Members of Britain’s three biggest trade unions now support a new referendum on Brexit by a margin of more than two to one.
Does this signify a growing groundswell of opinion that the UK deserves and, in fact, needs a Peoples Vote following the finalising of the Brexit terms? Or does it just show there's a schism between those who work for a living and those who benefit from owning businesses?
Have the Trade Unions ballotted their members on this I wonder ??? nah....didn't think so.
Why on Earth would unions ballot their membership about this? Has the Tory party ballotted it's membership about Chequers? Did the Labour party ballot it's membership about a Peoples Vote?
The story is merely a report about a poll which shows unions members overwhelminingly support a Peoples Vote. Having a ballot to confirm this would be a waste of time and money as there is nothing that unions can do to enact a Peoples Vote - it's not in their gift.
What an odd thing to suggest.
Workplace TU reps and conveners would have a pretty good idea how their members were feeling about this issue. Knowing your members views goes with the job. That would without doubt be fed up the line at branch and regional level and ultimately to the conference proper. That’s how TU democracy works. It would be astonishing if the recent polls didn’t closely reflect the membership as a whole allowing for +/- error. Given the scale of majority in favour of a second vote the adjustment for error is virtually meaningless.
Of course this will mean sweet FA to the Tories. They have enough problems without getting concerned with what the people think. It might though impact on The Labour Party Conference in a couple of weeks time.
So no then. Just remainers still trying to overturn the referendum .
Not sure how you can draw that conclusion. If more people voted Leave than Remain two years ago and now more people want a Peoples Vote than don't, isn't the obvious conclusion that at least some Leave voters support a Peoples Vote?
Members of Britain’s three biggest trade unions now support a new referendum on Brexit by a margin of more than two to one.
Does this signify a growing groundswell of opinion that the UK deserves and, in fact, needs a Peoples Vote following the finalising of the Brexit terms? Or does it just show there's a schism between those who work for a living and those who benefit from owning businesses?
Is there a single person behind the 'Peoples Vote' campaign who was not a Remainer?
Yes, there's a whole organisation of previous Leave voters who accept they were spun a load of lies and have come together to fight for a Peoples Vote.
I believe they're called RemainersNow or something like that.
Members of Britain’s three biggest trade unions now support a new referendum on Brexit by a margin of more than two to one.
Does this signify a growing groundswell of opinion that the UK deserves and, in fact, needs a Peoples Vote following the finalising of the Brexit terms? Or does it just show there's a schism between those who work for a living and those who benefit from owning businesses?
Is there a single person behind the 'Peoples Vote' campaign who was not a Remainer?
Yes, there's a whole organisation of previous Leave voters who accept they were spun a load of lies and have come together to fight for a Peoples Vote.
I believe they're called RemainersNow or something like that.
Hilarious. The only names in their website are Caroline Lucas and Andrew Adonis.
Members of Britain’s three biggest trade unions now support a new referendum on Brexit by a margin of more than two to one.
Does this signify a growing groundswell of opinion that the UK deserves and, in fact, needs a Peoples Vote following the finalising of the Brexit terms? Or does it just show there's a schism between those who work for a living and those who benefit from owning businesses?
Is there a single person behind the 'Peoples Vote' campaign who was not a Remainer?
Yes, there's a whole organisation of previous Leave voters who accept they were spun a load of lies and have come together to fight for a Peoples Vote.
I believe they're called RemainersNow or something like that.
Hilarious. The only names in their website are Caroline Lucas and Andrew Adonis.
I don't know much about them, I'd just heard the name or saw someone on Twitter talking about it.
You asked the question, I answered it, simple as that really.
Quick poll. Who here would want a people's vote on the final brexit deal/terms? Open to both leavers and remainers
Only if the deal was negotiated by people who want to Leave-not our current virtually entirely Remainer Government who are negotiating a deal that is as close to staying in anyway. Another referendum would not settle that.
The best thing would be a General election in which we could have a choice of voting into Government people who want to Leave or Remain, not those who lied about it at the last General Election.
I think a prople's vote which goes either way is probably the only thing that will halt the divisions in the country. However, if the vote is to reject the Brexit deal, it would need to be clear cut whereas a Brexit confirmation could still be close as people would just have to accept it.
Quick poll. Who here would want a people's vote on the final brexit deal/terms? Open to both leavers and remainers
Trouble is, it won't be a vote on the final Brexit terms. Remainers will do their utmost to turn it into a Brexit cancellation vote. The referendum vote was leave or stay. Not best of three.
The vote would have to be smarter than the initial referendum was. You have Brexiters that would want to leave on WTO rules and reject the deal and others who would want to accept it. If you want to reflect public opinion, and given the past mistakes, I think it is pretty essential we do , then you have to break it down into Brexit or overturn Brexit - then you have to have a secondary question that asks all voters if there is a Brexit, is their preference the deal struck or leaving with no deal.
Nobody could argue with the outcome of that result. The worry for me would be that the government would try to make it Brexit with the deal or Brexit without the deal. This is because remainers would almost certainly vote for the deal making it very likely to win - but nobody is likely to be satisfied at the end of it!
Quick poll. Who here would want a people's vote on the final brexit deal/terms? Open to both leavers and remainers
Yep. It should be on the basis of a three-way choice. Leave with no deal; leave with whatever deal is negotiated by the Government; cancel Brexit.
First and second preference votes. Simple majority on first preference votes cast; or simple majority with first and second preference votes cast.
That way, we end up with a clear instruction to the Government as to what to fulfil and how (unlike what we have now). And we end up with the majority of people getting what they think they voted for (unlike what we have now).
The biggest proponents of such a vote should be anyone who is clear about what they voted for.
The vote would have to be smarter than the initial referendum was. You have Brexiters that would want to leave on WTO rules and reject the deal and others who would want to accept it. If you want to reflect public opinion, and given the past mistakes, I think it is pretty essential we do , then you have to break it down into Brexit or overturn Brexit - then you have to have a secondary question that asks all voters if there is a Brexit, is their preference the deal struck or leaving with no deal.
Nobody could argue with the outcome of that result. The worry for me would be that the government would try to make it Brexit with the deal or Brexit without the deal. This is because remainers would almost certainly vote for the deal making it very likely to win - but nobody is likely to be satisfied at the end of it!
I've said before they've gone about this completely arse backwards. Personally, I think there should have been a Royal Commission to investigate Brexit and the possible forms it would take. During the 18 months or two years that would have taken the UK could have used the time to increase pressure on the EU to reform properly (not the usual pretend EU, kick the problem down the road type reform). Then there could have been a vote for remain or whichever flavour of Brexit people would prefer, based on a sensible examination of the subject by an independent body. Not 'Project Fear' or 'Project Free Money for the NHS' telling lies. But then again, Ted Heath lied his face off and took us in without a referendum so why would I expect anything remotely sensible when politicians want to get their own way.
It is fundamentally undemocratic to make irreversible constitutional changes on the back of a flawed referendum requiring a simple majority with no other checks and balances. There has to be a second referendum to redress this travesty.
The reason we need another referendum is because nobody knows if people want the equivalent of a soft or hard Brexit. There is quite an important difference, too important for politicians or even you or I to decide what people wanted. This could have been covered simply in the referendum but it seems no thought was given to it!
Just to build on @Grapevine49 remarks, and specifically re the confusion across the EU about what the Brits actually intend; I qualify for Czech dual citizenship exactly on 29.3.19. However I canot submit my application in advance and the process can take up to a year. That leaves me in limbo in terms of my free movement around the union. But I have a lawyer looking into this and she reports the Ministry of Foreign Affairs think I wont have a problem because " there is a one year transition agreement".
Now correct me if I am wrong but no such agreement has been reached, has it?
You're not wrong.
The transition is conditional on successful conclusion of the current talks on a Withdrawal Agreement. No deal means, effectively, that nothing will be agreed - and will require the UK (in particular) to seek mini deals with the EU27 for essential services/interactions to be in place for Brexit. If talks end acrimoniously the chances of agreeing such mini deals must be significantly reduced.
Well here's a thing. We are on holiday in Slovenia. As a tiny country where everyone speaks 2-3 languages as "native" plus English, it's no surprise to find that one of the State radio channels runs a multi language music plus talk output. So while cruising through the vineyard country today we listened to an interview with the British Ambassador on Brexit. She blithely maintained that a transition agreement has been established to Dec 2020. She made no use of the phrase Hard Brexit, nor did she suggest that this agreement might not be in place if the talks go wrong. What are our diplomats playing at?
You’re lucky. We have to listen to Little Mix when we drive on holiday.
Just to build on @Grapevine49 remarks, and specifically re the confusion across the EU about what the Brits actually intend; I qualify for Czech dual citizenship exactly on 29.3.19. However I canot submit my application in advance and the process can take up to a year. That leaves me in limbo in terms of my free movement around the union. But I have a lawyer looking into this and she reports the Ministry of Foreign Affairs think I wont have a problem because " there is a one year transition agreement".
Now correct me if I am wrong but no such agreement has been reached, has it?
You're not wrong.
The transition is conditional on successful conclusion of the current talks on a Withdrawal Agreement. No deal means, effectively, that nothing will be agreed - and will require the UK (in particular) to seek mini deals with the EU27 for essential services/interactions to be in place for Brexit. If talks end acrimoniously the chances of agreeing such mini deals must be significantly reduced.
Well here's a thing. We are on holiday in Slovenia. As a tiny country where everyone speaks 2-3 languages as "native" plus English, it's no surprise to find that one of the State radio channels runs a multi language music plus talk output. So while cruising through the vineyard country today we listened to an interview with the British Ambassador on Brexit. She blithely maintained that a transition agreement has been established to Dec 2020. She made no use of the phrase Hard Brexit, nor did she suggest that this agreement might not be in place if the talks go wrong. What are our diplomats playing at?
You’re lucky. We have to listen to Little Mix when we drive on holiday.
Crispin someone Tory brexiteer on Newsnight tonight. Didn’t really come across as having a clue what he was talking about. A few sound bites about us giving into the EUs demands.
It’s like they just believe we need to stand firm and we will get what we want
Also another one that seems to think the EU put the Irish border in???
Also, said he spent the majority of the day watching/following Cook get his century, so couldn’t answer a question Emily Matis put to him in any specific detail. Did this presumably knowing he was going to be on Newsnight
Got about a month to sort this out and our MPs are more interested in Cook’s century. Great stuff
Members of Britain’s three biggest trade unions now support a new referendum on Brexit by a margin of more than two to one.
Does this signify a growing groundswell of opinion that the UK deserves and, in fact, needs a Peoples Vote following the finalising of the Brexit terms? Or does it just show there's a schism between those who work for a living and those who benefit from owning businesses?
"Law should always be servant of policy, not the other way round."
Back to silence again now
Things are put “into law” to exactly stifle the whims and policy of politicians. It protects us from the likes of Johnson, Gove and Jacob Rees-Mogg. Parliamentary debate has the process to amend and change law and that is really all we need to know.
Also, said he spent the majority of the day watching/following Cook get his century, so couldn’t answer a question Emily Matis put to him in any specific detail. Did this presumably knowing he was going to be on Newsnight
Got about a month to sort this out and our MPs are more interested in Cook’s century. Great stuff
But that’s what it will be like after Brexit. Long lazy days watching the cricket, a bit of rugger and fox hunting. Chaps will be able to have a fag with their pint in their local. No more of the EU inspired PC and health and safety nonsense. The riff raff knowing their place and doffing their flat caps to their betters while picking the fruit and vegetables in the fields. Moggie, Crispin, Johnson and co know what is good for us
All project fear mate, companies will happily sacrifice profitability to make an ill-thought out decision they're not emotionally invested in work, for no possible benefit to themselves.
They have just spent millions on a new showroom in Basingstoke, was planned and built long after referendum vote. Oh well something else will have to go in there.
Comments
Of course this will mean sweet FA to the Tories. They have enough problems without getting concerned with what the people think. It might though impact on The Labour Party Conference in a couple of weeks time.
#maths
I believe they're called RemainersNow or something like that.
You asked the question, I answered it, simple as that really.
The best thing would be a General election in which we could have a choice of voting into Government people who want to Leave or Remain, not those who lied about it at the last General Election.
Nobody could argue with the outcome of that result. The worry for me would be that the government would try to make it Brexit with the deal or Brexit without the deal. This is because remainers would almost certainly vote for the deal making it very likely to win - but nobody is likely to be satisfied at the end of it!
First and second preference votes. Simple majority on first preference votes cast; or simple majority with first and second preference votes cast.
That way, we end up with a clear instruction to the Government as to what to fulfil and how (unlike what we have now). And we end up with the majority of people getting what they think they voted for (unlike what we have now).
The biggest proponents of such a vote should be anyone who is clear about what they voted for.
It’s like they just believe we need to stand firm and we will get what we want
Also another one that seems to think the EU put the Irish border in???
Deluded
Got about a month to sort this out and our MPs are more interested in Cook’s century. Great stuff
jackofkent.com/2018/09/why-has-brexit-become-a-legal-matter-when-it-should-be-a-political-matter/
"Law should always be servant of policy, not the other way round."
Back to silence again now
The blog was basically bollocks.