Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

[RingoMcCartney]

Boris to meet the queen tonight.

Resignation? Stand down as PM forcing the Rabble Alliance to pick a PM and let them go to Brussels for an extension. After all, it's their, mandate-free, idea!

Or , one theory is suggesting that, given that the gina Miller non case has been thrown out, he may bring prorogation forward and scupper Monday's parliament. That's why Wednesday's lord's planned filibuster had its plug pulled prematurely. Mind you, that could also apply to the resignation theory.

Apparently, he's cut short his timetable in Scotland and has back down London a day earlier than originally planned.

[Mala591]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-49600646" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Varadkar outlines the Irish border arrangements if no-deal exit happens on 31st October.

[Stalbansclaret]

How can people be so hot to trot for something the vast majority, possibly all, of them can’t possibly fully know the implications of ie Breaking off our trade and legal relationship with the EU ? I’m a remainer but can maybe understand a desire to leave with a clear deal and understanding in place but , other than some blind jingoistic fanaticism, I just can’t get my head round the No Deal mindset.
To say nothing of my dismay that anyone could think Boris Johnson a suitable PM (and no, neither is Jeremy Corbyn imo but he never will be).
A 52:48 referendum result says a “soft Brexit” is probably the way forward. Sadly Boris wants it hard (but can’t get an election)

[HartleyClaret]

Ringo, some facts about the 2016 referendum or “People’s Vote” as you like to call it.
The people/electorate/voters numbered 46,500,001. Is 17,400,000 a majority? I’ll help you there - 50% would be 23,250,000 (and a half) if you wish to be pedantic. Please stop calling it the will of the people, it’s the will of 72% of the people.
Before you come back with your usual, rather childish, in my opinion, reply


“We won, you lost, get over it.”

(How many lines do I need to miss?)

It’s not your fault, many educated commentators say this. In fact I believe Claire Fox said it today on Politics live.

Another aspect of why people voted to leave i don’t understand is the one of “taking back control of our borders” and then saying “we won’t be constructing a border in Ireland”. Is this not just a teeny weeny bit contradictory? Or do I just go back to Ringoland and say



“We won, you lost, get over it.”


And another thing while I’m here, and this is for those of you who have read the Belfast Agreement, is it possible to take Northern Ireland out of the EU and the ECJ without the consent of the people? Remember, the people born in Northern Ireland have dual nationality - Irish (and therefore by the terms of the Belfast Agreement members of the EU) and British. I see the two as totally incompatible and if you try to break the Belfast Agreement either way (Irish out of the EU; British [DUP] out of the UK) then sit back and watch the sh1t hit the fan! Sad (and worrying) times ahead.

[aggi]

There's no doubt what we voted for. We voted to leave the EU, under the terms of leaving then on offer via Article 50. which means that the two sides had 2 years to negotiate the deal, and if they can't find one, we leave without a deal. Those are the specific rules on which we voted, and we voted out.

I wouldn't disagree that's technically what people voted for.

I'd disagree that this is what all leave voters thought they were voting for. All the talk was of a deal (generally a better deal than the one we had), with plenty of talk of things like Norway. Not "we will negotiate for two years and if we fail to make a deal we'll crash out".

As such, particularly given the narrow margin of victory in the referendum, whilst it's perfectly reasonable to use that as justification for trying to leave the EU with no deal it should also come as no surprise when it's contested (and most likely defeated).

On a more general note, it's amazing how far the window has shifted (and particularly how the media and politicians have managed to shift it without people noticing) where a no-deal Brexit is viewed as reasonable and things such as a Norway deal are now not even classed as leaving the EU. That's a massive step from three and a half years ago.

[aggi]

Also, the standard of political discourse from our politicians may have hit a new low:

https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/11 ... 7423036416" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[android]

Oh great another parody account. Not you aggi.

[martin_p]

There's no doubt what we voted for. We voted to leave the EU, under the terms of leaving then on offer via Article 50. which means that the two sides had 2 years to negotiate the deal, and if they can't find one, we leave without a deal. Those are the specific rules on which we voted, and we voted out.

The specific ‘rules’ also include the facility for requesting an extension to the two year period. Or are you picking and choosing the rules that you voted on like you pick and choose the flavour of Leave you voted on despite the ballot paper just saying ‘Leave’?

[Falcon]

Also, the standard of political discourse from our politicians may have hit a new low:

https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/11 ... 7423036416" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I think that's quite funny tbh

[aggi]

I think that's quite funny tbh

It's not even fried chicken.

[Falcon]

It's not even fried chicken.

It's no Dixys

[Lancasterclaret]

Interesting idea floated by PM Foster of the Telegraph that might fly

https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/11 ... 6974743557" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[claret_in_exile]

Interesting idea floated by PM Foster of the Telegraph that might fly

https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/11 ... 6974743557" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I don't see the DUP agreeing to that, to be honest. I think they would raise holy hell (but when don't they?)

Stranger things have happened, though. Just this week alone!

[Lancasterclaret]

I don't see the DUP agreeing to that, to be honest. I think they would raise holy hell (but when don't they?)

Stranger things have happened, though. Just this week alone!

Point is that it wouldn't matter if enough opposition MPs voted for it, which is a possibility.

[RingoMcCartney]

Ringo, some facts about the 2016 referendum or “People’s Vote” as you like to call it.
The people/electorate/voters numbered 46,500,001. Is 17,400,000 a majority? I’ll help you there - 50% would be 23,250,000 (and a half) if you wish to be pedantic. Please stop calling it the will of the people, it’s the will of 72% of the people.
Before you come back with your usual, rather childish, in my opinion, reply


“We won, you lost, get over it.”

(How many lines do I need to miss?)

It’s not your fault, many educated commentators say this. In fact I believe Claire Fox said it today on Politics live.

Another aspect of why people voted to leave i don’t understand is the one of “taking back control of our borders” and then saying “we won’t be constructing a border in Ireland”. Is this not just a teeny weeny bit contradictory? Or do I just go back to Ringoland and say



“We won, you lost, get over it.”


And another thing while I’m here, and this is for those of you who have read the Belfast Agreement, is it possible to take Northern Ireland out of the EU and the ECJ without the consent of the people? Remember, the people born in Northern Ireland have dual nationality - Irish (and therefore by the terms of the Belfast Agreement members of the EU) and British. I see the two as totally incompatible and if you try to break the Belfast Agreement either way (Irish out of the EU; British [DUP] out of the UK) then sit back and watch the sh1t hit the fan! Sad (and worrying) times ahead.

1, I dont say, "we won, you lost, get over it."

I say, democracy means sometimes you lose. For democracy to survive you have to have the losers consent.

2, I call it the 2016 Peoples Vote because those pushing for a 2nd referendum, (before the 1st has even been implemented , wheres the democracy in that?) Call a 2nd referendum The Peoples Vote, some how implying the EU referendum of 2016 was only open to cats and dogs or something!

3, The tired old arguement that you're pedalling about the total number of eligible voters has been done to death on here. Following a general election the party with the most votes gets to form a government. Nobody in there right mind turns round and says "you didn't get the votes of all those who were eligible to vote but didn't, so you're percentage is actually lower than you claim" .

Stop whining on about the result after the event. If it really irks you to be called a sore loser, then stop bleating on and sounding like one.


Have a great weekend.

[elwaclaret]

PostTue Sep 03, 2019 11:46 am







BBC Question Time Tuesday Sep 03 approx 11.00 pm

Fiona Bruce , to Emily Thornbury,

"So let me get this right, Emily. Your stance on brexit is this. You plan to go to Brussels, to negotiate a deal?"

"Then you'll hold a 2nd referendum."

"And in that referendum, you'll campaign against you're own deal!!!!!?????"

Mystic McCartney strikes again!!

That was quite frankly awful. Even when FB pulled her up she did not understand just how ridiculous the policy was. Thought many times she is far far more dim witted than she seems to think... she does it time and again...

THAT is what we want to govern? Thick as pig dooda

[If it be your will]

This is the first of a thousand similar interviews Labour will be faced with over the next 6 weeks:

https://twitter.com/PaulEmbery/status/1 ... 5368289283" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Dear God. How has Labour been reduced to this? We were superb in 2017.

Well, twice in 2 days.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politi ... against-it" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(Shaking head in despairing disbelief) What on earth are they doing allowing this nonsense to carry on? Surely they can see how laughable this strategy is? Dear oh dear, Labour.

[TheFamilyCat]

Well, twice in 2 days.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politi ... against-it" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(Shaking head in despairing disbelief) What on earth are they doing allowing this nonsense to carry on? Surely they can see how laughable this strategy is? Dear oh dear, Labour.

Hang on. Which part of negotiating a deal, then putting that deal to the a public vote (along with the other options available) is a bad idea?

It’s just what a lot of sensible people said should have been the basis of the referendum.

[If it be your will]

That was quite frankly awful. Even when FB pulled her up she did not understand just how ridiculous the policy was. Thought many times she is far far more dim witted than she seems to think... she does it time and again...

THAT is what we want to govern? Thick as pig dooda

Thornberry's stupidity is not the problem on this occasion - it's the underlying strategy. Like her or not, she's actually quite a skilled politician, and the fact she was made to look ridiculous highlights just how dire the policy is.

(Thornberry is directly responsible for Labour's nonsense strategy, though. On the night of the Euro election she broke ranks with Corbyn live on the BBC, and Corbyn failed to chuck her out of the Shadow cabinet. And now we see the result - this utterly woeful policy.)

[If it be your will]

Hang on. Which part of negotiating a deal, then putting that deal to the a public vote (along with the other options available) is a bad idea?

It’s just what a lot of sensible people said should have been the basis of the referendum.

You've missed out the "And then campaign against our own negotiated deal" part. Never in my life have I ever known a politician - or anyone for that matter - enter a negotiation having publicly said they will campaign to reject whatever they manage to negotiate.

Maybe you're right, and it's some majestic curve-ball strategy to confuse the hell out of the EU. Looks utterly stupid in the meantime, mind.

[Spijed]

That was quite frankly awful. Even when FB pulled her up she did not understand just how ridiculous the policy was. Thought many times she is far far more dim witted than she seems to think... she does it time and again...

THAT is what we want to govern? Thick as pig dooda

And Boris was any better last night, standing in front of those police?

A Prime minister that looks shaken is unfit to govern, whatever the circumstance!

[TheFamilyCat]

You've missed out the "And then campaign against our own negotiated deal" part. Never in my life have I ever known a politician - or anyone for that matter - enter a negotiation having publicly said they will campaign to reject whatever they manage to negotiate.

Maybe you're right, and it's some majestic curve-ball strategy to confuse the hell out of the EU. Looks utterly stupid in the meantime, mind.

But I still see it from the other side. And I’m not a Labour supporter who will blindly defend them

If Cameron had done this (assuming the EU would agree a deal prior to the vote) and put “leave with this deal”, “leave with no deal” and “remain” on the paper then the result, whichever way it went, would have been implemented by now.

Cameron could still have credibly campaigned to remain.

[martin_p]

You've missed out the "And then campaign against our own negotiated deal" part. Never in my life have I ever known a politician - or anyone for that matter - enter a negotiation having publicly said they will campaign to reject whatever they manage to negotiate.

Maybe you're right, and it's some majestic curve-ball strategy to confuse the hell out of the EU. Looks utterly stupid in the meantime, mind.

But having a negotiated deal is the only way to make another referendum meaningful. IF Labour want to remain then they can only really achieve that through another referendum. If we have another referendum a straight Leave v a Remain vote could leave us where we are now. We need a negotiated deal then if Leave wins it can actually happen.

[JohnMcGreal]

You've missed out the "And then campaign against our own negotiated deal" part. Never in my life have I ever known a politician - or anyone for that matter - enter a negotiation having publicly said they will campaign to reject whatever they manage to negotiate.

Maybe you're right, and it's some majestic curve-ball strategy to confuse the hell out of the EU. Looks utterly stupid in the meantime, mind.

Thornberry is smart enough to understand that no matter who negotiates the exit deal, be it Conservative or Labour, and no matter what option they go for, be it a Norway type arrangement, a Canada plus arrangement, May's deal, no deal...they are all worse than full EU membership.

She's of the view, like an awful lot of people, that there is no arrangement better than full membership.

If she can be criticised for anything last night, it's probably for being a bit too honest.

[Cirrus_Minor]

But I still see it from the other side. And I’m not a Labour supporter who will blindly defend them

If Cameron had done this (assuming the EU would agree a deal prior to the vote) and put “leave with this deal”, “leave with no deal” and “remain” on the paper then the result, whichever way it went, would have been implemented by now.

Cameron could still have credibly campaigned to remain.

Before Cameron decided to include Brexit in his election , to avoid losing votes to Uk, most people couldn’t give two shiny sh1tes. Now people are turned into Brexit zombies and care more about it than anything else.

We have had one of the worst governments in history, proud to boast about austerity whilst the rich got ever richer. Nobody is shouting about food banks or homelessness or the appalling state of NHS or the welfare state crisis, but just the mindless zombies everywhere who constantly moan about “Brexit, Brexit, Brexit...” as if we have been visited by extraterrestrial body snatchers.

Maybe it’s just me but it’s like living in some strange parallel universe waiting for people to wake up.

[elwaclaret]

And Boris was any better last night, standing in front of those police?

A Prime minister that looks shaken is unfit to govern, whatever the circumstance!

No, it was poor... but at least his were random questions not policy... her department. And in fairness he wasn’t to know the poor buggers had been standing to attention for over an hour before he arrived.

So yes... on balance it played even worse. She blew Labour credibility in two sentences...and in uncomprehending stare.

Edit - it was her department and a core Labour policy.

[martin_p]

Boris to meet the queen tonight.

Resignation? Stand down as PM forcing the Rabble Alliance to pick a PM and let them go to Brussels for an extension. After all, it's their, mandate-free, idea!

Or , one theory is suggesting that, given that the gina Miller non case has been thrown out, he may bring prorogation forward and scupper Monday's parliament. That's why Wednesday's lord's planned filibuster had its plug pulled prematurely. Mind you, that could also apply to the resignation theory.

Apparently, he's cut short his timetable in Scotland and has back down London a day earlier than originally planned.

Well that was ********.

[Taffy on the wing]

How can people be so hot to trot for something the vast majority, possibly all, of them can’t possibly fully know the implications of ie Breaking off our trade and legal relationship with the EU ? I’m a remainer but can maybe understand a desire to leave with a clear deal and understanding in place but , other than some blind jingoistic fanaticism, I just can’t get my head round the No Deal mindset.
To say nothing of my dismay that anyone could think Boris Johnson a suitable PM (and no, neither is Jeremy Corbyn imo but he never will be).
A 52:48 referendum result says a “soft Brexit” is probably the way forward. Sadly Boris wants it hard (but can’t get an election)

What do you have against Corbyn?......serious question.

[martin_p]

Looks like Johnson’s negotiations are likely to create more problems than they solve, both at home and abroad.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... SApp_Other

He’s fashioning an ERG dream deal which hasn’t a chance of EU agreement or getting through a parliament where he’s 22 short of a majority.

[Stalbansclaret]

Primarily his lack of leadership and decisiveness on the whole Brexit issue over the past 3 years (and in the run up to the referendum itself come to think of it). At a time when we needed statesmanlike behaviour and sensible cooperative action we got two main party leaders who totally failed to deliver any kind of clear vision. To have reached the current total joke of a banana republic situation is their legacy.

[Imploding Turtle]

So it’s an army then, really some people just want an argument for the sake of it.

Of course I know it’s a multinational army.

No, it's an alliance. Not all alliances are armies just because they're comprised of armies.

If a dozen football clubs formed an alliance would the alliance be one big football club? Of course not. Saying that would be moronic. Just like saying an alliance between multiple armies makes that alliance one bigger army.

If you're going to live here then learn to speak the ******* language.

[ClaretAL]

Remain or leave to one side, our MP is not and has never delivered what her constituents want or what she promises. The fact that those who voted leave in a democratic vote won surely she should be delivering the same message back to parliament on her constituents behalf rather than voting against there will at every point? I genuinely feel she is just stealing a wage and no matter if you are leave or remain she should walk. I see other parts of the country have managed to oust their MP for exactly that, and there are obviously some very knowledgeable people on here when it comes to politics, so how does the process start to overturn and oust the MP?

[taio]

Remain or leave to one side, our MP is not and has never delivered what her constituents want or what she promises. The fact that those who voted leave in a democratic vote won surely she should be delivering the same message back to parliament on her constituents behalf rather than voting against there will at every point? I genuinely feel she is just stealing a wage and no matter if you are leave or remain she should walk. I see other parts of the country have managed to oust their MP for exactly that, and there are obviously some very knowledgeable people on here when it comes to politics, so how does the process start to overturn and oust the MP?

You're right. I can't think of anything positive she's done for the town. Useless MP.

[AndrewJB]

Remain or leave to one side, our MP is not and has never delivered what her constituents want or what she promises. The fact that those who voted leave in a democratic vote won surely she should be delivering the same message back to parliament on her constituents behalf rather than voting against there will at every point? I genuinely feel she is just stealing a wage and no matter if you are leave or remain she should walk. I see other parts of the country have managed to oust their MP for exactly that, and there are obviously some very knowledgeable people on here when it comes to politics, so how does the process start to overturn and oust the MP?

To just say “has not delivered” or “stealing a wage” has little concrete meaning, without some explanation. If you just have a hazy feeling that this is what she’s doing, then that might just be a result of the determined campaign against her (which is also fairly low on specifics) Here is her voting record. I don’t have any of her campaign literature, but maybe someone does? https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/25283 ... nley/votes" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; If she’s that bad it shouldn’t take you long to pick out how she’s voted against the interests of her constituents.

[ClaretAL]

To just say “has not delivered”r “stealing a wage” has little concrete meaning, without some explanation. If you just have a hazy feeling that this is what she’s doing, then that might just be a result of the determined campaign against her (which is also fairly low on specifics) Here is her voting record. I don’t have any of her campaign literature, but maybe someone does? https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/25283 ... nley/votes" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; If she’s that bad it shouldn’t take you long to pick out how she’s voted against the interests of her constituents.

Apart from General elections and local elections the only time her constituents have been able to giver her a direct order was through the Referendum which I believe was an overwhelming 67% majority. Whether you voted leave or remain or vote for Conservative or Labour, the fact that she has gone against the directive from her constituents i think at best gross misconduct when you read this http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders ... h13s7.html and i also think this article now proves the initial allegations correct https://www.burnleyexpress.net/news/pol ... -1-8751958 Especially the comments she made.....

“Personally I have never sought to overturn the outcome of the Referendum or ‘block Brexit’. My constituents voted out; I promised to respect their decision and I have kept that promise.

“I have never tried to delay the process and I never will; to do so would be in my view undemocratic"


So I presume there is a process that can be started that others have done up and down the country to get their MP out?

[aggi]

Interesting idea floated by PM Foster of the Telegraph that might fly

https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/11 ... 6974743557" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This is my tip for how we leave. Post general election though when the Tories have a big enough majority to ignore the DUP.

[Spijed]

Is there any way that Boris can actually survive and win a general election if he has to legally ask for an extension?

Or will there be another PM if the Tories are to win a majority?

[aggi]

Is there any way that Boris can actually survive and win a general election if he has to legally ask for an extension?

Or will there be another PM if the Tories are to win a majority?

It will be spun as I wanted to take you out but the traitorous politicians stopped me. Vote for me to give me the power to ignore them.

[Spijed]

It will be spun as I wanted to take you out but the traitorous politicians stopped me. Vote for me to give me the power to ignore them.

But hasn't he boxed himself him by saying he will not ask for an extension under any circumstance?

[elwaclaret]

Is there any way that Boris can actually survive and win a general election if he has to legally ask for an extension?

Or will there be another PM if the Tories are to win a majority?

I don’t just expect Boris to survive. He still has his party memberships support. A lot of people don’t blame Boris in the slightest. It is parliament that sizeable chunk of Tories / Trad Labour blame for the mess.

He will not only survive long term, he will thrive. If the party holds its nerve I expect a far far better showing than May achieved last time out.

Still expect a deal though... if lib lab reject that, then the boot very much lands on the other foot with a lot more support than he has already.

[Spijed]

I don’t just expect Boris to survive. He still has his party memberships support. A lot of people don’t blame Boris in the slightest. It is parliament that sizeable chunk of Tories / Trad Labour blame for the mess.

He will not only survive long term, he will thrive. If the party holds its nerve I expect a far far better showing than May achieved last time out.

Still expect a deal though... if lib lab reject that, then the boot very much lands on the other foot with a lot more support than he has already.

But to thrive he has also got to save the United Kingdom from breaking up and even you must admit he has no chance of that anymore.

[elwaclaret]

But to thrive he has also got to save the United Kingdom from breaking up and even you must admit he has no chance of that anymore.

Disagree, in so much that there is very little chance whoever comes in. Both Labour and Liberal already offered a referendum for Scottish support... so they have also made it a straight choice for Unionist Scots... The Conservative and Unionist party... or give your support to the independence referendum.... This in itself will serve the Torres in ways the Labour haven’t even seemingly legislated for....

While everyone is pointing and laughing at the tories, they are missing just how much traditional Labour ground they are giving up. Labour are in REAL trouble. If you are remain, you vote Liberal, if your Scottish union, you must vote Tory.... that is a lot of labour votes gone.

[RingoMcCartney]

Jul 12, 2018 10:22 am

The people already hold politicians, and politics as a whole, in very low esteem. This will kill the conservative party and people's trust in the whole political and democratic process for decades. Potentially permanently.

This treasonous act by May is bad for those who voted Leave and remain alike. Because it's a disaster for trust in the democratic process.

Sep 28, 2018 1:34 pm

the disconnect and mistrust of the political Establishment and the democratic process itself would be permanently and generational shattered for milllions.

Jan 25, 2019 11:14 am

Care to highlight what no brexit will have on people's trust in democracy being geographically, permanently and trans-generationall.

Tue Sep 03, 2019 2:19 pm

The same as you may do in the future when, an issue of national importance relies on the votes of millions, to stop something that you disagree with. But because those millions have already abandoned democracy, because, "theres no point voting , it doesn't change anything", you wont have been able to stop it.......trans-generationall.

Taken from the Guardian THIS WEEK in Wakefield while Boris Johnson was visiting-

Most people met his arrival with a weary sigh. “They promise you this and that and it never materialises. We’ve no reason to trust them,” said Clare Ramsden, 44, 

Outside Royal Amusements on the city’s main shopping strip, Kathleen Taylor, 73, said she was angry that politicians had “let us down” by not hauling the UK out of Europe already. She said she did not regret voting for Brexit but was fearful about the potential effect of leaving without a deal. “I’m for a deal, but it’s got to be a good deal,” she said. “If he doesn’t get a good deal and he doesn’t get a Brexit, I shall never vote again, and I’ve voted ever since I could.”

On his cosmetics stall, Mark Evans, 60, said politicians had worn people down to the point where “they could do something really drastic” and voters would just shrug. He said he could no longer trust any promises or pledges from MPs and that Johnson was “just after power, he doesn’t give a toss about the country”.

Enjoying an early evening pint in Moodies pub, George Theodopolis, 68, said he voted to remain in 2016 but now firmly believed Britain should leave the EU. “I voted to remain, but we’ve realised that nobody listens to us. What’s happened to parliament? Who would I vote for now? We are the laughing stock of Europe.”

[If it be your will]

But having a negotiated deal is the only way to make another referendum meaningful. IF Labour want to remain then they can only really achieve that through another referendum. If we have another referendum a straight Leave v a Remain vote could leave us where we are now. We need a negotiated deal then if Leave wins it can actually happen.

I agree. I could write an essay on the potential pitfalls of a second referendum, but one overwhelming problem is what what the options should be. For any referendum to have any meaning at all, it would have to include 'Remain' and 'No-deal'. That is surely a given considering, according to opinion polls, about 45% want the former and 35-40% want the latter. Anything not including both these options would be seen as a complete sham. So if you want more options, they have to be concrete - i.e. a fully negotiated deal, then use AV to determine the overall result. I understand all that.

But for Labour to put 'their deal' v 'remain' on a referendum, all the while admitting they never wanted 'their deal' anyway, would surely be the most ludicrous referendum in history.

[AndrewJB]

Apart from General elections and local elections the only time her constituents have been able to giver her a direct order was through the Referendum which I believe was an overwhelming 67% majority. Whether you voted leave or remain or vote for Conservative or Labour, the fact that she has gone against the directive from her constituents i think at best gross misconduct when you read this http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders ... h13s7.html and i also think this article now proves the initial allegations correct https://www.burnleyexpress.net/news/pol ... -1-8751958 Especially the comments she made.....

“Personally I have never sought to overturn the outcome of the Referendum or ‘block Brexit’. My constituents voted out; I promised to respect their decision and I have kept that promise.

“I have never tried to delay the process and I never will; to do so would be in my view undemocratic"


So I presume there is a process that can be started that others have done up and down the country to get their MP out?

She voted against the Tories’ Repeal Act - which gives ministers the right to amend laws without going through Parliament. That illustrates your Burke quote, that an MP owes their constituents their considered judgement. There’s no evidence there that she’s trying to stop Brexit, but instead trying to stop a crazy power grab being pushed through under cover of Brexit.

You say you’re opposed to the thwarting of the Democratic will of the people, but also looking for a way to overturn her as an MP - which is thwarting the Democratic will of the people.

[If it be your will]

Thornberry is smart enough to understand that no matter who negotiates the exit deal, be it Conservative or Labour, and no matter what option they go for, be it a Norway type arrangement, a Canada plus arrangement, May's deal, no deal...they are all worse than full EU membership.

She's of the view, like an awful lot of people, that there is no arrangement better than full membership.

If she can be criticised for anything last night, it's probably for being a bit too honest.

Saying "Labour want to remain in the EU" is a logical position to take. In that case they should have the policy of "We will revoke A50 without a referendum". I wouldn't agree with this policy, but I would at least accept its coherence. (It would also result in a heavy GE defeat, in my opinion.)

Saying "We'll negotiate a deal that we will ultimately campaign against, and put it to a referendum v 'Remain'" is so laughably stupid I can't believe it got this far.

I'd have to say the Lib Dem policy of "We'll hold a second referendum, but if 'Leave' wins again we'll remain anyway" is even more stupid than Labour's position, however.

[RingoMcCartney]

I agree. I could write an essay on the potential pitfalls of a second referendum, but one overwhelming problem is what what the options should be. For any referendum to have any meaning at all, it would have to include 'Remain' and 'No-deal'. That is surely a given considering, according to opinion polls, about 45% want the former and 35-40% want the latter. Anything not including both these options would be seen as a complete sham. So if you want more options, they have to be concrete - i.e. a fully negotiated deal, then use AV to determine the overall result. I understand all that.

But for Labour to put 'their deal' v 'remain' on a referendum, all the while admitting they never wanted 'their deal' anyway, would surely be the most ludicrous referendum in history.

Why should Leave voters have to have won TWO referenda to finally have their view implemented. Whereas Remsin voters would only have to win ONE?

It effectively means a leave vote is worth half that of a Remain.

Also, all those remoaners who want a 2nd People's Vote, and it's only Remoaners because remainers have actually accepted the 1st Peoples Vote, claim it would "finally bring this brexit crisis to an end."

Really? Why?

If Leave win again, why would we believe theyd accept the result of a 2nd referendum? They've NEVER accepted the result of the first! They've got previous on accepting results.

If Remain win then , as a brexiteer, I want the best of 3.....5.....7......

[If it be your will]

Why should Leave voters have to have won TWO referenda to finally have their view implemented. Whereas Remsin voters would only have to win ONE?

It effectively means a leave vote is worth half that of a Remain.

Also, all those remoaners who want a 2nd People's Vote, and it's only Remoaners because remainers have actually accepted the 1st Peoples Vote, claim it would "finally bring this brexit crisis to an end."

Really? Why?

If Leave win again, why would we believe theyd accept the result of a 2nd referendum? They've NEVER accepted the result of the first! They've got previous on accepting results.

If Remain win then , as a brexiteer, I want the best of 3.....5.....7......

I'll be brief, because I know how this will go...

As a leaver, in principle I would be in favour of a 2nd referendum. In practice I'm opposed to a second referendum. I have a whole list, of which the one you state is only one amongst a great many other problems associated with having another referendum.

[BleedingClaret]

Which is the greater democracy or the law

[BleedingClaret]

Reference BJ going to jail
I think MPs knowingly standing in elections on policies and promises that they knew at the time of the election they did not support and would not honour is more a cause for prosecution.
The law is supporting Parliament but Parliament is full of MPs who are there on fraudulence and who are failing to uphold the democratic vote of the people they are elected to represent.