The referendum vote for Brexit was clear: the electorate was 46,501,241, Leave was 17,410,742 and Remain was 16,141,241. The UK public actually did not, does not and will not want a Brexit in the foreseeable future. Adrian Low makes this argument by analysing the post-referendum polls and demographic trends.
The difference between leave and remain was 3.8 percent or 1.3 million in favour of Leave. However, in a close analysis, virtually all the polls show that the UK electorate wants to remain in the EU, and has wanted to remain since referendum day. Moreover, according to predicted demographics, the UK will want to remain in the EU for the foreseeable future.
There have been at least 13 polls since June 23rd which have asked questions similar to ‘Would you vote the same again’ or ‘Was the country right to vote for Brexit’. Eleven of these polls indicate that the majority in the UK do not want Brexit. The poll predictions leading up to the referendum narrowed but a significant majority of late polls indicated that the country wanted to remain. The leader of UKIP even conceded defeat on the night of the vote, presumably because the final polls were convincing that Remain would win.
In fact, according to the first post-referendum poll (Ipsos/Newsnight, 29th June), those who did not vote were, by a ratio of 2:1, Remain supporters. It is well known that polls affect both turnout and voting, particularly when it looks as though a particular result is a foregone conclusion. It seems, according to the post-referendum polls, that this was the case. More Remain than Leave supporters who, for whatever reason, found voting too difficult, chose the easier option not to vote, probably because they believed that Remain would win.
Percentage lead of LEAVE or REMAIN according to the polls post June 23rd
Immediately after the referendum, there was a marked ‘shock’ reaction in the polls against the Leave vote. Some Leave voters had voiced the opinion that they had only voted Leave to give the government a good kicking and they wished they had the opportunity to change their vote. That was reflected in the early polls with the reversal of the Brexit referendum result into double percentage figures. A higher percentage of Leave voters changed their mind to Remain, whilst the Remain voters generally stood firm. Four months on and that has now softened to 90 percent ± 2 percent of both Leave and Remain voters sticking to the guns and the rest of the original voters balancing somewhere between changing their vote or responding that they now don’t know.
What has been largely ignored are the 12.9 million who did not vote.
What has been largely ignored are the 12.9 million who did not vote. Had the democratic process been that of Australia where voting is compulsory, the polls indicate the result would have been to Remain from day zero, and would still be Remain (see no2brexit.com and businessinsider.com). Of course, there is a criticism of the non-voter but, for various very good reasons, some were reported as simply not able to vote.
Unexpected administrative, personal or employment circumstances disabled some members of the electorate on the day from voting. One Financial Times study pointed out that most university students would generally be encouraged by their university to register to vote in their university town and they may not have realised early enough that they would have to apply for a postal vote given that term would be finished by June 23rd. The non-voters were largely younger voters and all the parties agree that the younger vote was (and still is) far more likely to vote Remain than Leave by a factor of nearly 3:1.
Since the initial shock, the gap in favour of Remain has decreased and, now, stabilised. Only two YouGov polls support a majority in favour of Leave was right, the other eleven polls have all indicated that the will of the UK is that it should remain in the EU. Such unpalatable poll results have been left unreported or occasionally inaccurately reported.
The “What would you vote now” question is being asked less frequently now. As of the middle of October, the polls indicate the continuing preference for Remain. The deciding factor is still amongst those who did not vote, with 41 percent saying that Remain was their preferred option and 26 percent preferring Leave. These figures are very similar to the News-night poll six days after referendum day when the comparative figures for the Remain and Leave non-voters were 35 percent and 19 percent respectively. When the most recent figures are applied to the 12.9 million they provide 1.9 million more Remain supporters which easily overturns the 1.3 million referendum Leave majority. Of course should there be another referendum the previous non-voters might well come out in force because they know what is at stake – but they might not.
By March 2017 when Article 50 is due to be initiated, there will be approximately 563,000 new 18-year-old voters, with approximately a similar number of deaths, the vast majority (83 percent) amongst those over 65. Assuming those who voted stick with their decision and based on the age profile of the referendum result, that, alone, year on year adds more to the Remain majority. A Financial Times model indicated that simply based on that demographic profile, by 2021 the result would be reversed and that will be the case for the foreseeable future.
by 2021 the result would be reversed and that will be the case for the foreseeable future
Finally, two groups, in particular, saw their exclusion from the electorate as undemocratic. According to NUS polls, 75 percent of the 16-18 age group felt they should have had a vote in the UK on Brexit (given its greater long-term implications than a general election vote). The 16-18 age group did have a vote in Scotland on independence and this referendum, many felt, was at least as important. Had the younger vote come out in force there is good evidence to suggest that the referendum result would have been different.
In the second group, members of the Commonwealth (and Eire) who were resident in the UK were able to vote but other members of the EU resident in the UK were not able to vote. All EU residents of Scotland were eligible to vote in the Scottish Referendum but not in the Brexit Referendum. Clearly, if democracy is regarded as allowing those most affected by a decision to have a say in that decision, then this has not happened. With 2.9 million EU residents in the UK, it is likely that the majority would have voted for Remain and that too is likely to have reversed the decision.
So the UK electorate, as a whole, has been consistently against Brexit and the Remain majority will increase year on year. All things being equal Remain will be the choice of the public by the end of 2021 whether the abstaining electorate is counted or not. Those who saw the vote as a protest against poverty are now experiencing the thin end of the wedge of inflation from a falling pound and slow, drip-like movement of multinational companies out of the UK. Some Remain voters have thrown in the towel, accepting what they see as inevitable. The latest YouGov poll suggests that more people in the UK believe Brexit is bad, rather than good for jobs, will result in less influence in the world, is indifferent for the NHS, and will make the UK economy worse. A falling economy is bound to bite and reverse some of the enthusiasm for Leave and the effect of that will simply be to consolidate the trend against Brexit.
Brexit is not the will of the people in the UK. It never has been.
Sadly nothing less than a second, fairer referendum could redress the unfairness felt by the exclusion from the electorate of both the 16-18s and the non-UK EU residents. This all paints a very sorry picture of the effectiveness of UK democracy. Brexit is not the will of the people in the UK. It never has been. Had all the people spoken on the day the result would almost certainly be what the pollsters had predicted, and what the UK, according to the polls, still wants, and that is to Remain.
This post represents the views of the author and not those of the Brexit blog, nor the LSE. Image credit:(CC BY 2.0).
Revd. Adrian Low is Emeritus Professor of Computing Education at Staffordshire University and Church of England priest for the Costa del Sol West Chaplaincy in Spain. He is the author of Introductory Computer Vision, Imaging Techniques and Solutions.
What utter patronising nonsense.
If people didn’t bother to vote when they had the opportunity, tough.
Poll after poll shows that people who voted to leave have not changed their minds.
Totally agree mostBrits want to leave the corrupt Eu
So you’re just going to ignore the statistical proof to the contrary offered and explained in detail and challenge it with what? your personal assertion and incredulity?
what statistical proof? the latest survey points to over half of the electorate saying that they see dealing with immigration is more important than staying in the EU.
Over half of leave supporters
Yes we are going to ignore ‘statistical’ proof. From what I gather from this..if they turned out…..and if this happened etc. Well it did happen, with a very well informed date of the referendum and cetain sections of the community failed to go and vote. Whatever the reason why not is irrelevant. This has been said before but of the situation was reversed I would love to see all the ‘remainers’ more than happy to have a second referendum or whatever bollox they wish think of….
There is no statistical proof here, just creative accountancy!
We only no the votes of those that voted!
The 16 year olds we have no ideal which way they would vote, but they do not vote so they do not matter! Talk about trying to delegitmize the vote, we are seeing the death of democracy, and worse partaking in its slaughter!
I can’t understand any one who wishes to stay in the EU, the only explanation I can come up with is they don’t live in an area where, locals have been pushed out of the work place, wage stagnation housing prices, doctors school places, I don’t want to hear the argument of immigration is good for the country, because it was to be tens of thousands, now it seems two hundred and fifty thousand is not enough, the EU was to be for trading not changing who we are.
The large list of problems you highlight are as a result of choices made by successive governments, not because of immigration or the EU.
The vast majority of immigration into the UK each year is from outside the EU, which is something the government can control, but choose not to.
I’m afraid you’ve been lied to by your government and the anti-EU side.
“…locals have been pushed out of the work place…”
If somebody can’t compete with a barely English speaking, newly arrived, unskilled immigrant then perhaps they don’t deserve the job. Simply repeating the mantra that immigrants depress wages because they are willing to accept less simply doesn’t cut it anymore. No employer is going to hire a bad employee simply on the basis of cost.
The UE does not force immigration on the UK. It it a lie.
“Ireland and the United Kingdom choose, on a case-by-case basis, whether or not to adopt EU rules on immigration, visa and asylum policies.”
You will find the rules at the European Commission website. Google “EU Immigration Portal Explaining the rules” if this link doesn’t work.
Jay-You don’t need to be skilled and speak English to pick strawberries. If you’re British you do need to take home a half decent wage to be able to pay your rent/mortgage. A lot of these immigrants will share a 3 bedroom house with 17 different people if it means they only have to pay £50 a week rent. Lets say picking strawberries pays £250 per week (take home). After rent an immigrant would have £200 left in his arse pocket. The Brit would be lucky to have half that.
Yes they do Jack, in fact they’re threatening Hungary with huge fines if they don’t take in immigrants.
The EU politicians are elected by proportional representation,which is more democratic than the UK system. Before EU legislation can be passed it has to overcome higher hurdle’s than in the UK. Most of the EU legislation is good for majority of British citizens such as workers rights, consumers rights and laws to stop companies damaging the environment
Well said Fred, how can anybody in their right mind believe that remaining in the EU is best for the UK in the long term, most are only thinking of themselves. I voted to join the the Common Market years ago, not the European Union.
I served my country for 13 years, I believe a united Europe is good for use, IF…………..it was democratically formed, which it was not, I for one am over the bloody moon that we left, the fat greedy bureaucrats who can not be voted out are just milking the system for god damned greed.
You haven’t left yet !
Remoaners like yourself will cling onto anything and nothing. Statistical proof – you’ve got to be having a laugh if you believe this. Brexit supporters have been gaining momentum month after month. Get out of London and listen to what the majority voice!
All current poll data shows a bigger and bigger support for Remain.
But nice try with your fake news.
The majority of those who voted, voted to leave, whither democracy? Seems to me democracy is ok as long as you do not upset the London centric establishment. The EU cannot be described as a democratic institution, the population of the EU as a whole has no direct democratic control over the legislation put forward by the un-elected and unaccountable commission who, it seems to me, to be driven by ideology, in other words dogma.
The EU is driven by not by logic, rationality or pragmatism. A case in point, they insisted that women drivers should pay the same rates for car insurance as males. Insurance has always been based on assessed risk so that is why female drivers got a better deal. Now the uninsured are covered if involved in an accident, even though they are law breakers, again on the alter of equality. So, I, a law abiding diver have to contribute towards the costs incurred by an uninsured driver. Rights also have corresponding responsibilities and if the individual does not discharge these then the corresponding rights in the matter are forfeit. But not in the EU. I voted to leave because I the voter and taxpayer have no democratic control over the machinations of the Commission. A brief look at the history of the decisions of the Commission will bear testimony to their deeply unintelligent actions and attitudes. Wine lakes, Butter Mountains, subsidies for holding land subsidies for growing unsuitable crops e.g. sweet corn in the UK, it is routinely ploughed back into the soil as we do not have the climate to ripen it. That is clever!. I voted to leave as did the majority but the London centric establishment na-sayers, scaremongers and vested interests are going to subvert democracy. I will never vote again, the process is a con and a sham.
There’s a telling section in this article about polls…that even the UKIP leader conceded defeat on the night of the election because the polls all said that Remain would win. And then,guess what,the polls turned out to be wrong!
statistics are a art form not a fact, with polls the numbers will vary wildly depending on the demographic who is asked, i personally have never seen a poll run by this group so that alone gives the potential for bias if they are not running a open poll for the whole population.
but as an example if you ask the same question to the elites in the country then you will get that they wish to remain purely because the eu gives them money and isnt directly impacting there lives, but if you ask the working class person they generally want to leave due to the fact that the eu is demanding more and more and more and all we see is our government just surrendering at every turn even tho we had the stronger hand when we first entered the negotiation for trade, migration policies and pretty much everything else.
The EU is the prototype for the New World Order, in which democracy will cease to exist. (It’s scarcely present right now). In which dumbed-down, mixed-race people will be ruled by a mega-wealthy elite. In which the police will have total control of the people. In which everyone will be watched & monitored. Money will cease to exist and all transactions via cards will be known. Sweden already has micro-chipping for people – voluntary – so far. Germany will continue to be the dominant power in Europe, just as they intended with their “Brussels Experiment” started in the late 40’s. British industry will continue to be shipped abroad (mainly EU countries) thus fulfilling Germany’s dream of ‘putting us in our place.’ 100’s of thousands of us a fully aware of the Barcelona Agreement, the UN Plan for 2030, Agenda 21, the Coudenhove-Kalergi Plan, and all those EU stalwarts that have been awarded it’s annual prize, the Bilderberg Group and of course the Fifth Column organisation: Common Purpose. A list of CP Graduates shows that they have infested the police, the BBC, the judiciary, the Church, local councils, schools and more besides. We are fully aware that mass immigration by incompatible people is the EU’s covert plan to destroy our way of life & Christianity prior to the end goal – World Government.
Don’t even bother to deny it – all the evidence is there in plain sight and the secret is out. You are either for this despicable future or against it. All the other petty arguments about tariffs, visa free travel, needing low paid workers, the ‘NHS will collapse,’ trading partnerships, etc. are mere red herrings to confuse people at all levels. The underlying evil of the EU is self-evident and must die.
Polls are not fact. Statistics gained from polls can be misleading. Claiming that the UK never really wanted to leave is not proven. Whilst the Leave/remain split was 51.9% to 48.1%, the vote, by voting area, was a majority of 270 areas or 67.7%. This is propaganda designed to make people believe that the UL wants to stay in the EU. Statistics can only ever suggest. they are not facts.
He makes totally unrealistic assumptions about the views of non-voters
I’m sure this article will annoy some people who still believe that Brexit is not an indefensibly stupid idea but I believe that many voted out as the result of being hideously shepherded by the media and the lies of politicians. I will never accept a Brexit decision as I can’t support restrictions on my children’s rights in the world or the negation of what has continued to be an extremely successful peace project in Europe. Finally, if your government has no idea what is to be gained by leaving the economic security of the EU, how can I possibly respect the points of view of the great unwashed.
It was not an advisory referendum and it was won despite the blatant lies by politicians on the remain platform. There was also plenty of support in the press for the remain position, which were only to happy to publish the dishonest fear and doom stories being peddled by remain supporting politicians and business people, the very same people who signed us up to ever closer union with the EU for which we never voted.
It is not those of us who wished to leave the EU who are destroying relations between the UK and the rest of the EU, it is those in the EU who will not respect the choice we have made to leave who are doing this. They are out to make an example of the UK as a warning to any other countries who may also harbour a desire to leave. Our politicians have made it clear that we value our relationships with our neighbours and wish to continue to trade with them, share intelligence with them and cooperate in many other ways, but also want to trade freely with the rest of the world, decide who can and cannot come into our country, be subject to our own laws and ruled by our own elected politicians, not by leaders of other countries or unelected bureaucrats. As for destroying peoples lives, the EU has been doing this for years, whole areas of this country have been affected negatively by our membership, our fishing industry for one example. Parts of the EU are bitter at our decision to leave because, as a net contributor, we subsidise huge parts of it and when we leave tat money will have to come from elsewhere, most likely by raising the contributions from other countries.
Let me tell how I see this situation, as someone from the EU27, namely Austria.
First I totally regret that the British voted to leave. I really think this European Union project is the greatest achievement for all people on this continent (I am counting GB in) we had in decades.
Three things in my life showed me how important this is.
1. The WWII stories my grandfather told me in the 70ies. As a kid it was a shock to realize that something like a world war exists.
2. My Inter-Rail-Tour in the 90ies through lots of European countries including UK and Ireland. That had been an eye opener for how stupid the concept of competing national states is.
3. The Internet. And the possibilities to get connected with people all over the planet, discussing and talking to virtually anyone on this planet, sharing thoughts, find new inputs. This gave me the sense of being an Earthling, not an Austrian.
Make no mistake I think we still have a very, very long way to go, and we should not let everyone just in from everywhere like it happened in 2015.
Second. It baffles me always how politicians can get away with talking how bad the EU is and how it forces laws on member states. When the same politicians sat in Brussels and voted for those laws. But at home somehow it has not been their decision? Seems to happen in every EU member state.
Third. We the EU won’t make GB an example. I think that would be against our own interests. But you have to realize that you can’t stay out the club AND get all the benefits of the club. You already had Thatcher’s brit-discount for your membership. And GB often decided to be more part of the US than part of the EU. That made the rest of us feel very uncomfortable.
I understand that you think going back to be a closed club on your island is the solution to your problems. I think that was part of your problem and why lots of you think you are not a part of us. I feel you are a part of me, of us. And I am sad you do not feel the same.
Actually with apologies this is a reply to Robert Niessner’s comment below.
As shocking as WWII was, you must remember that if we had all been under something like the EU at that time, there would have been no WWII at all. Peace? Yes, but the ‘peace’ of utter ruthlessness, including the mass murder of millions of innocent people. Without recourse to a neighbouring country free to send help, as Britain did.
So more than any other thing what we all need most to retain is sovereignty. What we all need most is not a mass UNITY, but a diverse HARMONY. We do not need to compete just because we are separate, and we do not need to give up our self-governance to work together. In fact, that is the ONLY way we can safely work together.
The regulations that come from the EU are good for UK citizens on the whole,such as workers rights and consumer rights.The UK government could have controlled immigration more if they really wanted to without leaving the EU. EU politicians are democratically elected. It is the the very wealthy in this country who call the shots and they wanted immigration so they can keep wages down aided by the con servative government who are ruling at present and are the reason why the nhs is suffering and the country is going downhill for most people appart from small percentage who are very wealthy
– i would ask any europeans living and working in the UK about the ‘benefits’ of the EU and the EURO. ask them why they came to the UK. i did. they told me
jobs? non existant, or 500gbp per month. ‘oh it must be cheap over there then?”- no- about 15 % cheaper to live than in the UK.. i know this- they told me so when i worked next to them.
– dont like the country you are living in? not ‘ok’ with the referendum result?- EMIGRATE!
27 countrys await you and your family , with plentiful well paid jobs, cheap affordable housing, they will be throwing either jobs or welfare at you!
‘great unwashed’ hmm more like ‘EU brainwashed’ get over it, get behind it, emigrate, or die whinging!
A couple of points. You are stupid, and I am sorry for you.
If you believe WTO without schedules works for the country, I pity you too.
Please, wake up.
hmm ‘stupid’ now lets see.. i was working at 17 making precision defence parts for bae. by 20 i had been working and started my own company. at 20 i had left the uk in 1987, and was living in Paris.by 27 i had worked in Paris from the bottom up, learnt the language to a sufficient level to do a DEGREE in a subject in a foreign language (french) by 30 i was working in I.T. infrastructure in finance (major usa company) and had started working in technical documentation as technical support manager in aerospace R&D electronics for french jet engine manufacturer. 20 years later, I moved to switzerland , where i worked in blue chip companys (american) and a pharmaceutical industry leader, in technical support. i returned to the UK 2007, where i worked in automotive prototype engine testing for top companys on engine devellopement (hands on role)..
i would contest your ‘stupid’ remark to that of a remainer, who cannot see the wider picture, yet is bitter and condescending towards those you clearly believe are inferior to you. hence the ‘name calling – the last refuge of those who have lost the arguement’ 1) i have lived and worked in europe for +20 years 2) i have seen 1st hand the transition from local currency to the Euro, its impact on the average citizen 3) europes impact on employment 4) europes impact on criminality and crime 5) european bureaucracy i have had dealing with 1st hand. have you? how many foreign languages do you speak? how many years living in Europe? doing what?
You’re stupid, obviously.
Democracy does not require me to get behind a decision I disagree with,
The definition of traitor points to you and your kind.
I despise you.
There, does that help?
– indeed. traitor. unlike you, who would spend time ‘trying’ to overturn a democratic vote (very E.U government like) because it didnt fall your way- as a convinced brexiter, my choice based on real- world facts and implications of total immersion in the subject at every level- i decided that the sheeple of the uk wouldnt vote against being governed from abroad , in a foreign country, by foreign elected councils, i decided to emigrate once again, out of the EU such were my convictions and the strength of them. so i did. i emigrated to Australia, a sovereign country. i admit i was wrong on the brexit result. just some advice- why don’t you emigrate to Europe then? you espouse its principles and ideologys? if not, why not? no cojones?
Yes, if you support Brexit, you are a traitor, without doubt. It will destroy our country. Brexit, as a concept was voted for. The final outcome, not.
If you believe in democracy so much, give us a vote on the outcome, including remaining in the EU. No? You’re a coward too.
– if you are not happy with the result of a democratic vote- emigrate. get behind it, emigrate or die whinging. prove you have the cojones to do so. don’t just whine about it- emigrate!- i did! – 4 countrys i have emigrated to, integrated, learnt foreign languages and cultures- ensured i was employable, took a lower job if necessary, did what it takes. people despising me i relish in. it confirms i’m doing/saying the right things c’mon.. pack up your troubles in your old kit bag.. bon voyage!
Emigrate? Haha! No thanks, I plan to stay and undermine it. This is MY country too. Never forgot that.
BTW you have yet to refute my statement on the lack of democracy (for the little people) that exists in EU. The governance structures of the EU are similar to those in Communist dictatorships, e.g N. Korea, China etc. A self selected elite determines what happens and you question them at your peril. My understanding is that individual commissioners cannot be fired for any reason, the only recourse is to fire the entire commission. Have not seen that happen yet in 40 plus years despite butter mountains, wine lakes, feather bedding of land owners, subsidies for climatically stupid crops like Maize in the UK. It will never reach proper maturity (i.e 8 ft plus) here like it might in the S of France, Our climate is simply too cool but just look at at the thousands of acres planted in the UK to be dug back into the ground as there is no market for it here. Such a sensible system eh?
You simply don’t understand the EU. Do some basic research, for goodness sake!
The EU is far more democratic than the UK, ffs.
Au contraire Justin it is you who should do the research. The EU democratic, really. How about the fact that the EU commission decided in its ideological wisdom to insist that male and female drivers should pay equal premiums all in the name of equality. Insurance is based in risk, fem\ale drivers are safer than males and that is a long established fact, but the EU insisted so all our premiums went up. Now to add insult to injury using the same ideological stance of equality for all the uninsured who previously would not have been able to claim as they were breaking the law can now make a claim. The law abiding amongst us are having to subsidise the law breakers, that’s clever isn’t it, punish those who obey and reward those who do not a fine logic indeed. The law abiding amongst us are having to pay for this and that includes me and there is nothing I can do about it and that is from Mr Hammond. Democracy, give me a break. Go do your homework and keep above all an open mind and deal with facts not beliefs. There are none so blind as will not see.
Stupid,coward… etc etc.. typical remainiac taliban. Exactly. Taliban. I wasnt afraid to venture into the world on my own. Mummy or daddy didnt hold my hand and pay for me.. i did it off my own back. Started flipping burgers, and worked my way up into top companys in good jobs. Hardly cowardly is it? I saw what europe had brought for the average joe in france, it virtually ruined many. Lower pay, higher costs, jobs moved abroad, becoming just a serf to capitalism. Hardly cowardice. In fact you are the coward. Emigrate, move closer to your eldorado. Coward.
Now you are just ranting.
What you’ll never get to do is enjoy your Brexit. The rest of us won’t let you.
Another contributor has described your attitude correctly as similar to the Taliban = my way or die. So much for a liberal democratic system, seems like it has failed, in Justin’s case, to inculcate the expected sense of fairness, equality and tolerance etc. Just what happened to you as a child?
Philip, I had an amazing upbringing, thanks.
Now what happened in your childhood to make you hate your fellow countrymen so much?
Do we need to bring a show and tell doll?
Another vote, just like the EU did to the Irish when they turned down the proposed constitution, or have we all forgotten that? I am afraid your emotions are all o show. How unBritish.
How unBritish? Since when do you decide what that is? Get over yourself.
No they didn’t they voted based on years of watching the eu experiment unfold! its still going on right now people are just too blinkered to see it!
Ditto. Everyone I know wants out and as quickly as possible.
I guarantee the author has been asking the wrong people.
Polls can be fixed by various means. Wording the question. Who you ask etc.
Our own personal bubbles to one side – if you seek corruption you need look no further than the 2016 referendum.
Plus, knowing where – or even what, you are leaving, says nothing at all about where you are going.
You obviously only know stupid, brainwashed people.
Sad truth is: no, I don’t. I know only smart, careful people who have done the maths, and found Brexit to be seriously wanting. I would be very happy to find a plus side to Brexit. There is none.
Why all the fuss?
We have only had one advisory referendum – the responses to which were mixed, to say the least. Therefor there is no change to the status quo indicated.
Also – we had a PM who took it upon himself, with the tacit approval of his Cabinet – no doubt, to declare the outcome – as he judged it to be, to be his Party’s policy from then on.
Then, lo and behold – Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition (& the other minor Partys) accepted that PM’s policy shift as their own.
It is unfortunate that no alternative to the cross-Party approved Tory policy was put before the electorate last June, but this does in no way set the future course of UK Politics. It is entirely within the law and perfectly admissible under our Constitution, for this situation to change at any time.
So – instead of piling fantasy upon fantasy, we could simply ensure that there is at least one Party to fight the next election on a (let’s say) Firm-Remain policy platform.
This has everything going for it. Nobody with even passing knowledge and /or experience of the UK’s Democratic system could possibly object. And, what is more (as we all know) the votes of the electorate in an election are 100% decisive and would set the course of Government for one electoral cycle.
I’ll finish by congratulating myself – to save anybody else the trouble – you are welcome. 🙂
Ahh justin the ‘tete de mouton’ remainer.. Stupid.
Do you have any evidence that most Britains want to leave the EU? Do you have any evidence that the EU is corrupt? Please share.
I suspect that those who didn’t vote would spilt the same -majority to leave…and of course the article overlooks the fiasco of unregistered postal voters, the extra registration and keeping the website open and as the article does mention all the Irish nationals who could vote but out of fairness really shouldn’t have been allowed…
This has actually been examined fairly conclusively and they vote the same as their age group tranches would indicate. And if everyone had voted they would have voted Remain by a small margin. See the Kings College study. http://ukandeu.ac.uk/what-if-everyone-had-voted-in-the-eu-referendum/
It is time to make it compulsory to vote in uk now, end all speculation on the apathy of non voters.
To those Leavers who say ‘Get over it’, just think that this is a major constitutional change that is being imposed on us by an advisory referendum against the opinion of the majority of the electorate (which is the clear conclusion of this article which has been demonstrated by now in a number of sound surveys). It is already having major economic effects that risk destroying the very industries that enable our economy to prosper (perhaps yes, not all of our citizens, but resolving that problem is a matter for our own Government, not the EU). Now does that seem constitutional or advisable or democratic?
I must declare an interest. My children are dual national and my wife is Polish. I will be dramatically affected I now feel a foreigner in my own country and my wife, and therefore myself, may be forced out of the country I love. But I still assert that the point I make above remains valid. Continue with Brexit at the peril of all of us.
But the majority of the electorate voted to leave. If they didn’t vote, then they chose to abide by the overall outcome, that’s how democracy works.
I write this as a staunch remainer.
The problem now is, regardless of how much research shows that the referendum result would change over time, or change if taken again, there is now no mechanism to put that to the test, because ALL parties have said there should be no second referendum.
We will blindly go forward now, regardless.
the majority of the electorate did NOT elect to leave. The majority of the electorate did NOT elect to remain. The electorate was 46 milllion. Leave was 17 million which is roughly 37%. Remain slightly less on about 35%. If the total electorate of 46m is 100% that leaves 28% who couldn’t be arsed. Thats where the problem is. If only we had compulsory voting or at least the interest the scots had in their own referendum democracy would emerge.
Not “ALL” parties have said there shouldn’t be a second referendum. Practically the Lib Dems’ first response to the result was to say there should be another at the very least to decide the strength of Brexit
I’m sorry but I’m lost here. There was a vote. MPs, when discussing this Referendum, voted 6:1 for the referendum. There was a result. And the result should be accepted.
It is immaterial that people did not vote. It is immaterial that Australia has a compulsory voting system: the UK doesn’t. It is no good the not-voters saying that if only they’d known, they would have voted.They had the chance to vote. Nobody forced them to not vote.
Your comments about “already having major economic effects” are based on the MSM picking bad news to “prove” that BREXIT is the cause of ANY malaise. To para-phrase Jo Moore, BREXIT is a good way to get out bad news. But, if you have noticed, one of our biggest manufacturers, who deals world-wide, JCB, left the CBI because of the CBI’s biased comments during the Referendum. Also, Nissan are rapidly expanding. They don’t give a toss whether UK is in or out. Just two examples.
Why you have to feel “a foreigner in my own country” beats me. And, what does having a Polish wife to do with it? She can quite happily live in the UK. I also have to declare an interest: I’m an ex-pat now living in Lesvos. as of Dec ’15. My wife and I both voted BREXIT – for the sovereignty of our nation. My Greek friends here applauded our decision and hope to get their own country back.. Back from Brussels dictatorship. (They know that the current financial problems are thos of their own making and are willing to make up for it – but not at the expense of their country. And not to prop up German/French banks that stupidly leant to them)
The referendum was advisory. They could have made it compulsory but didn’t. Cameron’s assertions regarding one vote being enough have no validity at all in law or in principle.
Nissan have been promised a customs union which the UK won’t be able to deliver without freedom of movement – you can be sure Nissan are making contingency plans. The economic auguries are not good at all – we risk destroying are leading industries – finance, high tech – all to prevent immigration which pays for our retirement with its social security contributions.
The point I make is that by the time we should be leaving the referendum result will be out of date, both among those who would vote, and in the opinion of the electorate. We will leave against the will of the people. Is that democratic?
Individually a lot of voters had a choice, but the deck was structurally stacked in favour of Leave in the following ways:
1) Students being registered at their universities and not realising in time that they needed to do a postal vote
2) Students not realising they’d been removed from the register at their home addresses and that they had to re-register in time to do so
3) EU residents in the UK not being allowed to vote (even if they’d been in the UK for decades)
4) The Remain campaign being a bit complacent
5) Media coverage – with the likes of the BBC trying to give both sides equal coverage, whilst the Sun, the Mail, the Express, and the Telegraph were 100% partisan for Leave.
Are you joking “Joseph A-S”? The mainstream media choosing to pick out stories about how Brexit is negatively affecting us? How about the fact the pound plummeted immediately after the result? Was that Fake News? Did they cherry-pick that one? How about all the jobs that will be next to impossible if we lose freedom of movement? Is that made up? No. It isn’t as I personally know multiple people to which that is the case. How about all the jobs that will be lost well with Europe? You know the first thing they’ll do to save money is either cut wages or simply fire people. How about the massive decrease in World Power we will have when we’re no longer one of the most powerful parties in the most powerful organisation in the world? How about the fact that the jobs that are being taken by immigrants 9 times out of 10 aren’t even from Europe?
You people all act like you’re so strong-willed and independent for choosing to ignore real news, but in reality you’re the ones who’ve been convinced to follow a xenophobic agenda by people like Farage and Steve Bannon and have been so brainwashed that you choose to ignore even the hard facts given to you by the news. And the reason I know you’re much much stupider than any of the Americans who support Trump or hate MSM? Because in this country, the two most popular newspapers supported your stupid cause; but you still go on brainlessly about the horrors of mainstream media. At least in America, they can actually complain about news that they don’t agree being the mainstream because their most popular news outlets, besides FOX, are central or left of centre.
Any British person who claims that MSM ruins everything by being biased against brexit, is instantaneously an idiot in my eyes. Not because some of the newspapers don’t have a political slant – because they do – or because scepticism is wrong – everyone should have a healthy amount of scepticism about the news – but because you are just copying what other people are saying, with no opinion or evidence of your own. If you look at the list of newspapers by circulation, you will notice that 4 are pro-brexit, 4 neutral or non-committal and 2 remain. There’s no to or fro here YOU ARE WRONG. There’s no other way of looking at it, this is it, you’re not right.
Well said Joseph A. S. I’m in total agreement with you. I wouldn’t even bother with a ‘person’ that apparently has no name……….
In my opinion YOU ARE RIGHT mate.
I voted out, would do so again in a heartbeat, and maintain it is the right decision. Anyone who wants to remain simply hasn’t absorbed the facts. The EU is corrupt, self-serving, and is certainly no friend of the UK. The Germans alone have systematically devastated our auto industry, in order to strengthen their own exports to the UK, whilst snapping up the jewels in the pile for themselves (Land Rover, Roll Royce, Bentley et al were all initially purchased by BMW/VAG etc etc). The only valid reason to remain is a cultural one – those who wish to become European, as part of a EU superstate. I (along with the majority of Britons) dp not consider myself European – I am British and proud of it. The referendum was the first opportunity in my lifetime to have my say. No one ever gave me the chance before, just years and years of half-baked rhetoric and EU propaganda. I do not hate Europe, I holiday there twice yearly, and love the people and culture, and I too should declare an interest: I am about to move to Spain, having bought a villa there, and Brexit will make that more problematical. Still I voted leave, in the full knowledge this wold be so. It’s not about immigration etc, at the end of the day its about SOVEREIGNTY. And one other thing – nobody in their right mind would believe we are about to start deporting people who live here – that is simply anti Brexit propaganda of which there is much, led by the liberal wooly thinkers and theorisers so well trumpeted by their mouthpiece the BBC. Think about it – the facts are incontrovertible!!
I’m so proud that we all voted for British Sovereignty. Take back control from the unelected EU elite!
Do we all understand how our parliament works? Our Government has to pass its laws through the unelected, elite House of Lords. Nothing actually comes into law until the reigning monarch accepts it. It’s a load of antiquated play-acting and removes the influence further and further from the British people. Our Prime Minister was given her title by default when all the other tories ran away from the responsibility. Nobody voted for her to be leader. And this unelected leader is now going to use an advisory referendum to enact the biggest change to our constitution in decades.
Meanwhile, having a team of experienced civil servants, some of them voted in by us, the British people, preside over EU law-making seems like a far more democratic and sensible system of law-making.
We now look like fools to the rest of the world, and our currency is plummeting just to prove it.
Deportations are not just anti-Brexit propaganda. They’re also something that the Mail, the Sun, and the Express have been clamouring for, and which the government have expressly decided not to rule out (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/mp-brexit-eu-right-to-live-and-work-uk-commons-european-union-a7372951.html). Also, even without Deportations per se, leaving the EU gives EU citizens resident here much less of a stake in the country, almost certainly gives them a pile of paperwork to sort out if they want to stay, and would likely deprive them of the right to vote in their local elections etc. We’re severely messing around both people from the EU-27 countries living in the UK and vice versa with this decision.
Also, blaming the Germans and other foreigners for the failure of our gvt to support our industries is a bit rich… given the chance, our own companies would happily have snapped up foreign ones wherever they were allowed to as well.
Barry blames “the Germans” for taking over our car industry. But isn’t it our fault for not having Governments and managers and Banks that support British Industry? If you investigate, you will find that German Engineering Companies are run by Engineers and the workers are represented on the board. Ours are run by Accountants who only want to make a quick buck. Our real problem is our electoral system is so poor that we are saddled with mostly poor governments.
I agree there are plenty of things wrong with the EU, but most of them have little effect on our daily lives. The benefits in trade and human rights are much greater. We are not in the Euro, so that doesn’t affect us. We have a large rebate and lots of “Get out” clauses.
I too am part Polish; my father was Polish. That does not mean that I, in any way, feel alienated. I am sick of listening to the nonsense people are coming out with. Why is it that so many of us, particularly those in the financial areas of London, and others, feel that the rest of the country are wrong in their decision to vote for Brexit.
If we do not agree which of our MPs have been voted in should we then decide to boycott the decision and do everything in our power to overturn the decision of the majority; if someone is elected to the House of Lords and we do not agree with the decision to put them there for whatever reason should we demonstrate against the decision. We are supposed to live in a democratic society. A vote has been made and we should all abide by it, but it appears that we are only a democratic society when the decision suits certain people.
When we joined the EU things were very different and a lot of the laws and changes that have been made have been to the detriment of this country. Stop treating us like morons who have no idea what we have voted for. Most voters, irrespective of their vote, listened to the arguments and did not make their decision lightly, weighing up the pros and cons. As for the so called “POLLS” that have been carried out recently, how many times have they turned out to be WRONG.
“…all the Irish nationals who could vote but out of fairness really shouldn’t have been allowed”
What exactly do you mean by this? There has been a long running agreement between the UK and Ireland that residents in either state can vote in each other’s elections. The same is true for any UK citizen voting in the Rep. of Ireland’s many referenda (there’s usually about 1 a year). I’ve lived and worked here for 10 years. Continually paid my taxes and never claimed benefits. I’m also a member of a (UK) political party. Can you please clarify what the ‘fairness’ of disenfranchising me would be?
On the contrary, poll after poll shows the people who voted to leave now regret their decision: they regret falling for lies; they regret isolating the country; they regret the rise in xenophobia they caused. Brexit is not the wil of the people – it is the imposition of something approaching fascism by the few on the many, and must be stopped
Isolating the country? How?
Alienating 27 of our neighbouring countries; alienating people from those countries who now want to go home / no longer want to come here; cutting trade links and deals both with them and with many other countries where those links and deals were negotiated as part of the EU; cutting freedom of movement, meaning visas etc will quite likely be required for travel either way until a new deal is negotiated; putting people off coming here or doing business with us with the surge of xenophobia and economic uncertainty after the referendum; those ways.
Couldn’t agree more with everything you said
AS to polls. I would have thought that polls would now be looked at askance, they got Brexit wrong they got Trump wrong. They are in effect somewhat unscientific because the numbers polled are too small and from a restricted set of society at large. The Eu is essentially undemocratic and run by appointees who cannot be removed individually from office. It is essentially a dictaorship, benigb possibly but capable of going the other way. I want to choose who writes the rules for me and mine..
Karl, where did you get the evidence that “Poll after poll shows that people who voted to leave have not changed their minds”.
I’d like to know, because many who voted Brexit are now ashamed to admit it. Ashamed, because of the damage to our currency,because of the open racism it has promoted amongst the thicker classes and ashamed for falling for the downright lies of Boris and Co, who now seem to have gone very quiet.
And embarassed by the other two thickoes, Fox and Davis, who have already fucked up over premature, illegal negotiations with the Australians.
Start thinking, instead of rehashing untruths.
Adrian, the pound was lower against the Euro back in Dec 2008 than it is at present. Pound goes up. It goes down. BREXIT has nothing to do with it. Industry is carrying on and will continue to do so. And, as you will have read, the head of JCB, a company that has international trade, has left CBI because of the CBI’s deliberate lies throughout the Referendum campaign. Nissan,another large manufacturing Japanese company is expanding. They don’t give a toss that UK leaves EUSSR.
By the way, who says that Fox/Davis are having “premature, illegal” negotiations with Australia? Oh yes, that is because the UK has its hands tied by the EUSSR. But, isn’t the UK supposed to be a sovereign nation? Or, do you want to be a lackey of the EUSSR.
You clearly have no grasp on reality – there have been no negotiations with Australia, just preliminary talks, and let’s hope we can get proper talks going ASAP. ILLEGAL? that just shows how the EU works does it not? The UK will soon be free. Free to negotiate our own deals, free of the overbearing EU corruption which threatens with words like “illegal negotiations”. We are well rid of the EU, I do not know a single Brexit voter who has changed their mind. This is just a fabrication by people such as yourself who refuse to accept reality. Grow up, or shut up. The only person rehashing untruths here is you!
I am from Singapore, having been living here for nearly 30 years. I voted leave. Yes, it will be painful in the first few years by leaving the current form of EU. But with determination, vision and a good leadership, I believe this country will thrive and prosper in the years to come.
Singapore left Malaysia 50 years ago. We are grateful for Lee Kuan Yew, our then prime misinter for taking us out of the Union. It was tough but we made it.
Man cannot discover new oceans unless he has the courage to lose sight of the shore.
What about the 16..18 years old – they weren’t allowed to vote, even though it’ll affect them more than anyone, certainly more than those at the older end of the spectrum. I think 16..18 years should be able to vote in all elections – at 16 you can join the army, work, pay tax – whatever happened to no taxation without representation.
…so we now lower the voting age and re run a referendum so remainiacs can try to scrape a few more votes to re run the referendum?
Deffo E.u. tactics
But it is their future you are playing with.
That argument doesn’t really hold water. The 18 to 23 year olds had the lowest turn out by age groups in the referendum so I hardly think that the 16 to 17 (not 18) year olds would of made a huge difference. You’d have to assume that the ones that could be bothered to vote would all vote remain. That’s unlikely as I don’t think the majority understand the impact of the vote. The majority of the eligible electorate voted leave. Constitutional issues were not raised prior to the referendum. Why raise them now?
Karl, your verifications and citations for your assertion appear to be missing from your post! Please supply!
Look them up on the web
Not yet met a 16 to 24 year old who could give any other reason to remain other than “might want to work there or visit some day.”
What a nonsense article. Statistically the numbers of each side not showing up because they think it was a foregone conclusion would be virtually equal. I can state that with 99% or better accuracy due to the very large sample size of the actual vote. Yes you can have opinion polls but even if you get over 3,000 polled you’ll have a 95% chance of being within 2-3% of the result. So they just aren’t accurate enough. (I’ve heard opinion polls quoted of a sample size of 1,500 or so – I really can’t be bothered to calculate the accuracy of those but any other Maths graduate can do it).
(This by the way is why the BBC’s exit polls failed so badly – they are illegal anyway and if I were a presiding officer again and saw them doing it I would have them arrested).
I suspect a sizeable majority of those complaining about the result in the various marches stayed home on the day.
Now of course the media want to convince us that because leaving is so hard we might as well stay. The British people are not stupid we are not staying in an arrangement we cannot leave. Not willingly anyway.
As for the youth wanting to travel the world the Commonwealth is still open to us, most of which has better weather than Europe and speaks English!
Utter tosh. I voted to leave the EU and I still stand by that decision. The EU is a corrupt anti-individual establishment that is brick by brick designed to disenfranchise the individual and give power to corrupt corporations and political idealogy.
The analysis is what it is. However, Parliament has to act on the vote, not the analysis of it, which can be represented in any number of ways that personally support your thesis, or even personal belief system.
You can argue that if a result is shocking, that you should ignore it until a result is considered “correct” by some authority figure who has the power to influence the outcome of public democratic process. A version of this is what the EU practices now in the states that it controls. But it would, for example, have nullified the Labour landslide in 1997 given the revulsion of Blair that presented itself a few years later, and probably the election of the Coalition government in 2010.. Again, it requires some omnipotent, God-like figure decreed which “shocks” should we act upon and which should not – and this figure does not exist, and cannot be created.
But back to the thesis, which is that one portrayal of a particular interpretation of a statistical theory is enough to override the democratic process. Also posited is this theory that if you waited until certain voters became old enough to vote, they would change the outcome, and since this vote affects the future, a “wrong” vote (as Brexit is described) should be annulled and the vote re-run, or abandoned altogether. This logic applies to every general election, in another way; as people get older, they tend to vote Conservative to fix their “wrong” Labour voting decision of the past. You may argue that since an elected government only lasts five years, this is less important, but far too many flimsy hypotheses also hang on that supposition. Chief amongst which is that it is not possible to destroy a country that badly after only five years. But as we have shown, Labour historically gives it a try each time.
Perhaps we should be protected from Labour? Perhaps not; instead, just pointless economic platitudes and attempts to airbrush democracy in favour of a self-selecting oligarchy that thinks it knows better than the people it wants to control.
Just get us out of Europe NOW.
We have waited long enough to be able to get back to controlling OUR country as WE want to.
Please stop writing such codswallop and focus your energy on getting us through Brexit.
An Emeritus Professor of Computing Education writes a balanced and properly cited account of the public position as surveyed since the Brexit referendum and the cave dwellers call it “rubbish” and “codswallops”! Truly, “the lunatics have taken over the asylum”!
Lets Get on with it
I did not voted for the common market as you could see it was
going to wind up very much where we are now
Didn’t bother to read the guff. Load of cobblers.
Just want to go on record stating this person does not, will not, and could not speak for me, even though the writer would like you to believe that.
UK is better off out. Though the current crop of elite are too worried about losing all the fat they have accumulated for the last 10 years and to that end will forecast doom and gloom. Shame the media isn’t objective anymore.
We need to address whether there is a real movement for leaving the EU and all the evidence suggests otherwise. If your concerns are really to do with migration , these can be sorted by government policies and have nothing to do with the EU. If however you believe in keeping uk jobs and the economy strong it’s far safer to remain within the EU and reform from within. Outside will cause grave economic damage and that risk cannot be born by the younger working generations.
Caroline, I think you’ll find we did address whether there is a real movement for leaving the EU on 23rd June. The question I find useful to ask people is “would you have voted to join the EU”. Only one person so far as answered in the affirmative.
Sir Mug Handle, Ignoring your dubious premise (I didn’t read the article, but its ‘a load of cobblers’), i’d like to emphasise one point you seem to take issue with: the media isn’t objective? The majority of newspapers, including the popular ones (Sun, Mail, Express, Telegraph) were all harpy screeching in favour of leaving, often after years of dangerously misleading headlines. Where does this accusation of bias in the media towards ‘the establishment’ (and often to the liberal left) keep coming from??
I am an unemployed former bankrupt and committed remainer. Please explain how I am part of any elite.
What absolute nonsense, thankfully, we do not live in Australia, here people are free to choose whether they vote or not.
Those who chose not to vote, have no right to complain about the consequences of their inaction. The majority of those who engaged in the democratic process, were in favor of leaving, and consequently that is the right and proper democratic path.
Just so we’re clear; I voted remain, but I respect the democratic process, and will work to make this a success in the decades to come, as should be your goal.
Of course, you are incorrect in your unsubstantiated opinion and, as the professor has indicated, the later opinion polls show that to be the case. On top of those groups denied a vote that he refers to are large numbers of the ex pat community living in the EU or elsewhere. I think it is highly likely that the majority of them would also have voted to remain.
The one truth that leavers refuse to accept is that Brexit is not “the will of the people”!
There is of course one very simple solution to the current mess. Hold another referendum but this time do it properly and include everyone who has a stake in the outcome, wherever they may live and certainly all British citizens. We know why leavers won’t agree to doing so, it’s because they know what the outcome would be and yet they chant “democracy” as a justification for their nonsensical position.
If we apply your logic to local and general elections then the country would be in a perpetual state of a paralysis forevermore.
Rightly or wrongly a decision has been made, now we must move forward as best as we can.
A day was chosen long in advance on which people could register their vote, and the deadline was even extended. If people chose not to vote or now feel that they made the wrong choice then this says more about the results of the education system in the UK since the 1990s, and it’s even more disastrous implications than Brexit, that has left a large proportion of the country either uninterested or incapable of making an informed choice.
Is he talking about the same polls and pollsters who forcast a Remain victory in the first place? Prior to that they got the general election wrong. I’d have more faith in Mystic Meg.
All rather desperate.
If the remainers had won, then, presumably, democracy would have categorically triumphed. However they didn’t and now people are scratching round for a get-out clause from democracy itself. How authoritarian these so-called liberals become when they don’t get their own way.
You lost, get over it.
Can’t get over it. Won’t get over it. Minority vote pushed by the rabid right wing media moguls again. Only 26% of the population voted to leave, the other 74% are now allowed to harp on about it for at least 40 years until we can force another referendum in the same way that the Brexitards couldn’t get over the previous referendum 4 decades ago and eventually turned into kippers.
Brexitmongers will just have to suck it up, get used to it. Can’t stand the moaning? Now you know how we’ve felt since the 1970s.
Bearing in mind that we were deliberately lied to about loss of sovereignty when we joined the then Common Market (Heath admitted as such on Question Time when Peter Sissons chaired it) people have had every right to complain.
As to “26% of the population voted to leave.” 37.5% of the eligible voters voted to LEAVE. As to “rabid right wing media moguls,” the biggest player in the media section, BBC, was pro EUSSR. So was FT, Guardian, Independent and, to a large extent, the Times.
Big Business was pro-EUSSR and, of course, their mouthpiece CBI. NFU and a large number of Trades Unions…… You’ll also know that JCB has left CBI because of it’s biased statements during the referendum. Manufacturing is going well. Likewise the pound is doing its normal ups and downs – still well above the last low back in Dec 2008. As an expat, I’m happy that the UK will become a sovereign state again. And, if you truly believe in democracy, so should you be.
Or, perhaps, it was a more serious point, and you have no facts to support your views?
The failure to allow 16-18 year olds to vote, when they are so clearly more affected than anyone else, was and is a travesty. If it was about the future of the UK then those with the longest future in this nation should have been entitled to vote. The fact people aged 90+ could vote, who will likely see the shortest impact, is deeply unfair if the youngest are excluded.
Brexit, irrespective of how it plays out, is one of the biggest cons on the UK public, and people like Karl above, who ignore facts and refuse to acknowledged the reality of the situation, are the reason the likes of BoJo and Farage can get ahead.
Oh here we go. You another one of those on the ‘old people shouldn’t vote’ bandwagon?
16 year olds are only as affected as anybody else but suffer from the lack of knowledge and life experience that guides informed voting. This nonsense line that they have to live with it longer and therefore they deserve more of a say is an attack on the very idea of democracy. Older people did not vote to sabotage the country as you would have to believe for this drivel about 16 year olds to make sense.
The travesty would have been engineering the electorate to design the desired result.
This is rubbish. I am 16. I watch question time, I read the news, I have my own opinions and knowledge to form informed decisions. Many in my school are the same, we have a debating club, we are not sponges who merely have the opinions of our parents/friends.
Although, I don’t really mind about not voting. There has to be a cut off age somewhere.
Ellie, your final comment proves that you and people of your age group can be mature enough to vote. You evidently have a mature attitude as well as an educated mind. There are a few comments her from people much older than you who do not show your maturity.
WB, what a patronising twit you are! You are another one of those fools who use the word “democracy” without a clue to its meaning! It means ‘of the people’, that means all of the people not just some of the people. It certainly does not mean of the privileged few who hold a piece of paper that allows them to vote!
..- if you can t win the vote, change the voting rules to engineer the voting system in your favour… textbook e.u.
If you support democracy, why are you so frightened of a confirming vote?
– a re-run because remainers didnt like the result?
ok, so lets say- we call a re run, but its got to be the best of 3 with only the last one binding.thats normal only fair.
– another remoaner favourite ‘ the percentage wasnt enough to sway the vote- it should be 70/30″ – ok. best of 3, last one the decider, BUT there HAS TO BE A 70% VOTE TO CONFIRM THE DECISION.
now to the math.
– referendum round 1 cost 142.2 million gbp.
round 2 divide the cost by the NUMBER OF REMAINERS they pay for it (only fair)
round 3 (the final round is definitive) re run continuously every 6 months until the ‘magic’ 70% majority is achieved.
-remainers pay for it. (they wanted a re-run)
-a legal document requiring you to PAY FOR IT will be signed under oath.
remainers tax code number adjusted accordingly to reflect the cost, or direct debit and the debt is permanently attached to name and n.i. number ..
go for it.
The only reason for a vote it to see what the largest number of voters wanted from the question asked. If you ignore the outcome because you didn’t like the result then democracy is dead. How can you then rule the country? Dictatorship, military rule just what we need to stop anarchy. I think you would be a good dictator Justin.
Now, if it was compulsory to vote then we could stop all this speculation couldn’t we?
why would we brexit voters bother with polls we won only the removers will lie about which way they would vote i know many people who push for remain and now say that they voted leave just so they can argue that they changed their mind bull crap
Absolute rubbish. Amongst all polls, the most reliable one is the one on 23/6/16 (simply because this is the poll where 33.5 million people were questioned) and this poll is the one the author chooses to ignore! Is this article for real?
Yes, a snap opinion poll on one particular day, with the result so close that on a different day it might be a different result. Hardly the overwhelming mandate and “will of the people” that ought to be necessary for such a fundamental change to the status of the nation.
Would that be a snap decision on one particular day like, say, a General Election?
Marie, how is it that you think democratic polls work normally?
Why sould anybody” get over” watching an economy go down the drain? , Any good news yet No?
All good news at the moment. Pound happy, well above its last low of Dec 08. Manufacturing exporting well. Nissan recently announced further expansion. Latest forecasts are good. But, taken with a pinch of salt because the UK was going to sink immediately after the LEAVE vote! LOL
“Finally my words ‘nothing less than a second referendum could redress the unfairness felt by…’, is fact. I am not specifically advocating a second referendum in the article, just recognising there are very strong feelings indeed from groups who felt disenfranchised despite paying UK taxes and the reality that the Brexit decision will directly, and potentially dramatically affect their own futures either in the UK or abroad.”
And just who are these groups who feel disenfranchised despite paying UK taxes?
Are you implying that the ludicrous suggestion (already mentioned on here) that people from other EU countries living and working here should have been able to vote in the referendum has merit?, or that people from the UK who have retired / gone to live in other countries decades ago should have been able to, or the 15 / 16 /17 year olds should have been able to vote? Why should they?
“The latest polls on what the UK thinks will happen as a result of Brexit are depressing reading. Frequently there is a majority expecting that immigration will reduce and the NHS will stay much the same but apart from that, more think the economy, UK influence, trade, travel, pensions and jobs will all get worse as a result. They are remarkable responses and it surely must make politicians question why, if that is the expectation, the same polls of the same people do not report an even higher Remain majority”
Maybe its because those who voted to leave aren’t the stupid, xenophobic bigots that so many Remain supporters like to portray us. I, like so many, thought long and hard before I voted to leave. I knew that we could be in for a difficult period if we decided to leave the EU but, on balance, I believed that was a price worth paying to be free of the EU and all its self inflicted problems. Therefore when I complete a survey I answer it honestly but still make it clear I support leaving the EU.
The problem with the Remain supporters is that they did not even contemplate that they may lose the referendum and, having done so, they are scratching around looking for excuses to overturn the result. That initial referendum was fair and people knew what they were voting for, so no, there should be no second referendum.
”Maybe its because those who voted to leave aren’t the stupid, xenophobic bigots that so many Remain supporters like to portray us. ” bull – that is exactly what you are! This country is now a ruinous laughing stock because of your stupidity. Life will soon get much harder; we will turn inwards, bitter and twisted upon ourselves. I used to love this country, but fools like you have taken it from me.
Please don’t forget the other group that were denied a vote, UK citizens that have lived abroad over fifteen years.
Many of these abandoned people still pay taxes in the UK on their pensions etc, and yet were excluded simply because the promise made by Cameron to remove the 15 year limit was not enacted.
I was prevented from voting by the 15 year ‘rule’, illegally, undemocratically and unilaterally, like many others – sadly, it’s impossible to know how many of us were prevented from voting and how many votes were disallowed, postal votes which were sent too late for people to get them back in time for their vote to count. That would have changed the vote. Karl and Mike Manning, would you accept being told to ‘get over it’ if you had lost?
Mr. Low, would you be interested in contacting me by email, please. Many thanks in advance. Cordially Claire
“You Lost, get over it” – hurrah, I win at Brexiteer Bingo! The only argument ever spouted from the mouths of Leavers
You know that actual referendum we had. Because it seems like you don’t.
Excellent article, full of common sense. I would go even further, by saying that the Referendum was never a sane or sensible way to decide the issue, and should be invalid by default.
The public were wilfully and systematically misled by lies, exaggerations, misinformation and promises the Leave campaign had no intention of keeping or even any power to keep.
Very few people understood what they were voting for. People voted Leave only because they saw their current situation, were dissatisfied with it, and believed they could improve it by taking the choice offered to them. The very government that put them into that sorry situation was able to dupe them into taking a self-harming decision, in the mistaken belief that it would solve their problems.
It wasn’t the EU that closed the docks, the mines, the car factories and the steelworks. It wasn’t the EU that invented the poll tax, ran down the NHS, neglected the North, slashed benefits and created a food bank culture. It wasn’t the EU that did any of this. But well done, Brexiters, for handing over unregulated power to the people who did.
you didn’t include all the British citizens who live overseas who were excluded from voting due to the 15yr rule, it is in the Tory manifesto that these citizens should have the vote for life but they did not implement this change in time for the referendum even though the result has long lasting impact on their lives and future. There was also an administrative foul up with many local authorities failing to send out the postal votes to overseas citizens in time for inclusion in the ballot.
Both Karl and Mike demonstrate contempt for real democracy. Apart from anything else, in real democracy there is an opportunity to change decisions, it is not a one off, especially if many of those most affected are disenfranchised. In real democracy one side doesn’t offer a wide range of possible future pathways (ie. Norway-like, Swiss-like etc., 350 M to be spent on NHS) if you vote their way, only to impose their own authoritarian vision after the fact. If they think that future referendums would be non-democratic, then they invalidate the result of the one we had. They also have conveniently short memories, if they don’t recall Farage pointing out that 52:48 would not represent a definitive result.
I can’t believe this bloke is a professor!
It is unbelievable how many people oppose democracy in the UK including those very people who are supposed to represent us in the first place
You lost. Get over it.
Do you oppose FPTP and The House Of Lords?
Our democracy is based upon the sovereignty of the House of Commons. Any attempt to block debate on this matter is undemocratic. Get over it.
Major constitutional change?
Why was the EU referendum advisory and why not a required percentage of the electorate?
“1 March 1979: Scotland – Scottish devolution referendum on whether there should be a Scottish Assembly (40 per cent of the electorate had to vote yes in the referendum, although a small majority voted yes this was short of the 40 per cent threshold required to enact devolution)” http://www.parliament.uk/get-involved/elections/referendums-held-in-the-uk/
Very interesting analysis, thanks. It confirms the idea that Brexit was won on issuing a lot of last minute promises by the Leavers (lies) and poor tactics and over-confidence from the Remain side.
It’s also very interesting that the pro-leave people on this comments threat repeat the same old lines of ‘you lost, get over it.’ It reminds me of my 6 year old who shouts “mum” angrily at me, and when I say what, is then silent…then “Mum” more loudly, but the same again. She’s got nothing (apart from wanting attention…fair enough, as we’re talking about a child).
Seriously, you pro-leave people have nothing positive to say at all. Where’s the plan? You ain’t got one. We’re all waiting.
Now imagine if EU citizens in Britain and British expats in the EU could have voted as well. I suspect it would have been a landslide victory for Remain.
Brexit was correct.We had a democratic vote and the Remoaners lost,so don’t tell me the majority of Brits didn’t want to leave–They did want to leave the corrupt Eu.
NOT a democratic vote – see the other comments about those of us excluded because of living outside the UK for more than 15 years (estimated at about 2 million out of over 6 million UK citizens abroad), the young, the lost postal votes, the Irish and Commonwealth voters!
Anyway, it was an ADVISORY referendum which means, despite Mrs May’s government’s opinion, that Parliament HAS to decide after a full and thorough debate and a non-whipped vote.
Why should you have a vote in the future of a country you’ve abandoned long term?
WB – you say “Why should you have a vote in the future of a country you’ve abandoned long term?”
One over-riding reason – we are UK Citizens, with a stake in how our country is governed, which affects us expatriates in this case FAR more immeasurably than you who remain in the country.
Second, we certainly never “abandoned our country long term” – merely exercising our treaty-given and therefore UK-given rights to free movement within the EU, and those of us outside the EU should not be so shabbily treated either.
Further, many of us have been working in the interest of our country while abroad – how does that constitute abandonment?
Try and find out some facts!
It cannot be ignored that the referendum result was very, very close. It was only 52% to 48%, so major parts of the country (Greater London, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Manchester) did in fact vote Remain.
The Brexiteers’ strategy is to bury these facts in a blizzard of abuse (as we see above), hoping for a speedy invoking of Article 50 so that arguing against a “fait accompli” becomes more and more difficult.
Why wasn’t the threshold for such an important constitutional decision at least 60% of the vote. You cannot tip 40 years of constitutional history so easily into the shredder at the whim of Rupert Murdoch (” The Sun”) and Richard Desmond (“The Daily Express”).
There’s a very bizarre attitude from some commenting on this article to simply rubbish observations like this. And I’m definitely not placing all that voted in any particular way in this box. The sorts of observations in this article are relevant and while the writer certainly can’t speak for anyone, he can certainly quote opinion polls. If it is the case and there’s certainly a possibility that the majority of voters in this country would now vote Remain and it looks like what the Leave campaign promised was very much unachievable and if some people’s opinions have been altered by the changing economics and changing race relations, then it would foolhardy for any government to simply ignore that opinion. Whatever damage is done by that government, they’ll pay for at the ballot box at some point in the future…
The author has missed another crucial group who were not allowed to vote in the UK’s EU referendum: those UK citizens who had lived in the EU or the rest of the world for over 15 years. This is estimated at over 1m (Financial Times) resident for over 15 years in Europe and near 2m in the rest of the world. Considering that vast majority of our peer nations (e.g. USA, France, Australia etc) allow life-long voting in referenda by all their citizens in possession of a passport it seems that the UK is out of step in depriving such a large number a vote last June. And how could extending the right to vote in the referendum to all Gibraltar’s 30k citizens be compatible with denying the vote to the British expatriate 15+ years group? Gibraltarians are not allowed to vote in UK general elections but were allowed to vote in the EU referendum. Surely this was an unjustifiable denial of democracy to those who may be among the most impacted by any change from the status quo? It would certainly have had a marked effect on the outcome in June.
I still think constitutionally Brexit is unethical.
We vote democratically to elect a Parliament.
A referendum is supposed to be an opinion of the mood of the people at that time.
With the Prime Minister vetoing parliamentary vote on the acceptance of a tiny majority expressed to a mendacious campaign from the leave camp,and thus denying our elected representatives to have the final say,( constitutionally) it’s undemocratic.
Bent polls with Remain bias before the referendum. Same bent polling companies, same bias, after the referendum. And with the scandals breaking over the US presidential elections and rigged polls now, the polling companies will have a lot more questions to answer. There is only ONE poll that matters and that was the votes of the people on June 23rd. Some who wished to Remain couldn’t be bothered to vote you say? Then they made their choice! THAT is what democracy is about, and thank the heavens that the people of Britain were finally able to force the establishment to hold the referendum they had been wiggling out of for years! Dangerous game being played in this article, all who want to be EU citizens have two years to apply for citizenship in an EU member state. You will probably find Lithuania very welcoming!
Bent and biased polling? Any evidence to back up that assertion? Or is it just true because you think it’s true? “Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur”,
Let’s just consider all the advantages Remain had:
Got to choose electorate (moaned about in the article). Changed half-way through the campaign (to Remain’s advantage)
£9m mailshot to all households
Use of Civil Service until purdah
Support of international organisations
Support of US President
Special deal with the EU to promote
Support of most trade unions
BBC being less than impartial
Support of most of academia (as this article balefully proves)
Support of Big Business and its funding
All four major parties
But, apparently, that wasn’t enough weight on one side of the scales. No, according to the writer, kids must also be included and those who didn’t vote must also be included for Remain. Also, those as yet unborn as for Remain and those who haven’t lived in the country for years and …..so on.
Let’s face up to it. The writer would happily change things ad infinitum until Remain won. Well, at least we have been spared the nauseating suggestion that the elderly should be disenfranchised.
Accept it: the referendum had a much greater turnout than the previous year’s General Election, reflecting its importance and one-off nature. And Leave won by getting people who had never voted before to vote; a remarkable achievement would took everybody by surprise.
Now, stop making a fool of yourself tying yourself into contortions to make Black into White.
Yes, it really is unbelievable.Yet, it is happening.We will not have heard the last of it.Globalisation as per the international high finance and transnational corporations has a stack of supporters who feel totally dependent upon the employ and perks given them by big business.Then there are the academics and a lot of workers who feel threatened by Brexit.They are unable to function in the wider world without a sinecure on the federalisation gravy train.For me, the answer is another referendum soon.If a majority vote for going back on the earlier referendum, the people of the UK will have made a fateful decision they will have to live with until the EU collapses, which could be a few years yet.In the meantime Brexiters will have a licence to play politics to their hearts’ content.For almost every carp they can think of they will have a sitting duck target.
Btw, I must confess, I am totally in favour Brexit, anti-EU, a Dutch citizen living in Oz and hoping to retire in Europe, sometime, Anglophile and supporter of democracy to boot.Good night, folks.
A convincing analysis!
This is only an extra reason to give the British people a vote by referendum at the end of the Brexit negotiations.
The question should be whether, after knowing what a Brexit does really look like, the people still support a Brexit.
After asking the people whether a Brexit process should be started, it is also fair the ask them how it should be ended: To accept the deal and exit the EU or not to accept it and to stay.
New negotiations in case the deal is rejected will not be accepted by the EU as it doesn’t want to become a hostage of UK domestic politics (which I consider as fair) so the final referendum will be a “take it or leave it” referendum.
The British people started this process and they should also decide how it is ended. That is just fair !
Since there is so much doubt, and since it is splitting the country so much, and since a referendum is a referral to the general public to advise Parliament before they make an act of parliament why do we not simply do it again? The cost of another referendum to check the public opinion would be insignificant compared to the economic consequences either way.
Its not simply a case of a clear result, and we are all falling apart because of it. In the interest of Unity why not simply do it again; after all everyone is better informed given the debate since the referendum has turned up more information than we were ever given before.
It is impossible to cohesively progress with any sense of ‘togetherness’ in such a finely balanced situation.
The interest should be in moving forward with a clear mandate to do something which is clearly defined. I haven’t seen anyone argue that the situation is clearly defined. If the will of the people really is to leave then there should be no fear that that is still the case. And if there is considerable doubt about it then a second referendum should provide clarity either way.
Best of three, yes?
Seems a good article, and by no means scientific, 3 people I know now regret their vote to leave. Leavers are scared, as they know when there is another referendum, which there will be, they will lose soundly!
And besides, until you give the vote to 16/17 year olds, as they did In Scotlands referendum, then this wasn’t democratic at all.
Also, given that only two of the four countries within the Kingdom voted to leave, and even then by a very narrow Majority, it’s clear this isn’t the will of the people.
The only reason that the 16 and 17 year olds were given the vote in Scotland was because it was thought that they would vote for independence, the answer was still no.
Also, EU citizens who have made their life here on the basis of European citizenship had no say in a referendum which will remove their right to stay and has unleashed a wave of xenophobia. They should have been consulted. You can sign my petition if you feel strongly about it: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/159488
With an advisory referendum it is up to MPs to take it into account. They could well have said – this is not a sufficient mandate, but so far haven’t. I think once the economic impacts start being felt, they will do so. And there should certainly be a referendum on the Brexit strategy proposed – which seems not to have been decided as yet – since what we are being apparently considered, as much as one can determine from the runes, is nothing like what was discussed by the Leave campaign during the referendum.
All the polls show is that there’s been no major shift either way and that the poll results are well within the margin of error.
The rest of the article seems to be trying to magic into existence an electorate prepared to vote Remain. There’ll be a pro-Remain majority by 2021? Well it’ll be a bit late by then won’t it?
Only 34% of 18-24 year old youngsters bothered to vote so can hardly blame those who took their civic duty seriously! If you don’t vote, don’t moan at the result!! Additionally, I believe parliament voted 6 to 1 to hold the referendum and the government leaflet sent out to all voters clearly states ‘it is your decision, we will do what you say’, (note it states ‘we will do what you say’ NOT what you advise!! The referendum bill does not say anywhere that the referendum would be advisory only and lastly, we voted as one United Kingdom, NOT as 4 separate countries so the overall result is the one that counts.
No it wasn’t – I did a study of the vote to make my own estimate of the effect of age differentials in turnout and the figure I came up with was 64%. This was the figure given by some wildly inaccurate estimates by the press after the referendum, but accurate figures from King’s College and the Ashcroft Polls come out at about the figure I used. Referendums are always advisory unless expressly otherwise – the advice to the public and Parliament clearly says it. What the Government said has nothing to do with the constitution – that is determined by the law. We have seen with Mrs. May that Government will try to ignore constitutional niceties if given the chance – but they don’t have the right to do it. You may be right constitutionally about the power of the constituent parts of the UK, but most other federal countries (and since devolution the UK has become a federal country like it or not) require all constituent parts to be in favour. You can take that line, but that means you are in favour of a kingdom, not a United Kingdom. If you want that, then say so. I would prefer the UK to stay together in the EU.
Thanks Adrian, Interesting article. I agree with you it is disappointing that 16-18 year olds weren’t given the vote, and as others have noted some of the British citizens living abroad (particularly in the EU exercising their free movement rights, and would thus be directly affected by the result). I am less convinced by your argument for EU citizens living in the EU, for the same reason that rUK residents weren’t allowed a vote in the Scottish referendum – they have a vested interested (in the status quo), but though the decision affects them it is not their decision. They take advantage of the current situation as the UK have granted (ie by exercising free movement to the UK).
Regardless, these points about the franchise should not be thought criticisms of the referendum result, but as failings of Parliament, which passed the bill with these limitations almost unanimously (save the SNP MPs).
I am also not convinced that non-voters can be relied upon. There is a distinction to be drawn between those who wished to vote, but could not (eg because of irregularities with the postal voting process), whose voice should be considered, and those who chose not to, whether out of complacency of the result or disinterested inertia. To contemplate the possible actions of non-voters at each vote brings significant uncertainty to every election and referendum.
No, I struggle to doubt the validity of the referendum result. Your arguments, and others, point instead to the defects of referendums, which make them wholly unsuited to make decisions on anything but the most simple of topics (and even then I doubt them). As you pointed out, results change from poll to poll, week to week; some voters acted based on ‘giving government a kick’ rather than the actual issue; the voting public are of a varying demographic nature and all have different, narrow concerns. Additionally, issues of voters’ competence to appreciate the implications, uncertainty as to what the result actually means (Brexit means Brexit is not in any way a meaningful answer) and the fact that we live in a representative democracy, not a direct democracy, all point to the fact that a referendum was the wrong way to decide this issue.
Hmm. OK. So, what with “low voter turnout”, “long-term poll trends”, “the general decline of the traditional working class” and the fact that we have an ageing population who tend to vote Conservative as they get older, we can safely assume that Labour won’t get more than 30% of the potential votes at any of the next ten general elections. And of course the Lib Dems don’t count because they’ve never won anything, and UKIP doesn’t count because they’re bigots who shouldn’t have been allowed to vote in the first place, and the Greens don’t count because they’re mad. So here’s an idea: let’s forget about democracy and let the Tories rule us forever. Yup. Nice one.
And..er…the country isn’t exactly falling apart. Pardon me if I’ve missed something, but the UK’s economic performance is among the best in the G8 and is in fact the best in Europe by some margin. Inflation might indeed rise, but at 1% it’s hardly anything to get worried about (I noticed, incidentally, that the bankers didn’t complain about the inflationary consequences of Sterling’s collapse in 2008, presumably because in that instance it was due to their own greed and incompetence). There is some real distress out there, of course, but it’s mainly emotional and felt by a (formerly) smug elite who seem completely unable to accept that 17 million people – the largest number ever to cast a vote for anything in the entire history of the UK – chose to ignore their alarmist claptrap and vote for democratic freedom instead.
Democratic freedom would entail allowing our sovereign parliament to decide.
You’ve forgotten to add in the UK citizens resident in the EU for a long time who were excluded from the referendum but who – quite sickeningly for them, no doubt – the government has now decided to include in future votes.
I assume the vast majority of those people would vote to stay in the EU, adding further to the revision in favour of Remain.
Let us just understand the main thing here. The decision has been made and the people have spoken. It always comes down to so much negativity. no one knows how this will turn out, as its early days. Yes it’s easy to say the economy is failing but come on it’s only been a few months!
A great example why we shouldn’t be dealing with Brussells is look at the recent collapse in talks with Canada! A great deal on the table but some twit in the EU decided not to take it on. Do we still want to deal with these buerocratic fat cats which think what is best for other countries like the UK!
Wrong on CETA. There were no “bureaucratic fat cats” involved in this vote against CETA – and try and learn something about the EU democracy instead of peddling this ridiculous propaganda.
Indeed it was the proof that some democracy exists – Wallonia was justifiably worried about the effects of CETA on them, and particularly about the ISDS (Investor-State dispute system) – otherwise relinquishing national and even EU control to “private” tribunals so that multinationals (yes, including US multinationals with subsidiaries in Canada) could sue states for billions in “lost profits” following fully democratic and legitimate national measures.
Where is the UK parliamentary debate on this? There wasn’t one. So if the UK decided to save our bees by banning the pesticides that kill them, the multinationals that make the pesticides could sur the UK for billions of £s. Millions of people have protested against this throughout the EU but NATIONAL governments paid no attention. EXCEPT in Wallonia’s regional government – Bravo to them, they have been able to swing it to reduce drastically the negative effects of CETA, allowing the positive ones (if any, but that’s another story) to persist.
AND of course the UK Government, which over-rides local and regional councils to allow fracking, for example, is strongly in favour of CETA as it was, and of TTIP. With NO parliamentary debate or approval – perhaps later, when it’s all signed and sealed?
A good analytical piece by Professor Adrian Low
“We are paying the price of our media. British journalism thinks of itself as uniquely excellent. It is more illuminating to think of it as uniquely awful. Few European countries have newspapers that are as partisan, misleading and confrontational as some of the overmighty titles in this country. The possibility of Brexit could only have happened because of the British press – if there were no other good reason for voting to remain, the hope of denying the press their long-craved triumph on Europe would suffice for me. But Brexit may also happen because of the infantilised and destructively coarse level of debate on social media too”.
As far as the EU and its workings are concerned, the British public are perhaps the most misinformed in Europe – independent of whether they are for or against membership. There have, over decades, been nothing but streams of increasingly vicious and sustained attacks against the EU that have been relentless in their intensity.
Agreed, it has been democracy of a sort, consisting of lies, manipulative propaganda and downright coercion promoted and instigated by a vicious right-wing press. And it achieved the very same democratic mandate that allowed the German Chancellor to gain power in the thirties, completely legitimately. He did it most certainly via the democratic vote, but that vote itself was fed by lies, half-truths, twisted statistics or no statistics at all, manipulation, and an appeal to the lowest common denominator. In short, it was a farce.
There has never been a level playing field in over forty years of membership. Remember the manipulative headlines of two decades ago? “EU to Ban Vintage Car Rallies.” “University Fined For Not Flying EU Flag!” And even, if you remember, “EU Says Bodies Must Be Liquidized And Put Down Drains!” All those headlines no doubt impressed the “grown up” majority. But none were true!
No country on earth could withstand this relentless avalanche of misinformation and blatant fabrication and yet remain unaffected and without eventually succumbing to its baleful influence.
The Referendum was, no doubt, all very pretty! But it was never democracy. Not by a mile! Or even responsible. Blame a rather weak PM who couldn´t control his eurosceptic backbenchers. That´s why we´re here today. Cameron no doubt excuses the thoroughly divisive catastrophe he presided over by saying he is a democrat and acted democratically. But he was fully aware that he was prime minister in Britain’s representative democracy and that his prime duty was to work through its parliamentary institutions and through those elected by us and paid to represent us. It is hardly elitism to say that you simply cannot extend the sole reins of power to those whose main interests in life have been anything BUT politics, economy and the manifest destiny of nations. Before the Referendum, 80 economists warned of the economic dangers that leaving the EU would impose on the UK. Do you equate the views of 80 economists with 80 fish-and-chip shop owners in the Midlands? The Referendum did! Had democracy been paramount, Britain would have reverted to capital punishment several decades ago, and would not have invaded Iraq or Libya.
As Shakespeare might have said quite accurately of democracy in Britain: “…..it is a thing honoured in the breach, but not in the observance.”
Eurosceptics have whined, complained and moaned for over forty years. In future it will be the turn of the Remainers.
This article is well written and well reasoned. I would love to feel more optimistic about a post-brexit future but the outlook seems predominantly negative. There are two things I find deeply frustrating:
One: The Government appears to be bent on interpreting the outcome of the referendum way beyond it’s scope to justify their agenda. If you accept the paper-thin majority who voted to leave the EU, the only thing that justifies is leaving the EU. Any attempt to justify anything else is invalid.
Two: The sum total of supporting arguments provided by the vocal proponents of Brexit, as distinct from those who voted for Brexit, is “Get over it, you lost.” There is not even the slightest attempt to present the benefits or advantages other than “taking back control” and “getting rid of the immigrants.” It seems to me, and this is a gross over-simplification I’ll admit, an inverse relationship between age and maturity in this regard. Speaking as a 50 year old, I am somewhat embarrassed by this.
If I can make a final point it is this: In almost any other referendum in any other country a decision to act in a way which redefines a country in such a deeply fundamental way would require a so-called “super-majority,” that is to say 60% of the vote. This is on the basis that the decision to overturn a stable social and economic situation requires overwhelming support to carry out effectively. To the point, of any of the people commenting on this board, I would ask was your life so terribly affected by the EU, that a completely unknown, costly and possibly disastrous future in a deeply divided country is preferable?
This blog piece is an elaborate We Wuz Robbed complaint – convincing enough to maybe tempt you to endorse the author’s conclusion: “Sadly nothing less than a second, fairer referendum could redress the unfairness felt by the exclusion from the electorate of both the 16-18s and the non-UK EU residents. This all paints a very sorry picture of the effectiveness of UK democracy. Brexit is not the will of the people in the UK. It never has been.” I disagree with his conclusion. …
There should be no second referendum for the same reason there should not have been one in the first place: there was no substantive EU treaty alteration that would have required it. The Labour Party was right not to offer one in its 2015 manifesto, and mistaken only to go along with Cameron’s project. Referenda outcomes are matters for Parliament to ratify, whatever the results. We have to recover the very language, arguments and procedures of representative democracy and not let “democratic/undemocratic” be hijacked by populist assertions that prefer the “will of the people” to be enacted by executive fiat.
If those people continuing to try and find reasons for ignoring the outcome of the EU vote do not like “you lost, get over it”, please stop trying to come up with ever more spurious reasons to overturn the outcome and just be honest by admitting you don’t like the outcome and want it overturned.
Parliament has a very long history of completely ignoring “the will of the people” so stating that referenda outcomes should be ratified by Parliament is naïve at best, unless of course you firmly believe that Parliament will overturn the said outcomes.
Oh, I freely admit that I want Parliament to oppose taking this country out of the EU, but the referendum was Cameron’s way of bypassing Parliament – the form of representative democracy through which the will of the people is expressed. If we manage to elect a majority Tory/Ukip parliament who will take us out, then so be it. I would continue to oppose it politically in the hope that being told to “get over it” didn’t entail compulsory membership of either party.
Robert Hunter, if you wish to raise manifesto promises you will have to include the promise Labour made to the British people that the European constitution – later Lisbon – would be voted on.
Tribal politics in the UK has resulted in a three-party stitch-up on the EU issue, and the people have not been able to have a say. Free of political tribalism, the people gave an honest assessment of what they thought of the European Union.
As for the article above, an LSE EU sock puppet coming out for a second vote on a result he doesn’t like, comes as no surprise to the British people; we have seen this EU form of democracy so many times.
It is about time that our would-be masters come to realise that “democracy” is about the power of the people – and he can produce as many irrelevant graphs as he likes; if the LSE was any good at its job, it would have seen the financial crashes coming.
“We’ve had enough of experts”
The British public did not vote to join the UK. It was the Politicians and business men. The people who would gain to make money and publicity out of it. The British public have now voted for Brexit so why are you politicians still fighting against your voters and supporters. We want our own identity, our own British pound, our own religions and cultures kept and treasured just as we enjoy and respect the many different cultures around the world. If Britain cannot support itself, it’s NHS and provide jobs for Brits…… then why oh why are you flooding us with refugees and opening our doors to every other EU country. Get on with Brexit and stop treating us like uneducated individuals without a mind of our own.
Amendment to my piece. I ment EU not uk….ok
“… nothing less than a second, fairer referendum could redress the unfairness…”
The day after the referendum, I uncharacteristically went to the bookmaker and put money on it never happening. Why? Think of the obstacles. All the reasons stated, plus the necessity (at last admitted by Government) for at least one if not more occasions for Parliamentary scrutiny and votes, the inevitable dragging out of wrangles about it domestically and with the EU, the possibility – I’d say likelihood – that the European Parliament will allow us to press the pause button, and the 2020 General Election, by which time the take-it-or-leave-it ‘deal’ will be far clearer and the deed almost certainly not done. Hence *that* will be the referendum. All we need now is for the spineless Corbyn administariat to step up to the plate and convincingly remind the ordinary folks of Britain that the people they voted for are those neo-Thatcherites who want to privatise the NHS, remove employment and environmental protections, and drive the economy in a hard capitalist direction. This is the bit I’m most worried won’t happen… 🙂
You were mugged by your bookmaker. He can’t pay out on a second referendum – or anything else, for that matter – ‘never happening’. You have to wait forever to find out what will ‘never’ happen.
British citizens living abroad were also excluded (5 million). I applied for a postal vote as soon as the referendum was announced only to get an email from Calderdale Council just a week or so before the date to say that they were processing the forms but I was unlikely to receive the papers in time. I made a frantic last-minute push for my sister to submit proxy votes. I gather this was not unusual. People had been posting the fact that voting forms would arrive only 5 days before the referendum date. Post from France takes 5 days. There are 1.2 million Brits living in other EU countries, 255,000 in France. Most of these people would have voted to remain. All those who have lived abroad for more than 15 years had no vote (this is now being changed’ alas too late).
Add to this the downright lies fed to the electorate by the Leave campaign and some of the tabloids – Farage admitted the day after the election that the EU money would NOT go to the NHS. Many poor souls believed him.
As a PS I note many of the replies here are saying that this data is ‘nonsense’. This is The London School of Economics and Political Science, not some crackpot blogger. On what grounds do the commentators base their ‘nonsense’ allegations? We are talking about the future of our country and the people in it (and those like me likely to be homeless and jobless should I be forced to come back to the UK). Yes, I know – I’m now classed as anti-British and a traitor – sigh.
Very well said, all absolutely and extremely sadly true.
I lived 19 years in paris, and had to get the carte de sejour before 1994. i cant see the french making you leave, if you have been there for decades. Unfortunatly i didnt go for citizenship during those 2 decades in France- my loss now as to get citizenship now would mean having to live in France for 4 years and work – and work there is none in France especially after 40 your chances are zilch. you should be able to get a carte de sejour if working or a retirement permit. i cannot see any problem at all for you in this.
I’ve never read such rubbish in my life. “Well if you just twist this and ignore that then clearly the result would be the opposite”
The author does understand that any vote is a snapshot at that point? Of course people die, youngsters become able to vote – this changes by the day but it doesn’t make the vote any less legitimate.
Accept that we are leaving with the EU and get on with your life.
Amen to that Andy both sides had the chance to argue the Case and on many Occasion more time and articles of imaginary Doom were more prolific from the Stay side. The decision has been made and the majority won.
But there will always be sour grapes from the losers. Perhaps now they see what the EU wants to charge us to get out and they will realise this may be our last chance…
Well, the above comments speak for themselves “split”. Although the actually voting results were in favour of leaving, can’t get away from that! I personally haven’t come across anyone that voted “leave” say, that they made an error in voting to leave…..and those people concerned about being in mixed marriages, well,I am too but, I am tired of being controlled by po faced business men in Europe telling me how to live, what I can and can’t do,say, eat, the list goes on…… I, like half the country on polling day, voted for what I believed in, and that was to leave,I also think that the comments from those that decided to leave the UK, and now complain that they could not vote…..well come on, get real, you actually gave up that right to have a say in what goes in this country when you decided to leave it, for “pastures greener” which government of the day were you not happy with?
Please try ti think before you plead “democracy” in support of your case. Democracy is a concept – we then use a variety of processes, electoral systems and laws to run the country. Any result that is seen as unfair by a large numb
This article and the manipulated polling it discusses are, wittingly or not, part of the globalists’ veiled attempt to turn back the Brexit vote. The elites need a docile global population and unfettered access to markets to retain their power and treasure.
The referendum was not fair, the “remain” camp used £millions of taxpayers money to issue a remain propaganda pamphlet to every household, painting a frightening picture of what would happen if we voted to leave the EU. There was little or no content highlighting the benefits of being in the EU.
Day after day in the run up to the election, remain bombarded the public with warnings of disaster if we were to leave, heads of state, so called impartial civil servants, the president of the USA etc. were all trotted out to make veiled threats of what would happen if we voted to leave. There was little or no content highlighting the benefits of being in the EU.
The remain camp even organised the registering of young voters (believing they would vote remain) and when that didn’t seem to be registering as many as possible, they put the date of the vote back.
Their campaign was a partial success as I believe that the outcome would have been an even larger majority voting to leave if the remain campaign had not been fed by lies, half-truths, twisted statistics or no statistics at all, manipulation, and an appeal to the lowest common denominator.
The only people who lied were the outists, pedalling xenophobic bullshit and crap about money for the NHS. People fell for the lies, and now the country is screwed because of it
This is well written and argued at a micro-level, but – while I wish the referendum result had been different -its over-arching argument is terrible – patronising and technocratic in exactly the way the various people below say. While it is true that Brexit doesn’t reflect the settled will of the British people and the EU/Brexit issue is likely to go on being divisive for years and years because of the narrowness of the vote 1) If polls and demographic trends can trump popular voting, then why bother ever to have elections? 2) While it might indeed have been a good idea to require that a certain majority of the overall electorate voted Leave for it to be binding or to give parents an extra vote for their children etc, no one seems to have thought of this ahead of the vote and all parties wanted a in-or-out referendum of the kind we had. While useful pointing out some home truths to Brexiteers that they are not exactly an overwhelming majority, this article does a disservice to the pro-European cause.
Ha ha, quite an amusing spoof, but the graph is a dead giveaway! Look at that curve which is drawn only through the most pro-remain polling results and magnificently ignoring the pro-leave results, and which at the end of a flat tail three months long concludes “Marginally increasing” on the basis of just two data points (Day 60: 1.2% remain lead, Day 112: 1.3% remain lead!!). No academic would in seriousness make such a claim from such a graph, so Adrian Low is clearly being satirical. Much of the “analysis” in the text struck me as probably satirical as well, but the graph is a bit too blatant for the otherwise straight-faced approach.
What an utterly embarrassing article. Total nonsense from start to finish.
I didn’t vote for the Labour government that destabilised the middle east by entering into the Iraq war, but I have had to live with it. It’s called democracy.
Tiny fly in the ointment is that the polls before the referendum also showed a majorty for remain.
The article makes no mention of ‘non-responders’ in its surveys – people who don’t like to participate in surveys.
The pre-referendum polls were skewed towards Remain partly because of this, and I don’t see why that wouldn’t apply to post-referendum polls, too. I mean, who wants to take part in a poll on a past event? The most likely participants would be people with a grievance i.e. remoaners, and not the general population.
Very weak intellectually, by this guys standard the vote to take us into the EU was also invalid so his point isn’t only self defeating – it’s just plain wrong. This referendum had a very high turnout, was given unavoidable coverage and the result must be accepted. Weak arguments like remain voters “found voting too difficult” is just tosh. The fact his source for the polling is an anti-brexit website rather than a non biased polling website (that conveniently misses several pro brexit polls) just shows how far academic standards have slipped at the LSE.
On the contrary: the article is strong and rigourous. Your objections, on the other hand, speak volumes: feigning an air of intelectual superiority when someone points out that brexit was sold to us on a pack of lies, and will turn this country into an inward-looking irrelevance.
So you disagree that under these rules the vote to take us into the EU would be void? Or that you can demonstrate how it was somehow harder for remains to vote? Perhaps you think that his analysis whereby he takes abstract concepts around how people “felt” the day after the referendum into actual numerical majorities is good practice (because it’s certainly not how the pollsters are interpreting the results).
It is intellectual superiority because there are so many holes in his argument, and what’s more you’ve been unable to refute the ones I’ve raised choosing some bluster instead.
No, it is not bluster. The points you make are pretty easy to refute. The overwhelming assumption on the day was that we would vote to remain, so people tired of the process yet who wanted to stay in did not bother to vote. A foolish mistake, and one which distorted the result. First year political students are taughtt the folly of such apathy: people who feel strongly about a subject – in case the outists – are moree likelly to go to vote. Haad people realised what was at stake, I daresay more people would have turned out. Thus, far fromh being abstract, these objections are concrete. we have been mislead; our future hijacked
You lost. Get over it.
What an absolutely stupid statement. Real people’s lives are being ruined. It’s NOT a silly childish game one loses or wins – the country, OUR country, MY country, YOUR country, risks ruin – indeed it’s already started as you may havre noticed.
It’s absolutely NOT a case of “getting over it”!!!!
Thank you for all the comments.
With respect to the suggestion that I have chosen biased polls, I have not done that, nor am I aware of any evidence of bias from different pollsters. The no2brexit.com website (which contains the close analysis referred to) is my own and whilst personal some commentary elsewhere on the site demonstrates my sadness at the poor quality of both the lead up to the referendum and the referendum rules, I have tried to re-present the results as accurately as I can (see commentary on the statistics). I have simply used every poll I could find on the net, and would value notification of any quality polls you think I have missed, which have similar questions/tables.
I have not said that the vote is invalid, it is a democratic vote using the UK rules to administer that vote. However, what the polls suggest is that political comments such as ‘the UK public wants to exit the EU’, or ‘the UK electorate wants Brexit’ are very questionable indeed, and almost certainly (allowing for polling error) not true.
It also seemed reasonable to speculate why the polls suggest that within the non-voters, there is an average 13% majority in favour of remain. Turnout behaviour (Remains are less likely to bother voting ) as a result of pre-referendum polls is discussed in, for example, Mutz 1992, 1998; Boudreau and McCubbins 2010, and, with a comprehensive bibliography, Vannette and Westwood (available here: http://www.dartmouth.edu/~seanjwestwood/papers/Mobilization.pdf). Why the young vote did not come out has been speculated on by others (Financial Times model) and I have presented that argument here.
With respect to the comment that the polls are biased towards Remain, that Remainers are more likely to respond, that may be the case, but all the poll companies undertake a weighting process which attempts to ensure that although the sample may not be representative of the population (perhaps because some Leavers don’t want to contribute), once the weighting process is completed it becomes representative of the (voting) population as a whole (for example see YouGov methodology).
The comment about the graph label ‘marginally increasing’ is based on the Financial Times model, discussed in the article, that there are about 750,000 new 18 year old voters each year who are likely to be 75% Remainers together with a balancing number of deaths of those who largely voted Leave. It was not based on the graphical entries. I regret not indicating that on the graph and have consequently relabelled the graph on no2brexit.com. Incidentally, as others have pointed out, the notification by the government on October 7th that those who have been expats for 15 years or more will soon have a vote, perhaps 1-2 million of them, would also be likely to increase any Remain majority in the polls. I regret not including this group in the article, I should have done so, as some comments have indicated, and not least because I work with many of them.
Finally my words ‘nothing less than a second referendum could redress the unfairness felt by…’, is fact. I am not specifically advocating a second referendum in the article, just recognising there are very strong feelings indeed from groups who felt disenfranchised despite paying UK taxes and the reality that the Brexit decision will directly, and potentially dramatically affect their own futures either in the UK or abroad.
The latest polls on what the UK thinks will happen as a result of Brexit are depressing reading. Frequently there is a majority expecting that immigration will reduce and the NHS will stay much the same but apart from that, more think the economy, UK influence, trade, travel, pensions and jobs will all get worse as a result. They are remarkable responses and it surely must make politicians question why, if that is the expectation, the same polls of the same people do not report an even higher Remain majority.
I voted to leave and not because I was taken in by the lies or exaggerations from the leave campaign, I fully understood the real pros and cons by doing my own home work. I ignored project fear and their lies too, my thoughts were that we should not have open borders there is too much threat from terrorism. My children’s and grandchildren’s safety was paramount and far more important than my personal wealth which no doubt could be affected by Brexit. For those that say the referendum was advisory please read the official government leaflet particularly where Mr Cameron says you the people have a choice and whatever you decided I will act upon it. If you still think the result is unlawful how does this referendum differ from the one that took us into the Common Market, we didn’t even vote to be in th eu in the first instance, it was a common market not an extension of the 4th or 5th Reich. I applaud every one of the 17.2 million who voted to take a chance, ok so we don’t know what the plan is or how it will eventually affect us but remember the Britain of yesterday, the no surrender and stiff upper lip brigade. Yes those people are most likely all gone and replaced by the greedy who are more worried about cash than what’s right and what’s wrong. Every remain voter has basically stated they support corruption in favour of safety
I love this: “For those that say the referendum was advisory please read the official government leaflet particularly where Mr Cameron says you the people have a choice and whatever you decided I will act upon it.” Now can we play a game of comparing what the leaflets said before the referendum and count what have turned out to be broken promises or complete lies? Shall we start with “£350m a week for the NHS?”
I will assist you regarding your confusion, perhaps you have the wrong leaflet as the official government backed document does not contain anything to do with the NHS or the £350 million a week. I didn’t mention the NHS within my post because I was not swayed by this gros exaggeration and I did actually say both sides lied but none more so than the statement from the government stating we control our borders, hogwash we may get to look at the passports europeans entering the UK but we cannot stop anyone, not even criminals. And what happened to our so called special relationship with the EU?
Steve: The leaflets I received from the official leave campaign were full of lies that have now been discredited, and were perpetuated by politicians who have now disowned them. You may not have been swayed, but many were, and a number of national newspapers decided to run similar fiction as headlines. If you’re going to hold David Cameron to account for his broken promise, you ought to be looking at Johnson, Gove and Farage first. Good luck finding any of them though, since they all buggered off from the smouldering remains of their filthy campaign.
Karl: I would simply point out one benefit of being in the EU: membership of the single market. We haven’t even left it yet but our currency, you may have noticed, has plummeted since the vote. Britain simply doesn’t have the natural resources or financial muscle to stay at the top table of the World’s economy without being part of the EU.
If you’re really unhappy that “no-one voted for” it, how do you feel about the fact that we now have a Prime Minister that no-one voted for, trying to pass legislation without consulting the House of Commons, which we all voted for?
.” Now can we play a game of comparing what the leaflets said before the referendum and count what have turned out to be broken promises or complete lies? Shall we start with “£350m a week for the NHS?”
Oh please! not that old chestnut again. What was being said was that instead of paying the EU millions a week for the pleasure of being a member, the money could be put into the NHS.
Why do you people who support remaining in the EU constantly try to discredit the result of the referendum, instead of pointing out what you believe to be the benefits of remaining in the EU?
I voted out and I have not heard one thing since which would encourage me to change my mind.
I appreciate that many people are afraid of leaving the EU and going it alone, but that, to me, is no reason to stay in what increasingly looks like a very dictatorial organisation which no one voted for.
Surely this should be up to your children and grandchildren to decide their future. Your loss if wealth? What loss?
Triple lock protected pension, likely increase in inflation and interest rates boosting returns for pensions. Perhaps property values may fall, but as this is an asset that cannot be liquidated until after your death then only impact on your inheritor not you.
You are supported by the European Institute, need I say more!!
We voted OUT for a reason, the government has accepted that and so should everyone else. We are already proving that we can get trade deals and we have company’s expanding in this country. At last WE can dictate what happens to our country, rather than a biased and corrupt European Superstate.
Let us ALL work together and prove to the rest of the world that we were right and bring back the great in Great Britain!
All you remainera get over it the uk is leaving the eu it was a democratic vote it wasnt a advisory vote trying to find ways to stop the uk leaving now would all those remainers be saying the same thing if it went the other way no i dont think they would
Yes the EU is a good idea in theory. Otherwise the fraud, corruption, waste, cronyism, undemocratic set-up, etc etc is a bit of a problem. We are / were a net contributor, really not a good use of taxpayers money, propping up a supra-national body not fit for purpose, more like FIFA as was than anything sensible.
The idea that only 51.9% of the population voted for Brexit is a polite convention. Most people in the know are aware that the poll was rigged but could not be rigged enough for Brexit to lose. As a statistician, the author of this article must appreciate that the polls before the referendum showed a Brexit lead but the bookmakers odds showed a strong preference for Remain. The only explanation for this is that the bookmakers had inside knowledge that the poll was going to be rigged.
Cameron must have known this also which is why he accepted the Brexit so easily, i.e. he knew that the real vote for Brexit was much higher.
That is ridiculous to suggest the vote was rigged, in fact the polls were fairly accurate and within the margin of error; some of the last polls even got the result correct.
We might pay more in than we get back, but, that will be lost in far greater numbers by the shrinking economy, which will be a result of Hard Brexit. Nearly £600 billion a year alone will be lost to the exchequer, if we lose our passporting rights in the banking sector. Then there is the lost to scientific innovation, where the UK currently excels, it will even have a negative effect on the music industry, as bands will have to apply for Visas to tour on the continent. It’s like someone invented a time machine. Then there will be an increased benefits bill to pay unemployment money to all those who lose their job and less taxation collected. Furthermore, this money is used to help less well off nations, mainly in Eastern Europe, you know the very same countries that the West encouraged to overthrow their communist dictatorships. In the 1970s, when Britain was described as the sick man of Europe, we took out more than we put in, this helped our economy recover.
There is no evidence to suggest the age demographics used by the author of this article are incorrect. It was written by a Professor of Computing Education at Staffordshire University, you know one of those experts the Michael Gove dislikes so much, i.e., someone who knows what they are talking about.
Re Comment from Nicholas Ennos, prior to the referendum the polls did not show a Brexit lead. From 1st September 2015 to June 22nd 2016 there were 272 polls, 58% were for Remain, 35% were for Leave and 7% were a tie. On June 22nd itself there were six polls, four for Remain and two for Leave. There was a period of 18 days from May 29th to June 15th when the polls seemed to be favouring Leave, but that reversed in the last seven days before the referendum with 9 out of 14 polls (64%) for Remain and 5 our of 14 (36%) for Leave . See https://ig.ft.com/sites/brexit-polling/
The governments mandate is to enact the will of the people. We all agree to that. The will of the people is different to the will of the electorate however. May see’s this as a chance to achieve a personal goal of exit, and I believe that she was a remainer for political expediency, as the majority wanted remain. This is giving her the perfect”will of the people” excuse.
She must be hoping to enact article 50 quickly to avoid an election where conservatives would lose every metropolitan area, and reinvigorating the opposition if they backed leave, or lose out further to ukip if they back remain.
Every survey still indicates a majority remain, even when not including the under 18s which cannot vote but are still citizens and are therefore govt should be obligated to consider. That is the will of the people and should be respected.
Statistically speaking, 52 to 48 is insignificant, especially given only 50% of the population is eligible to vote, and of those not eligible, the very large if not vast majority are remain.
HAHAHAHAHA. Is this the way now for all future elections/referenda? We’ll keep recasting the result/repolling the electorate until we change the outcome? I’m no expert but am sure I could find a myriad ways to present the actual statistics to show a different result. I’m sure many of us regret voting decisions we may have made over time but never thought for a second that we’d be able to either go back in time or keep voting until we got a different outcome. Entirely fatuous to imply that people (and only Remainers?) somehow prevented from voting – on any given voting day, some will be unable to exercise their right to vote. But let’s be clear, the process is that eligible parties have the right to vote. If said parties do not exercise their right, their view doesn’t count. IF only 100 people had voted, and 52 voted to Leave, that is the democratic outcome of the referendum/vote. Them’s the rules. Fatuous in the extreme to try and include non-eligible demographies in the ‘count’ to attempt to present a different outcome. I look forward to future General Elections if this trend ensues..(No, don’t like that outcome, let’s have another go). What’s most offensive is that if Leavers had lost, and were seeking to undermine the result with this same vigour, we would be citing the rigour of our ‘democratic process’ and calling them poor losers.
There was a third group of disenfranchised voters: UK citizens living in Europe more than 15 years. We didn’t get to vote and I’m sure the vast majority of us were for remaining.
We are probably the group most affected by the decision, especially if ‘hard’ Brexit goes ahead.
I know some are of the opinion that living outside the country negates our right to vote, but we are still deeply affected by UK foreign policy. Also most of us have investments and pensions in the UK and many have property there and want to travel freely to visit friends and family. All this is up in the air along with our right to live and work in Europe.
Most countries in the world have no restriction on how long one can stay out of the country and still vote. The UK is moving to this as well, but rushed through the referendum before it will be in place.
i lived in europe for 20+ years- i wished the uk to leave.though i didnt vote.
i stood by my principles, and as i believe that a fit for purpose immigration policy is primordial, and that the UK and Europe doesnt provide that, i emigrated to where there is one. Australia.
criminals not admitted, sick notes, people unable to work.
deportation is a big stick to wield, and for any delit equal to or superior to 1 year even on suspended sentence will see your visa revoked and deportation. same as overstayers, and people working cash in hand. deportation and ban. thats how it should be, and the reason why the Uk has become a crime ridden hole now is partially because of the lack of a decent immigration system. the EU just rams it through, they are going for the superstate project ( as outlined and designed by the likes of walter hallstein and the full integration and Eu government presiding over countrys governments) its all there in black and white.
print it off, pin it to your wall, its there in black and white. try to deny the superstate project after that.
Just as Churchill wanted it.
I have read the report of the European Court of Auditors for the budget for 2015. It says,
“(a) Revenue was free from material error (see paragraph 4.22). (b) In expenditure, we continue to find a material level of error. The estimated level of error in expenditure was 3,8 %, a lower level than in 2014 (4,4 %) (see Figure 1.2)…. For reimbursement expenditure the estimated level of error is 5,2 %”… For entitlement
expenditure, the estimated level of error is 1,9 %… Out of 1200 transactions, 12 instances of suspected fraud were forwarded to OLAF.”
It continues, “The accounts were not affected by material mis-statement.” The target error is 2% so the Court of Auditors finds the error level while low is above the desired level and there is room for further improvement.
Just to point out, the insistence that the vote was the exercise of the democratic will of the British public is severely called into question by the nature of the campaign. A democratic vote is not just the exercise of the will of the public, but an exercise of the will of a well informed public. The integrity of this particular exercise is compromised by the fact that many voted (on either side may I add) on the basis of arguments that were simply not true in the case of historical circumstances, or unsupportable in the case of future forecasts.
Even if we accept that what you say is fact, how does that differ from local council elections or a general election? We don’t dream up ever more spurious reasons to demand a rerun of those elections because we don’t like the outcome.
An advisory referendum to fundamentally change the conditions of life and livelihood of 66 million people, at least 6 million of whom are UK citizens resident abroad, 2 million or so disfranchised, carried by a very narrow majority of votes cast, without any of the safeguards of a mandatory referendum, won on the basis of outright blatant and criminal lies by politicians and a rabid tabloid press run largely by overseas interests, without any prospect of a change back for something like 40 years or more, furthermore destroying relations between the UK and the rest of the EU, being pushed by a stubborn, incompetent and dishonest government bent on the destruction of the country, is VERY different from local council or general elections. The effects cannot be reversible, they cannot be changed in practice for at least a generation, not just a few years, and they are destroying people’s lives.
Exactly. I agree with you 100%
This article would get laughed out of. sixth form debating society meeting!
Trying to give a poll the same level of importance as an actual vote would be laughable if it wasn’t so pathetic…
To all those “get over it”s… do you have any idea how many funds will be or have been already cut off from education in the UK due to this so called ‘voice of the people’? Do you have any idea how many European potential loans and investments will be stopped in other areas such as the infrastructure and even the NHS? Do you even considered, beyond your nearest Premier store and local pub, how many lives will be affected by your ‘gain sovereignty’ moans? Sorry to say this but you live in a darker age than this century…..
What sort of funds are you talking about?
The Government has already made it clear that any current funds being received from the EU will be protected for a given period.
What EU funds are being received for infrastructure projects and the NHS?
How many lives are being affected and how?
What is a Premier store?
Not all of us frequent said store or local pub and it speaks volumes about you, that you should try and insult all 17+ million of us who voted to leave.
If you are that enamoured about living in the EU, have you thought of moving to a country which is a current member and looks like continuing to be one for the near future?
Yes I voted to LEAVE and didn’t want to do a deal. I just wanted to take back what was ours and that’s that. I don’t want to be a part of Hitlers dream of world domination and control or to be responsible for financially helping the European elite live their lifestyles. I care about the lifestyles of the workers of my own country not the elites that only care about themselves. I am English NOT European and nothing will change my mind or convince me to live under European law whilst they dump their criminals on us. If people from Europe want to live here that’s fine, but they will have to buy a house and have private medical care and not be entitled to any benefits. Then we’ll see if they still insist on coming here.
I have never read a more ridiculous pile of rubbish. The 16m who voted remain is about the same as who took part in the last EU Elections it could be argued that the remainder of the 40 or so million voted with thier feet and didnt want to be involved in the whole European project. Given the chance to kick it into touch a majority of the entire electorate said an emphatic NO to the EU.
To Andrew Harvey: No, not a majority of the entire electorate, only a narrow majority of those who actually voted, i.e. roughly 37% of the electorate, excluding the 2 million or so of us disfranchised. And skewed anyway by the number of votes lost through the postal voting papers not being dispatched in time from the UK to many abroad.
To Nicholas Newman: If you make the assumption that those who support something will demonstrate an interest. You will see from the following data the level of support shown by casting a vote has for some time been abysmally low.
Where as for the Brexit election there was a 72.2% turnout. It may not be scientific but me it says given the opportunity to do something about the EU project a majority of those interested got out and registered their disapproval and desire for something new and better. A feeling that is being expressed all around Europe and accross the world from the Arab spring to the USA the real people don’t want more of the same
You forgot 2 million expat Britons excluded because of living out of the UK more than 15 years, despite Tory manifesto pledge to scrap the 15 year limit on expat voting
Why should Britons who no longer live in the country and haven’t done so for decades be able to participate in a vote that fundamentally affects those Brits who still live in the country and pay our taxes here.
Simply because we are UK citizens. And hence have a FUNDAMENTAL interest in our home country and how it is governed. The UK is contravening a fundamental human right in continuing to deny us a vote, and Brexit is an outstanding example of the necessity to regain that right. Most of us have no other citizenship, a very high proportion of us have been working abroad for UK interests, UK firms, UK membership of international organisations, and many many of us civil servants, teachers, armed forces, police etc. have UK pensions which CANNOT be paid elsewhere than from the UK. Many of us ave family in the UK and maintain a keen interest in UK affairs. BY NO MEANS have we abandoned our country.
Anyway Karl, stop trolling.
We are talking about people who have been living outside of the UK for more than 15 years. Not people who are just working abroad.
Definition of a troll =
someone who leaves an intentionally annoying message on the internet, in order to get attention or cause trouble. a message that someone leaves on the internet that is intended to annoy people:
As can be seen from my posts / comments, I am consistent in my views and none are just “flamers” designed to elicit a reaction. Sorry Nicholas, I don’t fit the bill and I am not offended, I have been called a lot worse than that for my views.
In a referendum setting democracy is surely 50% +1. The results is that we voted to leave. Might it be that the LSE as an academic institution fears Brexit and the possible loss of funding? The author of the leading article seems to me to be a remoaner who cannot accept the result and is fearful of grant loss from the EU hence the tenor and content of the article. Special pleading methinks. The Eu is undemocratic by design, go look at the treaty of Rome. If the EU implements a decision I do not like I have no democratic response available to me, the commission is appointed not elected.. For example incandescent light bulbs that I can no longer buy due to a ruling from the commission who are appointed not elected. The EU is an incipient dictatorship driven by what I can best describe as dreamers with a fixed view of the3 future, i.e as they want to see. Any dissent will be punished! I say leave the single market, the Customs Union, the EU court and if the EU want to play tariffs let them. the arithmetic is compelling, we import 3X the value that we export to them so who would fare worst?. Bring it on Juncker!
What utter nonsense, We should never have gone into Europe in the first place. They only want to control us.. Heaven knows how many times the’ve tried to by war over the centuries. We have had to fight practically every country in the Eu at some point. If people can’t be bothered to vote then they should shut up, they have no right to give us all this nonsense about we would be better off ‘in’. We are already better off now than before the brexit vote, The doom mongers said we would all be out of work in two weeks!! So what happened there then? We remember what it was like before Europe and it was much better. Why do so many want to come here? because it’s better than all the EU countries. Get on with Brexit Teresa May and let’s shut up these moaners.
I am from Singapore, living here for over 25 years and voted leave as I can’t see how EU could survive and prosper in the current form. True democracy is a luxury for many countries, so please embrace change, it’s time to unite to move forward for a brighter future.
” It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is most adaptable to change. – Charles Darwin”
You forgot the UK citizens currently resident in other EU countries who were denied the right to vote. Of the (probably conservative, since it may exclude descendants with dual nationality) UN estimate of 1.2 million, even the Telegraph estimated that around 700,000 Brits living in Europe were being denied the right to vote on their own future.
When you say currently resident I am assuming that you don’t mean people who are temporarily working abroad, but those actually living in another country and have done so for a considerable time, in fact long enough to be considered citizens of the country in which they dwell. If that is the case, why on earth should they be allowed to vote on an issue which affects those of us who still live here, pay our taxes here, spend our money here and have to put up with the negative aspects of our membership of the EU.
As I’ve commented to Karl already (on 11 December 2016):
“Simply because we are UK citizens. And hence have a FUNDAMENTAL interest in our home country and how it is governed. The UK is contravening a fundamental human right in continuing to deny us a vote, and Brexit is an outstanding example of the necessity to regain that right. Most of us have no other citizenship, a very high proportion of us have been working abroad for UK interests, UK firms, UK membership of international organisations, and many many of us civil servants, teachers, armed forces, police etc. have UK pensions which CANNOT be paid elsewhere than from the UK. Many of us have family in the UK and maintain a keen interest in UK affairs. BY NO MEANS have we abandoned our country.”
Why in response to others do you ignore what I and many others have repeated ad nauseam? (our nauseam, not yours apparently).
I see no reason why we should espouse a different nationality just because we live in another country, and you may not realise this but many people who have lived outside the UK for more than 15 years have lived in several countries over time, for many reasons which may include their profession, and may be also for UK interests, and which may not give rise to any desire to acquire one or more other nationalities.
And another remark – there are imperfections in the EU – which you do not list – but it is ALL EU citizens who may have to put up with any negative aspects, wherever they live, in the EU or outside, not just UK citizens resident in the UK.
Anyway Karl, stop repeating yourself.
“Anyway Karl, stop repeating yourself” – Lol!!
Have you compared this latest comment of yours to all the others you have posted?
I am not so sure that it is I who needs to stop repeating myself
“Why in response to others do you ignore what I and many others have repeated ad nauseam?”
Ad nauseam indeed Nicholas.
Why do I ignore it? I don’t, it is the lack of acceptance you, and others like you, consistently demonstrate over, and over, and over again with almost identical comments and zero originality, which basically amount to one thing, it isn’t fair.
Karl – Since you believe that expatriate UK citizens who had lived ‘long enough to be considered citizens of the country in which they dwell’ should have been formally disenfranchised by being forced to take the nationality of the place they live, can you confirm that you believe the obvious other half of that equation: that the millions of EU citizens who had lived in the UK for a similar period should have been ‘considered citizens of the country in which they dwell’, forced to take UK citizenship, and thus allowed to vote in the referendum? If not, would you mind explaining why?
Your raising a straw man.
If you want to discuss reciprocal arrangements between the EU and the UK after we leave, then say so.
Avoidant answer. A straw man is a false argument, set up to be defeated – this is a genuine, concrete, historical situation with real consequences: whom it was legitimate to allow to participate in the referendum. You postulated ‘residence’ as the qualification. If sufficient absence should lose you the vote, sufficient presence must logically gain it – unless, of course, it’s more complicated. Place of birth perhaps? Which would make every child of Brits born abroad – including diplomats, the military, contract workers, etc – not British. Recent payment of tax? Immigrants pay more. Where should we go next – blood line?
You started your comment with a typical straw man statement i.e.
“. Since you believe that expatriate UK citizens who had lived ‘long enough to be considered citizens of the country in which they dwell’ should have been formally disenfranchised by being forced to take the nationality of the place they live”
Which I never wrote or said I believe, hence my naming it for what it is.
Karl, why not just answer Boghall’s question instead of treating it as a straw man for a new discussion?
Sorry, wrong place – supposed to be a reply to Karl’s answer to Boghall.
The mathematical analysis is at best extremely lazy and at worst deliberately misleading. For example, the author has taken it upon himself to adjust YouGov’s polling data, as he explains here: http://www.no2brexit.com/noteonstats.htm, because he think it’s “likely to be more accurate” presenting no data whatsoever to support this claim.
I don’t believe the pollsters have been doing a great job as of late, but for an academic to make crude adjustments to a professional polling companies’ results because he thinks he knows better, and then to present the adjusted values as “poll results” in graphical form, and then for LSE to publish that graph, is absurd.
Without more data from/collected by the polling companies it is necessary to use some method to estimate the number of respondents to any poll who actually have or had the right to vote in the referendum. About 5% of 18+ UK residents did not have a vote. Those who indicate they would change their vote or stick with the vote I have assumed had a vote. In the YouGov results, particularly, they have presented two types of table for the others. Most include a Did not vote category which. at best, suggests that these people had a vote but did not use it. One YouGov poll also included a Don’t know answer category to the question what did you vote. This provides the only indication of the numbers in the poll that simply did not have a vote so their preferences should not be included. This is not a crude adjustment but a serious attempt, given the limitations on data available, to present the results as what the electorate would vote, rather than including individuals who were unlikely to be in the electorate.
As an expat I wholly support the views expressed by Adrian Low
Albert Gomperts –
To paraphrase the immortal words, well you would, wouldn’t you?
You don’t have to live in the country, we do.
Polls as we know are not to be trusted, their selection procedures are flawed (Trump, Brexit, Cameron’s election victory) as they tend not to sample the working class in any depth. Get with the programme, we are leaving the dictatorial and undemocratic (QED) EU.
I’m really pleased somebody is putting this forward. I have not understood since June why we are running with the result of one rather dodgy horse race, instead of seeking to find the settled will of an informed British public. And only the most dodgy outfits would make a major change on such a slim majority. I suspect that people have accepted this result because we use the first past the post system in general elections. And don’t really understand the significance, or lack of, the numbers/percentages. Thanks Adrian!
Great article if you like dishonest moaners
Irrelevant about Australian voting. Irrelevant about 16-18 year olds. Irrelevant about people not being bothered because they thought it was in the bag. Pitiful stuff from author. They were the rules.
Why didn’t he mentioned the extra cash Gov’t sent sending a leaflet to every household in UK to try to fix the referendum, or all the organisations trying to twist our arms to stay in. Or the BBC’s self-criticism that it had marginalised reporting anti-EU sentiment for years prior to the referendum??
Great article if you like hearing the ugly voice of liberal extremism and contempt for democracy, all done, of course, in the name of democracy.
I really don’t know how many times it has to be said for the message to get through: there is only ONE poll which actually counts. This is how democracy works. No amount of statistical manipulation and special pleading can alter this fundamental fact. The only democratically valid evidence we have is the result of the referendum. Opinion polls are becoming notoriously unreliable: look at the result of the 2015 GE, the recent American election and indeed the polls leading up to the EU referendum. I voted remain in the referendum, but now think that I would vote leave if given a second chance. How many more people think like me, bucking the alleged statistical trend? One other thing… opinion polls are only as good as the level of genuine freedom of speech which exists in the society in question. In our increasingly politically correct society many people are nervous about expressing their honest views publicly. The only place they may feel safe is in the voting booth. This is why opinion polls need to be tested by a robust method, which allows people to express their views with complete confidence and without any fear of negative repercussions. Relying on untested polling data is hugely irresponsible – and, of course, utterly undemocratic.
And I don’t know how many times it needs to be said that the referendum was only advisory, AND EXCLUDED AN ESTIMATED OVER 2 MILLION UK CITIZENS DISFRANCHISED FROM LIVING ABROAD FOR OVER 15 YEARS. and was therefore PROFOUNDLY UNDEMOCRATIC. And also that IT WAS FRAUDULENT as the most blatant lies were being peddled by a rabid tabloid press, partly foreign owned. And it is also known that there were occult over the legal limit finances involved.
The referendum result is therefore NOT VALID and it is only through this government’s dictatorship (ask yourselves why, and who is pulling its strings?) that Article 50 is about to be triggered ILLEGALLY!
Whoever said it was ‘advisory’? On the contrary Cameron told us absolutely clearly that whatever the electorate decided would be implemented by parliament. It’s all on record, so it’s pointless trying to negate it. He was the Prime Minister. You were not.
Well would you Adam & Eve it !!….. “Most recently, [Cambridge] Analytica helped US President Donald Trump, secured a win for Brexit Leave campaign and led Ted Cruz’s 2016 campaign surge, shepherding him from the back of the GOP primary pack to the front.”
Surely a second referendum would, according to the leavers, show that the majority wish to leave, so why are they so opposed to it? They should rejoice at the idea of a second round as according to them it would go the same way. But it seems better to say no and call people all the names under the sun. The stench of fascism is unbearable.
What all this ‘argument’ highlights, is the tendency all of us have to ; Not accept other peoples preferences!
There will ALWAYS be differences, but how far are we – as individuals – prepared to adopt an ‘allowance’ of otherness, or different preferences?
Wars and conflicts arise continually among humans – because we deny other peoples preferences. Religious belief is a primary ‘divider’ of people. Without the capacity to ‘accept’ difference and choice and preference. the human race will continue in its conflicts. This problem isn’t going away. We need to learn a lesson here!
You can imagine how these ‘polls’ were worded…
If I stop shoving this brick in your a$$ would you please tick the box that says ‘remain’?
‘Get over it… get on with it!’
How dare anyone state what the British general public want or not. IF we are to keep a freedom of choice,
which I thought the whole World is fighting for wether politically or otherwise, the VOTE to exit the EU was definitely a YES. You cannot keep voting until it suits the Powerful & manipulative otherwise surely that would NOT be democracy.
I also know a lot of people who did not vote at all & now wish they had as they also wanted to vote LEAVE.
Even when in France recently every working class person I met i.e. Taxi Drivers & Waiters etc., SAID quite strongly they wanted the Franc back and they did NOT want to be in the EU. SO what is it ? is it just the manipulative – Company Directors, Politicians, affluent rich or what who are trying to control us or the way we think/believe? JUST Leave the EU as democratically decided & prove them all wrong, by putting the Great back in Britain once more.
This whole debacle demonstrates just how easily deluded “the public” are. The leave campaign used lies upon lies yet were barely reproached for it. They still are, telling us how giving us a fantastic deal is in their interest more than ours! You have to be an ardent leaver to believe that rubbish. It has already been stated multiple times that the remaing 27 are more concerned with maintaining the integrity of the eu than their industries. We are not their most important trading partner, you have to remember that the eu is much more than a german car industry.
Yes leaving the eu led to predictions of a huge economic downturn, it was less severe than predicted but this so much more to do with pre emptive measures taken by the boe. Plus we haven’t actually left yet, despite this the pound is dropping and inflation is increasing, more companies are starting to rescind their promises of “we’ll back britain” as they start to see what they are losing. The economy is dropping, its just more of a trickle rather than a deluge. Sure we’ll manage to trade etc outside of the eu, we will all just be poorer for it. Imagine your standard of living now, within a few years it will be a step down from that.
What i found most telling about this whole thing is how opportunistic the politicians were, jumping on the populist (kick out the immigrants crowd) brexit campaign to further their own ambitions, (tilts head to Boris). They figured they’d come out of a losing campaign as folk heros, gracious in defeat but with many little englander supporters ready for the next leadership and general election. Well didn’t their shock and silence speak volumes on the results day, it wasn’t in their plan and it wasn’t what they wanted in reality.
Anyway, given the way the votes fell i wouldn’t be surprised if my childrens generation celebrate the day they rejoin the eu as they hit their 20’s. Cos the people who generally voted out will be gone.
Why, when the original polls proved to be wrong, do you use subsequent polls as evidence of public opinion?
“unelected pm doesn’t represent me”
And I suppose unelected Eurocrats does?
All you are doing is regurgitating the same old discredited nonsense, that the country cannot survive outside of the EU. OOps, sorry, I hadn’t realised that the mantra had changed from couldn’t survive, to could survive but would be poorer for doing so.
Interesting to note that you are still pedalling the old and discredited line of “kick out all the migrants (EU) migrants” and “little Englanders” rubbish, change the record.
What part of the result dd you not not understand? We the people voted out! Dont patronize us! Now we need a vote for Aussies Kiwis and South Africans coming here. The only people who do the jobs we dont want to do and Indians. Most hold up our NHS system and heck we have made their food the National dish of England. Yet we pander to the white Common Wealth and white Europeans.It took Joanna Lumley to recognize the part the Gurkha’s played in the wars we roped them into it, and then we deny them the right to residency here. Yet we allow the offspring of criminals the right to come here work here use our NHS. I have never seen one kiwi, one Aussie work in A&E, or do the crap jobs that really they should do in their non career developmental work permit. A lot come here and violate their work permits, claim the VAT, avoid UK tax by setting up offshore companies, leave the UK owing thousands, yet we will clamp down on some one who has fallen short by £1. in their Council Tax benefit, or failed to pay their road tax. Whilst all that come to this county do not pay the TV license, road tax, or any form of tax!
In the ‘glorified opinion-poll’ of June 2016:All that were asked responded:1/3 ‘for’ Leave, 1/3 ‘to’ Remain, 1/3 not sure.
By any reasoning this sums to ‘Remain’.
-Why have Partys chosen to ignore the law they passed:For an ‘Advisory’ Referendum only.?
-Even though the ‘triggering’ of A50 was ‘voted through’, what are elections for if not to vote-down bad policies and vote-out the purveyors of bad policies?
Yet, Partys offer nothing more that their own – unspecified, version of that bad policy?
The answer of course is that democracy is dead in the UK (if it ever existed) and it is all about a coup d’état by a consortium of foreign and UK billionaires. And I cannot understand why both Houses of Parliament passed the Article 50 bill and why Her Majesty the Queen gave her Royal Assent to the act. Surely the time was grave enough to justify her NOT giving it, even though the last time was 310 years ago.
Yes indeed Mr. Newman,
UK Democracy has been exposed for the sham it was. While Politicians and their Partys pay little to no heed to the Law, the law has not gone away. A Court Case in Dublin may yet help us. [the case…]https://d2l6cjylzkj2qa.cloudfront.net/uploads/2017/03/31142347/Maugham-Ors-v-Ireland.pdf
Technically speaking, if the Queen were to refuse Royal Assent, then we would be in constitutional crisis, with the very real possibility of removal of the royal family.
I don’t disagree with your points, but the Queen is savvy enough to know when to stay out of decisions.
I’m afraid I’ve been rather absent lately so had not replied.
You are perfectly right of course, but surely we are already in more than a constitutional crisis – a deliberate attempt to use the “Royal prerogative” to avoid due parliamentary procedure, having to be imposed by the Supreme Court in the “Miller et al.” case.
But surely if the Monarch cannot even oppose the consequences of a flawed referendum result based on fraud, lies and dishonesty of the highest order, tantamount to treason (i.e. actions contrary to the interest of the state, its Sovereign, Parliament and the country as a whole), if she only rubber stamps every decision of Parliament even in such circumstances which threaten to break up her kingdom, what useful role does she play any more ? What use is the monarchy if even these circumstances don’t break it out of its traditional subservience to what used not to be total rubbish? So although I have always felt a great loyalty to the Monarch in the past, that loyalty is now being very, very sorely tested.
And who exactly would dare to remove the Royal Family? By what means? A new Revolution? But it could not be a successful revolution if only the 27% “leave” voters were involved – it would be quashed by the other 73%.
Oh well, pipe-dreams I suppose!
I believe when the Brexit deal is finalised two years from now, the Uk citizens should be given the right to vote whether to accept or reject the package & if they reject the package that they remain in the eu.
There are several difficulties with the notion of ‘Ref2’:
-It legitimizes the standing of ‘Ref1’, which was ever only advisory (and fact-free). Which would take us further away from the Representative Democracy we are supposed to be.
-It supposes there would be facts and trusted people to state them, both of which were absent from Ref1.
-It could only take place after two years or more of economic and industrial ruin. Even though there is a realistic prospect of the UK throwing-in the towel before then in ‘favour of’ the WTO.
Our best bet would be for MPs to do the job they are paid to do:Act in the BEST interests of the whole of the UK, and quickly come to terms with the futility of Brexit.
“Our best bet would be for MPs to do the job they are paid to do:Act in the BEST interests of the whole of the UK,”
In other words do what you want them to do?
Simply vote to NOT implement Brexit, cancel the Article 50 letter and state that the UK remains a fully committed member state of the EU. And NEVER, EVER try to delegate such complex decisions to the voting public by referendum.
To late, we are leaving and not before time.
Mr. Newman. That’s pretty much ‘it’. The difficulty is that we have seldom, if ever, been “a fully committed member”.
And, as things stand with the Partys and their Leaders, that commitment appears to be absent still.
This whole mess has left me relying upon two old-saws and a duty that has so far been neglected:’A week is a long time in Politics’, ‘events, dear boy, events’ and the Burkean Principle of MPs independent judgment to act in the best interests of all.
The ‘up-side’ to our being so poorly represented, is the unlikelihood of either May or Corbyn being competent enough to make any sort of decent fist of Brexit.
Yes ‘Karl’,. It is no mere coincidence that my view coincides with the correct course of action;common sense, is just that – common.
You forgot to add, in your opinion.
You are on the wrong side of history and it is time all you remainers started supporting those determined to make leaving a success rather than constantly talking the country and its people down.
I neglected to add that my view is also supported by the norms of our Constitution.
I am content – given that I have the Law with me, that I will be on the right side of history.
Last June’s glorified opinion-poll returned these results:All that were asked responded;1/3 ‘for’ Leave,1/3 ‘to’ Remain & 1/3 unsure.
Its advice can only be reasonably construed as supporting the status quo – i.e. UK remaining a member of the EU.
“those determined” are who exactly? And in what regard are they determined to succeed?
It is already clear that the UK will lose out economically;jobs are going, investment failing to materialize etc.
I do not ‘talk down’ anything:As I show above, the people expressed themselves more in favour of our continued EU membership than opposed it. You may rather just be getting your excuses in early, by blaming me and folk like me, for your own failings. Consider the words of Brexit’s biggest advocate:Nigel Farage. He it was who said that a 48:52 split in favour of Remain would mean his campaign would continue.
This is Brexit all over, one rule for its proponents and another for its detractors.
Those readers who consider the EU Referendum to have been illegal, as suggested in the article above, might like to consider crowdfunding a legal case to be brought against the European Commission by lawyer Julien Fouchet. Go to http://www.gofundme.com/action-for-expat-votes
What about all the British citizens living abroad for more than 15 years who were denied the right to vote ? Those votes alone would most probably have secured the right to remain.
If you are living / working and living in another country for 15 years, why should you get to vote on the future of this country.
Well Karl, if it’s all to do with 15 years.
Given a life-span of 3-score & ten, perhaps only folk under 55 should have been allowed a say last June?
Simply because we are UK citizens and thus affected by parliamentary and governmental decisions and procedures. It is also a fundamental human right, unfortunately not rendered obligatory under the Treaties and conventions concerned.
Many, many of us have been living and working abroad FOR BRITISH INTERESTS anyway.
Karl – Lots of those people who have lived abroad for more than 15 years are paying British taxes. Have you never heard of “no taxation without representation”.
Crowdfunding of challenge on legality of EU Referendum now only £105 short of target. Go to http://www.gofundme.com/action-for-expat-votes and help to stop this Brexit folly.
While I think the gofundme idea is good, it is highly unlikely to be heard let alone won.
The European court has shown enormous reluctance to wade into national constitutional matters, except in the highly narrowest of senses, which is the correct approach – each country’s constitution is its own affair.
It is true that successive ministers have said they would return voting rights to expats who left the UK over 15 years ago, however, those are political promises, which have yet to be approved or voted for in the Houses of Parliament.
Therefore, the EU referendum is currently legal in terms of meeting out constitutional requirements.
Ministers promises are nothing until enacted.
Unfortunately I have to agree with you.
Harry Shindler took our disfranchisement to the ECHR and lost through mendacious and heavy intervention by the UK government and frankly a misunderstanding of the issue by a narrow majority of the judges involved, leading to an excellent report by the remaining minority of the judges.
Mr Preston took this issue as high as he could within the UK courts and lost.
Multiple attempts have been made in Parliament but always shot down or been “requested” to withdraw by the government as they said they were “hard at work” on the required legislation – more lies leading to a frankly woefully inadequate proposal made last year for a “votes for life” bill that does NOT apply to all UK citizens of voting age.
Unfortunately our “human right” to representation in the affairs of our country is nowhere made obligatory on governments, although enshrined in the Treaties but with no binding force.
So our magnificently dishonest government are now in the Brexit disaster with the rest of us, whereas had we had the vote the result of the referendum would almost certainly have been the opposite.
I remain convinced that the result would have been marginally remain, had expat votes been allowed.
However, that would be a reasonably strong reason why the government dragged their heals in allowing the legislation to move forward.
We were set up for a fail from the start.
Its good to have the idea of stopping Brexit discussed so rationally but let’s have a bit of optimism Justin and Nicholas. Surely it must be possible to do something to stop this madness?
There is no mechanism for challenging the outcome.
The Act left no wiggle room, and the Tories have decided to go “full metal brexit”, so what would you propose?
I want the decision overturned as much as many of you, but there is no mechanism left to do so. Unless the Lib Dems get a majority, there will not even be a referendum on the final deal with any other party.
I want to be optimistic, but we also have to face facts: the damage to our reputation has been done; the damage to our economy will follow. Once the electorate realise how bad the damage will be, it will be far, far too late to do anything about it.
Brexit cannot be said to be the will of the majority of the electorate.
The mechanism available to prevent it remains with the principle of MPs using their best judgment to do what is best.
Brexit is but a Party-Political choice. Such choices are commonly overridden.
Yes, lets be optimistic and hope this attempt to overturn the will of the people will fail miserably.
It remains the will of a minority of the electorate.
That is what all the arguing is about.
Do try to bring intelligence to the discussion.
Last time I looked more people voted to leave than to remain and please don’t cite any nonsense about people who were either not eligible to vote or decided not to vote. Intelligent enough for you?
No intelligence shown in your reply at all.
Perhaps go back and re-read the data analysis on this very page.
You don’t get to exclude data points because they’re inconvenient.
You sound just like Corbyn who claimed he won the election by getting less votes. You wouldn’t be Diane Abbott by any chance?
What absolute rubbish. More people would back Brexit today. The ‘CESSPIT’ EU has shown its true colours.
We know 37.4% of the electorate voted to leave the EU in the advisory referendum, but that’s all. The gamble the politicians are taking is that by following the advice and leaving the EU, a sufficiently large proportion of the electorate will either keep them in power (Cons) or put them in power (Lab). There is a risk that there will be a backlash, if the UK doesn’t prosper outside the EU. Looking at the change in voting patterns across the age groups it would appear the risk increases over time. This will be an uncomfortable time for political supporters of Brexit, because people are unforgiving of politicians who make their personal situation worse.
The Remainers LOST. This site is much the same as Corbyn and his bunch of hooligans who also LOST, but claimed to have WON. To re-quote Robert Spencer: “We live in the Age of Absurdity.”
There can be little else quite as ‘absurd’ as discounting the ‘law’ – specifically, the law that instigated the ‘advisory’ referendum.
Also ‘absurd’ to declare that an opinion-poll (glorified or otherwise) can be ‘lost’ or ‘won’.
We have Brexit solely because MPs (yes, them again) passed the bill to ‘trigger’ A50 [A bill that ONLY saw the light of day at the insistence of the Supreme Court.]
Yes, Corbyn is at fault – but only to the same degree as Theresa May.
[What has she ‘won’, by the way?]
Tom Austin – There can be little else quite as “absurd” as the constant whinging by remainers. The referendum was not an opinion poll, it was a vote put to the country on whether or not they wished to stay in the EU or leave, and more people voted to leave than remain, therefore those who voted to leave “won” and now we are going to leave. What has Theresa May won? she won the last general election, or haven’t you been keeping up? and just in case you are wondering, Labour lost.
Well Karl, the mere parroting of Dave does not alter the facts.
I wasn’t parroting anyone, I was stating the facts, which fact or facts are you disputing?
And who is Dave?
The Commons voted 6/1 in favour of the Referendum. The Prime Minister of the day promised that he would abide by the majority decision. The majority decision was LEAVE. It is clear cut. What is there to argue and bicker about forever and a day? As for those who claim we didn’t know what we were voting for, I can claim exactly the same about the remainers. I have friends who voted to remain, but on questioning them, I found they had no idea what the EU is really about and their reasons were quite trivial.
Oh, how exciting it all must be – that the entire future of the UK should rely solely upon trivialities.
I have no doubt that the Tory verses Tory contest, was certain to end with a Tory victory.
So much for the Tories.
We need not tarry on the other Politicians involved either.
But, what about the future?
What is it about UK democracy – that thing that gloried in the USP of Parliamentary Sovereignty which, together with an uncodified Constitution, could react quickly to the approach of economic ruin?
How is it now that we seem set today to impoverish all – come hell or high water?
No! This will not do.
We remain that same Democracy & as Brexit is but a Political policy that has only a transient approval from a slim majority in a previous parliament, we can (& indeed must – I would argue) change tack.
If such a thing is not to be countenanced in this Parliament – there will be others.
Which fact or facts were you disputing?
Facts are not in dispute Karl.
We voted by 1.3 million to leave.
Everyone pol shows that we would rather stay.
Ever considered that the polls themselves are innaccurate, and may be centred on city folk rather than poor northerners, as it is the city folk who will often answer these surveys? We have a very London dominanted focus.
Thankfully, we have, in the 2017 General Election, a more recent full electorate test of public opinion. In that election the LibDems, Greens and SNP nailed their colours clearly to the remain mast while Conservative and Labour offered different flavours of brexit. The result was that the pro-remain parties polled 12% while over 80% voted for a party offering brexit.
If the pro-remain parties had polled anything approaching the 48% that voted remain in the referendum they would have won by a landslide.That they lost so spectacularly shows that the majority of those voting remain at the referendum considered some other issue more important to them than staying in the EU (avoiding £27k of student debt for example)
Time to move on.
What a totally baseless and specious argument, which demonstrates a fundamental ignorance about how politics works. To many indeed it was a “Brexit election” but in a General Election there are more issues that come into play than in the totally flawed and dishonest referendum. You cannot equate a general election with all that entails for party loyalties etc., with a referendum!
What a totally baseless and specious argument, which demonstrates a fundamental ignorance about how politics works. To many indeed it was a “Brexit election” but in a General Election there are more issues that come into play than in the totally flawed and dishonest referendum. You cannot equate a general election with all that entails for party loyalties etc., with a referendum!
I don’t know why but my name changed from Nicholas Newman to “Simply because we are” in my reply above.
Yes it did – but your message was clear enough Nicholas.
Brexit stems from lies, all it can ever become is a lie.
As when applying FPTP terms to an opinion-poll becomes; “80%+ voted for Brexit at the last election.”
Oh – the straw-man with off-hand put down technique (not, if I may be permitted to say, very well executed). Unfortunately, you see, your straw man doesn’t hold together at all. Did I say there were no other factors in a general election? No – in fact there it is in black and white and central to my whole point.
So let me construct a straw man back.
Let us assume that the referendum result had been a marginal win for remain and that in a subsequent general election UKIP, as the only pro-leave party, had, as the LibDems in this election, polled just 7.4%.
Would you, I wonder, be arguing that the thrust of leave was still very much alive.
I very much doubt it.
See – straw-men are easy.
I would agree that the referendum was flawed and dishonest. Though perhaps you won’t agree that this was on both sides. There was, for example, quite blatant foreign interference in the process (by no less than the US president) and a propaganda leaflet, paid for by public money, that quoting our imports and exports with the EU as percentages of different bases (an old and well-worn trick) and in so doing obfuscated our £60+bn/yr trade deficit with the rest of the EU – a deception that, at least in financial terms, was at least 5 times greater that of the £350m gross contribution scam pulled by the other side.
Neither side, in my view, comes out of this looking very good.
Brexit is based on lying promises, over 1000 of us voted Brexit for extra funding for the NHS. We don’t want BREXIT rubbish NOW. We want another referendum (meaning 2nd referendum) now we know the truth about this lying BREXIT government we want to change our vote. WE wish to remain with EU. We were stupid to vote BREXIT.
Oh, give it a rest.
Dear Joe – no need to beat yourself up. The electorate got it right in June 2016:
1/3 ‘for’ Leave,1/3 ‘to’ Remain,1/3 unsure.
Given that the law passed by Parliament allowed only for ‘advice’, it is clear that the advice did not favour a change from the ‘status quo’.
ONLY the willful disregarding by MPs of their own law has resulted in Brexit.
Absolutely right Mr Austin!
I didn’t see anything about the 2 million British citizens that were refused the right to vote because they had retired in another country.
A citizen loses the right to take part in the Parliamentary process if they haven’t been registered to vote in the country for 15 years: clearly undemocratic.
What’s undemocratic about it? If you are living in another country, why should you get to vote on what happens in this one?
So Karl by your logic all citizens of another EU member state having lived in the UK less than 15 years ago, and those currently living there, should have had the right to vote in that absurd, twisted advisory referendum.
We 2 million or so UK CITIZENS WITH A STAKE IN OUR COUNTRY, denied the vote, NEED TO HAVE OUR SAY, as we are UK citizens with an enduring interest in our country.
Please stop spouting your utter rubbish, so often refuted, about those of us living abroad not deserving a vote on what happens to our country. As explained many times before, living abroad by no means means abandonment of interest and rights in our country – those who indeed don’t care won’t vote anyway.
So, Mr. Newman where will you draw the line? Suppose a person emigrated to Australia 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago – do you think that they should still have the vote? How long have you lived out of UK?
Very simple. Votes for life means the line is death.
Why this obsession with the idea of withdrawing voting rights from citizens? Even those who may have lived in Australia for 50 years, even 80 years – if they are British citizens, they should retain their RIGHT to vote. This of course does not mean an obligation to vote – if they are not interested, perhaps because they no longer have family or pay taxes or receive a pension in the UK, they will probably not bother to vote. If like myself, having lived in two different EU member states outside the UK for the last 47 years, one has close family, friends and other interests etc. in the UK and visceral ties with my country, and if as many one has worked for British interests abroad, many drawing pensions and paying taxes at source in the UK, why should we be deprived of the fundamental right to a say in the running of our country, because of a totally arbitrary, politically motivated cut-off date, as if we were considered no longer to be UK citizens?
Don’t forget that UK government decisions affect us deeply – look at the effect of the devaluation of the pound on the many UK state pensioners living abroad, look at the horrifyingly unjust freezing of UK pensions in many countries (for example Australia and Canada but not the USA).
What next, strip us of our nationality? And don’t say “take the nationality of the country you live in” because many change country from time to time, some never accumulate enough residence or even local interest and motivation in the country in which they reside to take up another nationality. And many countries (for example Austria) do not allow multiple nationalities.
It has become glaringly obvious that mass-immigration was engineered to pave the way for globalisation; to dilute national pride and cultural identity, two characteristics that would undoubtedly pose a huge threat to globalisation phase one: The European Union.
A proud indigenous population of a historical nation wouldn’t accept being absorbed into a homogenous artificially formed ‘global’ nation, a New World Order.
There is no other feasible explanation for letting largely unskilled, uncivilised, fiercely religious, wholly incompatible people, with a high propensity to violence, into our land. They have nothing positive to offer.
All of the spurious explanations for filling Britain with third-worlders, given by successive governments, have been easily debunked with facts, figures and logic.
If Britain so badly needed skilled workers, why would the workers have to be immigrants? We have some of the best education institutions on the planet, and why would the immigrants have to be from the third-world? Judging by the state of the countries these people come from they are clearly short of skills. Their nations have been ruined by their cultures’ inability to build and maintain civilisation…which is why they want to flee the desolate wastelands their cultures have created/destroyed. If they couldn’t create something worthwhile for themselves, do you expect us to believe they could contribute anything of value to Britain? If these people are so wonderful why are their countries of origin so uninhabitable?
Why wouldn’t the government make it easier for Americans, Australians, New Zealanders or South Africans to come here? We share a language, similar cultures and ethics. They would fit right in.
I’ll tell you why; It’s because those people are of European descent, who also come from independent, sovereign nations with proud histories, who would also oppose the destruction of their ancestral homeland. They would oppose handing Europe over to an unelected global dictatorship, run by the Rothschild dynasty.
The nonsense about immigrants propping up the pension pot is a fatuous lie. Mass immigration has been reported to be a net loss of up to £17 billion per year, and has brought with it a whole host of social and cultural problems: Honour killings, FGM, terrorism, rape, fraud, gang culture, acid attacks, identity theft and robbery. Not to mention the anti-social behaviour and contempt these beings present to their host nation. Multi-culturalism is killing Britain.
70% of ‘skilled worker’ migrants are illiterate in their own languages, yet are somehow paraded as a miraculous solution to our economic problems, when opposite is true.
Low-skilled, low-IQ people take low income jobs. Low income jobs are subsidised by the taxpayer in the form of benefits. The vast majority of employed migrants are in low-skilled work, making them a net drain on resources. What about unemployed immigrants? 50% of Muslim men don’t work. 75% of Muslim women don’t work. Yet they are producing children at a rate that has made Mohamed (and its spelling variations) the most registered baby name in Britain. Their religion promotes subversion and conquest. They are taking Britain over from within. I would say a fifth column, but we already have one of those, making Islam a sixth column.
They are populating our country with their people who will, in turn, do the same as their jobless parents; take resources they haven’t earned and breed. That is the definition of parasite. Britons are financing the parenthood of jobless immigrants who will, at this rate, outnumber native Britons in a few short years. All while the native population put off having kids because they can’t afford them, because they’re paying exorbitant levels of tax to fund the third-world invasion and Britain’s involvement in wars in the Middle-East, for the purpose of defending Israel from their enemies, of which there are many.
This is genocide, according to the United Nations. Any act likely to cause displacement (white flight) or dispossession (diminished access to services and housing) are acts of genocide. Allowing the native population to be outbred by the invading hordes is another act of genocide. This is all outlined in the U.N Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous peoples. I suggest you read it and re-evaluate Britain’s immigration policy accordingly.
It is often said that the NHS wouldn’t survive without migrant workers, even though the NHS will collapse as it has been engineered to, to force the nation into private healthcare; another little gift from the government to the bankers they represent.
If migrants are so essential to the NHS, why have average A&E waiting times increased by 100%, from 6 hours to 12 hours, during the peak of the migrant influx? Could it be that the migrants are using our services, rather than contributing to them? We are one of the wealthiest countries in the world, yet have a shockingly poor healthcare system that isn’t fit for purpose.
Migrants make up the majority of NHS doctors stuck off for negligence, indecency, sexual assault and forged or inadequate qualifications. Those ‘skilled workers’ again.
Why do we have a demand for new homes to be built that exactly matches the figure of net migration to the UK each year? We have too many people, not too few homes. We’re now the most densely populated country in Europe. Something has got to give.
Since the British people have refused to be swallowed up by globalism, by voting to leaving the EU, mass-immigration no longer has a purpose. Its purpose of diluting public resistance to globalism has failed, so you can send the invaders back. Last in first out.
We have no obligation, morally or legally, to accept, tolerate, house, feed or clothe these people. British citizens are forced to work for 40-50-60 years of their lives to survive, while the tax they contribute isn’t benefiting them or the people of Britain, but funding the breeding programs of people who do not belong here.
In Britain we conserve our areas of outstanding natural beauty. We give historical buildings listed status and maintain them with period methods and materials wherever possible. Our native wildlife species are carefully monitored and managed so that they may be around for future generations to enjoy.
Why isn’t the native human population given the same consideration?
This is genocide.
While you rail against the EU your critique is of successive UK Governments & Westminster as a whole. Oddly, the sole saving-grace of the UK institutions, that have brought you the ruin you describe, is their tendency to cherish the past – stately homes etc.
You are entitled to your view, but as the main thrust of the arguments here has it, such has never been the predominant view.
The UK electorate has never shown a preference to Leave the EU or for Brexit.
“The UK electorate has never shown a preference to Leave the EU or for Brexit”
Oh, so a mistake was made when the votes were counted and the majority of votes cast were not to leave the EU?
Silly us eh?
Karl, you forget that over 2 million of us were disfranchised. The referendum was based on a deliberately engineered electorate and therefore invalid. Anyway it was advisory. And kindly do not continue to dispute that, it is amply documented – look it up.
Mass immigration as organised by various governments in the past, particularly Labour, was reported to be intended to boost the number of voters favourable to their party.
Your comments about certain categories of non-European immigrants are widely shared and have been aired since over 26 years ago by people from other European countries, notably in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg (not an EU institution and not to be confused with the EU Council in Brussels). They are also difficult to infirm or dispute, and anyone who agrees with them or relays them risks being instantly labelled.
But here you are talking about NON-EU immigrants, not immigrants from other EU member states.
It is certainly not an argument for Brexit, which has nothing to do with third-world immigration, apart from the report that third-world or Commonwealth voters were more likely to vote in favour of Brexit because they felt it would lead to greater ease in bringing their families to live in the UK.
33% is not a majority to leave the EU another vote is needed until you get an lets say 60 either way
You mean until you get the result you want. Its not going to happen, the vote was taken and of those eligible to vote, the majority voted to leave, we are going to leave, thank heaven.
In most democracies the opinion of those who choose not to vote are discounted, this si as it should be. Talking about democracy, if the EU commission comes out with a law that affects me personally and that I do not like, for example allowing uninsured drivers to claim compensation at the expense of all law abiding drivers by putting up premiums to deal with this, where is the logic in that? I might add to this nonsense the nonsense of making female drivers pay the same as males when insurance is based on risk and female drivers are a lower risk, where is the logic in that? the ridiculous subsidy on growing sweet corn in the UK, we do not have the climate for it and never did. I see on my travels field after field of 3 ft. high sweet corn that has no real value and which will be cut and burned or dug into the ground. That is clever! The EU commission is QED run on an ideological not a pragmatic basis, it is inherently undemocratic Quo vadis EU? Administrative dictatorship I think. The EU has succeeded where the Nazis failed, they now control most of Europe and are not democratically accountable to the population they govern. I rest my case.
I do not know if that has been noted yet.
The “LEave” majority is 1.26M
The number of UK Citizens living in the EU is widely reported as being 1.2M
Many of those 1.2M were, like myself, prevented from voting in the referendum as we were not on UK election rolls as we had been absent for so long.
Yet the vote specifically targets our rights to live in the EU.
So next time someone talks about “The Majority”, “Will of the people” or “Democracy” please remember up to 1.2M people were prevented from voting AT ALL!
Nicholas – “Please stop spouting your utter rubbish, so often refuted, about those of us living abroad not deserving a vote on what happens to our country” Because you do not agree with what I am saying does not make it utter rubbish.
You may have an enduring interest in what happens to this country but you no longer live here and havent done so for at least a decade and a half, therefore your views on its future are no longer of concern and it is legally and morally right that you, and all others in your position, are not allowed to vote on its future.
Please spare us your ranting about the referendum being advisory, it was clearly spelled out that the Government would abide by our decision and those of us who want to leave the useless and corrupt EU were in the majority of those eligible to vote.
Sorry Karl, you are just wrong. David Cameron’s purely political statements about abiding with the result of the referendum don’t actually count as they were untruths. It was legally an advisory referendum, this was made abundantly clear to Parliament before they so misguidedly voted to install it.
And don’t presume that my views on what happens to my country don’t count. How dare you presume that, just because governments have. And I remind you that the Conservative government has promised us votes for life now for years while simultaneously sabotaging any attempt by others in Parliament to give us back our voting rights.
And the EU is very far from useless, and what evidence do you have to say it is corrupt?
Nicholas – “And the EU is very far from useless, and what evidence do you have to say it is corrupt?”
What would you call an organisation which does not have its accounts signed off year after year, where one leader of a member country feels free to autonomously extend an open invitation to every economic migrant to come to Europe and then demands that all other member countries should take a percentage of them or face financial penalties, where countries are granted membership with no thorough financial vetting, adopt the Euro and watch their economy collapse, where two countries who have the misfortune to be in easy reach of the previously mentioned economic migrants invited by Merkel are left to deal with the continuing flood with no help, the list goes on. You may have a different label for all of this, I call it useless and corrupt.
You don’t live here, so no, your views on the future of this country don’t count.
No, I`m not wrong.
It’s time to stop quoting the lie about the EU’s accounts not being signed off year after year – see
European Commission – Press release
European Court of Auditors signs off EU accounts for 10th time in a row and sends positive message on EU spending
Brussels, 28 September 2017
and all this was well known before the referendum, applied to previous years.
I suppose when you mention one leader of a member country you are referring to Angela Merkel. She gave the possibility to a large number of refugees to come to Germany, but certainly not an open invitation to every economic migrant to come to Europe, and it is not she but the EU Member States which decided on the mode of distribution of refugees, and (except Denmark with its opt-out) which decided on the Dublin Convention in 1990, subsequently refined and replaced by the Dublin III Convention and extended not only to all member states (except Denmark with its opt-out) but also beyond (Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland). And I recall the UK was represented and party to the decisions. So by no means a unilateral action by Angela Merkel.
And what role have wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria played? With our (meaning several countries) help and arms of course – and what role African wars, drought etc.? By no means simple!
And I deplore just as much as you the leaving of the main part of the migrant influx problem to Italy and Greece – and the various solutions that have been vigorously contested by some EU member states, contrary to most. But this does not indicate EU corruption.
You say countries are granted membership with no thorough financial vetting – I remind you that the accession of a new member state is done according to Article 49 of the Treaty on European Union. It is a very lengthy process of adoption of the “acquis communautaire” of regulations, decisions, directives etc., adjustment of national legal and justice systems, financial management systems, human rights etc., and that financial aspects are by no means the only criteria – there are also extremely important foreign and domestic policy aspects which this is not the place to explain – they are abundantly explained in the EU’s documentation. For a start, see
And which member states are you referring to?
Presumably mainly Greece, whose successive governments must share a large part of the blame because of their deficient tax system etc.
These points by no means indicate corruption on the part of the EU institutions.
Your comment about “you don’t live here so no, your views on the future of this country don’t count” – how do you think our former Empire was constituted? How do you think we were able to be a “great trading nation” (in the words of Theresa May I think) without UK citizens living and working abroad? Do you think their views didn’t count?
Why would those of us who have played a role in British businesses for years abroad, or as staff members of international institutions of which the UK is a member, or teachers, or simply who have retired abroad, as is their right, having worked a lifetime in the UK or elsewhere, and who are UK citizens, not have a say in the future of our country? It is an enshrined human right refused by our grossly undemocratic UK.
So yes, you are wrong. Take your blinkers off and inform yourself.
Love this small island thinking Karl. Take a look at the UK. What do you make of its governance? Its bloated civil service? Its partial democracy? It’s support of EU direction? It’s politicians? Corrupt and useless is a label that could easily be applied to the UK using the same reasoning..
Mr. Austin: You haven’t addressed the content of my long comment at all. Could it be that you have absolutely no idea what the EU is really about? It’s not about trading partners, tariffs visa-free travel, etc. – that’s just the ‘surface phenomena.’ The real purpose of the EU is to generate a multicultural SUPERSTATE, populated by ‘serfs’ with no national identity or pride. Hence the mass immigration of totally unsuitable people with zero skills, non-English speaking, zero ability to integrate and, most significantly, about 80% young males. You must know about the NWO, the Bilderberg Group, the UN Plan for 2030, the Barcelona Agreement & the Coudenhove-Kalergi Plan. You must know about all those EU-supporting politicians who have received it’s Annual Prize, including Heath, Jenkins, Clinton, Blair, Merkel, Tusk, van Rompuy, Juncker, Schultze and even royalty. You must know Jean Monnet’s quote: “Europe’s nations will be guided towards the SUPERSTATE without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually and irreversibly lead to the federation of Europe.” The EU is in the process of implementing World Socialism, even Communism with Europe to be ‘Sector 1’ & the USA to be ‘Sector 2.’ It’s a very long term plan and has been taking place for decades, but now it’s speeding up. I can’t believe you cannot see what’s happening – all the evidence is staring you in the face. Yet still you discuss all the minutiae of trade, tariffs, law, free movement etc. – and ignore the horrors of the big picture.
I am fairly sure that my mentions of ‘EU’ are pretty minimal. Which seems to me to be perfectly in line with the thrust of the original post.
My only thought upon what you have just written;regarding this ‘big picture’, is:How may Brexit extricate us from this?
Can it be that the demise of the EU is what is envisaged? Perhaps causing yet more of a domino-effect around the globe? If so;the positive purpose of any of it, escapes me.
I read a neat aphorism today:”We do not inherit the Earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children.”
Applying this to what you have to say [Agenda 21?]:Does it not make more sense ‘to be in it to win it’, as far as the UK & EU are concerned?
I tire of hearing what Brexit is a running away from, and nothing about the sunny-uplands to which it is heading.
Given the thrust of this Blog, coupled with all that we are supposedly being rescued from:Am I to conclude that Farage, the Conservative Party; Labour Party &c., are our altruistic saviours?
I can tell you – this is not what stares me in the face.
Yes Geoff, we can see what you are frightened of, but what is that you want and are willing to embrace?
What a bizarre question. Willing to embrace? You sound like a spoof psychiatrist from Fry & Laurie. Be off with you.
How would an opinion by the LSE ever be conducive to knowing the will of the people? How would those who constantly claim that polls prove that everyone (of the so-called majority) now wants to remain.
A decision claimed by them to represent the will of the nation,
Understanding that most polls are only the opinions of a very small random and comparatively limited expression of that limitation and not that of the 47 million people who voted in the biggest non Political nation wide poll ever. I can’t see how any Emeritus Professor can deduce an alternative decision from any poll or multitudes thereof that can more likely be affected by the specific regions or the financial bracket selected. Furthermore who can say that those excluded from the vote would have voted for a different outcome.after all the choice to not to vote is also a democratic freedom choice which affects both viewpoints. Polls are notorious for giving an indication that questions asked are nothing to do with those taking the poll and that is the very reason for allowing them to be private..And you don’t have to be a Rhodes scholar to understand that, Just hold an opinion often biased and often soured by over ripe grapes.. With this in mind it would seem unnecessary to have a vote when a poll would provide a cheaper and far more accurate assessment incorruptible by even more Polls and possibly more suitable to the all knowing elite rather than the masses.
Please tell me if after a further referendum to suit the stayers will they be happy to have a further 3rd vote to clarify the issue or will we have more polls to prove that wrong too. When will it end ?? ????.
To people now referring to the polls as some form of statistical proof I would refer them to the nation wide survey and POLL that has already provided the statistical proof we need to leave the EU and its dictatorship.
This statement put out by some Remainers that the Referendum was only “advisory” is risible. What would be the point of polling the entire electorate for their “advice” and then having done so, ignore it? Supposing the OUT vote had been 75% – would that still count as “advisory” and be ignored? As for Mr. Newman living abroad for 47 years yet still expecting to have the right to vote on UK affairs – I can only say ABSURD. Let’s take it to the extreme – a boy of Pakistan descent is born in UK but goes to live in Pakistan and is still there after 47 years. He keeps his UK Citizenship but chooses to live in Pakistan for the rest of his life. He has the right to vote in a UK Referendum? It would be a nonsense.
“We are RULED by Law & Governed through Party-Politics.”
We’ll all be in ‘a world of hurt’, should we accept the upending of the above statement.
The Referendum of 2016 was indeed ‘advisory’ only, for that was the law passed by Parliament.
MPs briefing papers made that clear.
Has a UK government EVER asked for advice from the electorate in the past? Not that I’ve heard. It was never described to the public as “Advisory.” It’s all on record that it would be acted upon & cannot be denied:
At most, that makes Brexit Tory Party Policy.
As was the Poll-Tax.
GeoffG: Tom Austin is right. The referendum was only advisory, as is any similar referendum in the UK, and it was stated to be so by the Government and by Parliament. That it was risible to hold it at all I can only agree. Any serious referendum would have had to include provisions for at least 2/3 of the enfranchised CITIZENS (not just those living in the UK and those outside for less than the ridiculously arbitrary 15 years).
And how dare you presume to say that I as a UK Citizen should have my citizenship rights curtailed because of living abroad. Would you also say that somebody working in an international organisation of which the UK is a member, the Council of Europe, a UN agency, the European institutions, or NATO for example, and living outside the UK for more than 15 years as a condition of employment, recruited AS a UK citizen and BECAUSE of being a UK citizen, should also be disfranchised? And the same for representatives of UK firms abroad, doing business or perhaps manufacturing abroad as a UK interest? Or teachers? And even if in your opinion some might be allowed to keep their vote, why not retired people abroad, having worked perhaps all their working lives in the UK and with their pensions taxed in the UK? look how their pensions have been affected since the referendum through the pound sterling’s crash, and we’re not even out of the EU yet. How will the NHS cope when millions of us are forced to return to the UK through economic ruin?
I demand the vote as a right because I am a UK citizen. Full stop. That is enough reason. And don’t say “get another nationality” – it isn’t that simple. I am British, I feel British, I have no other nationality. I have family and many attachments in the UK and it is certainly not living abroad that would have changed that.
As for your example of the Brit of Pakistani descent born in the UK and then returned top Pakistan it is very unlikely that he would be the slightest bit interested in voting in UK elections if he also had not maintained a keen interest in the UK. But why remove his right? Perhaps he may have kept very close touch with the UK, in which case he as a British citizen may be interested in voting when issues concerning the welfare of his country are at stake. As a counter example there was a case – probably like lots of others – of someone born in Jamaica to 2 Brits, there temporarily, having returned to the UK when a couple of months old. He always thought he was British until he wanted to go abroad, and applied for a passport, only to be told he couldn’t have one as he was born in Jamaica. I have no idea how he solved that one eventually, but it is a good example of the fact that international life doesn’t sit well with the prejudices and ignorance of typical bureaucracies. And their publics.
And finally it is almost certain that had we UK citizens living abroad for more than 15 years been able to vote, and the Tories not broken their repeated promises to re-enfranchise us, the country would not now be in the absolute shambles and violent xenophobia now so disastrously apparent.
Personal rudeness. In this forum and many more.
Calls for another vote,
Maybe one after that and again and again. Until we get it right.
None of those matter.
The majority of those who voted, voted out, that was more than 50%.
Out we shall be Else there will be serious consequences.
I don’t mean or condone violence, but much of the voting public will never vote again probably for generations if the will of the people is thwarted.
That will have long term consequences
Having spent this week in Ypres
We should not forget the cost of earning what we have.
Stop attempting to destroy it.
Those that died for our freedoms would find this referendum a disgrace to their memory and be sick at the lack of statesmanship of our politicians.
That so many died to allow a cheating Leave campaign to get away with cheating, that’s an affront to all that is good with our country.
You just can’t help yourself can you?
I suppose in your world this is a lie as well.
I have said before.
If rules were broken then they should be punished.
But how does the £9m spent by the government sit within the rules.
The above article is clear evidence of Whitehall civil servants. Determined to feed us with false information.
Sooner we leave in full the better.
And I wonder if you Justin will, in years to come, see the folly of your ways.
I agree, two wrongs don’t make a right, the result should be voided on both counts.
But let us not forget, Leave have actually found guilty of cheating, Remain have not.
“The referendum was only advisory, as is any similar referendum in the UK, and it was stated to be so by the Government and by Parliament.” Emphatically NO, it was not. On the contrary – you know what Cameron stated openly to the country.
As for the 15 year rule – you sound like you want to pick & chose which laws suit you. NO to that one, but YES to “it was stated to be so by the Government and by Parliament.” It’s not your choice.
But in the end, it all comes down to. “Do you want Britain to become an Islamic State?” That IS where we are going, whether you can see it or not. All the evidence is in plain view, you only have to join up the dots. That is where the EU is taking us. Is that really what you want?
It was Parliament and the Government that defined it as an advisory or consultative referendum. Cameron’s statement that his government would act according to the result was a political statement of his intention as Prime Minister, actually contrary to what the debates and the briefing notes stated. Look it up – I don’t have the time right now. Except for the HoC Briefing paper p.25, see http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-7212 :
“This Bill requires a referendum to be held on the question of the UK’s continued membership of the European Union (EU) before the end of 2017. It does not contain any requirement for the UK Government to implement the results of the referendum, nor set a time limit by which a vote to leave the EU should be implemented. Instead, this is a type of referendum known as pre-legislative or consultative, which enables the electorate to voice an opinion which then influences the Government in its policy decisions. The referendums held in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland in 1997 and 1998 are examples of this type, where opinion was tested before legislation was introduced. The UK does not have constitutional provisions which would require the results of a referendum to be implemented, unlike, for example, the Republic of Ireland, where the circumstances in which a binding referendum should be held are set out in its constitution.”
It has nothing to do with choosing what laws suit me – but as a citizen I demand the right to vote for an MP who will listen to me. Laws passed by Parliament affect us expatriates as well. The history of the now 15-year rule is ridiculous – expatriates used not to have any right to vote, then in 1985 we were given the right to vote if we had been living in the UK during the previous 5 years, extended in 1989 to 20 years, then reduced in 2000 to 15 years, with effect from 2002. Yes it is Parliament that decides and the Government has systematically sabotaged all attempts through private members’ bills etc. to give us back the right to vote, while simultaneously promising to bring in legislation to give it to us. So far nothing except a flawed text that doesn’t even do what it purports to do – give the vote for life to all UK citizens wherever they be.
I note that you do not comment on my different categories of UK citizens living and working abroad AS UK citizens and BECAUSE they are UK citizens. Also, how do you think we “acquired” our erstwhile Empire?
I won’t comment on your off-subject comments about an islamic state beyond saying that this is a preoccupation in many other countries as well, it was first (?) raised at European level in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (nothing to do with the EU I hope you realise) on 9 September 1991 by Hallgrim Berg (read also Oriana Fallaci’s books) and it is certainly not the EU that is responsible. Neither for the application of Sharia law in the UK in parallel to our own laws.
(1) Firstly, we must understand that the EU bureaucracy is not elected by the UK and it is an overarching government of sorts that brought about its own being without election and as a follow on from the common market a trading enclave for those so joined. In effect the EU proper has come about by stealth.
(2) If we decide to stay within its clutches we will in effect turn over our sovereignty and all our defence forces to their control.
(3) We must never forget the past nor ever assume that all is forgotten, the ways of conquerors have predominantly been used repeatedly only the scenery and the generations change. Consequently, much learnt by experience and the method of defence is forgotten. I.e. The blackboard is wiped and the history is lost I.e. the monkey orphaned and not taught awareness by its parents thinks the Lion is just being friendly.
(3) Part of the price we would have to pay for staying in the unelected EU would be to turn over our Army and our defence systems to a foreign entity that could in time turn that same army against its own people with impunity. I.E BRITISH CONSCRIPTS FIGHTING BRITISH PEOPLE. AND who will have their finger on the Nuclear Button?? That’s one hell of a price to pay for our involvement.
(4) There is so much ambiguity related to staying in the EU one will never essentially know who’s will is being imposed or who becomes the next predator.
(5) The total disappearance of lost civilizations only tends to prove what has gone thousands of years before. The EU in my view is just the base pedestal for another ending. Let’s face it who will hold the ultimate unelected Power over all the co-joined countries. It simply can’t work without force and control of its own peoples.
(6) The UK has had nearly one thousand years of self-government and has thrown back the potential invaders of that time. Albeit the last invader of 1066 soon lost no time documenting everyone who lived on these islands as is shown in the Dooms Day Books still available for reading to this day. Every person and his her possessions were recorded in detail to provide the new King with the knowledge or taxable income and the specific share for his purposes, his armies and his pockets etc , with the remainder given to those who performed the collection.
(7) Nothing New there albeit the amounts now required for all the so-called EU functions and their overlording actions runs into the Billions of pounds more suited to be retained for the benefit of this country. We simply do not need another overpaid and underworked layer of duplication of unelected faceless bureaucrats riding in chauffeur driven cars at our expense.
8) The European common market may have been beneficial But why and for what reason was the EU created and why was it a clandestine implementation of self-aggrandisement?
Looking to the future we will have a situation where the UK is further locked into the rules and ideals of just a few would be dictators. And lets have no questions about this for wherever Power is contained it will corrupt and we may find ourselves fighting against our own people. With some Foreigner to our shores leading the charge.
9) Rest assured that once all the above is embedded we will have lost control of our own destiny.
10) It is not the now that we need to consider but the future and rest assured with such power available old aggrievances will surface along with a dictator or President comparing our combined countries to EU States and becoming the Supreme leader possibly greater than any other world Power.
11) And more to the point I find it difficult to understand how some one from the LSE can equate a number of subsequent polls of predominately smaller numbers, as having a greater representation than the millions that voted in the nationwide referendum. Do not forget that NOT voting was a choice that was also a democratic choice and applied just as strongly to the In vote as it did for the Out vote. Unfortunately there will always be those that cannot accept the peoples decision and will seek to denigrate the result long after the event. Time will tell we made the right decision.
Let us deal with these points one by one.
1) All roles in the EU institutions are either directly elected by EU citizens, are elected by our directly elected representatives or ARE our directly elected representatives. The comment would suggest Denis has no inkling of understanding about how the EU works.
2) As the UK Parliament (as any EU member state) under its constitutional arrangements can elect to leave the EU institutions, by definition, our sovereignty has remained exactly where it belongs, with our Parliament. The comment with respect to armed forces being under EU control is a simple lie. The EU has commented simply that, as the UK wishes to use their armed forces support as a bargaining chip, they can no longer be relied upon, and the EU are, therefore, left with no other option but to investigate further the options for an EU standing army. This is neither agreed nor, at this time, happening, but remains an option. While the UK is a full member of the EU, we have always veto’d this: we lose our veto when we leave.
3) The entire of this paragraph is simple FUD lies, with no basis in fact what-so-ever.
4) Again, FUD lies.
5) Again, all FUD and no substance of facts or truth.
6) The UK has, in fact, been constantly taken over by other races, including Viking, Romans, etc. Again, posturing, no facts.
7) Again, complete lack of understanding of how the EU institutions work, and no other facts to be had in this paragraph.
8) Again, no actual facts here. Plus, we will be locked into EU rules and regulations if we want to sell into the EU markets. That’s the nature of the single market.
9) Again, FUD lies. Some facts would have been welcome.
10) Again, FUD lies.
11) In a functioning democracy, we have the right to change our mind. Those so-called lesser polls suggest that the public tide is turning against the decision. Time to kill Brexit before it destroys us.
Oh dear I am please to see that you have noticed that the EU delegates or whatever were voted for NOT by the people of this country. But by those voted into the domestic Parliament of this country. That was never on anyones manifest to my knowledge so UNDER OUR NORMAL ELECTIONS NO CURRENT MP HAS THE RIGHT OR THE MANDATE TO SHOUT FOR US IN THAT RESPECT.
2) Our laws have already been overrun, dissected, and overruled by those of the EU and they are the major part of our sovereignty and part of the reason for the leave referendum or don’t you read.
3)4)5) FUD FUD FUD to all your three.
Item 6) I know of no group of invaders under the title of the Etceteras Vagaries again and you forgot about the Norman invasion Oh Dear, Some early Jews and the Cavemen. again no facts.
Item 7. More vagaries without an apposing argument just the rampant use of generalities.
Item 8) involves loss of sovereignty exactly as I said. Which of course you denied previously.
Item 9) Ditto.
Item 10) Concerning you point of view I agree absolutely but I wont stoop to criticising you for that..
Denis, none of your comments make any sense, unless you are so deranged by false news. Let me guess Daily Mail.
You don’t even seem to have a basic grasp of democracy.
Put the gutter press down and try a bit of thinking, eh?
The June 2016 referendum was akin to the “half-time” score. It was a mandate to explore the process of
leaving the European Union – and thus was a mandate to trigger Article-50.
Now, we are finding out the implications of departure. The UK public deserve an opportunity to vote on
the proposed terms of departure – the “full-time” score. This was the procedure when Greenland left
the Union three years after their initial vote in the 1980’s.
It would be an affront to democracy for parliament alone to overturn the 2016 result. The duty of MPs
is to call #EUref2018 to ratify the decision in sufficient time for Article-50 to be revoked if that be the
will of the voting electorate at that time.
Akin, perhaps, to a Rolf Harris daub:The common factor being the regular:”Do you see what it is yet?”
-What can be so dreadful about sticking with the Law & the UK Constitution?
-What can be the attraction of the self-serving utterances of ‘here today & gone tomorrow’ Politicians?
If the running of opinion-polls was ever sensibly to be on FPTP terms, there would be no Marmite on the shelves/Manchester would have but on football team – & much else.
Brexit is beginning to read like a Greek tragedy:The ‘gods’ have spoken.
The burning question remains: What is the difference between ad hoc Democracy & the divine right of Kings?
– Justin Bellinger
Let us deal with these points one by one.
1) I do not remember anyone electing Merkel to be the spokesperson for the EU when she invited every economic migrant from around the world to come to the EU and then threatened any country refusing to take a share of them with fines. The comment would suggest Justin has no inkling or understanding of how the EU really works, or, is more likely, just ignoring the reality of who actually makes the decisions in the EU
2) The idea of an EU standing army has been around for a long time, which, if we were not leaving, we would eventually be a part of and is just one more example of the drive for further integration in the EU. The suggestion that because our armed services role future role in Europe was raised is responsible for an EU standing army being back on the table is not just facile, it is also untrue.
3) Your opinion
4) Your opinion
5) Your opinion
6) What has past armed invasion of our Island got to do with it?
7) We are one of the main financial contributors to the EU and the suggestion that none of the money is wasted and that Eurocrats lavish expenses is just “the way the EU works” is ignoring the point.
8) We wouldn’t be in the single market.
9) Your opinion
10) Your opinion
11) Lies and hyperbole
Dear Karl, and also Dennis Newland,
1) I repeat what I wrote in a reply to you on 30 October:
“I suppose when you mention one leader of a member country you are referring to Angela Merkel. She gave the possibility to a large number of refugees to come to Germany, but certainly not an open invitation to every economic migrant to come to Europe, and it is not she but the EU Member States which decided on the mode of distribution of refugees, and (except Denmark with its opt-out) which decided on the Dublin Convention in 1990, subsequently refined and replaced by the Dublin III Convention and extended not only to all member states (except Denmark with its opt-out) but also beyond (Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland). And I recall the UK was represented and party to the decisions. So by no means a unilateral action by Angela Merkel.”
2) etc. Justin Bellinger is right.
Most of the rest of Dennis Newland’s post on 28 November shows a – to me at least – extraordinarily twisted and partial view of history and of EU reality, and ignorance of what the EU is and how it is governed – a lot more democratically than the UK, as is increasingly obvious. And why does he base his arguments on so many lies?
Karl, your comment suggests that it is YOU who has no idea how the EU or its institutions work.
Your number 11 reply suggests you have no basic grasp of how democracies work.
I pity you.
The upside is, Theresa May is caving at every moment, Labour are open to a second ref and public opinion is changing rapidly against Brexit. We’ll kill it off for you, you can thank us later.
Your latest comment reeks of “yah boo”, don’t be so childish.
Ah, I see, as I thought, you have nothing to add.
Childish? Says the guy using “Yah boo” in his reply.
The obvious question is how on earth did the transition from a common market to the EU come about without any british public involvement?
Who suddenly gave the EU the power to override Britain’s courts decision.
How did we ever get the unnecessary right to appeal to the EU against decisions made in UK courts?
Before the EU we lived under our own laws where decisions and appeals were dealt with finality when made by british jurors and judges.
This list of EU involvement Is long and I don’t profess to know them all other than the fact that I have lived through all stages of the unelected EU transition. And the implementation and cost of additional overriding ability to countermanding British.legal decisions. More duplication at an incredible cost placed in the hands of more Bureaucrats and judges to override our laws.
Britain is a relatively stable country and with the pride of knowing that our work supports our country and not half of Europe we will do just fine.
Now the suits in the money zones have run out of expletives and dire warnings for the country we need to get on with the job without .further ado.
In that case: The obvious answer is:At/through several general elections[.]
Many who vote to stay have also told me of their regrets at being to scare to vote leave and now think its a good Idea. Source of this information comes to me from the same source you use so it must be accurate
If Mr. Low believes in his point then every single election is not valid.
My concern is that with any nation or company, if you have something good to sell then people will buy it whatever country, company or shop. Unfortunately what do we produce that the world wants?
86% of our economy is derived from within UK activity, of the 14% left half of that is to the EU the rest to elsewhere. WE import in value terms three times what we export to the EU. A disorderly exit will hurt the EU more than it will hurt us. Also and most importantly the EU is a bureaucratic dictatorship driven by ideology not practicality. The commission who control the population are democratically unaccountable. The have succeeded where the Nazis failed, the continent is controlled by an appointed elite. One example of their ideological drive is the way they changed the rules for car insurance, first by insisting that females paid the same as males, insurance is based on risk, and now the uninsured will be able to claim compensation in any accident. Who will pay for tis, why the law abiding insured. All in the name of equality. Remember Abu Hamza? Get us out of this madhouse.
Philip, you are just repeating an in-educated lie.
We have an enormous surplus in services; £100’s millions.
Until you appreciate WTO won’t cover this, you understand nothing.
in (?) educated as I might be (BTW what is your educational level?) I can recognize a bureaucratic dictatorship when I see one. Firms in the EU will still come to the UK for financial services after Brexit. But discounting all that the fact still remains the EU is not democratic, the voters have no control over what the commission decides to do. The EU is and always has been corrupt. It is deeply protectionist. I will take coffee as an example, green beans can come in without tariff, prepared, i.e. roasted face an enormous tariff. This is to protect the Italian coffee industry. If a slew of bankers end up unemployed so be it. I see that the EU is now advocating free WiFi everywhere in Greece, paid no doubt out of my pocket as will the cost of the travel pass for all 18 year olds. Take a look at Mr. Juncker’s actions when he was in charge in Luxembourg. Tax havens, look no further than the Duchy. Get us out of this dictatorship. We are still one of the wealthiest nations on the planet, we can stand on our own two feet, we did it before we can do it again. We have nothing to fear but fear itself to quote FDR. AS the man from the WTo said no deal will not be the end of the world for the UK, lets do it.
[I have ‘O’ Levels – just in case anyone needs to know.]
I have a memory too, even going as far back as late childhood:Mid 60s.
Those mid 60s though – part post-war regeneration, part empire-diminution.
This leaves little time at all for any “we did it before…” stuff.
Aye – there’s the rub.
Having been born in 1940 I can go back to the 40s. What point are you trying to make re decolonising, not enough time? I do not see the relevance of this to the argument that we should quit the EU. Are you saying because we no longer have an empire that we, the sixth largest economy on the planet, cannot survive without nanny EU? How do all the other non EU states survive then? If you want to be a ‘citizen’ in an undemocratic state run by ideology rather than rational pragmatism then I do not. If the EU brings out a law or regulation that adversely affects you what can you do about it? the answer is nothing. If the current government brings out a law I do not like I can vote against them next election. Cannot do that in the EU. In the EU democracy is over, QED, I rest my case.
That “we can stand on our own two feet//we’ve done it before so we can do so again” is your argument.
Just when could this have been?
You’d think we were doing Europe a favour by joining the EEC – at the umpteenth time of asking, the way you talk.
How do all the other non-EU states survive;you ask? Most of them have trade deals with the EU, that’s how. However; some of those, and the rest, have far lower living standards than we aspire to:On what basis then can we hope to trade with them?
One final – but telling point.
Pragmatism. Whatever happened to that – the USP of UK Representative Democracy?
The ability – nay, the habit, of steering clear of disaster after disaster:apart from, perhaps, the South Sea Bubble, Suez and NOW Brexit.
You might want tot live in a system run by an unelected elite I do not. The numbers are simple, we import from the EU 3x what we export to them. Our exports to the EU are in long tern decline, our exports to the rest of the world are increasing, we, if we had the self confidence we should, have the whip hand. The argument is simple, the EU wants, nay needs, tariff free access to the UK market, we want free access to the EU market. They take it or they leave it.. You cannot argue with numbers. Most other nation states do not have a free trade agreement with the EU so, in this, you are factually incorrect. When we joined (I voted against) we were not told of the small print in the original Treaty of Rome which envisaged a European state. We were conned. How many billions have we given the EU over the years and for what? to subsidise rail passes for teenagers, free wifi for the Greeks? where does the insanity stop. If we leave and cease contributing to EU coffers they will become insolvent. If we leave and are successful then others will follow and the commission knows this. There is a lot of anti EU opinion in many of the smaller EU states. Those that refuse to take refugees, what has happened to them, answer nothing. So much for all this tosh about the 27 singing from the same hymn sheet, really? and only when it comes to Brexit because of the money. Wake up to the reality and accept the outcome of the democratic process. Or, is the Eu going to try on us what they did to the Irish when they voted down the new EU constitution? repeated votes until the EU got its own way. They are essentially bullies and should be resisted. Get us out.
“in-educated”, auto-correct malfunction.
Let’s see, looking at your comments to me, and to others on the same thread, you are listening to the Daily Mail and not actually thinking. Bureaucratic dictatorship? You mean common rules across all member states? We voted FOR ALL of those rules 95% of our voting record; abstained 3% and were outvoted just 2% of the time. Hardly a dictatorship. But you’re not big on facts.
You didn’t pay for Greece. Their bailout wasn’t financed by the UK.
Tax havens? The UK controls overseas territories that are far, far bigger than anything within the EU (which are low tax, not no tax).
A dictatorship? How so. Every member of the EU institutions is elected, confirmed by our elected MEPs, or are nominated and confirmed by our elected government or, are in fact, members of our elected government. Remind me about how we elect our House of Lords again? Oh, no, we don’t.
I am afraid, Philip, you are the problem, not the EU.
Who voted for all these things, the populace, no, gravy train MEPs. Just look at their salaries, expenses and pensions. Make our MPs look poor. Get real.
Oh, apologies, I forgot one thing, Philip. We might import more goods from the EU than we ship to them. But we have an enormous surplus in services. Far, far more important. And without passporting, we won’t be getting that income, and the tax revenue it generates.
Wake up, Philip, put the Daily Mail down, and try to understand what is really going on, because it appears to me that you have a very poor grasp of the EU, its institutions, and how much money we actually make from it.
Justin, au contraire mon ami. I know exactly what the EU is about and I have stated that in a previous. posting. Dearer food if we leave the EU says who, Clegg and other remainers? Other people say otherwise. It is the EU that imposes tariffs on food from elsewhere on the planet, why, to feather bed the agricultural systems of the EU. I provided the example of Coffee. There are many more. So much for trade not aid. I will happily pay extra for all that I consume as long as we are outside the EU dictatorship. BTW, have you read the original Treaty of Rome? A federal Europe is mentioned in the very smallest of print. Not what was offered by either Heath or Wilson, they offered a Common Market no mention of eventual federation. Wedgewood-Benn tried to warn us of this but was drowned by the establishment of the day including his own Labour Party, perhaps you should read some of his speeches on the matter. I was born into a sovereign nation, I would prefer to die in one rather than in a vassal state that we currently are under EU rules. As I have pointed out, no doubt ad nauseam to you, the voters of the various nations who make up the EU have no democratic control over the commission who write the rules.. If you can find any wording in any of the treaties signed so far that contradicts this then let us have it. You lost the vote, accept it and adjust. If the shoe would have been on the other foot then no doubt would that would have been your advice to the leavers. GET US OUT!
I do not read the Daily Mail, do you? Refute my comments on the undemocratic (each ordinary voter able to express a choice on the Commission’s decisions) if you can. The City will recover I am sure, in any case who got us into the financial meltdown? The unemployed in the areas that voted leave? Perhaps it might be judgement for badness or bad karma for the overrated and overpaid in the City, I look upon their gleaming towers regularly from street level.
Well, food is already dearer, it’s not something that is said, it is something already happening now, due to inflation pressures, which are primarily driven by the uncertainty of Brexit. The devaluation of the pound has put the cost of food up. Inflation is running at 3% (1% above target) and the Bank of England tell us this is entirely due to Brexit the pound devaluing. So it hardly just remainers, is it?
The EU does impose some tariffs on some products, but it is non tariff barriers you seem to not talk about – because the one’s imposed by the EU are standards-based, ensuring safety and standards compliance across the trade bloc.
You seem to have also completely missed off services from your diatribe. The truth of that, our most important EU area, too much for your silly rhetoric?
The commission is made up of 28 members, each of who is appointed by their government (i.e. our elected representatives from our home country). The president of the commission is proposed by the European Council (who are our own elected heads of state) and elected by the European Parliament (who are our directly elected MEPs). Hardly a dictatorship, is it? And hardly something we don’t have a say in. Write to your MEP, write to your Prime Minster! What you fail to do is engage with the EU, instead you spout rubbish about it, because you don’t understand it. You just think you do.
You might be willing to pay more for everything: I am not.
We, Remainers, use democracy to undermine the 36% who voted to destroy our country. And the way Theresa May is caving in, and now Labour are calling for a 2nd ref possibility, and to keep CU and SM options on the table, you know what? Brexit is going to die on its arse. I admit, mostly because the government has screwed it up so badly.
By the way, you ask me to refute the undemocratic nature of the EU (which I’ve done above), but now you want me to say how an ordinary everyday voter can express their vote on the commission? They can’t, except via their MEP, same as you can’t affect, individually, the make up of a commons select committee, or you can’t vote out a House of Lords member.
We live in a representative democracy, not a direct democracy. There is a lot more democracy in the EU than the UK has ever had. You need to understand that before spout further rubbish about it.
OOH diatribe. Ask your mep, your PM, again get real. You have not refuted my contention regarding the ability of the ‘man in the street’ or the Clapham Omnibus if you prefer to alter the governance of the commission by democratic means. As I said before the EU commission succeeded where the Nazis failed, a Europe governed by a selected elite not accountable to the population they govern. Food has gone up because of uncertainty over Brexit, fine, lets make it certain then, WTO from 2019 just like most other countries in the world. GET US OUT.
Philip, you’ve been brainwashed by the Tory right-wing press. You failed when you compared the EU with Nazis. Try not to act like a child, eh?
We’ve undermined Brexit for you. You can thank us later.
Whatever happens, Brexit as you want it is dead. May will see to that. Corbyn, ironically, too. Kier too.
You have been fooled, or you are a fool. Pick a side. Traitor for wanting to destroy the country via Brexit, or embrace remain for your countries’ sake.
BTW, WTO without schedules means hard border in Ireland and a return to the troubles. If you genuinely want that, you are a traitor.
oh dear!!- more name calling!.. hmmm ‘traitor’
treason ~ noun uncommon
1. a crime that undermines the offender’s government
2. disloyalty by virtue of subversive behavior
3. an act of deliberate betrayal
brexit was voted, and you are trying to undermine the democratic vote.
the dictionary has you described perfectly.
Perhaps you need to read a little wider. The goal of the Nazis was domination of Europe and other areas so that their writ would run unchallenged and it would all be governed by an elite answerable to no one but the party. Tory propaganda, I am not a member of the tory party and neither am I a member of the present Labour Party. I am against the EU because it is undemocratic. What about some of the Remainer scare stories e.g the planes won’t fly, the UK will collapse the day after the vote was taken etc. Perhaps I can assume from your need to protect the City that your are employed there. If so this is ‘special pleading’. I did not want the 2010 coalition but it happened and I accepted it. That is the way a democratic society works. Could I advise that you take up mindfulness training as a means of lowering your very obvious stress levels. AS has been remarked on by others your attitudes are rather like thsoeof the Taliban and other extremist groups. I have work to do now.
Philip, Philip, all of your guesses are wrong.
I don’t work in the city. I have read widely on the Nazis, the two so-called Great wars, and, and this is where we seem to differ a lot, on the EU and how the institutions work.
I am also not stressed. I was, until May showed how “good” she was at delivering Brexit. Now I am relaxed that she won’t, and that opinion is changing.
While you are entitled to your opinion of how you view my attitude, again, like just about everything your write, you are wrong. Taliban? Extremism. Yet you use the Nazis as a comparison for the EU.
Grow up Philip. Stop acting like a spoiled child. I am glad you have work to do, it might take your mind off of yourself for five minutes.
Well well, aren’t we quite the analyst. Nazis and EU, the desired outcome is the same, read my words. All I write is in error? mea maxima culpa. Take up TM, it is good for the blood pressure.
Enjoy it?! Haha! You are funny.
Theresa May has caved in on every single EU point, because, in order to deliver the Northern Ireland solution, they all know the only outcome is SM/CU that will work. They’ve kicked it down the road two years with a transition period. Brexit is dead. Good riddance to bad ideas.
Indeed she has. What we need now is a new political party and it may end up extreme right. This si what tends to happen when the establishment ignore the population. Let’s see what transpires before hanging out the flag.
It’s only the will of 36% of the population.
They’ve sold both sides out, really. They’ll be a bit of demonstrating, the odd riot maybe. The ringleaders of the rioting will go to jail, the politicians will get away with everything.
Finally something we can agree on: the current political system is broken, as are the Tories and Labour.
Enjoy living in your future Islamic world with Sharia Law, raping gangs, regular atrocities committed by Islamic hot-heads, illegally killed livestock according to their archaic ‘religion,’ FGM, honour killings and ultimately – the takeover. I hope for your sake you don’t have children who will have to bear the consequences of the actions of people like yourself, who have no idea what is taking place at the behest of the EU & UN..
“If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face – forever.” George Orwell
Yawn. Stop being scared. All of that isn’t happening, and most are UKIP-sourced rubbish stories.
Go on, tell me about no-go areas in Sweden (rubbish, disproved)…
Stop using the Daily Mail as your source for all knowledge.
1) I don’t read the Daily Mail.
2) Not UKIP sourced stories. Nothing to do with UKIP.
3) It IS happening, but like the BBC you turn a blind eye to it because it doesn’t suit your agenda.
4) The plan to storm No 10 and murder Theresa May that was thwarted recently – an MI5 joke do you think?
5) The multiple murders across Europe over the last few years – all fake?
6) What’s it like living in your dreamworld?
1. You genuinely surprise me.
2. Many of the direct story points you put were pushed by UKIP.
3. No, most of what you write isn’t happening. I do a lot of research on these stories; my only agenda is the truth.
4. It was thwarted, the system is working. No one knows the full details, however.
5. No, not fake, but with two exceptions, the murders were carried out by home-grown people living in their home state.
6. I’m not, you are. Though yours must be a nightmare, or your anti-muslim rhetoric wouldn’t work.
@ Justin Belligerent: “5. No, not fake, but with two exceptions, the murders were carried out by home-grown people living in their home state.”
So that makes it acceptable? Hilarious and irrelevant. They were committed by MUSLIMS – that’s the point.
Oh, I forgot to mention all the Muslim raping gangs all over England – Rotherham being the prime example. But that’s OK isn’t it – some went to prison – an institution packed with them.
I am absolutely staggered by your stupidity, which you seem to wear with pride. No further communication is possible – it’s like trying to explain how a colour TV works to a caveman.
Try your very hardest to stop being a racist Muslim-hating prick.
You are the problem with our society, not muslims.
Can you imagine playing any kind of game with Adrian Low, the author of this piece. No matter the result, if he lost he would insist on playing best of three, then best of five until such time that he won! Or he would argue that the dice be re-rolled because they had fallen off the board or if you were playing football with him he’d insist on re-taking every unsuccessful penalty he took because the sun got in his eyes! Britain voted to leave the EU because the majority of Britain’s work in jobs where they must compete with limitless imported labour from the continent which depresses their salaries and effects work contracts. The hated zero hours contract, now standard in so many industrial work sectors, would not exist if it were not made possible by the endless supply of poor unskilled workers climbing over each other to find work. The British worker knows that they will be better off outside of the EU. Wealthy men like Adrian Low know nothing of the exploited working class.
Well said, I fear for Mr. Low’s mental health. Presumably he is an academic (of sorts) based in the LSE. The LSE was in the past and probably still is, a left wing cabal angry at losing EU money (our money) by way of research grants. Hmm, special pleading! Mr Low seems unable to understand that in a vote like the referendum the measure of success is 50% +1. Like many left wingers e.g. Momentum, democracy is ok as long as they get their own way, go against them and you are in peril.
There you go again, Philip, with your lies and “Daily Mail” specials.
You seem to believe democracy stopped at the referendum and cannot possibly evolve.
So, let’s not berate each other, let’s ask an honest question: If (note the IF) there is a huge shift in public opinion, to have a second vote, on the final deal, with an option to call it off (again, note the IF there is a change in public opinion), surely it would not be undemocratic to allow that vote, no?
Would it not also be particularly democratic to make the outcome binding, unlike the last one, to avoid the constant bitching and moaning by either side?
If you are all for the democracy you say you are, why are frightened to ask the people if the situation has changed based upon current information and, in particular, the balls up Theresa May is making of it?
Very interesting piece and a thread brimming with brexitards effing and blinding complaining that it’s all a leftie plot etc.,
So, asssuming you brexitards are democrats, and trust the will of the people, can you kindly answer the question, Would you support a second referendum when the exit plan, pluses and minuses, are clear?
– the E.U was NEVER meant to be exited. once you are in- its forever. like joining the USSR. there WAS NO EXIT CLAUSE before 2003. none. it was never written into the treatys. the E.U. works like this.. it places treatys on the table for a while, if no one examains them or questions them- they get passed off as is. that is why the exit clause -art 50 was tacked on later. because someone noticed. i actually remember on the radio it being stated “there is no exit clause!” then, one being added.these snippets are heard very rarely, once or twice maximum, then hushed up and shut down by the powers that be.
it speaks volumes.
No, absolutely NOT. Let me tell you why. The EU and the Remainers are clearly in collusion to make exiting the EU as difficult & expensive as possible, with the sole purpose of stopping Brexit. That’s what is known as “moving the goalposts” and is total unacceptable. When we voted OUT, it was done under the conditions stated loud & clear by David Cameron. You’ve seen it, we’ve all seen it. You cannot go back and change the conditions AFTER the Referendum. As for people on this site stating that Cameron was lying and therefore the result was invalid, or that the Referendum was “only advisory” – please – you are clutching at straws. You all need to listen, read & re-read what the PM prior to the Referendum. THAT was what we voted for.
“Brexitards” How original, did you come up with that all by yourself, or was it generated from a group session?
We are not leaving he EU because the case to leave is nonsensical, and will create far worse situation financially for Britain than they currently realise. If there’s one things about the British, we do not do things to get poorer.
Issues of domestic strife like waiting lists, school places, Housing and NHS issues are NOT immigration induced but rather government induced & the irony is that the Woman who presided over much of it now runs the Country. Also the EU is no more corrupt than any decent large well doing government body. The people there are elected by its members not self appointed, this false narrative of corruption is a diversion and a myth.
YOU HAVE BEEN LIED TO & the Conservatives have stitched up the people by covering up their own culpability in all of this whilst racist sentiment coalesces for the dregs of society to unify under the banner called Brexit. The Far right ARE BREXIT. WAKE UP PLEASE.
The EU commission who make the rules are not elected but appointed. IF you want to get rid of them the whole commission has to be removed. There is no local democratic control over commission rules. Example, in t drivers, who are less risky then males should have to pay the same rates all for the notion of equality. Another one, in the UK if you drove uninsured and were involved in a RTA then you could not claim as you (a) broke the law, (b) had no cover. Along comes the EU commissions and introduces a rule that says even uninsured drivers can claim. And who funds this, why the law abiding amongst us. Again all in the notion of equality. The EU commission is driven not by pragmatism but ideology and that is downright scary. Get us out of this undemocratic dictatorship.
-the EU protecting workers. Its nice healthy competition isnt it?
I voted leave. I have not changed my mind. The people in my town that I speak to who voted leave have not changed their minds. They are even more determined that we leave. Most feel betrayed by the Governments weak stance in the negotiations. We knew and know exactly what we voted for and feel the MPs, after voting for the referendum and Article 50 and constantly saying they respect the vote and accept we are going to leave, are doing their upmost to delay and obstruct our decision. We voted to leave not to be half in half out. There is no such thing as a soft or hard brexit – just brexit – which means, obviously we leave everything. It’s not difficult to understand. The notion of “soft and hard” was invented by remainers to confuse the situation and use as code for “soft” means stay in. if we end up wtith some wishy washy half arsed half in half out Brexit no one will be happy and the Brexiteers will be up in arms. The betrayal will not be forgotten. I and the people I know knew exactly what we voted for and it certainly isn’t what we appear to be getting. We are hoping for a miracle and for different reasons than you on here.
Most peolpe do not understand how the EU functions and voted based on a gut reaction. I think if more people researched how the EU works, there would be an even higher number voting to leave. the EU.
CAMERONS WORD JUST BEFORE EU REFERENDUM.
THE TRANSCRIPT OF:
David Cameron’s video recording from Chatham House re EU vote to the people just before the Brexit vote 23rd June 2016.
“It will be your decision whether to remain in the EU on the basis of the reforms we secure or whether we leave.
Not lobby group’s.
You the British people will decide.
This is a huge decision for our country.
Perhaps the biggest we will make in our lifetimes.
And it will be the final decision.
So to those who suggest that a decision in the referendum to leave would merely produce another stronger renegotiation, then a second referendum in which Britain could stay, I say think again.
The renegotiation is happening right now.
And the referendum that follows will be a once in a generation choice.
An ‘In’ or ‘Out’ referendum.
When the British people speak, their voice will be respected, not ignored.
If we vote to leave, then we will leave.
There will not be another renegotiation and another referendum.”
The next person to speak is the LOSER.
The vote was done, despite all the fear mongering of the remain campaign, despite, Obama, Blair, and other global elites attempted interference with the process, despite all the attempted interference of other countries, the British people voted for Brexit. You wanted to have a fake vote and get your result of remain. You didn’t, now you are throwing your toys out of the pram. And you want to keep voting till you get the result you want.. It is over the vote was done, you lost. We won’t get brexit anyway, regardless of another vote, so what are you so bothered about? The reality of the situation has been exposed. We have no power, we have no democracy. This has been exposed for all to see. This is what it was all about. Time to grow up and deal with this reality. Either real democracy or no democracy. Keep your staged, pre scripted, democracy to yourself.
Well said Democracy it seems is a sham designed to keep the establishment in power. I will never vote again, it is not worth the effort.!
For years I have voted conservative
Some of those years I have seen labour get in. Often by a narrow margin
I haven’t shouted “let’s have another vote until we get it right” I accepted the will of the people.
If the remoaners get their way and we do not exit EU I will never vote again in any election, because those who treat us like the unwashed, and we didn’t know what we voted for should stop insulting us.
They should get over it.
If they truly back Britain then they should respect democracy and allow the business negotiations to complete in a busines like manner and not attemp to scupper it.
Germany does not want a hard brexit and will not allow it, that obvious Unless of coarse we go in with a weak hand.
Those who shout loud about wanting more information have never negotiated a business deal.as I have many times for big money
The remoaners are clever they know that we will get a bad deal if they have their way, that way they can say “there told you so” but they will not admit to being the architect of the demise.
I’m looking forward to Great Britain!!!!
Why would we get over it, when we can undermine it to better effect.
May is caving in to all the right demands, and you will get a Brexit in name only, because that’s what the government deserve for following a referendum that was bought and paid for by billionaire foreign interests, using stolen data to target and influence the result.
If it was bought and paid for, it wasn’t a win. So you get over it, this is our country too.
From where did the Remainers get their funding? The pro remain stuff put out by Cameron was paid for by the taxpayer irrespective of their attitudes or wishes in the matter. Go ahead, undermine democracy and see where it gets you.It might just come back and bite you.
It won’t come back to bite us, the country will thank us.
When you are fighting an illegally won referendum, we’re the patriots.
Oh dear, there are none so blind as those who will not see. Illegally won? Lets get back under Nannys skirt the world is so frightening. Please Brussels do our thinking for us we are frightened weakly Brits. Tell us what to do. Enough already.
As I thought, you have no actual argument. Just tired rhetoric. Like all of you digressions.
This is our country. We’re going to fight for it, like all patriots do.
Very well said.
At the risk of boring!
The European Union is a cartel.
Cartels are illegal.
a coalition or cooperative arrangement between political parties intended to promote a mutual interest.
The rest of the world cannot sell into the union unless they pay tariffs.special
Arrangements exempt but bribery is acceptable.
Those tariffs are to maintain the gravy boat of unelected Eurocrats.
What can we do about it? Nothing
That is an undisputable fact.
By leaving the doors will open to free trade from around the world
Prices will be more competitive, we will not be restricted to getting goods ( at the right price ) from elsewhere around the world.
Another fact that I have personal experience of.
We are and always have only been in the parts of Europe that Europe allow us to be in.
I wanted to buy prouct in the EU when the pound was so strong.
( I have a good memory)
Everywhere I went the doors were closed.
You try it, your dead!!!!
– patriot justin says.
– you can be patriotic to your country, not a trade deal, or international organisation.-
‘ im patriotic towards NATO’
ala mentality of justin..
Supporting continued membership is being patriotic to my country, not the trade area; you’re trying false equivalency, and failing.
here is the plan.
– the Uk voted A G A I N S T IT BY LEAVING THE E.U..
(BIG CAPITALS TO DRUM IT INTO YOUR THICK SKULL)
we are out. the first and not the last.
-and theres nowt you can do about it.
And yet we are not out yet, even MPs are calling for a second referendum, and Theresa May has sold your Brexit down the river.
At this point, we just need to maintain our Remain pressure and campaigning to kill Brexit.
#BrexitIsDead, and you know you were betrayed but you’ll thank us in the end.
If we are asked again, I think we should go for best of three, or five, or etc etc.
I know I’m being stupid, but the MP’s and remoaners started it, they really can only agree on one thing, and that is that they can’t agree.
We are leaving as toecutter says and as May says, but the hard brexit is looking particularly likely.
Even our very decisive parliament(not) will agree that the deal on the table is so watery it’s the worst of all outcomes.
The EU will by its nature firstly reject it and then attempt to water it further.
That will, without any doubt lead to walk away. With only hard left on the table.
I do not agree with many who say it will harm EU more than us, just ask German motor manufacturers.
Ask Land Rover what will happen in UK if BMW VW etc are taxed out of U.K.!
Ask france how the airbus will fly without wings!!!!
We hold a number of stong cards, soon to be played.
Sadly our weak government have not been strong enough to stand up to EU bullying, but have pampered to the popular press.
This white paper is a result of Brussels unelected officials demanding to know what we want.
They have always known what we want, isn’t it time we asked what do THEY want?
Oh yes “our money”
£100 Billion of it!!!
The game isn’t over, not by a long chalk.
Calm down Justin
In golf terms your having an early gloat.
Ah, the old tropes of “unelected” (they are, or appointed by OUR elected representatives, OR ARE our elected representatives), of Landrover (they’ll simply move production to the EU, what choice do they have) or Airbus (who will move wing production to France, what choice do they have?).
The big problems are not Landrover taking jobs abroad (or Nissan or Toyota or BMW/Mini), it’s the supply chains they will take with them, where far more are employed, and far more actual profit is earned, and therefore tax paid (I am sure the likes of BMW and Nissan have their tax affairs arranged to pay as little tax as possible in the UK already).
It is usual for quitlings like your good self to try to blame remainers and MPs for Leave failings, but it’s simply quitlings having no coherent plan, despite many having wanted this for 40 years. Shame on you.
You are right, however, it’s not over yet. There may not be a long time left to discuss anything, but nine months is a very long time in politics.
OUR ELECTED MEPS HAVE NO POWER OVER THE COMMISSION, IT CAN ONLY BE REMOVED AS A WHOLE SYSTEM IF AND ONLY IF ALL COUNTRIES AGREE. GO READ THE CONSTITUTION. A COMMISSION JOB IS A SINECURE AND YOU CAN MORE OR LESS DO AS YOU LIKE WITHOUT BEING ACCOUNTABLE. IN AN INTERVIEW THIS MORNING ON THE DAVID VINE SHOW A SENIOR POLITICIAN DESCRIBED THE EU CORRECTLY AS A BULLY WHO HAS DELIBERATELY OBSCURED THE ISSUES AND WHO, AS IN THE CASE OF THE IRISH, SLOVAKS AND OTHER WILL KEEP WHINING FOR ANOTHER REFERENDUM UNTIL THEY GET THE ANSWER THEY WANT. ALL THIS FUSS BY THE EU OVER THE IRISH BORDER IS A FALSE CHOICE AND USED AS AN ISSUE TO DELAY ANY AGREEMENT. IF YOU WANT TO SUPPORT SUCH AN UNDERHANDED SYSTEM GO AHEAD. HOPEFULLY WE WILL FALL OUT TO WTO, THE REST OF THE WORLD SEEMS TO GET BY ON IT. ALL THE EU SEEMS TO DO IS PROTECT VESTED INTERESTS AT THE COST OF THE INDIVIDUAL CONSUMER. TARIFFS TARIFFS TARIFFS. TELL EM I AM WRONG BUT IN A NON INSULTING WAY PLEASE.
What utter rubbish and tosh.
The entire commission has its mandate under the European Parliament, who must approve its appointments and agree to its law proposals, which often it doesn’t.
The commission is, itself, the civil service of the EU, and you don’t appoint the civil servants in the UK (or any other EU country for that matter). Each lead commissioner is appointed by their home country, via the The Council of the EU, and each, in turn, is subject to approval of the EU Parliament.
The whole of that process is, in and of itself, a hell of a lot more democratic than the way the UK (or any other EU country) runs its civil service.
It seems to me you have very, very, very little understanding of how the EU institutions work.
What utter rubbish and tosh.
The entire commission has its mandate under the European Parliament, who must approve its appointments and agree to its law proposals, which often it doesn’t. REALLY?COULD YOU PROVIDE SOME INSTANCES WHERE THIS HAS HAPPENED
The commission is, itself, the civil service of the EU, and you don’t appoint the civil servants in the UK (or any other EU country for that matter). NO IN THE UK THEY ARE APPOINTED BY THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION WHO ARE INDEPENDENT OF GOVERNMENT Each lead commissioner is appointed by their home country, via the The Council of the EU, and each, in turn, is subject to approval of the EU Parliament. THIS SUGGESTS TO ME OVERDONE POLITICAL INTERFERENCE IN WHAT SHOULD BE AN INDEPENDENT CIVIL SERVICE.
The whole of that process is, in and of itself, a hell of a lot more democratic than the way the UK (or any other EU country) runs its civil service. HOW SO, EXPLAIN PLEASE, HOW CAN APPOINTMENT BY A SITTING GOVERNMENT BE MORE DEMOCRATIC CIVIL SERVANTS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE NEUTRAL IF THEY ARE APPOINTED BY POLITICAL MASTERS HOW IS THIS DEMOCRATIC?
It seems to me you have very, very, very little understanding of how the EU institutions work.THAT MAY WELL BE YOUR OPINION OF ME BECAUSE I DISAGREE WITH YOUR STANDPOINT. i DO UNDERSTAND HOW THE EU WORKS AND THAT IS WHY I VOTED TO LEAVE.
If you really, genuinely, understood how the EU worked:
1. You wouldn’t write the illiterate guff you spout;
2. You would never have voted leave, unless you are that stupid (which, I am afraid, I begin to suspect you are);
3. You seem to have very little thought into all this, beyond sound bites from the right-wing press.
4. As previously stated, shame on you.
Sadly justin you show time and time again your lack of understanding on how the elected MEPs operate
Its called a gravy boat by most and they do not develop any legislation, their role is a pretence and nothing more than a rubber stamping one.
Also you appear to have no understanding of business when you say airbus will just move.
Ohh yeeeh, not this side of five to ten years to build a bespoke factory and employ the skill sets.
In the mean time how will it fly??!
Maybe a prayer!!!
All our car manufacturers will have the growing benefit of FTA with most of the world opening markets that are currently stifled by Eu.
On the other hand if we don’t get a FTA from Europe all German cars will have a levy applied.
Along with much much more products.
This would be disastrous given that the EU is insolvent…
Justin, time and time again you appear to blame leave voters for your vindictive comments.
Have you forgotten how flexible the EU were to Cameron?
He went to get a deal, they laughed in his face and he came home batting a loosing wicket.
The EU are to blame and continue to be astounded/arrogant when others treat them as they treat others.
By that I mean trump on steel etc,
I voted to be part of the common market not a political union.
The difficulties in getting agreement are testament to just how dangerous the domination in EU had become.
Justin time we’re leaving.
Sadly you show you know nothing much about anything; I suppose that’s your age showing outdated understanding about the world of both business, and next to no working knowledge about the workings of the EU and their institutions; you possibly scanned Wikipedia once, and didn’t retain the information well. Again, age.
Airbus: can be moved on a nine-month cycle, the test and rigs already exist, what is missing is the buildings in France to house them, and the skilled staff.
The buildings, using steel construction, can be in place in around six months. The staff, well, a good portion of the Bristol staff would be willing to move, the rest would need to be trained over the next two years.
This would actually be slightly cheaper than Airbus’ already published estimates of cost to the business of a destroyed just-in-time supply chain, but, of course, still very expensive.
Mini the same. Rolls-Royce too.
Nissan and Toyota are tougher, and their entire operations for Europe are based here.
Denis, best you retire from public comment; like your career, you are past it.
Justin. It shows that you have never worked in aerospace manufacturing. I have. 1) you cant just have any old renault car repairer (trained up) to say build complex and hi tech aircraft parts. You would literally have to build a complete town to house and supply the parts.
2)aircraft documentation is in english (very few french speak any english whatsover, thats why i got a job on technical translation and writing on cfm 56 engine calculators(fadec) in the mid 90,s at the snecma in france because the joint G. E. Project required it in english)
3) finding people with the skillset/ training them is 5 years plus.
4)you would have to entice brits to work there for large pay increases and shuttle home uk for familys, or relocate them.
Complete transport system built from ground up.
5) state of the art buildings and fittings?
Justin, i reckon you should go about painting unicorns or whatever you do for a living, the real world is not where you exist.
Interesting that my info came from people in Airbus.
You’d be amazed what can be achieved if an organisation sets its mind to it, and one thing has them laser focused right now: the threat of Brexit.
BTW, state of the art buildings for aviation from the specialist steel buildings providers, drawing board to complete in under six months. Fit out takes a bit longer. I know quite a bit about that sector 😉
Well at least your honest if misguided
Clearly thinking and supporting those elite right wingers who believe that the unwashed are there to feed their power hungry ego’s.
Then move on the House of Lords to rule the rulers.
The arrogance of believing you can undermine the electorate and ride rough shod over their will is one that is soooo dangerous..
Wars have been fought for much the same principles.
The ever closer union headed up by unelected dictators is to sacrafic the sacrifices made lest we forget.
Thanks for your opinion.
Theresa May is now doing all the undermining of Brexit that is required.
Luckily, as can be seen from the resignations, May’s deal, etc, Brexit in name only is going to be the future.
May has completely ignored the outcome of the vote, so where is democracy, I will tell you, it is a sham WE have been betrayed. Red lines? bullshit. The establishment has got its wicked way. There there, the electorate got it wrong, pat them on the head and tell them we the elite will put it right..Hopefully the EU will reject this arrant nonsense and we can go WTO, the rest of the world seems to manage quite well on it. Will all these firms really abandon their investments in the UK. I think not.
Well, two points:
1. We are a parliamentary democracy, so May can implement this, with the permission of Parliament as she sees fit (I think this is wrong too, Parliament should decide entirely);
2. Most of the rest of the world DON’T implement simple WTO rules (one country only, as I recall), most belong to FTAs, free markets, etc. Going to straight WTO rules, without schedules, would literally destroy our economy – it’s why the rest of the world don’t do it.
OK, under what terms do we trade with the re, e.g US, China etc. etc. The world is not organized into lots of FTAs so you are incorrect in your assumption. A parliamentary democracy WE ARE, HOWEVER THAT IS TO DETERMINE THE SHAPE OF THE PARLIAMENT. A REFERENDUM IS UNDER DIFFERENT RULES. THE ELECTORATE WERE ASKED FOR THEIR OPINION AND GAVE IT NOW IT WILL BE IGNORED. CAMERON CHICKENED OUT THAT SI WHY IT HAS TAKEN SO LOG TO COME TO A DECISION. UK DEMOCRACY HAS BEEN SHOWN TO BE A SHAM, WILL OF THE PEOPLE? DON’T MAKE ME LAUGH. THE ESTABLISHMENT RULES OK? NO IS MY ANSWER. I WILL NEVER CAST A VOTE AGAIN, IT IS A FUNDAMENTALLY USELESS EXERCISE.
If the trade is not covered by one of the hundreds of agreements between the EU and the appropriate trading bloc, or intra-trading bloc agreements under trade liberalisation “panels”, then it is covered by WTO, but, and this is the important bit, most trading nations and blocs have schedules that allow far better trading conditions (Non-tariff barriers in particular are something you want to be watching for).
On leaving the EU, we lose all schedules. That will put us at a major disadvantage in all trading, until we negotiate news ones. Funnily enough, no one has shown an interest in letting us roll them over, but want concessions for new ones – that’s what happens when we become a smaller negotiator.
You state are referendum is under different rules, which is factually incorrect: either parliament is sovereign or not, you cannot, constitutionally, have it both ways. Parliament had the opportunity to bind itself (though not a future parliament) to the referendum result and chose not to (for what reason, I guess we will never truly know).
The Supreme Court has already rules in Miller that the EU referendum result is constitutionally meaningless, hence why parliament remains sovereign.
You say you would never cast a vote again? So if they decide to prolong the A50 notice, so the government can water down Brexit further, you wouldn’t vote on the final deal? 🙂
NOTWITHSTANDING ALL ALL THESE COMMERCIAL NICETIES, THE EU IS UNDEMOCRATIC AND IN THE LAP OF BIG BUSINESS. THE SO CALLED CITIZENS (THEY CANNOT BE PROPERLY CALLED THAT AS THEY HAVE NO DEMOCRATIC CONTROL OVER THE MACHINATIONS OF THE COMMISSION)THE EU IS CONTROLLED NOT BY PRAGMATISTS BUT BY IDEOLOGUES. I TAKE IT YOU DRIVE A CAR, THE EU HAS TWICE IN THE LAST FEW YEARS INCREASED THE COST OF LAW ABIDING DRIVERS SO THAT UNINSURED DRIVERS, WHO ARE LAWBREAKERS, CAN CLAIM COMPENSATION THEY ALSO REMOVED THE LINK BETWEEN RISK AND PREMIUMS ALL IN THE NAME OF EQUALITY. CLEVER EH? IN THE FIRST REFERENDUM (I VOTED NO) ANTHONY WEDGEWOOD-BENN FORETOLD THAT THE SO CALLED COMMON MARKET WOULD BECOME A SUPERSTATE AND AN UNDEMOCRATIC ONE AT THAT. THE COMMISSION HAVE MANAGED WHAT THE NAZIS COULD NOT, CONTROL EUROPE BY DIKTAT AND FIAT. IF YOU ARE HAPPY TO LIVE IN A VASSAL STATE SO BE IT. THERE IS MORE TO LIFE THAN MONEY
Philip, I can feel the spittle flecks explode with your invective.
I admit, you’ve been betrayed, but you’ve been betrayed by your government, not the EU, and the EU are far, far more democratic than our rabble; we directly elect our own MEPs, the Commission (the EU civil service) is directly placed by our elected governments, and confirmed by our elected MEPs.
Compare and contrast with our unelected House of Lords.
You’ve been lied to Philip; but not by the EU.
The saddest part, Philip, is you’ve fallen from the chancer Leave lies of Gove, Johnson, Davis and Fox.
When you add in the Leave collusion, illegal money, stolen data and potential foreign state actor interference, and you never won the referendum, Philip, your side stole it. You are now reaping your rewards.
You won, they screwed it up, live with it.
NO SPITTLE, YOU CAN USE ALL THE SOPHISTRY YOU LIKE. THE EU IS UNDEMOCRATIC IT IS A DICTATORSHIP BECAUSE THE POPULATION IT CONTROLS HAS NO DEMOCRATIC CONTROL OVER IT THE COMMISSION CAN ONLY BE REMOVED A S A WHOLE AND NOT BY THE VOTERS. I AM LUCKY I HAVE CITIZENSHIP IN A NON EU COUNTRY SO IF PUSH COMES TO SHOVE I WILL MOVE. I HAVE NO DESIRE TO LIVE UNDER DICTATORSHIP. IF YOU DO THEN GO AHEAD.
Try not to be stupid. The EU is nothing of the sort, and either you are Russian troll or a fool if you think this.
If you have residency under a non-EU country, why not go there then? You’ve lost the hard Brexit fight, we’ve undermined it and it’s working for the real Patriots, us.
Your team had their chance; they cheated to get the result, they screwed up delivering it and now you’ve been sold out in the final stages of the negotiations. You lost.
Enjoy your non-EU lifestyle. Just elsewhere.
But I do celebrate.
Your Brexit, the one you’ve advocated in your comments on here, that’s dead; you were sold out.
– having been in ‘Europe’ living and working for over 23 years, i could see what was happening (unlike you brainwashed europhiles) thus i have greater insight on the politics derriere the scene- You know, the msm tell one story in one country, and highlight something else in another. sometimes the same issue is not reported even. you can only really see what going on when you are living there. I cringed at the moment the UK was going to have to make a choice on taking the Euro currency, for i had seen the same situation in France, and witnessed 1st hand the (negative) results across the board. After having worked travelled in North africa, and parts of africa i could see the folly of removing gaddafi- and as he rightly said ‘europe will be awash with poor african migrants’ if i am removed.
and so be it.
Having robust immigration laws is essential, and any country that does not (uk and especially the EU) with the ‘open frontiers’ is doomed to reap the terrible consequences for decades.
– so, not having a blinkered view about geopolitics, and actually having been to these ‘european” countrys on work and leisure, i could see blatantly the lunacy of the EU politics. Why was greece accepted into Europe?- i had been there several times in the early 90’s, tourism and olive oil. thats it. I smelt a rat even then. Luckily i am multiskilled, had foresight, and decided that i could emigrate to where the values i hold important are upheld.
-sure you can’t just walk in, but hey, if you could it would be full of the dross that seems to have walked in elsewhere.
me i emigrated to where the values i feel important are upheld-
– maybe you too justin bell-inger should do the same..
only a few more months before you cannot emigrate to Europe ‘il suffit de en avoir ‘los cojones’…
espouse your beliefs, and emigrate.
I’ve lived in Europe for 20 years, in multiple countries; I’ve lived outside of the EU for many years too. Now I split my time between the UK and the EU.
I’ll stay in the UK and fight for the EU, thanks; it’s my country, I plan to do something about the situation, not talk a lot.
“most deals are under the table, its the nature of deals”.. In corrupt countries.. So thats how business is done in your opinion?, look justin, there is no going back now, put your back into it, emigrate, or die whinging.
Over and out.
There’s no going back?! 🙂
Bless you, there’s no going forward, you’ve been betrayed and left with Brexit in name only.
And if you think deals are not done under the table in non-corrupt countries, you can’t have done many deals.
I’m staying, and screwing up Brexit more and more from here: my country, my way.
AS POINTED OUT EARLIER YOU REALLY DO HAVE IT BAD, DON’T YOU? I WOULD IMAGINE YOU ARE DEEPLY INTO WHAT IS BEST DESCRIBED AS MAGICAL THINKING. THE MARK OF AN IMMATURE MIND.
The only magical thinking is you lot, who seem to believe in unicorns and magic.
You’re a traitor, sir, and that is why I will neither forgive you or give up fighting against you.
It won’t take long, with Theresa May just literally having given in again to the EU, this time over the human rights legislation, your Brexit is dying, and that makes me happy.
Good riddance to a bad lot.
The more you prod a viper the more likely it will respond.
Always remember… Rumors are carried by haters, spread by fools, and accepted by idiots.
Then stop carrying, spreading and believing BS, then.
I’ve never been so happy to engage with such an idiot Imagine how much damage you could do with a brain.
Insults are all you have, because you’re not smart enough to have a coherent argument.
You’re a traitor. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
I suspect you have sat there with a grin winding people up.
I won’t justify your rudeness to others by engaging with you any further
– me too.
gagging to hear justins bitter rancoeur about brexit..
all the sneering from the sidelines, name calling, self evaluation on intelligence and education..
i do enjoy people on ‘educated’ and ‘intelligent’ blogs trying to inverse refendum results, predict the future, show graphs, charts and flowcharts to justify their reasoning and why the opposing view is ‘wrong’ – akin to adherants of the ‘flat earth society’ trying to prove that the earth is…. flat.
YOUR VOCABULARY SEEMS RESTRICTED TO INSULTS AND VITUPERATION. RATIONAL DISCOURSE IS OBVIOUSLY BEYOND YOUR CAPACITY.
Haha! Your response is nearly always the same, you have nothing to bring to the conversation. You never did; that’s why we’re in this mess, you, and your ilk, never had solutions, just moaning.
I’m very glad you’ve been betrayed by Theresa May: you got what you deserved. You won the vote, lost the negotiation: live with it.
Now, stroll on, sir, save your eyesight; there’s nothing to see here, most especially from you.
PS. I’ve unsubscribed from follow-up comments, because, to be honest, you’re not worth my time.
GOTCHA! ENJOY THE SILENCE AND USE THE SILENCE TO IMPROVE YOUR COMMAND OF THE LANGUAGE.
Justin- if you wish to stay in the uk and ‘fight against brexit and for the eu’ ‘il faut mieux aller pisser dans une violin”
No, I really don’t. I can stay and just screw it up; my country, my rules 🙂
AS I SAID, JUSTIN, GOTCHA. POLITENESS WORKS, INSULTS DO NOT, WELL NOT WITH MYSELF. I PREFER REASONED ARGUMENT NOT EMOTIONAL OUTBURSTS.
Gotcha? You got no one, you’re not that smart.
And if we’re talking emotional outbursts, try most of what you post. Alas, no reasoned arguments from you, and I doubt ever could be.
MAN, KNOW THYSELF.
WELL SAID TOECUTTER, THE LAST PART MADE ME LAUGH.. BONNE CHANCE!
So simple the both of you; it explains why you both support Brexit. 🙂
AU CONTRAIRE, I AM PRO BREXIT FOR REASONS ALREADY STATED TO YOU. I THOUGHT YOU WERE NO LONGER GOING TO RESPOND.
‘The EU, to my mind, has only ONE major failing, which continues to this day: it does not know how to deal with mass economic migration from outside the EU, and still has no approach. Much of the fear, resentment and trouble to its institutions comes from this failing, and until they find a solution, the EU itself is in grave danger. But I am sure you already know that.’
– so signing a trade deal for say white goods, cars, or wood imports has the same impact on a town/city/village/country as opening the doors to anyone, from anywhere within 26 countrys where crime gangs and mafia type setups are the norm, with no police background checks, no medical, no employability checks, full unlimited access to the host countrys social housing and welfare and jobs?
– you have never travelled anywhere, never had boots on the ground zero of a eastern european countrys, or in fact any other country for any significant time. I call you out as bullshitting that you have lived anywhere else and actually lived, worked, paid taxes in a different country.
prove me wrong.
i bet you cannot.
Get behind it??
Never going to happen.
May has screwed it up. Badly.
I like that you’re nice and dumb.
When you can put some kind of useful and cohesive argument together, you come on back.
Brexit is dead on arrival due to Theresa May’s incompetence, not because of the EU or me.
Enjoy your BINO. 🙂
“If the remoaners get their way and we do not exit EU I will never vote again in any election, because those who treat us like the unwashed, and we didn’t know what we voted for should stop insulting us.
They should get over it” – did you know when you voted that millions of us British citizens most affected in our daily lives and the possibility to earn our living, often for British interests (though that is actually irrelevant), were going to be ruined? Did you know of the very high risk of the country being ruined?
If you knew, then be damned to the realms of the hateful wicked.
If you didn’t know, then you had not informed yourself and have shown that indeed you didn’t know what you voted for.
Also, if you knew what you were voting for, the destruction of your country, despite all the evidence spread beforehand, and believed the refuted lies of the brexiteers, then you must be a traitor to your country.
So don’t feel insulted by the truth. How do you honestly expect people whose lives and livelihoods are being ruined to “get over it”? Whether they happen to have availed themselves of their treaty rights to free movement in the EU or not.
You mention “getting over ” general elections that don’t go the way you would wish – but that is only for 5 years and doesn’t ruin the country in this way. Brexit on the other hand, if it indeed goes ahead, is for generations. So totally incomparable.
Then you say “If they truly back Britain then they should respect democracy” – it was not a democratic referendum, David Cameron lied in his Chatham House statement about it being the people who decide, not Parliament – it was anti-constitutional, anti-democratic, and totally impardonnable for a Prime Minister. The referendum was not democratic in principle
– because millions of us British citizens, often living and working in the EU for British interests and international organisations of which the UK is a full and active member, were deliberately kept disfranchised;
– because the referendum was advisory as had been correctly stated by the Parliament beforehand, because it is neither the Monarch nor Government, nor “the people” (ignorant of the complexities of real government, real trade, real international relations etc.) who are “sovereign” but Parliament. Remember Charles Ist? Remember the Glorious Revolution of 1688? Remember William of Orange?
If not, please take the trouble to brush up a bit on the history of our countries and the origins of PARLIAMENTARY democracy, even though it often makes heinous errors such as allowing British citizens to remain or become disfranchised;
– because millions of Commonwealth citizens without British nationality, and millions of Irish citizens, also without British nationality, were also able to vote on the future of a country which is not theirs.
– and because citizens of other EU countries who had totally legitimately made their lives in the UK, and who also couldn’t vote in a referendum whose result could also ruin their lives, also couldn’t vote in it.
And I won’t even mention the shambolic crew of Mrs May’s ship of disaster!
So to conclude, at least temporarily, enjoy little England if and when it comes about!!!!
You are living in another country by choice, so why should you, or others in the same position as you, get to vote on whether or not we stay in. or leave the EU.
As for allowing citizens of other countries who are members of the EU to vote on whether or not we leave or remain in the EU, why on earth should they be allowed to do so, until such times as they apply for and receive British citizenship, they are citizens of another country living here.
The then Prime Minister of this country said that Parliament would respect the outcome of the referendum and Parliament must now deliver, if it fails to do so, then that would be the biggest betrayal of all.
As for your statement “So to conclude, at least temporarily, enjoy little England if and when it comes about!!!” it needs treating with the contempt it deserves.
What would be the sate of politics if the attitudes of the remoaners were applied to the outcomes of UK elections? A Labour victory means that the new government would need to take the opinions of the defeated side into account and vice versa with the Tories. Get real. The EU is a dictatorship plain and simple. No ordinary citizen of the EU has any democratic control over it, the apparatchiks govern us. They cannot be voted out by the populace. That is dictatorship. Get us out of this Faustian disaster.
This Brexit nonsense is not at all in the same category as a general election. Your opinion of the EU is totally false but I am not going to waste my time trying to educate you – there is plenty of FACTUAL information freely available – look it up. In terms of democracy the EU is far more democratic than the UK. And if you want to see dictatorship in actin, look no further than our current government.
You lost the vote, get over it and adapt to whatever the new reality might be. That I am sure would have been the resposne to leavers if the vote had gone the other. Your comments are simply special pleading. We lost NOT FAIR I’m going to tell my mummy. Grow up.
No, my comments are by no means “simply special pleading”. Read them again – I prove that IF leave voters knew what the consequences would be, then they are wicked wishers of evil upon their fellow countrymen, and if they did not know, then they were putting their heads in the sand whenever they saw the lies they believed being proved wrong, so were nasty fools. It’s not entirely clear from your comments which category they put you in. Lives are being ruined – can’t you see that? And as I also point out, the whole thing was NOT democratic.
So please all visceral leavers and EU-haters without cause or reason, stop your ridiculous childish remarks. And start campaigning for a stop to this suicidal, criminal and treasonable nonsense.
– “So please all visceral leavers and EU-haters without cause or reason, stop your ridiculous childish remarks. And start campaigning for a stop to this suicidal, criminal and treasonable nonsense”
– myself having lived in Paris 87-2006 certainly saw the decline in many areas du to the EU.
-employment, pay, cost of living rules and regs popping up. notably the change of currency from the franc to the EURO shafted most. well, anyone that was a worker.
“Lives are being ruined – can’t you see that? And as I also point out, the whole thing was NOT democratic”
-indeed- if the French had known how much it would negatively affect their lives today- they wouldnt have accepted it- just take a minute and check out the strikes now on as the EU ‘deal’ to open french railways to foreign competition has caused huge strikes- now into several months. it was part of a ‘treaty ‘ somewhere, unbothered where but its the net result that matters.
and yes, railway workers WILL lose their jobs, and livelyhoods, due to this EU ‘treaty” agreement or whatever. same as the workers from whirlpool in France- their jobs being shifted to poland. Anyway we saw similar in the UK with the railways etc..
I do find objectionable that you consider the referendum not democratic- do explain?
– it was in black and white, and delivered in brochures to every uk household at the cost of 9 million quid.
do tell, how it wasnt ‘democratic?”-
i wonder what YOUR answer would have been if remain had won- ‘undemocratic’ then?
– would you have tried to force another referendum/vote/ whatever because it was ‘undemocratic?” where do YOUR principles lie?
(the crime of) showing no loyalty to your country, especially by helping its enemies or trying to defeat its government.
– the UK government is by the means of BREXIT executing the will of the people- 50+1
– thus anyone trying to destabilize the government in this task of BREXIT is guilty of treason.
I believe nicholas newman you are excellant in ‘role inversion’ –
Yes, Toecutter – some people in all EU member states – generally in certain categories of the population – have suffered as a result of being in the EU, but far less than if their country had remained outside it, and we are seeing now some of the consequences in the UK of wishing to be outside it – far graver, and we haven’t even left yet.
The referendum was legally “consultative” and Parliament was by no means bound to follow it – constitutional change, even in Trades Unions, requires a much greater majority than 50%+1. Even strikes require more!
And it was certainly not democratic – read my previous posts about the disfranchised British Citizens – even the Cabinet Office estimates 3 million of us, which must be well short of the truth as it is based only on those REGISTERED in other countries – and the Commonwealth non-British citizens being enfranchised. No, we did not choose not to vote, although also too many others didn’t think they needed to vote in a consultative referendum – they made the mistake, in all probability, of believing in the good sense of our Parliament – perhaps unaware of the effect of three-line whips or not believing party leaders would use such a device in such a grave matter.
Nicholas, I find your turn of phrase interesting. It sounds somewhat evangelical in tone. How can you prove the answer to an unasked question ..if the voters had known etc..? If the electorate behaved in this way after every election just where would we be? If the vote had gone the other way by a similar margin how would you as a remainer respond to complaints from leavers that the electorate did not know what they were voting for? I would advise remainers to read Grammatology by the French linguistic philosopher Derrida. It might help sharpen up your argument. I voted to leave simply because as a voter I have no democratic control over the decisions of the Commission who are appointed not elected should the Commission go bad individual members cannot be removed only the entire commission and that would require the assent of ALL MEMBER STATES. Highly unlikely. The EU at the level of government(i.e the commissions who determine all the rules) is a dictatorship QED. Remember the wine lakes, butter mountains olive oil being subsidized multiple times without moving from the original producer? If you drive a car your premiums have gone up because of the Commission, nothing to do with your driving history. Clever eh? Insurance has always been based on perceived risk, but the Commission in their wisdom replaced this sensible notion in the name of ‘equality’ Another idiotic idea is that now thanks to the Commission, law breakers (uninsured drivers) can now make a claim against an insured driver. And who is paying for this why the insured whose premiums have gone up as a result. Clever eh? I could go into the CAP madness, wine lakes, butter mountains etc. but I do not ahve the time.
Ah Philip, close but no cigar, as they say
Unfortunately/fortunately ‘referendums’ are NOT elections.
We could (perhaps) agree that 100% of the electorate got it 100% right in 2016.
Alas, this only gives ‘Leave’ 37% of the vote.
Don’t smoke, this is chicanery with figures. 100% of the electorate did not vote. This was a matter of choice and free will. 37% voted leave by a margin of around 1.7 million over those who voted to remain. That is how democracy is supposed to work. If the vote had gone the other way how would you as an individual respond to claims from leavers that the vote was invalid because the remainers did not know what they were voting for. I find all these arguments from remainers special pleasing. Go read Derrida.
What it was not, Philip, was ‘decisive’ – merely an opinion.
While Cameron was committed to follow whatever opinion was expressed, we did not, and we do not, live in a world ruled by the choices of Tory or any other Party. At least, not for more than about four years.
Au contraire, the nay sayers had the majority and that is a fact. Those who did not vote cannot now claim foul. As to Cameron, a grammatological analysis of his pronouncement prior to the vote made it abundantly cleat to the EU that he would not, under any circumstance,s consider leaving the EU that is why we were offered crumbs and temporary too. Go read Cameron’s speeches to the EU and the Commission. Georg Soros who put billions of the UK taxpayers money in his pocket as a result of the ERM debacle is accusing leavers of heinous thoughts and actions, read his posts on the subject. Perhaps he wants us to stay in case there is another financial cock up that he can profit from, It seems the very rich minority want us to remain and the unwelathy want to leave, who is in the majority? The EU is very close to meltdown, a.g. Italian and Greek debt, Poland, Hungary and other East European states refusing edicts from Brussels regarding immigration. The EU Commission in its stupidity in many areas are encouraging the rise of the extreme right, not good. The Commission is not driven by practicality but ideology, dangerous at any time.
– what a pearl that one is “voting to destroy your country”
– with the EU you won’t have a country- you will live in a provence of a superstate. the EU was conceived from a 1950’s doctrine of walter hallstein and jean monnet- to create a European superstate, full european integration- its on the EU website, and, you can download a pdf explaining it.
“Walter Hallstein was the first President of the European Commission from 1958
to 1967, a committed European and a ** decisive proponent of European integration**
As President of the European Commission, Hallstein worked towards a rapid
realisation of the Common Market. His energetic enthusiasm and powers of
persuasion furthered the cause of integration even beyond the period of his
presidency. During his mandate, the integration advanced significantly.
The one-time Secretary of State in the German Foreign Ministry originally attained
international recognition through the ‘Hallstein Doctrine’ of the 1950s, which
shaped German foreign policy for years to come, and had at its core the linking of
the young democracy with western Europe”
– 1950’s political doctrine and direction in 2018- what could go wrong?
in the 1950’s we were told we would work 15 hours a week, and have flying cars by 2000.
all the predictions were and are wrong.
where was china in the 1950’s? a backwater with wheelbarrows and shovels to construct dams -with 20,000 labourers working 24/7.
today, china sends up space stations, and mars exploration missions, 2nd largest worlds economy.
does hallsteins doctrine fit in?
Yes I think we’ve been over this before. Yes I’m living in another EU country by choice, having been recruited to an international organisation of which the UK is a member, BECAUSE I was a British citizen and AS a British citizen. And we remain british citizens heavily affected by HMG and Parliament’s decisions, so, yes, we should have the right to vote. It is a fundamental human right to representation which is being denied to us. Yes Brexit, if it happens, will affect us deeply and irremediably for at least a generation.
As for allowing citizens of other countries… to vote, what about the non British citizens of Ireland and the Commonwealth who were able to vote? What an imbalance!!!
The then PM of this country said etc. – he lied as he had no authority to over-ride Parliament in this fashion, as you very well know.
So to conclude once again, at least temporarily, enjoy little England if and when it comes about!!!
You do appear to be disillusioned and negative ( for want of better words) using such words as traitor and little England
Here is a comment I made further to Phillips points. About which he was right.
Not IT literate
So posted again for all.
Well I have been looking for a lively debate with intelligent people on brexit.
So I’m continuing to look?
I said earlier, that I voted out because I looked into the pros and cons myself.
Since then one blogger has asked if I knew that I was a traitor and had voted for the destruction of the uk.
Well yes I did know that george Osborn was lying with his threat that he would punish us for not doing as he says.
Hands up those who think “ever closer union” is a good thing.
Ever closer to an unelected dictat is what will result.
Our friends in Europe are not looking very friendly right now.
I still believe I was right to vote leave.
I still think I was right to vote for the fact that I can vote.
No one in Europe has a vote to elect the dictators or to remove them.
The narrow margin is irrelevant the winning line is 50% + 1
Can anyone honestly say that had same margin gone in favour of stay that they would agree another referendum? Remainers would be telling us to shut up, it’s democracy.
Why therefore can we not do the same?
I knew that the £350m bus was not true.
I knew that obamas attempted intervention using Cameron’s words and not his was a lie. ( we are at the back of the queue)
Americans say line!
It’s interesting to look at the newspapers from just over two years ago (10 reasons to vote stay)
None, not one of their predictions have come true.
I’m not going to use words like traitor or there are none so blind.
But when I say to the remoaners get over it, I mean get over it because it’s going to happen, like it or not.
Especially now that the recent scuppering in parliament failed.
( the failure was more down to fear of another election another separate debate)
We should make the best of it.
We should therefore get behind GB as I am doing so in business to make it a fantastic opportunity.
The trade defecit with the Eu is circa £100 billion pounds, £100b, £100b pounds.
Did you know that there has not been 1 million days passed since Crist died?
What a huge huge number a billion is!!!!
There is a queue of countries wanting a share of that and more.
Who controls Europe?
Answer Germany ( a completely different debate)
Who is going to loose most in the case of no deal?
The deafening silence for that quarter is obvious, Audi, VW, Mercedes, BMW, and Porsche. Will indeed not want a no deal.
So let us play all the cards we have in the right order.
Walk away and wait. It will happen,they need us more than we need them.
On my business.
We are actively seeking to buy British manufactured goods and are proud to do.
Remoaners, stop attempting to sabotage the will of the people. Instead embrace the challenge and show the rest of the world that we are still a Great Britain.
Only in the case of no deal.
Don’t panick captain!!!!!
Dennis, of course I’m disillusioned and negative, seeing my beloved country being destroyed by wicked bigots for party-political and anti fiscal non-dom billionaires. Why aren’t you also disillusioned and negative?
Why am I not despondent?
Because I’m one of the hundreds of thousands of people in the uk who aspire to be a millionaire.
Not a billionaire, because that’s more money than anyone needs.
I WILL achieve it by working very hard indeed.
I’m an entrepreneur, I won’t get there if I’m not prepared to change, adapt, risk, and work very hard.
But the uk is full of such people, that is why I know that outside of a dictatorship we will
thrive like never before.
Surely you cannot agree with ” the ever closer union”? We all know where that road leads.
Please don’t be blind to the situation in Greece.
Ok it’s their own fault go fiddling figures.
But the evil of driving a country into the ground when all they need to is write off the debt, shows me just who is in charge.
There is your example of greed.
Would you have any say in “the ever closer union”?
We are out just in time. Our fantastic country is the best place in the world to live and trade and can he much much better, especially if we pull together.
Why have we not heard that phrase for years?
Because Brussels says we can’t.
Your obviously a very intellectual person.
But the current situation is far from good.
A bad deal is worse that s no deal and we will be dictated to on going from
We are close to a bad deal!!!
That’s not the voters fault, it’s the fault of weak government, and wrecking by another unelected group!!!
If it helps.
We have had a second vote, at the snap election Lib Dems stood on a second vote platform.
Look what happened there!!!’
Agreed cons lost as well but that is as I have said
Heaven forbid the communist leader gets in, we will all be stifled.
But do you know what? I will
Accept it as democracy, no matter how narrow the margin.
Dennis, fine, as an entrepreneur I applaud that you wish to become a millionnaire. I happen to have friends who have succeeded brilliantly in what you are trying to achieve. But I have never heard them say they couldn’t have done so within the EU because they indeed did succeed while within the EU. And don’t believe or perpetrate all that nonsense about the EU being a dictatorship or under German control – both patent falsehoods! And the EU is actually far more democratic than the UK, its Parliament is directly elected by its citizens, who have a direct line of contact to their MEPs, and if you are not happy with some EU legislation which our country helped to shape and agreed to, then you can always kick off a European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI – look it up if you are unaware of them).
As for your comments on week government – totally agreed, and I find you are very polite to them!
I’m already there. But didn’t like to brag.
The EU initiative is a suggestions web site.
I have french friends inside what he calls the gravy boat, and getting to those that count is a long and winding road. If you ever get there.
I have experience with Brussels.
A few years ago when the pound was stronger I decided to source product within the eu. The roads were blocked, brick walls were built. It was a closed shop.
Even nearly cost me my business because uk distributors refused supply after I attempted to bypass.
Illegal? Yes, what could I do? Complain and your dead ( commercially )
When you think about it the eu is an illegal cartel.
It restricts the rest of the world from trading with them unless they pay.
If we did that at our level we would be prosecuted.
Don’t like Trump, there’s a bad smell there, but he is right, why would the arrogance of the unelected Eu president tell the elected president that he doesn’t have many friends.
He just lost a big one himself!!!
How can the Eu tell America that they will tax American goods but are in uproar when America does the same?
It’s unbridled power ( probably both sides )
That unbridled power has, as history has shown gone overboard in the past.
It is not a secret that Germany ambitions for a united state of Europe, it is dangerous because and only because the leaders are not elected. Stealth!!!!
Please see https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/07/martin-schulz-united-states-of-europe-germany-sdp
Ok tusk, put yourself up for election, in a way the the majority of populous can vote you in or out.
Then I will actively campaign for united state of Europe where one country cannot dictate the fate of another ( Greece )
At the end of the day current situation is about the gravy boat of money, that’s all.
Democracy has been earned from blood.
Lest we forget!
…. Bliar is on your side.. that vampire decided to resurrect itself and latch onto a cause worthy of its involvement- its must be the odour of money and corruption..
Tony Blair is for remain
“the angel of death”
Could be worse, he could have been a Leave idiot.
Luckily you have that covered.
– he has been wheeled out for your side-
you own him.
‘the angel of death”
And you own the screw-up that is Brexit.
Enjoy Brexit being dead.
-brexit is alive and well- and its going to be a full metal brexit soon- crash out!-
and there is eff all you remoaners can do about it..
You are funny…
You’re going to be very disappointed.
@nicholas newman “Dennis, of course I’m disillusioned and negative, seeing my beloved country being destroyed by wicked bigots for party-political and anti fiscal non-dom billionaires. Why aren’t you also disillusioned and negative?”
– george soros
– richard branson
– Tony Blair (dite – ” Bliar the angel of death” )
there you are ..
all for remain..
all non doms
all millionaire /billionaires
and one war criminal.
It’s always those facts you have a problem with, you Leavers.
Blair is not a non-Dom and none of those listed have a conviction for war crimes.
However, of the non-Doms, all donations have been made legally to NGOs, declared and transparent, unlike the Leave campaigns, who have now been found guilty of campaign fraud, collusion and accepting illegal money.
You leave lot, dodgy cheaters.
Ah, toecutter, I never said or implied that ALL non-dom billionaires were of the same ilk as the non-dom billionaire press barons and their cronies – thank heavens the ones you quoted seem, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, to be honest, thinking people.
I’m having to “reply” to myself because there is no “reply” button above toecutter’s last comment:
Branson is perfectly entitled to live wherever he wishes to live, as are all non-doms – nobody is accusing him, nor Blair currently, of deliberately and cynically undermining the “democratic” process as it is said have done the non-dom press barons for their own financial ends of squirming out of the anti-tax dodging regulations that come into force next year.
So the crux of this article is:
a) Non voters are as important as voters (few couldn’t vote, most choose not to do so)
b) That post “opinion polls” are more accurate than pre vote ones
c) The margin of circa 1.3m of the votes CAST, is not a majority (try counting to 1,300,000)
d) 11/13 opinion polls since the vote suggested people want to remain – which isn’t the truth; the polls said people would have voted Remain, but now it has happened want to respect the result and Leave
e) That as the largest turnout in UK political history was not the full electorate it isn’t representative
Time people stopped bickering about Leaving or Remaining (the vote has taken place!) and concentrated solely on obtaining the best result from negotiations
A non partisan article would have been so much more informative
Richard Branson was domiciled in the UK for his entire working life, paying UK taxes. He’s in his bloody 70’s now an mostly retired; good luck to him, I say.
Blair is has neither been charge with nor convicted of any war crimes, but don’t you let facts stand in the way.
Like most Brexiters, you think your opinion trumps facts; some news for you: it does not.
And BTW, most deals are under the table. It’s the nature of deals.
-so according to you, multinational corporations all do under the table deals?
– funny, whilst working in the head office of a swiss pharmaceutic company, i never heard of that.
au contraire.. all contacts and conflicts of interest must be disclosed..
-funny the circles you orbit in… mafia like..
To directly answer your question, yes, they do. But the definition of “under the table” will be slightly different, dependent on context.
Under the table does not necessarily mean illegal.
And Swiss-based organisations have hardly had spotless record, have they?
Re your comments about disclosure of interest
Of coarse I don’t believe what is just in print because they sell newspapers
But there’s a smell about pharmaceuticals in Switzerland.?
But you and the remoaners appear to me to have a crystal ball.
Please share it!!!!
How do you know that leaving Europe will be a disaster?
I can’t say for certain that it going to be good, but how do you know???
For every casualty there will be winners.
Hopefully more winners than casualties.
Under wto rules we will still want to spend our money with Europe, that is if they want it!!!
If they don’t there’s a huge queue waiting outside.
What I do know is that we won’t need to beg Brussels for our refund yearly, we won’t pay the usual economic fine for a thriving economy (4 billion extra in 2015 )
We will control what the surplus money can be spent on when we are not contributing.
And if we have a hard brexit ( which is still on the cards ) we will have the further 40 billion that we won’t b paying as our get out fee.
In fact the more I look at it the more a hard exit is attractive!!
agreed dennis. we know where the EU is headed- it has been said loud and clear by the EU and its influencers https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/07/martin-schulz-united-states-of-europe-germany-sdp
united states of Europe.
the EU’s founding father- walter hallstein declared it in the 1950’s- no denying it- its on the EU website in black and white.
anyone who is not a totally brainwashed zombie knows thats whats coming- though, some are -even with the hard evidence- in denial, cards on the table, for all to see. in denial.
justin bell inger for example.
we know where europe is heading, as per martin schulz’s statement, there is no light at the end of the EU tunnel, no sunny uplaonds, no eldorado, as the EU lurches from crisis to crisis.
even today, on French radio talks of the EU breaking up, serious discours on the roadmap to take for the EU pending the breakup.
– remoaners will blame Putin, then blame Trump, then the right wing ‘nazis’ then blame… well, leave voters.
funny, i remember well the media stating that greece was joining the EU- now, anyone who had ever set foot in the country would see in 24 hours that joining a ‘trading block’ when your economy is based on tourism and olive oil exports and the others have heavy industry and high tech its a case of ‘point at area on map- invite them to join’
EU benefits, are very few and far between for the average brit- thus the leave vote..
well, i have a new startup idea-blue zimmer frames with gold stars for remoaners for the years to come so they can bang on about it and show their support for the eussr decades after its demise.
“Full metal Brexit”
the best choice at this moment in time.
A United States of Europe is what Churchill envisaged, is exactly what will keep us at the top table of the world.
You lack the vision to see that doesn’t involve giving up your own identity.
I’m looking forward to seeing it happen.
I don’t know if you have been watching.
We’re leaving Europe!!!!!!’
Sadly because of weak government we look likely to end with the worst of all outcomes
The prime minister had capitulated to remoaners who will jump up and down about the worst outcome and blame the democratic vote and the great unwashed. But that was always their plan.its a little to early to gloat because our dictators haven’t said if we can spend our money with them yet.
Ohh please Brussels!!!!!!
Finally something we can fully agree on.
Theresa May has sold everyone out. But we’re only leaving Europe in name only.
We should all be angry about the end result.
Uk out, and seious talk in french media of other countries leaving.. Will it be the migrant crisis that finishes it off, or the next crisis? Tick tock. ‘down the dunny’ where it belongs
On the contrary, European unity has increased substantially since Brexit, especially in France.
Your little fantasy is just that: a fantasy.
…. Wrong again!.. Even in 2015 serious people were discussing it.. Just how will it collapse?..
Like all empires this one is no different..
-news for justin..
and so many more, just take your EU blinkers off justin, put your ‘brain’ back in your head,
not long now. 😀
To toecutter – your response to Justin, citing the Euronews article: the article, dating from may 2016, merely cited the organisation of a debate with Sophie in’tVeld MEP and a UKIP MEP William Dartmouth – debates happen al the time, which is healthy in a democracy such as the EU, despite some member states such as the UK not being democracies. It certainly doesn’t form any sort of condemnation of the EU!
I’m so disappointed at the latest May submission.
I thought she had the most difficult job, and that the poisoned chalice was hers.
But I couldn’t think of anyone else who was up to the job.
If only we had had President Trump as Prime Minister we would be out of the EU by now with a mutually beneficial trade arrangement, free of EU laws and freedom of movement.
Sorry didn’t finish
both stay and remain must be disappointed with the white paper.
We have allowed Europe to walk all over us and we are now doomed to be a satellite state, following rules that we have no say in at all.
It’s the worst of all outcomes.
It cannot be blamed on either stay or remain camps, it can only be blamed on weak government.
It would have been temporarily controversial to walk away but factually Europe would have called us back, because the consequences were deeper for them.
The Euro negotiations are nothing to do with politics but are pure business.
Parliament has demonstrated it is incapable of negotiating business deals and now we face a collapse of our ability to trade with other nations. We have a bus but Europe has the wheels!!!!
It’s likely that the poor deal will be diluted further and we will still be in Europe but with even less say.
I’ve lost it with the Conservative party after 50 years of voting.
May should resign, I demand the right for my vote to be respected and that of the majority who voted to leave.
Democracy has been defeated, parliament has shot itself in the foot.
Lest we forget how hard it was earned.
Well said Dennis. 17 and a half million of us voted to leave and I do not think a considerable number of those are going to just shrug their shoulders and soldier on. If the vote is not fully honoured turbulent times await us.
Denis, age has everything to do with it. You Brexit supporting dinosaurs are dying off, thank god.
You come across as one of the dumbest of the quitlings it has been my displeasure to interact with.
Your stupidity actually makes me feel sullied.
Brexit is dead. Good. Your side screwed up by trusting May to deliver. Unlucky.
Denis, age has everything to do with it. You Brexit supporting dinosaurs are dying off, thank god surely god should be God, your attitude is. to say the least uncharitable, unChristian and un British). You come across as one of the dumbest of the quitlings (this word comes up as a misspelling) it has been my displeasure to interact with. Your stupidity actually makes me feel sullied you seem to easily sullied by opposite views to your own, this suggests extremist mindset on your part. Brexit is dead. Good. Your side screwed up by trusting May to … Continue reading “Brexit is not the will of the British people – it never has been” The outcome of the referendum then is null and void whither democracy, this is a dangerous route to go down but your extremist mindset will not be able to understand or appreciate this. As always Justin lots of insults but no hard evidence for anything you say.
God would only be upper case if starting a sentence. After all, you don’t really believe in imaginary people living up in the sky, do you? ???
I had assumed it was just the unicorns being delivered by Brexit you believed in.
Un-British? Remind me which country you live in again?
The trouble with you Brexiters is you simply gave in on your country with no plan. Hence why you are called quitlings.
Leave this to us real patriots. You bring nothing to the table.
God would only be upper case if starting a sentence. After all, you don’t really believe in imaginary people living up in the sky, do you? IT IS HOWEVER A PROPER NOUN.
I had assumed it was just the unicorns being delivered by Brexit you believed in.
Moron. YOU REALLY CANNOT HELP YOURSELF CAN YOU. ALWAYS HAVE TO USE AN INSULTS OVER RATIONAL ARGUMENT. AS I HAVE SAID THIS ATTITUDE IS THE MARK OF THE EXTREMIST CLOSED MINDED THINKER.
Un-British? Remind me which country you live in again? LIKE YOU I LIVE IN THE UK, UNLIKE YOU I PREFER TO BE POLITE.
The trouble with you Brexiters is you simply gave in on your country with no plan. Hence why you are called quitlings. I WOULD ARGUE THAT IT IS THE REMAINERS WHO HAVE GIVEN UP ON THEIR COUNTRY AND ARE BASICALLY AFRAID OF THE WORLD BEYOND NANNY’S SKIRTS. YOU REMAINERS PREFER TO BEUNDER THE CONTROL OF BRUSSELS RATHER THAN DEAL DIRECTLY WITH THE REST OF THE WORLD. Leave this to us real patriots. You bring nothing to the table. SO WHO NOW ARE THE PATRIOTS, THOSE WHO WOULD PREFER INDEPENDENCE FROM AN UNELECTED AND VINDICTIVE EU COMMISSION OR THOSE WHO SEEK TO REMAIN UNDER THE EU DICTATORSHIP.
As they are elected, placed by our elected representatives (civil service) or are our elected representatives, as we’ve covered many times before, all of your points are somewhat moot.
Insults? No, just saying as I see. That’s honest, unlike you cheating Leavers. At least the electrol commission caught your Leave campaigns out.
God can only be a proper noun if you believe in his/her existence, as there are literally hundreds if not thousands of gods, which would break the definition of a proper noun.
As they are elected, THE COMMISSION ARE APPOINTED NOT ELECTED, THEY MAY BE APPOINTED BY MEPS BUT THEY ARE STILL APPOINTED placed by our elected representatives (civil service) or are our elected representatives, THIS LASTPHRASE IS NOT UNDERSTANDABLE as we’ve covered many times before, all of your points are somewhat moot. AS I HAVE POINTED OUT BEFORE I CANNOT VOTE THE COMMISSION OUT SO, IT IS BY DEFINITION UNDEMOCRATIC.
Insults? No, just saying as I see. That’s honest, unlike you cheating Leavers. AH MORE INSULTS At least the electrol DO YOU MEAN ELECTORAL commission caught your Leave campaigns out. WHAT ABOUT THE 9 MILLION SPENT BY CAMERON TO PERSUADE US TO STAY?
God can only be a proper noun if you believe in his/her existence, NOT SO as there are literally hundreds if not thousands of gods, which would break the definition of a proper noun. SO, ALL THE NAMES IN THE WORLD ARE NOT PROPER NOUNS BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY OF THEM?
‘Project Fear™’… “quitlings”
– news-speak appellation for Freedom Fighters.
the break up of oceania is imminent.
(Project Fear™-registered trade mark of the EU and its proponents)
Alas, project fear has already become project fact.
The only campaign that cheated was Leave, now guilty on four counts and referred to the police.
Leave couldn’t win without cheating, that much has become obvious.
put the crack pipe down justin.
What crack pipe? These are simple statements of fact; Be Leave has been found guilty of collusion and cheating on four counts of electoral fraud; that’s a done deal.
The case has been handed to the police for further investigation to determine if further criminal charges are warranted.
Again, these are facts.
Leave cheated, you could never have won otherwise.
Sorry if the truth hurts.
WELL SAID I WONDER IF JUSTIN EVER READ 1984.
You’re, not your, Denis ?
Dennis not Denis
to busy to be challenged on my dyslexia
I’m sitting here now with a smile I think you’re wound off the clock.
Your pretty insignificant
Your really a very unpleasant person
Doubt you care!!!!
You’re the traitor and I’m unpleasant? ???
Stroll on old fella, you can’t even be bothered to work out how the EU works, probably dementia kicking in, hence why you repeat the same old Leave lies so much.
Anyway, Dennis (feel better now?), considering you don’t think I’m worth the time, you spend a lot of that time responding.
It’s just a shame you have nothing to bring to the conversation. ?
You’re the traitor and I’m unpleasant?
Stroll on old fella, you can’t even be bothered to work out how the EU works, probably dementia ONCE AGAIN HEREB IS JUSTIN THE VOICE OF SWEET REASON kicking in, hence why you repeat the same old Leave lies so much.
Anyway, Dennis (feel better now?), SARCASM considering you don’t think I’m worth the time, you spend a lot of that time responding.
It’s just a shame you have nothing to bring to the conversation. ALL YOU BRING IARE INSULTS AND VITUPERATION. WELL DONE!
I’ve been traveling all day, work don’t you know?
Keeping the country going!
I’m feeling much better thank you for your concerns.
And I’m travelling down through France next week to my home in the alps.
Mountain biking, uphill and downhill
Not bad for an oldie!!
Feeling much better!!!’
Good for you.
Those of us with skin in the game back in the UK will look after the UK.
Let me guess, French citizenship or on the way towards it?
Glad you were able to exercise your free movement rights and free movement of capital rights while you could.
Now, tell me if you would, why don’t you want to extend the same rights to my children?
You’ve enjoyed them, yet you seem determined to remove them from your fellow countrymen.
Understand better why you’re hated now?
anyone can go and retire anywhere. if you have the money and language skills, its not difficult. Approx 4 years on site doing whatever to learn the local lingo, then adapt your skillset tp the market.
you could even retire to the sunny gold coast Australia, or a quiet town in the hinterlands with your own large holding.
thing is with France- for example- is there is NO WORK THERE. ok, i lied.
1100quid net per month max- if you can speak the language to native level and trump the locals for the hard to find jobs.
-What?- you thought they would dole you out a 3-4k gbp net per month job?
france, nice for retirement, being seconded off by a british company on a job mission in France, holidays and sight seeing. Thats it.
Even the French cannot find work in their country, thats why they nip over to switzerland to try for employment- but, only high level international quals. are accepted, otherwise you work pushing caddies at the supermarket.
-What?- you thought you could turn up, and score a good job off the bat just speaking English?
Dream world Justin
voila une titre..
It all rather depends on where you are in France and your skill set.
Local language skills essential if you want a decent job; that applies anywhere in the world.
However, you deflected all answers to questions and there’s one bit you forgot: you can’t just retire anywhere, you need to meet the country’s immigration requirements. That will apply to France too (for Brits) if we leave with no deal, and may apply anyway, even with a deal.
That’s why a cheating result will not do.
Yee of very thick skin.
I don’t know ( and don’t care ) if you hate me.
Certain your children will be allowed to travel.
They will only need a passport.
That is assuming that unlike you your children were born in wedlock!!!
No, not french citizenship, the french do what they are good at, setting the rules and then ignoring them!!
The fact is that the french are very much split down the middle, but I have warned them that in the uk some people feel that to win a referendum counts for nothing if it’s close.
I note Corbyn had that view at the last election, the french thought he had won.
Corbyn thought he had, Justin thinks he has won.
Listen up boy!
Unlike you who knows everything I’m not certain, My bet is the hard wsy.
Don’t choke on it.
Btw I’m half German, I can see your quivering finger reaching for the keyboard.
-yes we know how the EU works.
they told us.
they printed it in the newspaper.
You see?- we all could read about it, and understand the consequences, and decided to vote against it.
thats the problem with democracy justin-sometimes it doesnt go the way you wish..
The main problem is, when your Leave campaigns cheat and collude, that’s not democracy.
I know that the dpndvlimit per side is £7m
But does the £9m from Cameron’s stay count?
It’s worth noting that Justin thinks that the extra £500k may well have swung the vote.
If that were true, then one side or both sides have wasted a great deal of money!!
But yet again Justin
Please comment on the last point put to you regarding Germany’s ambition for a federal state.
Would you be happy with that???
You would have no say.
You should be happy Justin
We’re saving you
The £600,000 is just what has been charged so far.
The money was then used to buy access to stolen data (being investigated by ICO, the police, serious fraud office and the FBI).
The ad industry would be pretty useless if it hadn’t worked out how to influence you after all these years, and that is what was done.
The Tories paid for a propaganda leaflet. The Leave campaigns colluded, cheated and used stolen data to do so.
Cheating means you didn’t win.
I guess the courts and parliament will have to sort that out.
Cheaters never win: we’ll make sure of it.
Agreed cheaters should never win and if rules or the law is broken the should be held to account account.
Now adress the ducking issue.
Are you happy to be part of federal Europe?
Don’t say it hasn’t happen do iit won’t.
Because we leavers use that discount the fear factor put about by remain!
You don’t accept that!
Again, again,is it that you can’t answer or haven’t got one?
I have actually answered this previously.
Yes, I will happily accept a “united states of Europe”, because that was how Churchill envisaged how Europe would be safest, and best run.
That doesn’t, and has never suggested that our individuality as a country need suffer. In fact the only thing Cameron achieved in his otherwise disastrous stint as PM was to make sure that “ever closer integration” was actually off the table – thereby ensuring our individualism as countries was fully understood.
The United States of Europe was always about better integration of systems and processes, and that I can get behind.
The potential European Army, I am less keen on, but that is actually our (UK’s) fault. We gave up our right to veto it when voting to leave. And we used security as a bargaining chip, and that pushed the EU towards it.
We will never see a federal Europe like you see in the USA, because each country has its own constitution and the EU treaties prevent the EU interfering in constitutional matters at the country level. That’s a good thing.
The EU, to my mind, has only ONE major failing, which continues to this day: it does not know how to deal with mass economic migration from outside the EU, and still has no approach. Much of the fear, resentment and trouble to its institutions comes from this failing, and until they find a solution, the EU itself is in grave danger. But I am sure you already know that.
Now for many of your replies I thought you were just purposely being an agitating prick
But I agree with much of what you say.
Cameron ran away with his confidence after winning the Scottish vote.
His learship qualities were zero
If he was so keen to stay in EU why did he call a referendum?
To appease ukip!!
But he did and that is that. The rest can only be guesswork
May cannot take the blame for that!!!
The immigration issue is not restricted to Europe. But also America.
My view is that the ill
Educated poor have now got new technology iPhones and computers.
The experts thought it would improve their lives.
It may have done but there are consequences.
It results in them being able to see what the rich west have in abundance. Who can blame them for wanting the same for their families?
The solution is not to allow mass migration or make it someone else’s problem.
The solution is to help them grow in their own economy.
That means interbvetion, unpopular yes, casualties yes.
But not so much as the vicious dicratordhip upon them.
Why not put the fires out???
“its what winston churchill wanted”-
1950’s politics in 2018..
wtf can go WRONG?
– go back justin and watch the old black and white films of the 50’s of ‘how life will be in year 1984..”
– Flying cars, and we all will work 15 hours a week.
where was china in the 80″s?
backwater underdevelopped 3rd world communist country.
today, sending space stations up, satellites to mars- worlds 2nd biggest economy.
– where was india in the 50’s?
– they were not a nuclear country, and had zero exportable manufacturing.
– Today, booming economy.
thing is justin, the EU was conceived to square upto the USSR in the 50’s today its a whole different world.
its akin to buying a car designed in 1952 and never being able to trade it in, upgrade, buy a more suitable one in 2018.
in the end, its the globalists dream the EU. and people like you buy into it.
lastly the free movement of people and goods-
totally insane. how can you compare the footprint on a small town of the importation of 30 shipping containers of white goods- with the same town the impact of 30 shipping containers of people, who will all need somewhere to live, most will buy a car, most will apply for jobs, have medicare, use schools etc.
4 pillars of the EU?
-4 horsemen of the apocalypse morelike.
Toecutter: You are not “comparing eggs with eggs”. The EU HAS changed. You don’t like the changes. The EU will (have to ) continue to change. Many people are predicting the imminent crash of the Euro, because it doesn’t have a reconciliation mechanism. This is complicated, bear with me:
When say someone in Italy buys something from Germany the Germans are credited with Euros to the amount of the sale. What is supposed to happen then is that someone in Germany buys from Italy and the amount of Euros is balanced. Where the 2 countries have Different currencies the relative strength of the country that doesn’t buy as much (Germany) increases, which deters the other which owes them ( Italy)from buying so much more and encourages the (Germans) to buy more, because the price is lower.
At present with the Germans being owed so much from virtually all the rest of the EU, they are getting a bit fed up. This happened with Greece, but Italy is too big to “Bail out” by restricting lending to the Italian Banks.
On another front several EU countries are getting fed up with immigration, and will probably force change.
Now my view is we should not walk away and let Europe implode. We did it about 100 years ago by having World War I. The result was World War II. AND the USA replaced the British Empire (Which by the way we don’t have any more) as the world’s biggest economy.
What we should be doing is arguing for sensible change with the governments of the EU, staying in and FIXING it. Otherwise it’s going to be a lose-lose situation whatever.
– comparisons with ww1/ ww2 are laughable.
– there wasn’t trident nuclear defence missiles then.
– modern conflict technologys were in the stoneage in ww1-2 compared to now.
– the world has changed in 70 years- no comparison with 70 years ago, european countrys wont be at each others throats because the uk bailed out of the superstate project.
What utter twaddle. I am not going to bother to explain why because these article is too absurd.
The people who did not vote chose to no have their voices heard, they had their chance and the wasted it, this is how democracy works.. more people voted to leave and not we are going to leave. Get over it.
More remainer nonsence
Nearly 30 percent of the population did not vote and were therefore willing to put their trust or go along with the majority result which was leave.
So to my mind if you were to add the 30 percent of non voters that were willing to let others decide to the 52 percent of the 70 percent that voted and won the leave campain. There is a lot more people willing to leave the EU.
NO! the 30% that didn’t vote probably A) couldn’t decide – after all what do most people know about such complex matters or b) assumed that the polls were correct and we would Remain or c) “Couldn’t be arsed” to use the vernacular!