Article 50 Discussion

[tobyjugg2]

and the next Tory resignation forced byelection next week could be even more telling, with the Tory ex-incumbent not standing. Local and national Torys really hissy fitting over this resignation

 

Quite the (Tory) opposite of Richmond

- A Tory stronghold with a large majority and where over 60% voted leave.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/0/when-is-the-sleaford-and-north-hykeham-by-election-and-who-are-t/

 

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/728857/Sleaford-and-North-Hykeham-by-election-what-happens-next-Stephen-Phillips-resigns-Tory-MP

 

 

Labour only just pipped UKIP to 2nd at the by-election last year.

 

2015 Result:

Conservative: 34805 (56.2%)

Labour: 10690 (17.3%)

UKIP: 9716 (15.7%)

Lib Dem: 3500 (5.7%)

Others: 3233 (5.2%)

 

 

New Tory candidate - towing the party line - and Mays line may simply not be hard enough for these voters - unless opinion has softened.

http://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2016/11/caroline-johnson-wins-the-nomination-for-the-sleaford-and-north-hykeham-by-election.html

(king12345 note that she was selected against 2 councilors - which she isnt)

 

 

Local Labour lad with a fuzzy stance on 'getting the best deal'- perhaps looking to avoid getting utterly trounced into 3rd or 4th place

http://www.eastmidslabour.org.uk/jim_clarke_is_labour_s_choice_for_sleaford_and_north_hykeham

 

 

UKIP representative - hardline ex Tory (all the hard Brexit votes should go here)

http://www.itv.com/news/calendar/update/2016-11-13/ukip-names-candidate-for-sleaford-and-north-hykeham-by-election/

 

 

Ross Pepper - Liberal Democrats The ONLY clear remain candidate

http://www.libdems.org.uk/ross-pepper

May be weak on real local issues that matter despite being a local lad and touting schools and rail transport, and a relatively recent addition

My opinion is he is a Bit of a poor candidate for what this may turn out to be now.

If there is potential for a significant shift - not sure this is the person to make that happen. Could be wrong.

 

 

Wild card Marianne Overton - Lincolnshire Independents - Brexiteer

 

 

Hows the betting?

Tories still favourite to win although the odds have reduced dramatically

UKIP currently projected in second place

With LibDem and Labour in a far third

 

 

 

Interesting issues:

* Will both Tory and Labour voters go to the hard face of UKIP?

- quite possibly

* Labour wipeout with Labours' Remain/Liberal votes shifting to the LibDems?

- Quite possibly

* If remain has grown stronger - there may be a significant shift to the LibDems even if they dont win.

* migrant agricultural workers - many many utterly conflicting reports

[fletch70]

Not quite on topic i am afraid but meritocracy is not all it is cracked up to be as some people are more equal than others. There is a significant gap in attainment between advantaged and disadvantaged children from birth to University . Essentially , a child from a disadvantaged background has to be better than one from an advantaged background to achieve the same reusults. On top of that they can then be alienated by the elite so that they do not achieve their potential.

 

It is really quite horrifying

[tobyjugg2]

Not quite on topic i am afraid but meritocracy is not all it is cracked up to be as some people are more equal than others. There is a significant gap in attainment between advantaged and disadvantaged children from birth to University . Essentially , a child from a disadvantaged background has to be better than one from an advantaged background to achieve the same reusults. On top of that they can then be alienated by the elite so that they do not achieve their potential.

 

Although I agree to some extent with your assessment there, but that is the case in ALL schools.

 

Yes, some will get more help from their parents, including private tuition,

Yes some kids will learn the topics easier than others - we are all different

 

BUT

should the gifted/able/hard workers/those with parents that will pay/invest time (all of which can result in better academic achievement) be dragged down into mediocrity to be fair to those who cannot achieve the levels these others are capable of?

Or should all children be encouraged and helped to achieve the best they can possible achieve?

 

I believe streaming and challenging kids is the only effective way to get the best from them, whatever that best is.

 

I think that article I linked says it quite clearly - and is exactly as I experienced it - although into business NOT politics in my case.

 

yes in those days the 'boys schools' outside the grammers were full of kids who weren't pushed, and a lot were unpushable anyway for many reasons- but there were kids who could (and some did) have risen far above that - and failing those is what needs to be avoided - NOT the grammer school streaming system.

 

Should more effort be put into pushing the brightest and best - absolutely.

[fletch70]

Although I agree to some extent with your assessment there, but that is the case in ALL schools.

 

Yes, some will get more help from their parents, including private tuition,

Yes some kids will learn the topics easier than others - we are all different

 

BUT

should the gifted/able/hard workers/those with parents that will pay/invest time (all of which can result in better academic achievement) be dragged down into mediocrity to be fair to those who cannot achieve the levels these others are capable of?

Or should all children be encouraged and helped to achieve the best they can possible achieve?

 

I believe streaming and challenging kids is the only effective way to get the best from them, whatever that best is.

 

I think that article I linked says it quite clearly - and is exactly as I experienced it - although into business NOT politics in my case.

 

yes in those days the 'boys schools' outside the grammers were full of kids who weren't pushed, and a lot were unpushable anyway for many reasons- but there were kids who could (and some did) have risen far above that - and failing those is what needs to be avoided - NOT the grammer school streaming system.

 

Should more effort be put into pushing the brightest and best - absolutely.

 

Toby

I am not for one minute saying that children should not be challenged just that things such as the structural inequalities should be addressed so that they each get the same chances. It is fact that more poor and failing schools are in deprived areas, it is a fact that some parents are better at pushing to get the help and support that will help a child succeed , it is a fact that in school age children there can be a 25% development differential between the most privileged and the most deprived however in parts of London this has almost been eradicated due to a lot of time and effort being put into it.

 

It is a fact that the poorest children may not have the same conditions that make study conducive - just a few points-

Some children have to share bedrooms and have nowhere to study , can you imagine if you live somewhere where as a 15 year old studying for your GCSEs you have to share your room with your 4 year old brother who goes to bed at 7pm say

 

As a child in a poor household, there may be pressure on you to do paid work, not just a part time job but lots of paid work - the EMA was designed to alleviate this but was abolished by our caring sharing government

 

It is an area that needs lots and lots of work, all I want is to try to level the playing field somewhat so that every child has the opportunity to succeed if they can.

 

There is an argument that the elite want to keep the poor uneducated so that they are 'factory fodder' , just a shame there are so few factories these days

 

It is not right or fair to say 'just because I made it , everyone can' - we are individuals with differing circumstances

 

We know that intelligence is not genetic -

[tobyjugg2]

Toby

I am not for one minute saying that children should not be challenged just that things such as the structural inequalities should be addressed so that they each get the same chances.

 

I agree, but how can objecting to grammer schools, which give the fortunate ones (for whatever reason) the opportunities they can make use of ensure a child whos parents work and dont have the time, money or ability get something that the parents wont or cant provide.

 

The link shows (in my opinion) that grammer schools mean a broader political base rather than just an elite commonly from rich families (like Farage),

My personal experience shows that they also gave kids from very poor backgrounds a headstart in achieving management positions that would otherwise have taken many years longer - if ever.

 

My experience as a parent is that the current schooling system which has minimum targets to be met (and minimum being the operative word) fails all the kids - and especially gifted and hard working ones.

If you doubt that, just ask any parent whos child has had their exceptional efforts 'rewarded' with a year on 'free reading' while the teachers spent all their time trying to get unwilling and/or unable kids to a 'baseline which sets the bar for education back in the 1920s; - and that at junior school.

 

We are all different, let those who are academically gifted develop those gifts.

Some bloom later - ensure they have the opportunity to develop later with evening classes etc.

 

Aiming to get everyone to a minimum mediocre level as a paramount goal targets mediocrity at best and fails everyone.

[fletch70]

I agree, but how can objecting to grammer schools, which give the fortunate ones (for whatever reason) the opportunities they can make use of ensure a child whos parents work and dont have the time, money or ability get something that the parents wont or cant provide.

 

The link shows (in my opinion) that grammer schools mean a broader political base rather than just an elite commonly from rich families (like Farage),

My personal experience shows that they also gave kids from very poor backgrounds a headstart in achieving management positions that would otherwise have taken many years longer - if ever.

 

My experience as a parent is that the current schooling system which has minimum targets to be met (and minimum being the operative word) fails all the kids - and especially gifted and hard working ones.

If you doubt that, just ask any parent whos child has had their exceptional efforts 'rewarded' with a year on 'free reading' while the teachers spent all their time trying to get unwilling and/or unable kids to a 'baseline which sets the bar for education back in the 1920s; - and that at junior school.

 

We are all different, let those who are academically gifted develop those gifts.

Some bloom later - ensure they have the opportunity to develop later with evening classes etc.

 

Aiming to get everyone to a minimum mediocre level as a paramount goal targets mediocrity at best and fails everyone.

 

I am not sure that I did specifically object to grammar schools but they are certainly different places from when i were a lad or indeed when Harold Wilson went to one. There are now so few that many of the entrants have had extra tuition to pass the 11+ , something that equally bright children from poor backgrounds can not afford. Then there is the prospect of junior schools from certain areas not encouraging applications for 11+ . Even once getting there , the issues of inequalities arise, I am lucky enough to have read some academic work on the subject although I am far from an expert.

Surely the goal should be that all children reach their potential, that they have the opportunity to achieve and get equal chances in life regardless of their origin

 

Much of the education debate seems now, to be built around either the ideas of individuality , i.e if you don't achieve it is your fault or the basics of addressing the inequalities . I could write pages on the subject but i won't. Maybe both areas need addressing- inequalities and motivation /encouragement

 

That opportunity should also be available to adult learners - so that they can, if they wish attend top universities later in life

 

The stats on school age inequalities make worrying reading

 

In order to try to bring this back to the topic, I believe that if we leave the EU in what is called a hard way, many Universities will struggle to continue as top flight research and teaching institutions. You may be amazed at the number of EU students that attend British Universities , either as full time students or as part of the Erasmus programme

 

Equally without EU funding we will not be able to attract and nature top flight EU research scientists

[tobyjugg2]

In order to try to bring this back to the topic, I believe that if we leave the EU in what is called a hard way, many Universities will struggle to continue as top flight research and teaching institutions. You may be amazed at the number of EU students that attend British Universities , either as full time students or as part of the Erasmus programme

 

Equally without EU funding we will not be able to attract and nature top flight EU research scientists

 

Now I fully agree with that, but the simple fact is that any options which do not deliver ALL of the following

 

* limit immigration (all immigration - not just EU - apparently few in the polls (or here from what I saw) understood the difference)

 

* VERY significantly if not entirely reduce the 'membership' amount paid to the EU (the £350M a week issue)

 

* Guarantee the preeminence of UK law

 

simply do not meet the quite clearly identified 3 main issues of the out voters.

- So should be considered as no more a valid an option than a fresh referendum or simply ignoring the referendum and remaining anyway

[fletch70]

This is the problem

people voted out ( as well as in) for different reasons so if an agreement achieved all three of the goals you set out above there will be many people who will say but I did not want a,b,c

 

As I may have said before

 

Some people I speak to say they voted out for mainly immigration and UK law although as you said, many do not understand the difference between EU and non EU immigration and also just what laws have been passed that are directly relevant to EU law- many will say the Human Rights Act but we know that is not direct EU law

 

As an aside, I walked yesterday from Digbeth Coach Station to New St station and passed at least two rather lacklustre buildings that claimed to be institutes of HE and FE . Now I have no reason to believe that they are not legitimate institutions that provide a service BUT maybe student visas could be limited to institutions that are registered to award degrees although even that is open to problems as i am sure the vast majority of these 'fringe' colleges actually do provide a good service, it is just a shame that the only ones we hear about are headlined in , shall we say, the more right leaning tabloids , as not legitimate .

 

I am not sure and would welcome others opinion but do people feel there is now a change in the rhetoric of the government

 

Examples may be

- we don't hear Brexit means Brexit

- The announcement that we may consider paying for access to the single market

- Many agreement will be in the best interests of the UK and its economy

 

It will be interesting few months, even more so if Italy votes down the constitutional changes tomorrow

 

What I really can see is the following

 

membership of the single market- where we have to pay for the privilege

Freedom of movement but , as allowed for in the treaty of Rome, settlement must be with a job - so you can come here if you have a job but not if you haven't . Of course that will cost us millions to police

[unclebulgaria67]

The government are sounding pretty desperate in their media briefings, talking about Judges not understanding how things work and that people who want to have a say on Brexit are just trying to stop it happening.

 

It seems to me that if you want to achieve best possible Brexit you have to have an open positive campaign getting the country behind the governments position. EU negotiators and all interested parties are not stupid, so will know what the various options are. The EU are not going to offer the UK a better deal being outside the EU, than the current deal as members. It will be a deal similar to Norway with paid market access and freedom of movement or it will be outside customs union ( borders closed to free movement) subject to WTO tariffs until a trade deal is properly negotiated like Canada which took 7 years.

 

If the government mucks it up causing an early election, it will be their own fault, but the country might reward their incompetence with a increased majority, because Labour are in a mess.

[tobyjugg2]

Adrew Marr show depressing in the politicians we have a choice from

 

UKIP - privatise the NHS - but we'll pretend thats not what we want and hope the dunb voters dont realise

 

Labour - waffling prat

 

Boris on War

Assad is wicked and should be overthrown by the rebels

but the Hooti rebels should be stopped from overthrowing the 'legitimate' Yemen government as chosen by the Saudis

and the UK is NOT actually the ones firing the UK missiles from UK Typhoons at Hospitals, weddings and funerals there, we are just advising the UK trained pilots and C&C on how to pick legitimate targets...

 

Boris on DD's 'pay the EU for limited access' and the £350M for the NHS

- 'What he (Boris) can say is that we will take control of the money we currently pay to the EU'

... Apparently by paying it to the EU for less

 

 

We really are screwed.

[tobyjugg2]

Well looks like May is well on the way to getting her rear kicked in court with such stupid stances as ' we should not be held back by old historic arguments

ie the basis and precedents that underpin our legal and governmental system

 

The people have voted leave I hear some cry!

 

Well yes they have in a minority of the voting populous even if it was a tiny majority of those who voted

BUT

what the people have NOT voted for is for a small part of the ruling class to pick and choose who will benefit from any secret and hidden negotiations at the cost of the UK taxpayer

 

examples

The car industry has already been given assurances

We already know that Camerons 're-negotiations' only benefited the City financiers with NOTHING but more cost and risk to the tax paying public

and there is NO reason whatsoever to think that May is any different - quite the opposite

 

Does anyone really want her to negotiate a deal which benefits the Car industry and the Financiers at EVERYONE elses cost?

.. and not be told about it until after its all done and dusted?

 

Not Me

[fletch70]

I wonder

If she loses the supreme court battle will she then call a general election based on In or Out - vote for us and we will get the best deal possible

 

I think that she is losing a lot of the impetus that was in the country

 

Oh well we will have to wait and see

 

I see the £ is recovering a little of what was lost against the $ and more of the euro, might just help to dampen inflationary pressures although I think it says more about those currencies than it really does about ours.

[unclebulgaria67]

I can see an early general election, because i can't see anything but problems ahead. There are too many people involved in getting any Brexit deal signed off by March 2019. We tend to focus on the UK, but there are 27 other EU countries that will have to agree to any UK deal and also the EU Parliament.

 

It may end up with a Brexit which is outside EU customs area and UK paying into the EU for access for some things such as Financial Services. But there will be a lot of people very unhappy with this and i am not sure a general election would resolve it. Many Tory MP's would probably vote against it.

[tobyjugg2]

I wonder

If she loses the supreme court battle will she then call a general election based on In or Out - vote for us and we will get the best deal possible

 

I think that she is losing a lot of the impetus that was in the country

 

Oh well we will have to wait and see

The problem is the massive splits across the country.

Its quite possible that the Tories would win a general election, but I think the likelyhood that there would be a Libdem upsurge along with the risk of a major UKip upsurge is too great a risk for them.

They are quite happy with a useless labour as the opposition rather than revitalised LibDem (clear remain agenda) and UKIP (clear hard Brexit agenda) - both being far more 'open' in their EU agendas than the Tories or |Labour

I would be glad to go to the country for a clear mandate were it me

- but there are clearly other agendas here than the 'peoples voice' constantly touted by all and sundry. And anyway, the peoples voice is actually shouting so many different things we could turn the UK back into 2 or 3 dozen pre-Roman kingdoms.

 

 

I see the £ is recovering a little of what was lost against the $ and more of the euro, might just help to dampen inflationary pressures although I think it says more about those currencies than it really does about ours.

So do I.

The pound has approached its limit until article 50 is triggered as I confidently reported higher in the thread. The Eu is now under increased risk which is showing as pressure on the euro, although not as much as the reports on the Italian referendum would have you think.

It seems clear to me the Italian public mainly didn't want more power concentrated in the hands of an elite few - as May is also finding.

 

 

I can see an early general election, because i can't see anything but problems ahead. There are too many people involved in getting any Brexit deal signed off by March 2019. We tend to focus on the UK, but there are 27 other EU countries that will have to agree to any UK deal and also the EU Parliament.

The issue seems clear to me: May doesn't want to simply exit - which is all there really is any sort of mandate for

So they are what they intend to do - fail everyone Remainers and Brexiters

 

 

It may end up with a Brexit which is outside EU customs area and UK paying into the EU for access for some things such as Financial Services.

 

But there will be a lot of people very unhappy with this and i am not sure a general election would resolve it. Many Tory MP's would probably vote against it.

Absolutely - as I said - the UK taxpayers paying for international fimanciers protected access to the EU markets, while the financiers make millions in pay and bonuses, their companies make Billions in profit and neither they or their companies pay damn all tax in the UK.

Truly diabolical.

[tobyjugg2]

and while we are waiting for the by-election results and all hoping for a Christmas surprise ...

 

 

"Two former cabinet ministers, John Whittingdale and Michael Gove, suggested to the CBI business group on Wednesday that companies should start drawing up a list of regulations they want to see abolished or reformed."

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/07/tory-mps-suggest-firms-draw-up-list-for-bonfire-of-eu-laws-after-brexit

 

"Gove highlighted a government-commissioned report by Marc Bolland, the former chief executive of Marks & Spencer, which ran through a list of EU employment protections it would like to see withdrawn or changed

including

pregnant worker proposals,

the agency workers directive,

the acquired rights directive

and the working time directive.

 

I'm sure its just tittle tattle reporting that a certain BHM abuser mumbled something about:

'Although some careful wording in the repeal to prevent these damned EU workers rights being brought into UK law is a good step forward, how about repealing those damn pension protection laws that cost me so much to bypass' let alone putting the knighthood I bought at risk.

 

 

 

 

Andy Burnham actually making some sense on migration

 

"I want to set out two principal reasons why there is a legitimate left-wing case for reform. First, in an era of increasing globalisation, free movement has arguably been providing greater benefit to large companies than it has to the most deprived communities.

There is nothing socialist about a system of open borders that allows multinationals to treat people as commodities and to move them around Europe to drive down labour costs and create a race to the bottom."

 

 

but then does seems to blow it afterwards (depending on the interpretation):

"Secondly, there is a strong case for saying that the immigration system that has developed over time in this country is inherently discriminatory—it does not treat all migrants equally. Instead, it accords a preferential status to migrants from our nearest neighbours in the context of a policy that seeks to cap numbers. That, therefore, discriminates against those non-EU migrants who seek to come here and who have families here."

[tobyjugg2]

Toby

it is a fact that in school age children there can be a 25% development differential between the most privileged and the most deprived however in parts of London this has almost been eradicated due to a lot of time and effort being put into it.

 

I really do wonder how much of that differential has been eroded because of failing the more able rather than improving the lot of the less able.

Quite a lot it seems to me.

 

 

 

 

 

Back to the by-elections

and Labour well on course for wipe out at next general election

 

"Vernon Coaker, the former shadow cabinet minister and MP for Gedling, who helped run Labour’s campaign in Sleaford and North Hykeham, said the party’s message on the EU was not getting through to voters yet."

- Clueless (at best) twonk - the Labour 'message' is being received load and clear.

 

 

Sleaford and North Hykeham byelection results

 

 

Caroline Johnson (Cons) 17,570 (53.51%, -2.68%)

Victoria Ayling (Ukip) 4,426 (13.48%, -2.21%)

Ross Pepper (Lib Dem) 3,606 (10.98%, +5.33%)

Jim Clarke (Lab) 3,363 (10.24%, -7.02%)

Marianne Overton (Lincs Ind) 2,892 (8.81%, +3.59%)

Sarah Stock (Ind) 462 (1.41%)

The Iconic Arty-Pole (Loony) 200 (0.61%)

Paul Coyne (ND) 186 (0.57%)

Mark Suffield (ND) 74 (0.23%)

David Bishop (BP Elvis) 55 (0.17%)

 

Comfortable win for the Tories though in one of the safest Tory areas there is. A Tory loss, or even a close call would have been a MAJOR upset, far more than Richmond.

- all on a very poor turnout (half) compared to last year though ...

[obiter dictum]

No biggie. Tory stronghold. Labour were never going to win. And their majority was slashed by 7000 with a poor turnout.

 

Electorate 88,712; Turnout 32,834 (37.01%, -33.23%)

[WarrenBuffet]

I agree obiter dictum but the big story is the runner-up.

[unclebulgaria67]

Good article which sums up my view

 

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/dec/11/brexit-will-suit-europe-wont-suit-us-fast-show

 

It is an interesting statistic that by the time of any Brexit, that about 2 million older voters will have died and be replaced by 2 million teenage voters. Given that teenagers are apparently more pro EU than older voters, this could mean there is a pro EU majority within the next few years. Now you realise why the government don't want a second referendum on Brexit.

[fletch70]

I received a certain amount of abuse on a Facebook page when I posted that there was a correlation between achieving a degree and voting remain. Equally there was a correlation between age and voting to leave i.e older people were more likely to vote leave. When you consider that almost 50% of school leavers now go onto HE at some point you can see the intercorrelation. Of course it does not mean that only clever people voted remain and less intelligent voted leave- for older people , the concept of getting a degree was alien , even to many of the most advantaged

https://electionsetc.com/category/eu-referendum/

[tobyjugg2]

I think we should follow Nigel Farages lead:

 

The Ukip leader speaks to the Mirror’s Associate Editor Kevin Maguire and warns that a '52-48 result would be unfinished business'

 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-wants-second-referendum-7985017

 

 

Nigel Farage: Narrow Remain win may lead to second referendum

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36306681

 

 

Remember that time Nigel Farage said 52-48 votes should lead to second referendum?

 

http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/24/remember-that-time-nigel-farage-said-52-48-votes-should-lead-to-second-referendum-5963900/

 

 

Farage warns PM over ‘unfinished business’ if xxxxxx narrowly wins ‘unfair’ EU referendum

 

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/671003/second-EU-referendum-Nigel-Farage-David-Cameron-unfinished-business-Brexit

[fletch70]

I am afraid I must hang my head in shame after reading the Daily Fail yesterday - my only excuse is that I didn't buy it.

 

I found the language used to be extremely emotive that gave the impression that the whole world wanted to get into the UK and that all immigrants (particularly those currently in France) are wild and dangerous. It also claimed that all 'child' refugees were mid 20's .

 

Another article was saying that the UK economy was booming- no mention of all the official statistics that say this is only temporary

 

To be honest I don't think this paper would have been out of place in 1920's Germany

 

I did have one almost cheering bit of news where a leave voter basically admitted she felt lied to - that the claims made by Boris and Farage, but Boris in particular seemed very plausible at the time but she now is reading that many of them were lies, the question asked was, why didn't the remain camp destroy those arguments at the time.

 

I suppose it shows just how liberal I am , I do still speak to people who voted leave , in fact I am on very good terms with some of them - and a very few are on my xmas card list

[tobyjugg2]

I am afraid I must hang my head in shame after reading the Daily Fail yesterday - my only excuse is that I didn't buy it.

 

Then for mail fans

 

But he (Farage) said David Cameron needs to win by two thirds to end the issue

Mr Farage said unless David Cameron's Remain campaign wins by a two thirds margin, there would be 'unfinished business'.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3594364/Nigel-Farage-warns-demand-SECOND-referendum-EU-Leave-campaign-loses-narrow-margin.html

 

I can agree with the sentiment that it should be a 2/3rds margin to generate change, and that very small margins are certainly no mandate for change.

[MrHat]

I voted leave but only because I based my decision entirely on a bus slogan and chose to misinterpret that slogan too, regarding the 350m to the NHS every week.

 

Therefore ALL leave voters were mislead. I demand another referendum.

 

Also, we should only allow newspapers that share our opinions to be published. To promote diversity.

[fletch70]

Mrhat

If you did, more food you. By the way freedom of extensions is only a qualified right and imo the Daily wail is teaching a very fine line between reporting news and inciting anti islamic violence.

Pardon me for expecting an option

 

As for the leave voter, did i say it applied to all leave voters? No, but i think we all know it applied to some,how many who knows.

Edited December 13, 2016 by Andyorch
Removed reference to Holocaust