← Back to context

Comment by anonymous908213

13 hours ago

> Bilaterals is a treaty, not a diktat.

The "diktat" is the thing you just voted on which says "we will not negotiate". There is always room for negotiation until you vote for a law that says "no negotiations, we are now legally mandated to do X".

> 2 years provides time for another referendum.

Voting for a no-negotiations amendment to your constitution as a negotiation tactic with the idea that you will later pass another constitutional amendment in a small window of time to revoke it is some kind of 4D checkers strategising that I suppose I am not enlightened enough to grasp.

> There is always room for negotiation until you vote for a law that says "no negotiations, we are now legally mandated to do X”

Which isn’t a thing for a sovereign. Past sovereigns can’t bind future ones. Laws can always be repealed.

> some kind of 4D checkers strategising that I suppose I am not enlightened enough to grasp

Neither was I. Hence my vote against. Doesn’t mean the core concept is flawed, or that we have to accept EU treaties as perpetual because my ancestors voted for it to be that way.