70% Of UK Supports Pushing Ahead With Brexit Despite Election Upset

Tyler Durden's picture

Despite Prime Minister Theresa May’s embarrassing performance earlier this month in a snap election that cost her Conservative party its parliamentary 'majority', more than 70% of Britons still believe the government should push ahead with Brexit – even after the election sparked exclamations from the left for a second referendum, according to the latest YouGov poll.

The poll showed that the country is split down the middle over whether leaving the EU was the right or wrong decision, but even among voters who didn’t support the “leave” campaign, there’s an acknowledgement that the people have spoken, and now the government must obey their wishes.

The poll also suggested that there’s still widespread support for May’s Brexit goals, which she outlined in January, when the prime minister emphasized a “free break” with the EU, suggesting that the UK wouldn’t swap control of immigration for continued unfettered access to the country’s single markets. However, the poll suggests the public is less confident in Theresa May’s ability to deliver on them.

 

When it comes to how Britain should proceed, the public has a plurality of opinions, as YouGov explains:

So, what should happen next? Unsurprisingly, the public is divided in several directions.

 

Over four in ten (43%) think that Theresa May should continue with Brexit on her original terms following the general election. Yet this group is narrowly outnumbered by those who would prefer a change in direction of some sort – be it abandoning Brexit completely (7%), having a second referendum (17%), or changing the UK’s negotiation terms to look for a "softer" Brexit (23%). Together, those seeking a different path of one kind or another account for 47%.

 

Similarly, there is a majority who pick either a soft Brexit (19%) or remaining in the EU (35%) as their ideal outcome (a total of 54%). This is comfortably higher than the 45% that prefer only a limited trade deal (22%) or no deal at all (23%).

 

However, support for a hard Brexit among members of May’s conservative party remains high at 66% (37% would ideally like only a limited trade deal, 29% would prefer no deal at all). This means that, even if there’s stronger support for a soft Brexit among the broader population and from the prime minister herself, May might be forced to pursue the hard Brexit line because it's the only politically feasible option. The Europeans, for their part, seem to have unified in opposition, seeming to suggest that a hard Brexit is the only option they will accept.

Here's a summary of the poll results:

As expected the timeline for Brexit negotiations is going ahead, with the British government confirming the first round of talks will begin on June 19th...

The first round of talks that will see Britain leave the European Union will start on Monday June 19, officials have confirmed.

 

Following discussions in Brussels today, both sides agreed that the formal negotiations under the Article 50 process can now start.

 

In a joint statement issued today, officials said: “Michel Barnier, the European Commission’s Chief Negotiator and David Davis, Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, agreed today to launch Article 50 negotiations on Monday June 19.”

And now the fun really begins...

 

As Reuters' Alastair Macdonald reported last week, Theresa May's insistence on starting Brexit negotiations next Monday is questioned by some Britons who think the prime minister's calamitous election setback means she should now seek to stay in the EU single market. However, as the polls above make clear, in the year since Britain voted to leave the European Union, the other 27 EU states have hardened their common position and narrowed British options for avoiding a "hard Brexit". The following scenarios touch on what may happen now voters have dashed May's hopes for a bigger majority to negotiate and left her dependent on pro-Brexit Ulster Protestants and on political rivals reportedly eyeing their moment to oust her.

1. HARD, SMOOTH BREXIT

May, a former supporter of EU membership, filed for divorce in March, meaning Britain would leave the single market and customs union and end EU court oversight, EU budget payments and free migration from the EU to Britain.

 

After a transition period, May wants an EU-UK free trade pact.

 

Under Article 50 of the EU treaty, Britain will no longer be a member on March 30, 2019, whether or not the two sides agree a deal to avoid leaving businesses and citizens in a legal limbo.

 

The EU priority is "damage control" by limiting the economic disruption and saving the Union. That would curb discord and any further breakaways by showing Britain was no better off out.

 

EU Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier has instructions to seek a deal that preserves the rights of 3 million EU citizens in Britain, recovers money owed by London (possibly $65 billion) and limits any damage to Irish peace from a "hard" EU-UK land border.

 

If "significant progress" is made on that, EU leaders may then open talks on a transition to a free trade agreement.

 

In this ideal scenario for Brussels, the outline divorce is set by the end of this year, agreed in full by late 2018 and ratified by lawmakers by March 2019.

 

There would then be several years of transition to a new treaty, even deeper than a trade pact with Canada, plus close cooperation on security and science.

 

BUT...Brussels hoped May would win a big majority to help her sell compromises needed for this scenario. Some EU officials now doubt she can remain in power if she accepts too many European demands.

2. HARD BREXIT WITH NO DEAL

May has said "no deal is better than a bad deal".

 

BUT...EU leaders think she is bluffing because no deal would spell economic and legal chaos. Yet EU officials have grown increasingly worried that both sides may box themselves in, with little time left.

 

Before the election, May and her ministers said they would not pay the EU billions on leaving and want trade talks now. Barnier, meanwhile, cannot stray from his mandate without a new, unanimous agreement of the 27.

 

While neither side of the negotiations wants potentially chaotic limbo, a breakdown could leave both with a messy and unpopular last-minute fix.

3. NO BREXIT

A year ago, 48 percent of Britons voted to stay in the EU, including most lawmakers from the main parties, most Scots and most in Northern Ireland. Some still cling to the hope of the Brexit process being reversed.

 

BUT...That hope seems forlorn now that both big British parties now accept Brexit, as does Brussels.

 

  • First, Britain would need a new government which wants to stop it. Neither a Conservative party coup against May nor a left-wing coalition led by Jeremy Corbyn's Labour, possibly after a new election, seems likely to deliver that.
  • Second, it would have to overturn a British legal opinion that the request to leave under Article 50 cannot be revoked.
  • Third, it would need the EU to agree, most likely by unanimous vote of all 27. And it might mean taking time for another British referendum.

 

Formally, EU leaders insist they would rather Britain not leave. But the prevailing view in private is that the Union is safer without a big member that has always been lukewarm on the project and is now so divided as to be unreliable.

4. LATE BREXIT

Political chaos in Britain has prompted calls for more time to negotiate, possibly on different terms from those May has sought. Article 50 allows for an extension to the two-year deadline if the other states unanimously agree.

 

BUT...EU leaders will hesitate to open a divisive issue among them and want Britain out before European Parliament elections in May 2019. The two-year deadline is designed to weaken the leavers' hand.

5. ENGLISH BREXIT

Scotland's government wants a special deal to stay in the single market or, if not, to secede and stay in or rejoin the EU.

 

Ireland's EU commissioner has espoused the idea of keeping Northern Ireland in the EU customs union. May's unionist allies in the province also want to avoid a hard border.

 

BUT...On Scotland, May and the EU doubt a "differentiated deal" on trade and migration can work, while Spain, battling Catalan separatists, may block it. Electoral losses for the Scottish nationalists have also weakened their hand to threaten a new independence vote.

 

On Ireland, such a scenario appears hugely complicated without raising some form of trade barriers between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK. That would be anathema to the hardline Protestant DUP.

6. SOFT BREXIT

This could be the key battleground in the coming months.

 

Many Brexit opponents suggest that, if it goes ahead, Britain should at least stay in the single market for the sake of jobs and trade.

 

BUT...While EU leaders do not rule that out, they have set tough conditions similar to those imposed on Norway, which can access EU markets in return for cash contributions, taking EU migrants as well as refugees and observing rules overseen by EU courts.

 

Such terms are far from what Brexit supporters want and also rob Britain of its big say on EU policy.

 

And Europeans, as well as May, rule out "cherry picking" deals that give Britain access to certain EU markets, like banking. EU leaders say that would risk undermining the whole single market.

 

British proponents of soft Brexit say the EU, especially big exporters to Britain, could be persuaded. But the bloc seems for now committed to not breaking ranks. So talks on "soft Brexit" could be a waste of time.

 

In October, EU summit chair Donald Tusk said: "The only real alternative to a 'hard Brexit' is 'no Brexit'." Pushing soft Brexit over hard is seen increasing the risk of replacing a smooth Brexit with rough.

With 70% in favor, perhaps May has more of a mandate than many thought.

 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Bes's picture

can we fucking  stop putting people into boxes: dem, rep, right, left, labor, tory, whatever????

 

Umh's picture

No. While labels encourage sloppy thinking they also can accelerate learning. Labels are like having titles on books in that they give you a clue of what might be inside.

Ghost of Porky's picture

Give Ireland back to the Irish while yer at it.

land_of_the_few's picture

You might want to check out the Union of the Crowns in 1603.

First King of the joined kingdoms of England, Ireland and Scotland was James VI of Scotland, and it wasn't done by force of arms. He is the one the Jacobean era is named after, he is also responsible for the King James edition Bible, and was King during Shakespeare's time.

And this.

NORAID IRA- America’s Plastic Paddy’s

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/noraid-ira-americas-plastic-paddys-alan-m...

As both are from the Republic of Ireland, going to an ‘Irish’ pub appeared to be a good idea, but once inside, nether were prepared for the greeting they received from Irish-Americans living in Boston.

They recalled their experience, “When we went into this pub in Boston, as soon as we opened our mouths we were greeted by fake Irish accents. At first we thought they were being sarcastic before realizing they truly believed they were ‘Irish’.  After they established we were both Catholics from the Irish Republic they began praising the IRA, calling them freedom fighters and cursing the Brits. Their view of Ireland and the troubles were firmly placed in the distant past, the 1920s and earlier; they clearly knew nothing about Ireland, Britain or the Troubles in Northern Ireland… “

"During a visit to Boston the Archbishop of Dublin and Primate of Ireland, Diarmund Martin, publicly said, “Irish-American sentimentalism is incomprehensible, but it’s also dangerous…  It hasn’t just been about singing ‘Danny Boy’: in Ulster its meant death and destruction. “

The Archbishop then went on to say, “I have no feeling for Irish-American’s… I don’t understand it…American sentimentality for a country they don’t know, it’s not my dish” (Catholic Herald 19 April 2011)"

"Only Libya supplied more financial aid and more weapons and logistical support to the IRA than Irish Americans did. The IRA were responsible for the deaths of approximately 1,800 people. The dead included around 1,100 members of the British security forces, and about 630 civilians. But it was OK to collect money on the streets of Boston and New York for the funding of all this death and destruction as long as you knew the words and music to “Have you ever been across the sea to Ireland?” (Answer, in most cases, no) and “Danny Boy”."

wmbz's picture

Well 70% may want that, but as with all big gubmint, they don't give a shit what the serfs want.

Good luck with the exit UK.

JustPrintMoreDuh's picture

Correct.  There will be no BRExit ... not w/o a shitload of blood-letting.

peopledontwanttruth's picture

The voice of the voters in many countries must suffer from Laryngitis as apparently the elected officials do what they want anyway

Glyndwr will return's picture

Walk in. Shake hands. Sit down. Hand over a note. All it says is.. We leave today. No divorce bill. See you in court.

Expat's picture

That is predicated on the notion that the UK can afford to be shut off from the Continent.  LOL

equity_momo's picture

Since when does Brexit means being shut off from the Continent economically speaking?

Corporations run Europe as they run anywhere else in the West.   German exporters will not be shutting off the Worlds 6th largest economy. 

As an expat i guess youre just worried about being kicked out of whatever part of Spain youve retired to. Expats shouldnt even get a fucking vote.

Glyndwr will return's picture

Don't be daft. The EU sells more to us than we do to them. Do you think the banks and globalists are going to accept the loss of income from the serfs? Where have you ex patted to? ( moving myself )

Endgame Napoleon's picture

Just leave the EU, Theresa, trading with the USA, a bigger market anyway, assuming it, too, does not collapse due to the greed at the top and the bottom: the greed of America-last business owners in the 1% and the two high-earner couples in the top 20%, concentrating wealth from the good-paying jobs in fewer households and, at the bottom, the greed from those who like a rigged labor market, which favors those who can work for low pay due to the fact that their major monthly bills are paid by taxpayers for their sex and reproduction out of wedlock, on top of bonus payments at tax time for copulation/reproduction in the form of $3,337--$6,269 Child Tax Credits.

edotabin's picture

Lol....i think the greek finance minister tried that approach. We saw the results.

It's all a shit show.

Expat's picture

There is a rather significant difference betweent agreeing with Brexit and agreeing to obey the results of the referendum.  but, hey, don't let facts get in the way of a good headline.  Fake news much?

land_of_the_few's picture

Brexit won mostly because of ISIS et al bombing the Bataclan in Paris and so on. Yes, someone needed to stop Turkey et al shoving dodgy "refugee-terrorists" into Europe. So this was a method to try to stop them later at Calais. Plus many people were a bit fed up of Polish plumbers and fruit-pickers taking their jobs and places in line to get social housing.

But clearly the poll numbers have been much the same ever since the result was announced, here we see it, 46% don't agree with the principle of Brexit, but many of those would support the result on general principle of fair play, and the minority, 41% are for Brexit - mostly older, retired and from the SouthEast, mixture of working-class poor and the wealthy and not much in between.

Anyone young, doing some kind of EU-funded training or international science, or with ambitions to study or work or do business in Europe from UK, are angry as hell. Exporters to EU based in UK are looking more than a little shifty too.

The polled support percentages seem to have been that way ever since everyone found out about the faked Euro-contributions figures plastered on the side of Boris' campaign bus,  i.e. we will give X-millions per week to the NHS instead of to Europe. Besides which, Boris would never willingly give *anything* to the NHS, his party would be terribly angry with him if he did :D

 

Yen Cross's picture

 I'm 100% behind that 70%.

 Europe is a clusterfuck, same as it ever was<

yabs's picture

Fuck The Eu.

I'd label the commision as a terrorist organisation and stone it's members .cunts

Soul Glow's picture

Teresa May fucked up, but that shouldn't change the fact that the people voted to leave the EZ.

PrivetHedge's picture

She did, the question is however: was it deliberate.

Looking at her actions it's hard to say it wasn't.

edotabin's picture

Just another setup job to throw doubt into the whole process.

Shit show of gigantic proportions

CRM114's picture

It's easy to say it wasn't.

Look at her record as Home Secretary.

She's an incompetent, f#ckwit control freak.

Why on Earth people thought that would change when they meade her PM is beyond me.

Funn3r's picture

We are not in the EZ so I can't quite grasp why you thought we voted to leave it. Maybe you are one of the people who think the UK is being flooded by referees?

GreatUncle's picture

The impression I get is May called the snap election, with UKIP standing down all advised by Junkers (go see RT) to try and reomve BREXIT.

Don't care you see a globalist never quits so you survived one battle the last referendum and they will repeat over and over until they eventually win. Happened to the USA with the FED, you never wanted a central bank but they were never going to quit until it happened.

You want to stop this ... democracy / votign is a all bullshit.

You must kill all the globalists and you must never stop because as explained they will be back over and over until you are "all slaves"!

Get the drift?

UK constiution is no more all broken and with it all UK law meaningless as it is derived from that constitution.

The US is not far behind as they continually attempt to pull down you constitution all.

In the end one world order, the elite living like kings and all the rest slaves!

Sy Kloine Bee's picture

"The impression I get is May called the snap election, with UKIP standing down all advised by Junkers (go see RT) to try and reomve BREXIT."

This was also my first thought. The powers that be found a way to scuttle Brexit, and this is it.

PrivetHedge's picture

Yes, I suspect she got the result she wanted and expected to sabotage Brexit, I mean who would call an election and then refuse interviews, discussions and talk about irrelevant stuff like fox hunting? Answer: Someone wanting to lose.

Glyndwr will return's picture

Buy local. Use cash. Get out of debt. Stay out of debt. All debt. Never use multinational companies .

UpTo11's picture

All of the "Remain" scaremongering BS has been debunked.  Let them vote again, and let the EU see how little support they have.

Twee Surgeon's picture

If I remember right, the Netherlands and Ireland were forced to keep having Referendums on entering into the EU until they got the right answer.

One referendum is all that's needed and Brexit is the will of the people and the Law of the land. Out is out.

May was installed to drag her ass and screw it all up, she's performing wonderfully.

Cordeezy's picture

Oh, so the globalist propoganda didnt convince the masses that they were wrong to vote for Brexit

 

 

www.escapeamazon.com

 

ludwigvmises's picture

The UK is going to go down the toilet without the EU but that's what they asked for so let them get a taste of a nice lil' depression.

smacker's picture

"The UK is going to go down the toilet without the EU"

HA-HA. In your dreams friend. In your dreams.

Britain will rise to the occasion as it has done in centuries past and will carve out a new role for itself in the world.

But as a socialist troll, you find such things difficult to grasp {sigh}.

hooligan2009's picture

is that before or after the italian and spanish banks collapse AND the Poles, Hiungarians and Czechs tell the EU COmmission to go fuck themselves over immigrant quotas?

your appeasing, islamapologist, libtard socialist ideals have been smashed against the cliff of common sense and the real world.

THERE IS NO MONEY LEFT FOR YOU TO SPEND ON YOUR BANKRUPT SOCIAL ENGINEERING POLICIES.

PrivetHedge's picture

You forget that the UK pays them money, and they are their best customer too.

The unelected, unwanted, un asked for EU is crapping itself.

CRM114's picture

Yes, it is going down the toilet, but a little slower without the EU.

smacker's picture

"[...] Brussels hoped May would win a big majority to help her sell compromises needed for this scenario. Some EU officials now doubt she can remain in power if she accepts too many European demands."

This is true. Let's hope the EU-negotiating-crats and the EU27 understand that May's ability to compromise has narrowed since 8-June.

Britain is leaving the EU. Period. All that remains is whether we remain on good terms with the EU27 or not. It will affect working/trading relations for a long time and Britain doesn't forget.

Lebronn Jakens's picture

This will not end well. Will crash markets 

smacker's picture

Maybe that's what the markets need?

smacker's picture

Once Brexit negotiations get underway, it won't be long for the British team to know whether Brussels is negotiating in good faith or trying everything possible to make life difficult and to make Brexit as painful as possible to discourage other EU27 member states from quitting.

If the latter, May needs to threaten & then invoke the nuke option: Hard Brexit.

hooligan2009's picture

agreed, but i would prefer the expression "you can go and get fucked" to "hard brexit"

no point beating around the bush

smacker's picture

Totally agree.

May press conference: "We have worked hard to achieve a mutually beneficial Brexit but have come to the sad conclusion that Brussels is not negotiating in good faith. So our message to them now is "you can go and get fuckedThankyou and good night."

:-)

BritBob's picture

Fair to say that the majority of the people in Britain were happy to join an economic union with free trade, but not a political union. Who wants to be ruled by Brussels? And who wants uncontrolled immigration?

There is a trade imbalance in favour of the European Union so it is in the interest of the EU to make amicable arrangements with the United Kingdom. What's more, the UK can do its own trade deals on a one-to-one basis instead of having the EU to deal 27 member states before it makes a trade deal.

Hard or soft Brexit the road ahead might be a little bumpy especially when one country (or part of a country in Belgium re the Canada EU deal) can stall negotiations for so long. Spain could act in a similar fashion over Gibraltar and has the cheek to maintain its Gibraltar sovereignty claim. Claim?

Gibraltar - Some Relevant International Law: https://www.academia.edu/10575180/Gibraltar_-_Some_Relevant_Internationa...

So it could be a quick hasta luego !

 

brushhog's picture

Your right but even a free trade union will eventually turn into a political one. You're empowering a centralized authority, its going to use that power to influence political decisions through the back door and then eventually through the front.

brushhog's picture

Right, keep voting until the left gets the outcome it wants...then stop.

decentralisedscrutinizer's picture

 

Almost all the world’s economic and political problems revolve around the hegemony of a global corporate cartel, which is headquartered in the US because this is where their dominant military force resides. The US Constitution is therefore the “kingpin” of an all-inclusive global financial empire. These fictitious entities now own the USA and command its military infrastructure by virtue of the Federal Reserve Corporation, regulatory capture, MSM propaganda, and congressional lobbying.

 

The Founders had to fight a bloody Revolutionary War to win our right to incorporate as a nation – the USA. But then, for whatever reason, our Founders granted the greediest businessmen among them unrestricted corporate charters with enough potential capital & power to compete with the individual states, smaller sovereign nations, and eventually to buy out the USA itself. The only way The People can regain our sovereignty as a constitutional republic now is to severely curtail the privileges of any corporation doing business here. To remain sovereign we have to stop granting corporate charters to just any “suit” that comes along without fulfilling a defined social value in return. The "Divine Right Of Kings” should not apply to fictitious entities just because they are “Too Big To Fail”. We can't afford to privatize our Treasury to transnational banks anymore. Government must be held responsible only to the electorate, not fictitious entities; and banks must be held responsible to the government if we are ever to restore sanity, much less prosperity, to the world.

 

It was a loophole in our Constitution that allowed corporate charters to be so easily obtained that a swamp of corruption inevitably flooded our entire economic system. It is a swamp that can't be drained at this point because the Constitution doesn’t provide a drain. This 28th amendment is intended to install that drain so Congress can pull the plug ASAP. As a matter of political practicality we must rely on the Article 5 option to do this, for which the electorate will need overwhelming consensus beforehand. Seriously; an Article 5 Constitutional Convention is rapidly becoming our only sensible option.

 

This is what I think it will take to save the world; and nobody gets hurt: 28th Amendment

 

28th Amendment:

 

Corporations are not persons in any sense of the word and shall be granted only those rights and privileges that Congress deems necessary for the well-being of the People. Congress shall provide legislation defining the terms and conditions of corporate charters according to their purpose; which shall include, but are not limited to:

 

1, prohibitions against any corporation; a, owning another corporation; b, becoming economically indispensable or monopolistic; or c, otherwise distorting the general economy;

 

2, prohibitions against any form of interference in the affairs of; a, government, b, education, c, news media; or d, healthcare, and

 

3, provisions for; a, the auditing of standardized, current, and transparent account books; b, the establishment of state and municipal banking; and c, civil and criminal penalties to be suffered by corporate executives for violation of the terms of a corporate charter.

    

earleflorida's picture

political pundits are running the show today...

that is to say 'tptb' ie, propagandized msm...

leading all the sheeple in some various way to follow the light?

the light being their intoxicating 'newsspeak'!

Glyndwr will return's picture

Fair play to Jeremy Corbyn today at Grenfell Tower, London. The man did a great job and showed leadership and compassion in equal measure . Not sure I could have done better . Theresa May was an outright failure same place same day. Devoid of meaningfulness . No politics at play here in this comment. Just good to see a leader with humanity . Not many about.

CRM114's picture

May I remind you that Rotherham has a Labour council?

And that every f#cking other city where muslims rape* white girls en masse has Labour councils.

He is not a leader. He is the head salesman for a bunch of evil, corrupt authoritarians.

 

Not that any other politicians are much better...

 

*Note use of present tense, not past.

gunbuster363's picture

The Brits are too selfish for their long term benefit. They have denied a PM who has been pushing Brexit but they still want a Brexit. They chose a leftist who gave false promises.

Good luck United Kingdom.