Forum Topic

The Will of the People and Brexit

One thing that really surprised me after the referendum is how polarised and tribal the issue became after the result. Many people had quite fluid views before the vote but afterwards they seem to have become set in stone with a relatively small proportion changing their minds. Most of the polls held since have shown a majority of people now want to Remain but the swing is a result of people having been undecided at the time of the referendum changing their minds. The most recent Survation poll does suggest that this is starting to change with a 6% gap between Remain and Leave. This was held before the news about Airbus and BMW so that gap is only going to get bigger. I've had a number of conversations with ardent Leavers in recent weeks in which they have said that they still would vote the same way even though their son's/daughter's, grandson's/granddaughter's employer would be negatively affected by leaving the EU. It occurs to me that many people might be saying this because they don't want to admit an error or to changing their mind after arguing so stridently for one point of view but if they were given the chance again in a live vote rather than a poll they would put the interests of their family members ahead of their desire for vindication. This would mean that the polls currently are significantly understating the swing towards Remain and, if there were a second referendum, the will of the people would clearly be to stay in the EU. It would really be helpful for someone to explain to me why, given that the will of the British people seems to have decisively changed, that we should be inflicting something on them that is clearly not wanted or in their best interest.

Andy Jones ● 2689d65 Comments

If we do manage to leave the EU (I hope not) then in four or five years we'll be begging to rejoin, and will have a chance to take on the Euro.

Paul James ● 2673d

Portugal has been one of the strongest growing economies in Europe last year and seen strong economic growth since the financial crisis with manufacturing, tourism and the fiscal position all seeing a dramatic improvement. It is not really a good example to use if you believe the Euro is a bad thing. The problems that it experienced in the past were largely down to the over-rapid build up of domestic mortgages which fuelled an unsustainable property boom and hit their banks really hard. You could blame the Euro for this as it was driven by interest rate levels which the local market had not seen before but although the Euro was a factor in this the Portuguese government had tools to deal with the problem which it chose not to use such as tighter capital requirements for banks and a more restrictive fiscal policy. As with Ireland the government chose to let the good times role and later had to deal with the consequences. Being a member of the Euro is certainly helping with recovery in these economies because it gives them access to capital markets and low interest rates which has enable the current levels of high economic growth.

Stuart Green ● 2674d

'The EU has been blamed for everything '.I hear Brexit blamed for everything.

Graham Weeks ● 2678d

That is true about the uk. But yes individual governments mess things up but the euro increaased prices in Portugal and destroyed savings of ordinary people. Destroyed investment. And government corruption increased.

Peter Chadburn ● 2678d

Every time you look into a claim that the EU is damaging its nations, it's local mismanagement by local government that's the cause, not the EU.This is MASSIVELY the case in the UK where The EU has been blamed for everything from under-investment and mismanagement in the NHS to the shape of bananas.

Paul James ● 2678d

I find quite a bit of truth in Rosa's analysis. The Euro has crippled Portugal and other countries. We see that people in power see it as a virility symbol but the reality was that peoples savings were devalued overnight and that investment in manufacturing disappeared from Portugal and went east. I know Portuguese people including my partner who see the Euro as a disaster for Portugal. The austerity has been used to punish the poor and in effect the cost of austerity has been to make Portugal/Greece and others unable to invest in making their country more attractive. As a Eurosceptic i view that the Euro whilst being convenient has crippled the countries at the edge of europe and in fact Britain has prospered by not being in it. But where i disagree is that if Europe catches a cold we will get the flu. We should have campaigned with like minded people to reform the EU and to stop the integration project. Russia is circling. Trump is going to damage NATO. The leave campaign of Banks/Farage was backed by Russian money. Trump is a disrupter and Russia was involved in  the US campaigns. Brexit will create great instability within Europe which Russia will love. These are dangerous times. Rosa yes the European project has done a lot of damage because people at the edges are suffering. This also leads to intolerance, anti immigrant prejudice and also the rise of the fascists. Popular consensus is important. I view European cooperation like good neighbours making the community work better. Over time we could end up with common currencies and policies but there are ambitious people that want us to be an unwieldy superstate. So for me a hard brexit will be a total disaster.

Peter Chadburn ● 2679d

This is a very outdated view of the EU that fundamentally misunderstands the way in which it has changed over the past few decades.  When the organisation was much smaller there were people in France, German and Italy who saw increased political union as a desirable goal but even in their own countries they were a minority. Margaret Thatcher was probably the first to realise how the single market and expansion of the EU actually weakened the case for political union. Do you really believe that these nations hold their sovereignty any more cheaply than we do? It is self-evident that the more countries that join the less power can reside in the centre and that is exactly what has happened. Britain was always the most enthusiastic advocate of expansion perhaps because it saw the dangers in being in an organisation that could be dominated by a Franco-German alliance. Similarly the idea that the Euro was imposed on countries is a false one. After generations in which their economies were hamstrung by fiscal mismanagement, many people in these countries looked towards joining the Euro as a way of ending the cycle of progressive impoverishment and decline which occurred when their governments were simply allowed to debase their way out of a deficit i.e. by robbing domestic savers. It is not true to say that most of the countries are worse off since they joined. Even allowing for the impact of the global financial crisis the growth rates in these economies has been well above historical norms. The view that current economic problems in many of these countries could be solved by leaving the Euro is totally incorrect. Debasing the currency and defaulting on overseas loans (thereby ending the inward flow of capital that funds growth) would lead to a huge contraction in the economy of anyone that went down that route. The problems that many of these countries have is not down to the requirement to keep budget deficits below a certain level but restrictive labour practices which have led to massive youth unemployment and stifled growth. These are policies which are set by national governments not the EU.

Andy Jones ● 2679d

There is a huge difference between what in the ‘70s was the EEC that Britain , willingly or unwilling, joined and the EU. countries that belonged to the EEC were few, they all enjoyed a period of economic prosperity and certain political stability, because of this immigration was manageable, could be easily absorbed and integration was not really a problem.The problems that we have now with the EU is not longer based on economic drive but a political one: a confederate Europe determined not on the will of the people of each nation that now belong to it but on that of some politicians, especially German ones,  and those non elected and non accountable eurocrats in Bruxelles. It reminds me in a way of a sentence pronounced by General Badoglio following the unification of Italy. We have unified Italy, we now need to unify the Italians. Therefore real unification must come from popular consensus. How many of those countries that now belong to the EU have asked their subjects whether they wanted to join the EU either politically or monetary?Most importantly how many of those countries really had the right requisites as demanded by the EU entry qualifications rules in order for this country to join the Euro? Hardly any of the east European block or Italy, Spain, Ireland Portugal or Greece - and yet by bending the rules they have all got the Euro now and the population of majority of them are now suffering and are worst off than they were before joining.I have seen what the grand European project has done to my friends and extended family in Italy or to Italy itself. I certainly don’t want to see it happening here.

Rosa Popham ● 2679d

In 1975 I was disenfranchised being resident overseas. But I would have voted out. Harold Wilson only called that vote to unite his divided party. I liken it to a few years after the baby, the mother being asked if she really minded that shotgun marriage years before.

Graham Weeks ● 2679d

You may not remember having a choice about remaining (not entry) in the Common Market in 1975, but I do. And voted to remain then as I did in 2016. And would do so again if we were given a chance to vote.

Sue Rowe ● 2679d

And how many of us alive to vote out of the EU were unable to vote against entry into the Common Market because the liars led by Heath gave us no choice?

Graham Weeks ● 2680d

Haha I hope when Brexit and The Transition is done and dusted someone does all the necessary counting of precisely who's died vs who's reached voting age."Here we are, out of the EU; a situation the majority of the people currently alive didn't vote for."It'd be a good bet ;)

Nick Foote ● 2680d

"those who voted otherwise should accept it and shut up"As someone else pointed out, I think you've missed the point of democracy. Yes, those in the majority win, but there also must be an opposition! There must be a dissenting voice to ensure those representing the majority are held to account to the very people who voted for them; the majority! Otherwise you just end up with some of mass-dictatorship or authoritarianism.My point was that 51.9% is a laughable majority and provides no clear mandate. As you can tell I'm 100% Remain, I view leaving the EU instead of remaining and campaigning for reform as a fundamental de-evolution of Humanity (not to mention an embarrassing throwing-the-toys-out-the-cot exercise)BUTIf the result was reversed, 51.9% voted remain, I would EXPECT the debate to leave to continue on and on given that, as I said, such a margin is laughable and provides no mandate either way. It would be nothing short of the Duty of Leave's leadership to present an opposition! (as much as I'd hate to ever see Farage on my TV again).

Nick Foote ● 2680d

Well there you go.It was May that first said we have to leave it due to her red lines."But the government’s policy on leaving this nuclear safety and research watchdog provides an unusually clear-cut example of the economic pain of taking back control – and one for which there is unusually limited political justification."

Paul James ● 2680d

'Clearly it hasn't settled the matter...' Because in the UK we have bad losers and the EU wants us to keep on subsidising them.

Graham Weeks ● 2680d

It was an advisory referendum...Clearly it hasn't settled the matter...

Paul James ● 2681d

I do not see why Euratom should have anything to do with Brexit apart from the bloodymindedness of those in the EU.

Graham Weeks ● 2681d

The democratic system we has means a referendum settles the matter even by one vote. In is called first past the post.

Graham Weeks ● 2681d

16 and 17 year olds have never been enfranchised except to try and get Scotland out of the union. In that referendum EU citizens were enfranchised if resident there. I resented this regargding myself as a UK citizen as having a better right to enfranchisement. I would of course have voted for the Scots to suffer the adverse consequences of their heart felt nationalism. But like the Queen I was happy the Union survived the folly of the SNP.

Graham Weeks ● 2681d

I agree with your first point.However, you can't be disenfranchised if you were never 'enfranchised' in the first place!  And 16/17 year-olds don't and have never had a vote.

Thelma Leach ● 2681d

I certainly never saw euratom mentioned before brexit vote and I was quite well read.It came up we would "have" to leave it quite long after the vote.

Paul James ● 2681d

Possibly correct - but I expect that those that were aware of Euratom in the context of Brexit would have had some idea about it.

Paul Webster ● 2681d

"those who voted otherwise should accept it and shut up"You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the democratic system going on there...

Paul James ● 2681d

I maintain also that there was a massive case of disenfranchisement going on.Lots of people living here and paying taxes for years weren't able to vote in something that was going to change their lives dramatically, and brits abroad too.I also think 16 and 17 year olds were disenfranchised.

Paul James ● 2681d

Yup.The leave campaigns didn't actively campaign on leaving the single market.Farage and Banks publicly stated the Norway option seemed the best idea (Norway is a member of the EEA), and Hannan said nobody was suggesting leaving the single market.

Paul James ● 2681d

I imagine 90% of them have no idea what the ECJ is or if they do, what it does.

Paul James ● 2681d

I never disputed that many Remain campaigners and, indeed the Government's material on the issue equated leaving the EU with leaving the single market. I suspect they deliberately did so to raise the stakes in the referendum. This doesn't change the fact that many leading leavers believed it would be possible to leave the EU and remain in the single market and many voters did too. It was only when the EU made its position on the four freedoms absolutely clear that many Brexiteers realised that if they wanted to end freedom of movement for EU workers then the single market had to be sacrificed. For most this enlightenment did not arrive until after the vote. It may be correct to say that most of the people who voted Leave also had a firm belief that this entailed leaving the single market but a significant number (significant at least in the sense of the size of the majority) held no such view or positively wished to stay in the single market.  I don't recall the Irish border issue being mentioned in debates although it may well have been. It certainly was never front and centre of discussions as a key issue as it currently is. I never gave it the slightest thought in casting my vote and that would probably be the same for 99% of the electorate without an Irish connection. The problem I have with your assertion that this can be sorted out 'fairly easily' is that nobody outside the wing of the Tory party advocating Brexit believes this is possible. We don't know the nature of the trading arrangement we will have yet with the rest of Europe but I think it is naive to talk in small scale evasion. I have a friend who grew up close to the border between the north and south of Ireland and the point he makes is that there isn't really a natural border between the two areas. You can be driving along the same road and cross the border several times without being aware. Many people have land which straddles the border. It is basically impossible to police effectively. He says that prior to EU entry the only people with real wealth where he lived were people involved in smuggling. Fortunes were built by arbitraging differences but you had to bribe the police on both sides as well as the paramilitaries which is why this became such an important source of revenue for them. With the advent of the EU most of the arbitrage differences disappeared and this led to a fall in criminality in general and funding for terrorism in particular. He points out that in many cases people who were involved in paramilitary organisations are now tied up with organised crime and would leap at the opportunity if the border hardened. Basically the further apart the EU and the UK are in terms of a customs arrangement the more opportunities will be presented to those who seek to illegally exploit these differences. The idea that a few cameras could sort all this out simply isn't credible. 

Andy Jones ● 2682d

Come off it Andy, all the major EU referendum campaigners said leaving the EU meant leaving the single market and customs unions. Here's Nick Clegg squirming when confronted with evidence of this: https://order-order.com/2016/10/20/cleggs-single-market-delusion/And here's Clegg himself saying leaving the EU means leaving the single market: https://order-order.com/2018/05/14/clegg-said-brexit-meant-leaving-single-market/The internet never forgets.Of course the ballot paper never mentioned it, just like ballot papers never lists parties' manifesto commitments. Ballot papers contain just enough information that people can understand the alternatives they have, the full implications of each option are for debate elsewhere.Irish border was mentioned in the debates and is fairly easy to resolve (ANPR, electronic tagging of goods and pragmatism about small scale evasion as is exercised currently for VAT enforcement) if anyone had the cojones to call the EU's bluff on this.Did you listen to the Today programme this morning? Ex-White House staffer Ben Rhodes said that David Cameron and his aides asked Obama to say the infamous “back of the queue” line. Likely to mislead the British public, no? Every election campaign contain exaggeration, evasion and spin, but only the EU referendum has seen the losing side engage in the mother of all hissy fits to try to deny the reality of a result they don't like.

Vlod Barchuk ● 2682d

Even if nobody changed their mind since the referendum and you ignored the opinion of anyone who didn't vote first time around when they were entitled to we are very close to the point where the majority of people who voted or have since become eligible to vote would be in favour of staying. 1.2million people have died since the referendum and given the overwhelming support for leave among the elderly in is a conservative assumption that around 75% of the deceased who voted voted for Brexit. These dead voters are being replaced by young people become eligible to participate in elections and they are likely to be in favour of remain by over 70%

Graham Southworth ● 2682d

Telling the truth??What is the truth??I wanted out, voted out for one reason only

Peter Yale ● 2683d

This is a profoundly anti-democratic point of view. People who didn't vote in the election may not have done so because they felt they had insufficient understanding of the issues to reach a decision either way. It is quite logical for them to have changed their views in the light of events and changing circumstances. There is overwhelming evidence from polling that people who didn't vote in the referendum now would vote and would chose to remain in the EU by a substantial majority. If your answer to my original question is that we should not respond to a clear change in the will of the people because many of the people who have changed their view forfeited the right to ever having a say due to not participating in the referendum, that is a profoundly weak and unconvincing argument. 

Andy Jones ● 2683d

Some rude comments about cameron. Also asking what brexit actually is . Because no one can tell us. Would love to see him on question time with boris or farage he would rip them apart. When we see that Aaron banks the main backers of the leave campaign has links to the Russians. Brexit is something that the Russians really want to destabilise the western Europeans. The more we look at trump and brexit we should be very worried. House prices are falling and businesses are getting worried about the so called negotiations. People are worried about their jobs.

Peter Chadburn ● 2684d

And he said?

Graham Weeks ● 2684d

I was fascinated by Danny Dyers comments the other night. The shock of someone telling the truth about brexit is refreshing

Peter Chadburn ● 2684d

Well said Rosa.

Graham Weeks ● 2684d

Decision are made by those who turn up. We have a system which is based on the first past the post. We may like it or not but this is the system adopted for our local and general elections. If the majority of those that voted at the referendum, regardless of their numbers, decided that they wanted Britain out ef the EU than those who voted otherwise should accept it and shut up. Those who  do not agree and did not bother to cast their vote - and this include the 18/35 age group— have only themselves to blame.

Rosa Popham ● 2684d

Your analogy is flawed — it should be that you go to hospital and 51.9% of everybody who is there, patients included, decide amputation is the best option for you. All of the doctors are in the 48.1% who are advising against it. But it's the will of the people!

Stuart Green ● 2686d

Andy,This is what I felt about the campaign totally. we were all misinformed and the implications of leaving or remaining were never fully explored or even explained. Project fear vs. wishful thinking was my analyses. I made my decision based on comments from the EU politicians who made it very clear that a pick'n'mix would not be possible. yet all the coverage was of the low level of debate that we had here

Peter Chadburn ● 2686d

Vlod claims that both sides were clear at the time of the referendum that leaving the EU necessarily meant leaving the Single Market and the Customs Union. This claim doesn't really stand up to the most cursory inspection. While it is true to say that the information issued by the Government about the referendum did say that leaving the EU would mean that we would also leave the single market this was not generally emphasised by the Remain campaign. On the Leave side some prominent campaigners such as Nigel Farage and Daniel Hannan are on record as saying that it would be entirely possible to leave the EU and remain in the single market.If you look at the wording of what was on the referendum ballot forms no mention is made of the single market or customs union - it simply says should we remain in the EU or leave.It is certain that a meaningful proportion of people who voted Leave did so on the basis that they wished to leave the EU but wanted to stay in the single market. The Norway option was widely discussed at the time of the Referendum.The inescapable fact is that virtually nobody, even those proposing leaving, had anything but a superficial understanding of the potential implications. The Irish border issues was barely mentioned at the time and a host of other challenges have arisen which were never anticipated. Personally although on occasion my job brings me into contact with EU bureaucracy I really wouldn't have been able to tell you the difference between the single market and the customs union or the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. This probably will be the same for the vast majority of the population, some of whom are currently government ministers. Therefore the idea that the British population made an informed decision and gave a clear message about leaving these institutions is transparently false.

Andy Jones ● 2686d

The Will of the People has always been a great phrase! 51.9% ... anything else and that would sound pretty unconvincing.Think about this; you feel a bit sick but aren't really sure what's wrong. You go to hospital, lots of doctors examine you. While everyone agrees you're sick, some want to try more tests and drugs but 51.9% decide you're extremely ill and want to cut off your arm, they're pretty sure they'll be able to replace it again, hopefully, somehow. I'm certain you wouldn't lay down on that table and would be off to another hospital for some second opinions!Another thing to think about is if it had been 51.9% Remain you can be sure Farage would have called the battle lost but the war far from over and UKIP would still be a thing.But no, the The Will of the People (well, at least 51.9% of 72.2% of voters eligible but not necessarily affected) is marginally clear! It's like the other Remoaner shutdown catchphrase "Democracy has spoken!" .. except democracy explicitly requires opposition! Oh and sanctifies the ability to change The Will .. like voting to leave an organisation The People previously voted join.End of the day Cameron is to blame completely, he had to do a referendum but he should have put a 66% or 75% majority requirement on any action changing the fundamental running of this country (and course of humanity). At the very least it would've been an easier pill to swallow if 75% of the country voted Brexit, that'd be a clear mandate and not a electoral anomaly...

Nick Foote ● 2686d

When it comes down to it. No one knew what was involved in Brexit. The campaigning never mentioned the Irish border (On both sides of the argument) and so much more. what we had were soundbites and slogans and since the Vote it has gone the same way. The only people that know what brexit means are the EU themselves. We are still running round trying to agree amongst ourselves what it means when 27 other countries know exactly what it means!! So as Theresa May explained that brexit means brexit. Well what are the consequences?? Can we believe Boris the Bulldozer protester?

Peter Chadburn ● 2687d

Presumably the issue with Euratom for Brexit supporters is that it sits under the jurisdiction of the ECJ.

Paul Webster ● 2687d

Having lost the referendum, remainers are determined to fudge and blur issues to keep the UK in the EU de facto if not de jure.During the referendum debate, both sides were clear what a vote to leave the EU would mean: leaving the EU Single Market, Customs Unions and the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. Membership of EU programmes and related institutions was not clear because non EU countries participate in many of these, so this was up for negotiation. Euratom is particularly odd as it has the same membership as the EU (plus Switzerland as an associate member) but is legally distinct from the EU and outside the regulation of the European Parliament.As for right wingers on Question Time, there is nearly always a majority of remainers on the panel.

Vlod Barchuk ● 2687d

Very True Paul,in fact the anti-EU campaigning from the Express, Mail, Sun and Telegraph was very poor in that it really concentrated on distortion rather than showing the real problems with the EU. The BBC was nominally pro-remain but failed to challenge any of the campaigners over their lies. Radio 5 live was better than BBC TV in this respect. When you look at Question Time you will find quite a few right wing folk there. In fact Nigel Farage is there more often than he is in attending the European parliament. A day after the government announce Heathrow expansion it's developers and owners are moving their head office to Amsterdam!! Because of the idiots who are not negotiating on our behalf, we now have a rising concern about business leaving the UK because of the lack of certainty. Car, Aerospace, Infrastructure are all getting very twitchy.

Peter Chadburn ● 2688d

It's clearly not the will of the people, it never was and certainly isn't today.It was the will of some of the 17.4m leave voters at the time of the vote.UK pop, 65m...

Paul James ● 2688d

Brexit was never the desire of the "majority".Certainly not the form of brexit that we look to be getting, leaving EURATOM etc..Some form of brexit seems to be the will of some of the 17.4m leave voters.And if you think there is a gross media bias for remain you must live in a different universe from me!

Paul James ● 2688d

'For me the common market was a great idea ' Yes that is what it was called and how it was sold. But some of us saw from the beginning that it was more than CM, it was a first step to EU federalism.

Graham Weeks ● 2688d

For me the common market was a great idea but the Maastricht treaty was when it changed from a group of common interest into a political project that is doomed. It is the political elite with their focus groups that have let us down by pandering to big business and corporate vanity. the crash of 2008, the current race to the bottom and the destruction of the middle classes are part of the agenda promoted by corporate interests that were not important for Blair, Cameron and co. The people have been forgotten in this race to please the corporations. Large scale immigration, tied to minimum wage and the gig economy has led to a race to the bottom. But the fat cats have got fatter!! In the EU the corporate lobbyists spend a lot of money so that they can poison us. luckily many MEP's still have a sense of morality, but sadly too many find the gifts too tempting. we see how Trump is creating a revolution that will screw totally the people that voted for him.

Peter Chadburn ● 2688d

'Remoaners wont be happy until they get the result they want. I find this attitude one of the most un-democratic you could imagine.'Isn't it the very essence of democracy that anyone with a view should keep stating it until they can persuade the majority that they are right? In this particular case that already seems to have happened with the majority now in favour of Remain. Shouldn't the will of the majority be reflected in Government policy."Goldman Sachs and Merkel have administered punishment to the Greek people and in Portugal, Spain and the Mediterranean coasts we have seen a rise in poverty and problems. The central area of Europe grows in power and the people in the centre resent subsidising the so called feckless poor of the south. "You can't really have it both ways on this - are 'Goldman Sachs and Merkel' punishing the southern economies or subsidising them? The reality is that a large part of the international banking system including British banks have extended substantial loans to this area. The only way these loans will ever be repaid is by continuing fiscal reform in these countries and tackling vested interest. Default and dropping out of the Euro will end the need to do this but it won't make the lives of the people in these countries any better.'The Euro meant that manufacturing became uneconomic in Portugal as it was saddled with German level costs.'The economic data doesn't bear this out. Portuguese export growth has been very strong for the last seven or eight years. Most economic analysts would agree that the main problem the country has is restrictive labour practices which have resulted in very high rates of youth unemployment "Then there’s a UK sized hole in the membership which Brussels will want to deal with....step forward Turkey? Oh dear....!"This is just plain untrue. The chief advocate for Turkish membership of the EU was the UK. There was massive resistance from most other members and there continues to be so. This opposition existed when democracy was reasonably robust in Turkey. Under Erdogan there is zero chance of EU membership even being a theoretical discussion. Don't get confused by Turkey aligning its economy with the Customs Union and the Single Market. They have to do this because it would be economic insanity to be on the borders of the Single Market and exclude yourself from trading with it.

Andy Jones ● 2688d

https://unherd.com/2018/06/brexit-voters-werent-duped-propaganda/

Graham Weeks ● 2688d

'they wanted to kick the political classes who have betrayed them. 'Yes and that goes back to Heath taking us into the Common Market with no choice given to the people.

Graham Weeks ● 2688d

Yes Europe has been in trouble since the Euro was foisted on people. the edges of Europe have seen the people punished for the sins of their leaders. Goldman Sachs and Merkel have administered punishment to the Greek people and in Portugal, Spain and the Mediterranean coasts we have seen a rise in poverty and problems. The central area of Europe grows in power and the people in the centre resent subsidising the so called feckless poor of the south. The rise of extremism is the consequence of the Euro eliminating economic fluidity. The Euro meant that manufacturing became uneconomic in Portugal as it was saddled with German level costs. Much of the economic strength of Britain came by being in Europe but not in the Euro. I voted remain but see there are inherent dangers within the so called European Project. Greater integration will lead to an elite running from the centre giving out crumbs for the regions. The Populist politics of the new right will tap into this very easily. Colin makes some sound points. The issue we have is that our Brexit is being managed by a bunch of clowns who don't care about the people who voted leave. why did people vote leave? the same reason they voted for Trump in america? because they wanted to kick the political classes who have betrayed them.

Peter Chadburn ● 2688d

Does it all go to show there will be no more talk of referendum until the lesson of recent history is forgotten? If so the Union is safer.

Graham Weeks ● 2688d

I find it all laughable Remoaners wont be happy until they get the result they want. I find this attitude one of the most un-democratic you could imagine.Europe is collapsing When the next Greece economic type situation comes along I think it will push it over the edge on the commerce side. The far right is gaining momentum in many parts of the mainland (for reasons mainly of Merkels making) and again I’d want as much distance from that as possible.Then there’s a UK sized hole in the membership which Brussels will want to deal with....step forward Turkey? Oh dear....!So let’s have a second referendum and stop Brexit Then in 2 years time the leavers can jump up and down and demand a third referendum and so it goes on

Colin Goodman ● 2688d

You may be right but I went by what they published 'Published on 23 Jun 2018Footage of pro-Brexit protesters and UKIP leader Gerard Batten marching on Westminster to counter the demonstration taking place by many thousands of Remainers in London today. 'Try https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUC5gXvhHLY

Graham Weeks ● 2688d

UKIP replaced their logo in September 2017 so I'm assuming this is old footage reposted over the weekend, Got anything a bit more reliable?

Paul Scullion ● 2689d

All media is biased. I am no Brexit central but a mere foot soldier. Thank you for the compliment.

Graham Weeks ● 2689d

Sorry. I did not see the date. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoRGXxx8yCY

Graham Weeks ● 2689d

The polls over the last year are pretty consistent the majority now support Remain not due to anyone changing their minds but because the previously undecided would now vote Remain. I also think Andy is right that a lot of 'shy remainers' are telling pollsters they'll vote Leave but should the day ever come they will do the opposite.I don't see any strong argument that leaving the EU can still safely be said to reflect the 'will of the people'. It was always fairly ambiguous and it clearly has changed. However, neither main political party seem willing to accept this so I think the person who says the Norway option is the only way forward. This means an option that nobody is really satisfied with and actually delivers us no real benefits and lots of costs. However, it could be seen as the first baby step towards a true Brexit if the British people subsequently express their will that this is the direction in which they wish to travel. If they don't then rejoining the EU would be far less complex than if we had already departed the single market and Customs Union.

Tricia Arbuthnot ● 2689d

I speak with many people who look at the prospect of brexit with great trepidation. however accept that it is the will of the people. the question is what kind of brexit? many of the folk i speak to thought that we could have a cake and eat it situation. however despite being anti-euro and anti much of the eu integration plans i voted remain. i am more eurosceptic that many who voted leave. the fantastic trade deals with the US and others will bring about the end of the NHS!!. So whilst accepting the will of the people both me and my good eurosceptic friend feel that our government have made a clear mess of the negotiations. There was no clear plan but contradictory slogans. The EU were clearly more prepared than us and in effect the Irish question was thought about in Brussels but not in the UK. All we have is vague ideas and slogans. Brexit means brexit just about sums it up. My eurosceptic friend believes that the only solution is the norway option and then work out over the next 10 years how a true brexit could be achieved!!

Peter Chadburn ● 2689d

The article was also on Breitbart, which is as biased a media outlet as you're going to get. Graham is Brexit central.

Simon Deakin ● 2689d

That article was written in 2016.  Do you have a link regarding this weekend?

Paul Scullion ● 2689d

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/09/05/blackout-media-ignores-pro-brexit-protest-hundreds-of-articles-published-on-pro-eu-demonstration/

Graham Weeks ● 2689d

Graham, I've taken a look on both liberal and non-liberal media outlets and cannot find an estimate for the numbers attending the pro-brexit element of the London rally.  Can you share any links?

Paul Scullion ● 2689d

Has the view of the majority changed? We have gross media bias for remain. See the reporting of the two demonstrations on Saturday. All I know for certain is that in my family the vote was eight for Brexit and two remain and no-one has changed. The two have an interest in property in France.

Graham Weeks ● 2689d