Brexit 2019 and Poland

I thought that the driving force was the referendum held on that specific issue....


a referendum with a clear result vs current public opinion, which should policy be based on?

It may depend to some extent on how much influence Rees-Mogg can bring to bear on those who are wavering. He's saying that leaving with May's deal is better than not leaving at all. The possibility of not leaving might be enough to get the agreement through at the eleventh hour, so Brexit may still happen.

May's deal can't pass without the DUP, and are you suggesting that they would ever back her with the backstop in place? (Perplexed emoji)

Even then - there are at least 15 Tory remainers led by Grieve and our Ken, who will never back leave in any shape or form. That means the Labour leavers would have to move across the Commons floor.

Who do you think a. is behind that, and b. is an elite Tory group perpetuating this when grassroots opinion has shifted?

I appreciate that in the US you suffered 4 more years of Bush jnr because of 800,000 contested votes........but in a referendum the country is allowed to change its' mind. The evidence is there that Brexit is going to be revoked - but a 2nd referendum would be more favourable. Even Common market 2.0 would be OK, as that allows for the single market and freedom of movement - and the leavers can pretend that the UK is an island again "Intire of itself..."

The result was slim, less than a 2% difference, the options (or one of them) was unclear in meaning, there was proven electoral fraud on a scale sufficient to compromise the purely advisory and non-binding referendum.


Without that possibility, it is no longer a democracy.

Golly, how could I have forgotten dear Arlene & Co! Well then, no, Rees-Mogg's intervention will make no difference. Obviously the ideal solution is 'remain' but failing that I really don't see a 'no deal' on the cards. You'll either leave with a deal or you'll stay.

How many times did Ireland ask the Abortion question? In other European countries, it is common to revisit the same question in referendums. Nobody cares what Cameron said at the time about the referendum being binding: "Please support owld Dave in this vote, and show me just how highly you think of me..." - He is totally discredited and his utterances are an irrelevance.

The real question is.... how many more times will it ask now?

Its an interesting question about whether to go with the referendum result or current opinion - given however that nobody from the Leave campaign has stuck around to implement their promises then the default should be to go with current opinion.

This is doubly so as taxpayers and working people heavily back remain. Leave was heavily backed by pensioners and unemployed who won't be picking up the tab for the resulting calamity

And your proof for thîs outrageous statement is......?????

All here and in many other studies - not outrageous at all - a simple truth

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0176268018301320

We find that voting Leave is associated with older age, white ethnicity, low educational attainment, infrequent use of smartphones and the internet, receiving benefits, adverse health and low life satisfaction

so the best response is.... rather than just look down on them convince them they were wrong (challenge: don't mention money)

Simple propaganda more like.
Nothing has changed,polls on both sides lie....one of the more recent ones claims that 42% want to leave with no deal this friday and 28% want to remain.What about the other 30%?

You can' trust any of this stuff...

No - not propaganda, it's a scientific study.

markets - 3 years have been wasted trying to engage with leave voters and their representatives using many arguments apart from money - the future of the union, geopolitics, jobs, education, the functioning of the health service etc. all that has done is cost time, money and energy so it's now time to ignore those people and let competent people sort out their mess.

The end of democracy........peasants do what your "Leaders" tell you,because they know best......dangerous stuff....do you realise that you are playing with fire?

As I have said many times, leavers have had 3 years to execute their promises - they have failed and left Britain in a terrible mess. Democracy gave them this chance and when they got it they wet the bed.

If any of them want to step forward now they have until Friday night to sort it out. Otherwise they should pipe down

No they haven't!
Remainers have been doing the deals!!!! LOL!!
Time to get some real Brexiteers in control methinks....

Davis, Raab, Foc, Johnson - all leavers, all heading Brexit dept or FO.

All achieved nothing, 3 of then resigned.

As for Gove - he chickened out of taking the Brexit brief

God help us when the real Brexiteers come with their zimmer frames and hot water bottles

You just can't help yourself with your daft propaganda,can you?
Poor effort cms neuf......you just insult yourself with this kind of rubbish.

Just repeating facts - Brexit is the project of old men. Probably why none of them want to do the actual work involved in implementing it - they run out of puff and are happier watching daytime tv.

Look at that hilarious march - down to about 30 people now and that includes Farage's minders

The petition will be debated by MPs in the Commons' secondary chamber - Westminster Hall on 1st April. A government minister will be required to respond to the petition, but there will be no vote on the action it demands. The government has also said that despite the number of signatures collected, there is no intention of revoking Article 50 as they must respect the wishes of the electorate in the referendum.

"Revoking Article 50 would break the promises made by government to the British people, disrespect the clear instruction from a democratic vote, and in turn, reduce confidence in our democracy."

Spot on.

Soft Brexit it is then..........but when?

IMHO a "soft" Brexit will boil down to a Britain still sharing all the duties but now without the rights that come with a full membership...I doubt that's what the Leavers wanted, certainly not Farage and his minions.

....If this happened, the short term economic impact of leaving the EU would likely to be small. However, if it remained in the Single Market, the UK would have to maintain free movement of EU citizens, it would remain subject to judgments of the European Court of Justice and it would have to contribute to the EU budget.

If the UK remained in the Customs Union it would be unable to strike its own trade deals with other countries. It would benefit from all trade deals signed by the EU. However those EU deals signed after Brexit would be negotiated without any UK input.

ukandeu.ac.uk/fact-figures/what-is-soft-brexit/

So tell me, who has won?

To start with,but once out we can negotiate to change things.


If we leave,then in the long term the leavers will get what they wanted.

May, being an ignoramus, still thinks that by all means fair and foul, she can win her deal. The figures say that she can't and wont.

The only real alternative is either a second referendum or revoke, because as you say, the UK would be fair worse off in any event. The only good Brexit is no Brexit at all - and no MP will publically admit to that because they are career politicians, and know which side their bread is buttered on, especially the Labour types who are not fit for anything else but to represent others.


Don't know what you mean Milo - how can you negotiate when you are no longer part of the club?

I agree Doug,that May is an ignoramus,but she might yet slip her awful deal through..............even if it is only by 2 or 3 votes......we are still in "anything can happen" territory.

You mean after a soft-Brexit-deal is agreed to and subscribed to by all sides and put into action THEN the treaty will be re-negotiated?

You can get 5-1 against Milo. Why not ring Ladbrokes and offer them your money? Better still, give it to me:)

Exactly.