[B0ycey]

Poor form Beren. My question was very relievent actually but your refusal to answer it speaks volumes.

If Corbyn is seeking to keep the UK in the CU, it could be achieved.

Corbyn wants to be in a CU but also able to trade. In other words Mays deal. Although as been pointed out a few times now it is the WA that the commons will reject and unless you are suggesting the EU will not negotiate a WA with Corbyn I don't see how Corbyn will perform any better than May.

If someone wants a second referendum, they still should vote Labour/LibDem/SNP. If the Brits want a functioning parliament and government that would be willing to resolve the political crisis, make an acceptable deal with the EU and even call a second referendum, they should want a Corbyn premiership. This is not so complicated.

It is Complicated actually as Corbyn says a second referendum is off the table. The whole point of the last few pages. If anyone wants a peoples vote they should vote Lib Dems. Only with a coalition could a peoples vote get a chance if both May and Corbyn are as stubborn as their words suggest.

[Beren]

Poor form Beren. My question was very relievent actually but your refusal to answer it speaks volumes.

Okay, there would most likely be a WA saying the UK wants to remain in the CU, if you're so interested in technicalities. How would it be the same as May's WA, including the backstop jeopardising the UK's integrity, hence refused by the DUP?

It is Complicated actually as Corbyn says a second referendum is off the table. The whole point of the last few pages. If anyone wants a peoples vote they should vote Lib Dems.

Corbyn's ambiguous for political reasons while his shadow Brexit secretary and everybody else in his party's frontbench is clearly a Remainer rooting for a second referendum. Also, how is a LibDem premiership possible? Only a Corbyn or a Tory premiership is possible, and a Tory PM won't call a second referendum because he/she won't be PM the very next day.

[Rich]

Remember contry to the Brexit liars, the Brexit we were promised was under David Cameron's leadership. Cameron was supposed to stay on for three years. i don't recall a single Tory Brexiteer saying that a leave result would mean Cameron stepping down.

Cameron was himself a pathological liar. Pretending to hate the EU, then saying that the EU had been miraculously transformed by his renegotitation. The Referendum was a sickening anti democratic act of fascism. The other political parties were expected to choose between a Tory controlled remain for the next 4 years or a Tory controlled Brexit. This is typical fascist behaviour. The fascists that had signed the 5 five year fixed term parliament act going us a binary referendum.

People keep complaining that Britain is not democratic enough. Making Britain more democratic is not hard. Reduce the parliamentary term to a fixed 2 years and add a 100 MP PR top up. Deosn't require boundary changes. Desn't require fundamental changes to Britain's constitution and most crucially doesn't require a referendum.

[B0ycey]

Okay, there would most likely be a WA saying the UK wants to remain in the CA, if you're so interested in technicalities. How would it be the same as May's WA, including the backstop jeopardising the UK's integrity, hence the DUP refuses it?

Well I am assuming the backstop would be in it to be signed off before negotiations on trade take place. Although I doubt Corbyn would have the notion of not being able to trade with the rest of the world in the agreement that was finalised. But as it is the backstop that seems to be the problem today, then it is likely to fail in the commons anyway. Plus, it will be interesting to see how the EU react when they find out that Corbyns deal is actually May's deal except with agreed standards on work conditions and standards.

Corbyn's ambiguous for political reasons while his shadow Brexit secretary and everybody else in his party's frontbench is clearly a Remainer rooting for a second referendum. Also, how is a LibDem premiership possible? Only a Corbyn or a Tory premiership is possible, and a Tory PM won't call a second referendum because he/she won't be PM the very next day.

I doubt the Lib Dems premiership is possible. But I look at Macron and think that it perhaps improbable but not impossible. Although really it is about coalition rather than actual premiership. And perhaps even Corbyn might concede a second referendum if that was the price of power.

[Beren]

Well I am assuming the backstop would be in it to be signed off before negotiations on trade take place.

How would a backstop be needed if the UK government agreed to remaining in the CU as part of a WA? It's there because it doesn't.

And perhaps even Corbyn might concede a second referendum if that was the price of power.

He already has because it is.

[B0ycey]

How would a backstop be needed if the UK government agreed to remaining in the CU as part of a WA? It's there because it doesn't.

So you are suggesting the EU will not ask for a backstop on the assumption that a form of customs union can be negotiated when the trade deal talks takes place?

He already has because it is.

So his words are a ruse?

You have faith.

[Beren]

So you are suggesting the EU will not ask for a backstop on the assumption that a form of customs union can be negotiated when the trade deal talks takes place?

I'm suggesting there's no need for a backstop in the agreement if it contains the UK government's declaration that it wants to remain in the CU, so thus further negotiations will be about the UK's CU-membership after parliament accepted that agreement between the UK government and the EU.

So his words are a ruse?

You have faith.

Yes, he's swinging like a pendulum regarding a second referendum to help his party maximise votes.

[B0ycey]

I'm suggesting there's no need for a backstop in the agreement if it contains the UK government's declaration that it wants to remain in the CU, so thus further negotiations will be about the UK's CU-membership after parliament accepted that agreement between the UK government and the EU.

If Corbyn was actually after the CU of course. There be a mighty shock on both sides when it becomes obvious that Mays deal has been brought back to Brussels.

[Beren]

As a matter of fact Turkey is also in a customs union with the EU, I wonder if Brexit means Brexit so much that even being as sovereign as Turkey wouldn't be enough. But maybe it's harder to jump the Channel than the Bosporus.

[skinster]

I find it so strange that there are people in this country blaming Brexit on Corbyn. It is bizarre.

Also, the way the remainers get all self-righteous as though they expected the vote to go to what they wanted, reminds me of Clinton supporters in the U.S. who are still crying about their queen losing an election to a TV idiot.

Anyway, as you were.

[Nonsense]

Remember contry to the Brexit liars, the Brexit we were promised was under David Cameron's leadership. Cameron was supposed to stay on for three years. i don't recall a single Tory Brexiteer saying that a leave result would mean Cameron stepping down.

Cameron was himself a pathological liar. Pretending to hate the EU, then saying that the EU had been miraculously transformed by his renegotitation. The Referendum was a sickening anti democratic act of fascism. The other political parties were expected to choose between a Tory controlled remain for the next 4 years or a Tory controlled Brexit. This is typical fascist behaviour. The fascists that had signed the 5 five year fixed term parliament act going us a binary referendum.

People keep complaining that Britain is not democratic enough. Making Britain more democratic is not hard. Reduce the parliamentary term to a fixed 2 years and add a 100 MP PR top up. Deosn't require boundary changes. Desn't require fundamental changes to Britain's constitution and most crucially doesn't require a referendum.

Nonsense -

It's amazing how BREXITEERS are labelled 'LIARS', YET, I have never seen one single 'LIE' over BREXIT proven.

So, people complain that the country is not 'democratic' enough! would they be, I wonder, 'Remainers'? , surely not, I mean, they are so 'superior', that they think, ^"The Referendum was a sickening anti democratic act of fascism" & they also think that if the voters get it 'wrong' first time, so give them another chance to get it 'right'.

The U.K is in great danger, of transforming our partly functional 'democracy', into a dysfunctional idiocracy,governed by an 'aristocratic' bunch of self-appointed,elitist idiots..

There's none so DEAF, as those who do NOT want to hear, whose stupidity knows no limit, whose ignorance is posted all over the web, whose prejudices block any pretence at reasoning.

As for 'five-year' parliaments, again,democracy in action, the political party that won, included it in their manifesto, along with boundary changes.

FFS, what is it that irks you about so-called 'democracy?

You don't accept referendum results & you don't like it when a party that has policies you don't like gets elected to office, what is about democracy that you DO like, it wouldn't be because you are on the 'LOSING' side is it?

NOW, I accept that 'democracy' is a terrible form of governance, but, the alternatives, as CHURCHILL said, are much,much worse.

[Rich]

It's amazing how BREXITEERS are labelled 'LIARS', YET, I have never seen one single 'LIE' over BREXIT proven.

They are proven liars. Most of them said negotiating a good exit deal would be easy. Thes liars are now trying to blames the bad deal on May. but it is entirely the fault of Brexit MPs that May is prime Minister. Brexit MPs only needed a third of Tory MPs to rally around a single candidate to guarantee a place on the Tory membership ballot and an almost certain victory. Tory Brexit MPs easily had the numbers to put Boris into number 10.

I don't say that every person that voted Brexit is a liar, but I do say that the Tory Brexiteer MPs were and are liars. They wanted a remainer Prime Minister to deliver Brexit for them so as they could then complain and blame the almost inevitable unsatisfactory situation on the Remainers. It was plainly obvious to those of us with modicum of intelligence and knowledge that the referendum result produce ambiguity. It would have produced ambiguity even if Remain had won. @Nonsense maybe you would have accepted a Remain victory in 2016, but the majority of Brexiteers are lying hypocrites if they claim that they would have accepted the result. I wasn't born yesterday, I knew the the SNP liars wouldn't accept losing. I knew that the Scottish referendum wouldn't settle the question for a referendum. The Brexiteers could have demanded that a hard Brexit be explicitly put on the ballot paper, but they didn't.

I accept democracy. I don't like the monarchy, but accept there is no clear majority for abolition. I accept a huge number of democratic results that I don't like. But I continue to assert my right to point out the lies, idiocy and hypocrisies of those winners, no matter how many times they win.

[ingliz]

FFS, what is it that irks you about so-called 'democracy?

Are you scared that more democracy, another referendum, will put the kibosh on Brexit. That the Willy of the People may have changed now 'the People' know what they are voting for?

[skinster]

Remainers are the biggest crybabies of 2018.

[Ter]

Are you scared that more democracy, another referendum, will put the kibosh on Brexit. That the Willy of the People may have changed now 'the People' know what they are voting for?

I am truly sorry to say this once again, but you are a hypocrite.
If the referendum had gone the other way, you would have laughed wit anyone proposing a second referendum.

That is by the way the methodology of the EU apparatchiks : make them vote again till you get the result they want and stop all referendums afterwards.

[ingliz]

I am truly sorry to say this once again, but you are a hypocrite.

What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. When he thought he would lose, Nigel Farage said that a '52-48 result would be unfinished business'

"In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way"

Nigel Farage, 16 May 2016.

[Nonsense]

Are you scared that more democracy, another referendum, will put the kibosh on Brexit. That the Willy of the People may have changed now 'the People' know what they are voting for?

It's NOT a question of "more democracy", that is pretty pointless as the 'Remainers' have shown - they CANNOT accept democracy.

You say that people have "changed now", well, tomorrow,they may well 'change' again, if you do not know what you are voting for, either do NOT vote, or at least when you do vote-ACCEPT THE RESULT.

That's called 'democracy'.

For those who do not like the result, so be it, that is reality, no one says that you shouln't campaign for another future referendum, at least have the decency NOT to attempt to 'steal' the current referendum result.
Now, let any political party include another referendum into the next election's manifesto & see what happens as a result to their election prospects.

[Nonsense]

They are proven liars. Most of them said negotiating a good exit deal would be easy. Thes liars are now trying to blames the bad deal on May. but it is entirely the fault of Brexit MPs that May is prime Minister. Brexit MPs only needed a third of Tory MPs to rally around a single candidate to guarantee a place on the Tory membership ballot and an almost certain victory. Tory Brexit MPs easily had the numbers to put Boris into number 10.

I don't say that every person that voted Brexit is a liar, but I do say that the Tory Brexiteer MPs were and are liars. They wanted a remainer Prime Minister to deliver Brexit for them so as they could then complain and blame the almost inevitable unsatisfactory situation on the Remainers. It was plainly obvious to those of us with modicum of intelligence and knowledge that the referendum result produce ambiguity. It would have produced ambiguity even if Remain had won. @Nonsense maybe you would have accepted a Remain victory in 2016, but the majority of Brexiteers are lying hypocrites if they claim that they would have accepted the result. I wasn't born yesterday, I knew the the SNP liars wouldn't accept losing. I knew that the Scottish referendum wouldn't settle the question for a referendum. The Brexiteers could have demanded that a hard Brexit be explicitly put on the ballot paper, but they didn't.

I accept democracy. I don't like the monarchy, but accept there is no clear majority for abolition. I accept a huge number of democratic results that I don't like. But I continue to assert my right to point out the lies, idiocy and hypocrisies of those winners, no matter how many times they win.

Nonsense -

Part of your 'rant's', include repeated claims of 'lying', but, not one specific instance, backed up by evidence is produced.

In any case, who in their right mind believes all that politicians say in public?

'Lying' is a professional requirement to being a politician, much the same as being a 'sucker' is to being a voter, neither being 'illegal'.

You are partisan in your assertions that 'Tory Brexiteers are liars', tell me which MP in Westminster, or elsewhere is not a 'liar'?

I too do not like the monarchy,all the more reason why democracy has to be seen to be both working & relevent in practice.

[Rich]

Brexiteers lied about the £350 million for starters. They lied about the German car manufacturers forcing Merkel's hand. They've lied about numerous things, as others have pointed out over the last two and a half years. Perhaps their biggest lie was that they wanted power returned to the British Parliament. Note how the Brexiteer hypocrites opposed Parliament having the meaningful vote that they have just used.

Then there was all their nonsense about wonderful trade deals. Just wait till we go up against China alone to make a trade deal, I'm sure that will respect Britain's sovereignty and security. The Brexiteer plan was never to give power back to parliament. The demand has already gone up that Parliament should have a meaningful vote on the Post Brexit European trade deal, just wait till you try to get your trade deal with China past a meaningful vote in parliament.

[JohnRawls]

I find it so strange that there are people in this country blaming Brexit on Corbyn. It is bizarre.

Also, the way the remainers get all self-righteous as though they expected the vote to go to what they wanted, reminds me of Clinton supporters in the U.S. who are still crying about their queen losing an election to a TV idiot.

Anyway, as you were.

I mean, Corbyn is blamed for a reason honestly. Majority share of Labour are pro-remain. Corbyn is famous for being anti-EU. When the referendum was held he didn't represent the majority of the party, he only represented himself. Why wouldn't people blame him for that. He has done the absolute minimum he could. I guess hurrah, he got what he wanted and not exactly what the majority of his party wanted.