Brexit

Well I think JC is more responsible for the sinking of the Labour Party than Smith was for the sinking of the Titanic.


Not true. He campaigned for remain in 2016. He stated in 2016 that, despite its deficiencies, there was still an “overwhelming case” for the UK remaining within the EU. He appointed a shadow cabinet stacked with ardent remoaners. He stated numerous times after 2016 that he still supported remain. He stated before BJ came to power that he would campaign for remain in any new referendum. So I don't see how you justify your contention re JC's stance on Brexit. Anyway, only JC truly knows what he really thought. What ultimately matters is what the people thought and the people have made their thoughts VERY clear. Leave Labour supporters have very dramatically rejected JC and Labour's stance on Brexit as they saw it. They wanted the UK to leave the EU and they believed that JC and his Labour party were opposed to the UK leaving. And so they voted accordingly. Ultimately that's all that matters.



At least as recently as July he did publicly state that he would campaign for remain if another referendum were to be held. It was only really after the party conference that he adopted his 'no comment' or 'i shall not publicly campaign for remain' policy. Note that at no time has he, or any other Labour MP (that I have heard), state that they would campaign in favour of their own deal!


It said they would pursue no deal if they couldnt get an acceptable one. Or more accurately, they would support no deal if the alternative was a bad deal. Extending endlessly with only a bad deal on the table was surely grounds for leaving with no deal. Anyway, the rebels DIDNT cross the floor as they thought a better deal could be had. They actually crossed the floor at a time that BJ was trying to get the EU to renegotiate a better deal as the only deal on the table was one that near everyone hated. But again, we dont need to speculate as to why the rebels crossed the floor. They told us. They said they crossed the floor as they could not, and would not, ever support ANY scenario that might lead to a NO deal exit. And yet they were elected on the promise that they would support NO deal as an option. So they lied to, and betrayed the trust of those who elected them, and happily many have paid the price for doing so. Again, regardless of what you or I think what's important is what those who elected them think. And if you look at the election results they clearly thought these rebels had betrayed them.



Aye, I know that. What i have been saying is that no one had the power to take either of these options.



There was no need for another referendum full stop. What was needed was a Parliament that would respect the will of the people. Hopefully they now have such a Parliament. Happily the people have reaffirmed their wishes of 2016 and now Parliament can go about respecting the outcome of the 2016 people's vote.



Yes but Brexit didnt feature nearly as prominently as was expected and not nearly as prominently as in the election just held. In 2017 both the CP and the LP pledged to respect the result of the 2016 people's vote. A big difference re this time around. Faced with a choice btw a definitively leave CP, and the remain parties of Labour and the LDs, people have resoundingly voted for leave...again.


Those who voted leave wanted the UK out of the customs union and out of the single market. BJ is in a position to do this. So he is respecting the wishes of the majority, he is respecting the wishes of 17.4 million Britons, and he is respecting the democratic process. He is not like the LP, LDs and others as he is not prepared to betray the result of the people's vote.


Based on what?


Ah yes, one of the many things that need to be reformed...if not abolished.


That's highly speculative...


No thanks. You can keep your version of democracy.

The question asked in 2016 was perfectly fine. Those who voted leave knew what they were voting for. It's only remoaners who insist otherwise. It's only remoaners who insist that the question being asked was unclear. The suggestion (indeed insistence) that the two options offered in 2016 were unclear is only offered up as an excuse by remoaners to justify trying to frustrate the will of the majority. Well there has been a fresh election and I suspect their efforts to frustrate the democratic process will now be more challenging.

And on that, the election result definitively tells us that knowing everything that has happened since 2016 the people are as determined as ever for the UK to leave the EU. Seems the question in 2016 was clear after all. Seems the people really did know what they were voting for.


That's because the wording of the question was just fine. All sides were happy with the wording. It was only after the result that remoaners suddenly started saying that the leave option was unclear. But the reality was that it was very clear to those who voted to leave. This has been dramatically reinforced with the election results overnight.


People knew that at the very least a vote for leave was a vote to leave the customs union and the single market. They didnt need it spelt out to them. Again, the election result confirms what we already knew, and that is that the majority of people want to leave the EU, and that means leaving the customs union and the single market. Simples.


Nope. The infighting has simply come about because MPs haven't respected convention, havent kept their word and havent respected the expressed will of the people. In Australia we have never had any issues with how our referendums are held. Our Parliament has always followed convention and respected the democratic vote. So had the UK up until Brexit. In light of the election result perhaps in the future MPs will think a little more carefully before saying FU to those who vote if they dont like the result.


Any action that didnt respect the 2016 people's vote would mean that the vote itself was ignored. The simple fact is though that try as they might the Government was unable to respect the people's vote because of the rebel alliance. So they did the next best thing. And BJ has been totally vindicated in his course of action. The people have dramatically re-affirmed their desire to see the UK leave the EU and they have given BJ the power to make this happen. So it's over to you Boris...

Loved the look on John Bercow's face as the exit poll was announced.

Looking at the election results and reading that Jo Swinson has lost her seat...priceless

Chuka Umunna gone, Anna Soubry gone, Dominic Grieve gone...what a wonderful day!

Good to see the pound surge the moment the exit polls were announced.

It's interesting that "Love Actually" is on the tellie at the moment. I wonder how dear Hugh is feeling?

And tonight Cornwall is a glorious shade of blue.

It's beginning to look a lot like Brexmas

Interesting to hear Ian Lavery, the Chairman of the Labour Party, speak not long ago. He said:
"We ignored democracy and it came back to bite us. What we are seeing in Labour heartlands is people aggrieved at the fact that the party ignored their view on Brexit. If you ignore democracy the results will come back and bite you. My view is simple – that you cannot ignore democracy, you can try to push it away but the people in the north are very angry at the fact that we are still not out of the EU after three and half years. They do blame the Tories but they believe the Labour Party is a Remain party and they are not going to tolerate that. They believe that they should have been listened to and they believe the Labour Party has totally reneged on that. The difference is that in 2019 we promised a second referendum and people suggested quite rightly why should there be a second referendum, we've already had one. It's ignoring democracy."

Well at least some in Labour can recognise the truth of their Brexit stand, even if it is after the event.

Steve Coogan on his alter-ego Alan Partridge"
"He was ill-informed and ignorant and therefore he’s a Conservative and a Brexiteer".

Yep, the enlightened, tolerant left bringing people together.

Well, the result is in and there is no arguing with the outcome.

Not much to say, really. The voters have spoken and this time there can be no mistaking what they are letting us all in for. Brexit won't end on 31 January, it will only just be beginning. We now face many years of disruption with no guarantee of what will come of it all.

Glad that Scotland is now a lovely shade of yellow.

It's a shame that people are celebrating what will lead to the break up of the United Kingdom. I asked a Scottish online friend who lives in Dundee what she thought about the result and she feels sorry for the English but is delighted that her country is now on the way to finally being free of the English.

The campaign to rejoin the European Union is being organised. Has been since this election was called. Nothing will be done early on, only an announcement that the campaign exists. The Brexit surge will last for a few months but that will wear off as the reality starts to take effect.

And so we have to bite the bullet. No choice now. But it doesn't mean the fight is over. Fall back, regroup, start again. Never quit. Never give in.

We've lost this battle, but not the war.

It still aint over.

As far as I know, Corbyn never said he changed his mind, so I have to take him at his word what he believes about remaining and leaving. Which leads to my earlier statements.

Political pragmatism only works if you don't show your hand too early. If you take a stance and then retract it for a more pragmatic one, it comes off as weak and wish-washy. Then again, I never said that Corbyn was a smart man, so who knows.

No argument here. From what I've seen, even in the Labour supporting camp there's a strong vein that Corbyn should be gone.



And what about a year ago? Or two? You're telling me that the Tories decision to hold a referendum and Corbyn's apparent 'change of heart' had nothing to do with each other?



So are we or aren't we taking Corbyn at his word?



When the Tories proclaimed that they would fight to the bitter end for a good deal, I don't think no deal was what they had in mind.



The facts are what they are, no matter what the 'majority opinion' is regarding them.



That's what I've been saying. We differ as to why that is the case.



Gee, it's almost as if voting on a bill allowed everyone to catalyze their opinions on the options on the table and make a clearer decision. The big Brexit debate was ultimately between Johnsons bill deal on the table (voting in favor of a bill), Labour's secret plans (voting on a different direction), and Lib Dems revocation (voting against a bill).



The US has been walking down this path for a long time, but if the UK and Australia think they can make a better go of it while ignoring all the history and experience the US has gained, then be my guest.



Voting on a bill both allows the public to voice a clear course of action and prevents politicians from twisting that voice to their own ends. When you vote on a direction, it leaves politicians the room to ask 'well what about this?'. When you vote on a bill, you vote on the entirety of the bill and only whats in the bill so politicians can't turn around and say 'well what about this?'. If your concern is to prevent 'lying politicians' from distorting votes, then voting on bills also achieves that goal.

And a big congratulations to Mr Johnson for winning !!

Yes.

Agreed.

But funny how he won by moving to the left.