain control of its utilities, infrastructure, and critical industries, including agriculture and fisheries. The must own the means of production to reduce the amount of wealth it is leaking overseas. A no deal brexit will place tariffs on imports making local production more attractive, bring industrial supply chains back to the UK. The EU must expect a considerable reduction in exports to the UK.
1