David Davis resigns

[JohnMcGreal]

What I'm saying is that because of Remainers rocking the boat, common sense has gone out the window.

Common sense went out the window the day this country voted to hang itself.

[Lancasterclaret]

Bullshit. Utter bullshit. Total utter bullshit. Alarming levels of bullshit.

You and dsr and the rest would never accept anything but this shitshow.

[Imploding Turtle]

Because nobody wants it.

And yet it if it won then it is the only option that was able to get a majority of support.

[Erasmus]

I have not been strongly in favour of Remain or Leave, mainly because the consequences of either of them cannot be fully known. But over the last few days I have moved strongly in favour of Remain, primarily because of the way Trump has been behaving. He seems to be extremely antagonistic towards Europe and at the same time looking to move closer towards Putin and Russia. I also thought his criticism of Sadiq Khan showed that he is actually a racist bigot, something I hadn't really believed before or at least not to that extent.

So it looks like the US and Russia may be forming a sort of new power block based on values that are uncivilised and run directly against the culture fostered centuries ago by the Enlightenment. With this happening I think it is even more important that Britain sides with Europe which looks like it may become the last stronghold of enlightened values. And by that I mean equality, fraternity and individual liberty.

[Lancasterclaret]

Top post Erasmus

Almost at the level of the man himself

[Spiral]

I didn't mean to say that fate accompli was necessary, when we voted Leave. Common sense should have sorted the fine details out long ago.
What I'm saying is that because of Remainers rocking the boat, common sense has gone out the window. The EU isn't going to negotiate anything whilst there is in-fighting at Westminster. As long as they think that we will water down the Leave vote, they are hardly likely to offer us anything.
In order to break the dead log, they have to be made aware that we are leaving. With a deal or without a deal, we are leaving. Only then are they likely to come to the table and try and sort this mess out.

Some of that sounds quite vague and that vagueness is part of why a lot of people criticise Brexit - the idea of it - as being an intellectual blank canvas onto which people have abstracted their own ideas and views on the direction they'd like the country to take but without any sort of consensus or clarity as to how it would be achieved. The one thing that is concrete, absolutely certain, is that a majority of people expressed a desire on a certain day in 2016 - informed by the political climate of that day at the time of the referendum, and with the information available at that time - to disentangle from the EU. You call it Leave, BINO, hard Brexit, secession, disentanglement, whatever you want, but when push comes to shove a cardboard box manufacturer from the UK, for instance, needs to abide by EU regulation if it still wants to flog cardboard boxes in France after Brexit, so it's the duty of the govt and that of a sovereign parliament to make sure that Cardboard Box Co. doesn't become insolvent on account of the unattainable, illogical fantasies of its more dogmatic fringes.

I can understand how it could be quite tempting to hope for 'common sense' to be used or hope for the country to unite but that's a utter cop-out of an argument as to why it's all going to $hit. Dorothy clicking red shoes won't solve the legal complexities facing us down. Sorry to be blunt but you're burying your head in the sand, you're looking for scapegoats. You can't disentangle from thousands of treaties and agreements by hoping for common sense; the EU is a rules-based and law-based institution so if the country is to extricate itself from the EU we need a plan on the framework of what the rules and laws will be post Brexit. Hence the current deadlock on Brexit. Without a framework in place, and without proper preparation, we become a temporarily-isolationist state practically overnight. I've mentioned it before but we're heading for temporary conditions similar to military besiegement if we don't come to some sort of agreement on our relationship with the EU post Brexit. I don't think some Brexiteers have fully internalised this. This is whe the people need to be consulted again. The government needs to ask us, "did we deliver what we promised?"

Like what this guy wanted to do just over a decade ago:

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

[If it be your will]

.

[Lancasterclaret]

Ok

1. Remain 2. May's deal 3, No deal

Anyone who thinks a No deal will have anything other than a catastrophic effect isn't really bothered what happens to other people to be perfectly honest.

I don't mind a deal like Norway has, and as Norway isn't in the EU that would fulfish a binary "yes/no" referendum

[Devils_Advocate]

Ok

1. Remain 2. May's deal 3, No deal

Anyone who thinks a No deal will have anything other than a catastrophic effect isn't really bothered what happens to other people to be perfectly honest.

Same as above

[If it be your will]

.

[Spiral]

Remain > May's deal > no deal.

The demographics are glaringly obvious. A fudge deal keep the door open for rejoining as a full member when the demographics...er...resolve, whilst doing minimal short and medium term damage.*

*edit-assuming 'May's deal' actually is a deal, and not the 'soft-brexit-in-name-only' Chequers agreement which is probably going to be rejected by the EU, anyway.

[Lancasterclaret]

To be honest, the most likely scenario now is an extension of the article 50 deadline to allow a 2nd referendum.

Brexiteers can whinge till the cows come home, but the complete failure of any of them to have an alternative plan (because, as we now know, the dream that Brexiteers were sold is impossible) means we have to go back to the ballot box.

And this one, when a Brexiteer tells you that the Germans sell us their cars, everyone can rip them to shreds. A full and frank debate on this will destroy Brexit forever, which is why they are so keen on stopping anything that might get in the way of it.

[mkmel]

I have not been strongly in favour of Remain or Leave, mainly because the consequences of either of them cannot be fully known. But over the last few days I have moved strongly in favour of Remain, primarily because of the way Trump has been behaving. He seems to be extremely antagonistic towards Europe and at the same time looking to move closer towards Putin and Russia. I also thought his criticism of Sadiq Khan showed that he is actually a racist bigot, something I hadn't really believed before or at least not to that extent.

So it looks like the US and Russia may be forming a sort of new power block based on values that are uncivilised and run directly against the culture fostered centuries ago by the Enlightenment. With this happening I think it is even more important that Britain sides with Europe which looks like it may become the last stronghold of enlightened values. And by that I mean equality, fraternity and individual liberty.

Excellent post Erasmus

[Imploding Turtle]

To be honest, the most likely scenario now is an extension of the article 50 deadline to allow a 2nd referendum.

...

IF all the EU nations agree to it. Part of me hopes that one of them vetoes it to prove to the Brexiteers that the EU didn't dictate over us.

[If it be your will]

.

[bfcjg]

The initial referendum was flawed. I have posted before that such a monumental decision should have been debated properly for at least three years then a referrendum to actually ask do you want a referrendum based on three choices in ,out or remain in the Customs Union with the knowledge that staying in the CU meant free movement etc etc. It was rushed to save the Tories.

[Imploding Turtle]

... It was rushed to save the Tories.

Rushed to save them in an election where they also told the public the choice was "chaos" with Labour or stability with the Conservatives

[Lancasterclaret]

Another good post. Certainly we've ****** this up from the start. Trying to shoehorn it into a ludicrous timescale is even dafter.

[PutTheWheelieBinsOut]

The initial referendum was flawed. I have posted before that such a monumental decision should have been debated properly for at least three years then a referrendum to actually ask do you want a referrendum based on three choices in ,out or remain in the Customs Union with the knowledge that staying in the CU meant free movement etc etc. It was rushed to save the Tories.

Debated properly??, this has been debated constantly since before we joined the EEC in the 70's, if anything its time we stopped wasting any further time on the issue.

Isn't it funny that the remoaners are full of knowledge about why the leavers voted to leave, they even know what type of leave the leavers voted for or didn't vote for. The fact of the matter is the remoaners just want us to keep voting until they get the answer they are looking for. Why don't the remoaners stop this silly pretense and stop trying to deceive people and admit they want the democratic decision made by the British people reversed.

And this latest AV referendum proposal is a joke, they just choose to forget that the British people rejected the AV voting system in a referendum, really you couldn't make it up. So instead of just choosing to ignore 1 referendum they now want to ignore 2.... oh they will say that was for AV in a general election.... which sounds a little bit like Leave means leaving the just parts of the EU institutions.Its utter madness...

As Mr David Dimbleby said on that great morning of Friday 24th June 2016 at 04.39 ''We're Out"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V64HV4gbcUg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Lancasterclaret]

Great

Just put your detailed proposals down here for your version of leave.

No one else who is a Brexiteer has managed it yet without answering the questions that need to be answered before we can leave.

Now is your big chance.

[Devils_Advocate]

Debated properly??, this has been debated constantly since before we joined the EEC in the 70's, if anything its time we stopped wasting any further time on the issue.

Isn't it funny that the remoaners are full of knowledge about why the leavers voted to leave, they even know what type of leave the leavers voted for or didn't vote for. The fact of the matter is the remoaners just want us to keep voting until they get the answer they are looking for. Why don't the remoaners stop this silly pretense and stop trying to deceive people and admit they want the democratic decision made by the British people reversed.

This is where you and a lot of other people completely miss the point. The "remoaners" dont claim to know for what reason the 17.4 million voted to leave and in fact their whole argument is that nobody can know because of the way it was carried out so chaotically.

Its individual Brexiteers who seem to think they can talk for the full 17.4 million people and seem stupid or arrogant enough to think that everyone thinks exactly the same as them

[tiger76]

Government narrowly wins tonight's Customs Bill vote,after Defence Minister Guto Bebb who voted against the Government has subsequently resigned,another Minister to replace for Theresa.

The government has won its vote on Brexit by a majority of three.

New Clause 36 is the European Research Group amendment to ensure that the UK does not collect taxes for the EU without a reciprocal arrangement.

Earlier today the government said it would support the amendment.

The government won the vote by 305 to 302.

[1fatclaret]

Debated properly??, this has been debated constantly since before we joined the EEC in the 70's, if anything its time we stopped wasting any further time on the issue.

Isn't it funny that the remoaners are full of knowledge about why the leavers voted to leave, they even know what type of leave the leavers voted for or didn't vote for. The fact of the matter is the remoaners just want us to keep voting until they get the answer they are looking for. Why don't the remoaners stop this silly pretense and stop trying to deceive people and admit they want the democratic decision made by the British people reversed.

And this latest AV referendum proposal is a joke, they just choose to forget that the British people rejected the AV voting system in a referendum, really you couldn't make it up. So instead of just choosing to ignore 1 referendum they now want to ignore 2.... oh they will say that was for AV in a general election.... which sounds a little bit like Leave means leaving the just parts of the EU institutions.Its utter madness...

As Mr David Dimbleby said on that great morning of Friday 24th June 2016 at 04.39 ''We're Out"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V64HV4gbcUg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yeah, let’s not dick about wasting time debating, properly, or electioneering, properly, on such trivial issues as whether or not we remain an active and influential part of the biggest, closest and most profitable market on the planet.

Instead, let’s just determine that a 1.8% winning margin is absolutely definite and conclusive. Let’s not bother ourselves with such trivia as border control in Ireland, customs, lack of trade deals elsewhere, decades of intertwined law, standards and free movement. Let’s ignore such things as MASSIVE investment in areas (Cornwall, mid wales, the frozen north) that wouldn’t see a penny of investment under Conservative government as there’s no votes in it.

Who are we to ponder how the demographics of the voters two years ago might have changed and how a new vote might produce a very different outcome.

It’s not our place to question whether writing huge, unsubstantiated numbers about NHS investment on the side of buses might just have influenced one or two people.

Let’s just suck it up and get on with shooting ourselves in both testicles and be done with it.

Really funny how all brexiteers seem to know what the country was like before the EEC, and hark back to such days. 3 day weeks, refuse mountains, power cuts, incredible poverty in huge swathes of the country, especially the north. Wonder if it’s because they’re all old racists? No? But it’s all fine to brandish all remainers as yoghurt knitting, grass shoe wearing lefties.

[CrosspoolClarets]

Has anybody who has posted that there is no alternative plan read the 100+ page White Paper (David Davis version) that was leaked to Conservative Home?

It was sensible, a compromise, that had a chance of getting through the Commons AND the EU. May has now realised that yet again she has totally misjudged the mood and fortunately been forced to backtrack with these amendments.

By the way, regarding IIBYW question above, I would vote for Brexit but if the middle option was a version of EEA which, befitting our size and status, had no freedom of movement, there was a chance I would vote for that. Otherwise, no deal would have to do (the impact would be a shudder that we would recover from, not a catastrophe which is a ridiculous statement, and the EU has to deal with us in good faith with us to avoid it).

As I said earlier though, the whole scam of this 2nd Ref is an anti democratic effort to hijack the vote by splitting the Brexit vote into two. I have never been so furious in 30 years watching politics, whether that be Iraq, Poll Tax or Austerity. Remainers are upset (I’m friends with many) but it isn’t a patch on the blind fury that Brexit voters are feeling.

[Lancasterclaret]

You been consulting your golf club again to judge the mood of the country on Brexit again?

[Imploding Turtle]

You been consulting your golf club again to judge the mood of the country on Brexit again?

You used again twice in one sentence. Why should anyone ever listen to you?

[Lancasterclaret]

And going on about the anger of Brexiteers?

How about the anger of those of us who've watched you fantasists spend two years doing **** all?

[Spiral]

By the way, regarding IIBYW question above, I would vote for Brexit but if the middle option was a version of EEA which, befitting our size and status, had no freedom of movement, there was a chance I would vote for that. Otherwise, no deal would have to do (the impact would be a shudder that we would recover from, not a catastrophe which is a ridiculous statement, and the EU has to deal with us in good faith with us to avoid it).

As I said earlier though, the whole scam of this 2nd Ref is an anti democratic effort to hijack the vote by splitting the Brexit vote into two. I have never been so furious in 30 years watching politics, whether that be Iraq, Poll Tax or Austerity. Remainers are upset (I’m friends with many) but it isn’t a patch on the blind fury that Brexit voters are feeling.

We won't get EEA with a concession on FOM so we're down to folk telling other folk how they'll do being poorer (not to mention any imagined recovery point being beyond the point at which the demographic shifts result in a preference to stay), VS, what, threat of violent retribution? Lashing out? At what? At whom? Politicians? Other citizens? I know the NI border issue, when you get right down to the bones, hinges on a similar threat, but here I was thinking Brexiteers would hold themselves to a higher standard than the IRA.

For the record, I've not heard any other Brexiteers talking in such terms, only you. I'm not tarring all leave voters with the same brush.

[RingoMcCartney]

A democratically elected government is carrying out the result of that referendum, and you can’t stop whinging about exactly how they are choosing to go about it, so where does that leave your democratic credentials?

Would May’s proposals involve us leaving the EU?

Yes or no?

You heard of "in name only?"

[dsr]

Instead, let’s just determine that a 1.8% winning margin is absolutely definite and conclusive.

3.8% winning margin.

[1fatclaret]

3.8% winning margin.

1.9% (that's the difference between a winning and a losing result). Hardly a conclusive and empowering mandate.

[Greenmile]

You heard of "in name only?"

Yes or no, Ringo?

[Colburn_Claret]

Some of that sounds quite vague and that vagueness is part of why a lot of people criticise Brexit - the idea of it - as being an intellectual blank canvas onto which people have abstracted their own ideas and views on the direction they'd like the country to take but without any sort of consensus or clarity as to how it would be achieved. The one thing that is concrete, absolutely certain, is that a majority of people expressed a desire on a certain day in 2016 - informed by the political climate of that day at the time of the referendum, and with the information available at that time - to disentangle from the EU. You call it Leave, BINO, hard Brexit, secession, disentanglement, whatever you want, but when push comes to shove a cardboard box manufacturer from the UK, for instance, needs to abide by EU regulation if it still wants to flog cardboard boxes in France after Brexit, so it's the duty of the govt and that of a sovereign parliament to make sure that Cardboard Box Co. doesn't become insolvent on account of the unattainable, illogical fantasies of its more dogmatic fringes.

I can understand how it could be quite tempting to hope for 'common sense' to be used or hope for the country to unite but that's a utter cop-out of an argument as to why it's all going to $hit. Dorothy clicking red shoes won't solve the legal complexities facing us down. Sorry to be blunt but you're burying your head in the sand, you're looking for scapegoats. You can't disentangle from thousands of treaties and agreements by hoping for common sense; the EU is a rules-based and law-based institution so if the country is to extricate itself from the EU we need a plan on the framework of what the rules and laws will be post Brexit. Hence the current deadlock on Brexit. Without a framework in place, and without proper preparation, we become a temporarily-isolationist state practically overnight. I've mentioned it before but we're heading for temporary conditions similar to military besiegement if we don't come to some sort of agreement on our relationship with the EU post Brexit. I don't think some Brexiteers have fully internalised this. This is whe the people need to be consulted again. The government needs to ask us, "did we deliver what we promised?"

Like what this guy wanted to do just over a decade ago:

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

I can understand people's disappointment at the vagueness of Brexit, although it should have been a lot clearer by now, but the direction we are going shouldn't matter. My whole argument for leaving is that we can go in whichever direction we want to. In whatever direction current economic climate demands. Under the EU we were tied to a direction completely out of our control. That was always the danger.
I'm not looking for scapegoats at all, just stating the patently obvious. If you went into a meeting for a pay rise, and the bosses knew that half the work force were happy with what they'd got, see how far your negotiations get.
There are many laws and rules that we are obliged to follow that are good for us, nobody suggested chucking the whole lot in the bin. But if we agree that they are good for us, and the EU insist that they are part of any agreement, what is to stop us from adopting them as British rules and British laws. We can align ourselves to Europe without being married to them.
All it takes is co-operation and a rational view of the future. Instead we have infighting at Westminster, and as long as that is on going meaningful negotiations are never going to happen.
It frustrates the hell out of everybody leave and remainers.
I don't believe the solution is another vote, just leave the negotiations to those who wanted it. At least they had their visions of what they wanted from it. To give the job to people who were luke warm at best, or against at worst is a major problem.

[Lancasterclaret]

Again, and I'm really sorry to keep having to mention this, but there isn't a vision of Brexit from the Brexiteers.

Because, and again, I know you really hate being reminded of this, the vision of Brexit sold before the vote was impossible.

We told you all this, you ignored us, and now we all have to live the consequences.

[martin_p]

I can understand people's disappointment at the vagueness of Brexit, although it should have been a lot clearer by now, but the direction we are going shouldn't matter. My whole argument for leaving is that we can go in whichever direction we want to. In whatever direction current economic climate demands. Under the EU we were tied to a direction completely out of our control. That was always the danger.
I'm not looking for scapegoats at all, just stating the patently obvious. If you went into a meeting for a pay rise, and the bosses knew that half the work force were happy with what they'd got, see how far your negotiations get.
There are many laws and rules that we are obliged to follow that are good for us, nobody suggested chucking the whole lot in the bin. But if we agree that they are good for us, and the EU insist that they are part of any agreement, what is to stop us from adopting them as British rules and British laws. We can align ourselves to Europe without being married to them.
All it takes is co-operation and a rational view of the future. Instead we have infighting at Westminster, and as long as that is on going meaningful negotiations are never going to happen.
It frustrates the hell out of everybody leave and remainers.
I don't believe the solution is another vote, just leave the negotiations to those who wanted it. At least they had their visions of what they wanted from it. To give the job to people who were luke warm at best, or against at worst is a major problem.

Again, if you could tell us what this ‘vision’ was it’d be helpful. People who voted for Brexit bang on about ‘everyone knowing what they voted for’, ‘the vision’, etc, but every time they are challenged on it don’t seem to be able to point out where I can see it.

There is no single ‘vision’ in Brexit and that’s the problem. Both before and after the referendum the people who got us to vote for Brexit haven’t managed to offer up what a deal may look like. Nothing to do with ‘remain’ politicians or voters.

Edit - Snap Lancaster!

[Lancasterclaret]

Oh, and today "Vote Leave" got reported to the police after breaking the law during the referendum.

http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/_ ... ritain.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

But hey, doesn't matter, all you lot got your incorrect information from the EU from totally trustworthy and legit sources.........oh

[burnleymik]

So far, only 3 people have said how they would vote in an AV referendum between 1) No deal 2) May's deal 3) Remain (on current terms):

Me 1. No deal (provided the exit date can be put back) 2. Remain 3. May's deal
IT 1. Remain 2. No deal 3. May's deal
dsr 1. No deal (2. and 3. equally bad so wouldn't put a second choice down)

Anybody else able to put their 1, 2, 3 preferences on the imaginary ballot paper yet? I really would be interested how this might turn out if it actually happened (because I think it might well happen).

This type of vote should never happen. It's basically designed to split the leave voters and consolidate the remain votes, in an attempt to overthrow a democratic decision that has of yet, has not even been implemented or prepared for by this failing government.

One thing is sure, with the way this is all going, is that you can't beat the establishment, even if you try and do it the right way, through a democratic vote, at the end of the day they still do whatever they want. Even after the biggest democratic vote in UK history. Pretty astonishing really.

[burnleymik]

Oh, and today "Vote Leave" got reported to the police after breaking the law during the referendum.

http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/_ ... ritain.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

But hey, doesn't matter, all you lot got your incorrect information from the EU from totally trustworthy and legit sources.........oh

If this is true then it is unnacceptable, but it is disturbing that despite many requests from Priti Patel, that the electoral commission (who are primarily remainers), refuse to allow an investigation into abnormalities from the remain campaign. Especially the Spending by the Britain Stronger In Europe campaign, who could have potentially overspent by millions. Another example of how you cannot beat the establishment.

[Lancasterclaret]

Because the evidence isn't there.

Nice try by the way, straight from the current media strategy in which you express "disquiet" about cheating and lying but then say "well, everyone is doing it"

Oh, and welcome to the board as you only joined last week................

[burnleymik]

Thanks for the welcome. I will ignore your implications.

There is evidence and that is why she requested the investigation. Like I said I am not condoning if any side cheated, but I do think that equal scrutiny should be applied to both.

[Lancasterclaret]

Which it is.

Vote leave were originally cleared until new evidence came up and forced a rethink. If such evidence existed for the remain side I'm sure it would have been found by now.

Reminder that the following people were part of Vote Leave

iam Fox
Iain Duncan Smith
Dominic Raab
Michael Gove
Boris Johnson
Steve Baker
Chris Grayling
Priti Patel
Lord Lawson

Yup, but we have to remember that the overspending had "no effect" on the referendum result................

[burnleymik]

That isn't true. Have a look into it. The only thing that happened was that Remain side was fined for not correctly submitting documents. An investigation was never actually approved. They should have been investigated for the overspending and also for possible collusion.

[Jakubclaret]

Both sides played dirty in the campaign, either way that's hardly grounds for a 2nd referendum, I fail to understand why the remain camp can't just accept the democratic process of the will of the majority of the electorate that decided.

[martin_p]

It’s a standard Brexiteer response, deflection.

And the reporting of the Leave campaign to the police comes less than 24 hours after Gove admitted that Leave effectively lied over Turkish EU membership and subsequent floods of Turkish immigrants.

[nil_desperandum]

My whole argument for leaving is that we can go in whichever direction we want to. In whatever direction current economic climate demands. .

I'm sorry but that's exactly where your argument falls down. We're no longer a big Empire capable of bullying weaker nations into submission.
Whatever deals we try to make, and whatever treaties we try to negotiate once we'have torn up the old ones will have to be negotiated, and if we end up with "no deal" then we'll be in an impossibly weak position.
As an example India, will exploit our weakness to demand Free Movement of people in exchange for a free trade deal.

[kentonclaret]

One of the world's biggest ever Trade Deals to be announced later today between the EU and Japan involving the automobile and dairy industries primarily.

Let's hope we are able to pick up a few scraps from the main table.

[Lancasterclaret]

So lets get this right Mr New Poster, you think the overwhelmingly pro-Brexit media wouldn't have been banging on about that if it was true for every single day?

Hmmmmm

[Lancasterclaret]

Best bit about this whole thing is that we will become the only country in the world without a trade deal with anyone on March 29 2019.

Can't wait.

[nil_desperandum]

Best bit about this whole thing is that we will become the only country in the world without a trade deal with anyone on March 29 2019.

Can't wait.

Considering where we are now, part of me thinks that this might now be the best outcome.
Two or three weeks of this, with no major trade deals on the table, and the country in far worse chaos than in the final days of the Callaghan government would have given the uber Brexiteers a taste of what they wanted, and after the total collapse of the government a National Coalition would have to conclude an agreement the EU with almost overnight on (hopefully) pretty much the same terms as we have now.

[burnleymik]

I am not sure why the new poster thing is a problem for you? Do you think it makes your position stronger?

Like I said if Leave broke the rules fine them. The pro Leave media, especially Guido have been pushing for the investigation to be opened, but it has been stonewalled. I am not sure why it is controversial to ask both sides be scrutinised equally?.

I mean Tim Shipman's book, which has the inside information from the Remain camp stated, openly, that the Remain groups had morning group calls to discuss strategy. How is that not collusion when in comparison to the accusations at Vote Leave?

The government leaflet was completely pro Remain and targetted every single household in the UK! can;t get better advertising than that. Remain state that that spending wasn't anything to do with their campaign, so essentially it was outside interference to push more pro-remain propaganda, once again completely ignored. Screams about Russian interference, yet Obama comes to the UK and makes a direct threat for us to vote remain or be pushed to the back of the "queue" for a deal with the US.

The hypocrisy and double standards are astounding.