Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[Fox Ulike]

10 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

Of course he did.  He is either incredibly dim or he deliberately and knowingly laid a wreath. 

 

Outrageous lies and bullying  Perhaps he should stop lying himself then people might be able to take him seriously.

 

Despite his quickly lost original tag line 'good honest politics' his has become of the least trustworthy people in British politics.

 

This is why the man and the party are so dangerous, they will lie and stop at nothing to get into power and to keep it, this is why they are as frightening as the regimes in places like Venezuela. 

Oh well, I don’t really see the point of a ‘Did he/didn’t he’ conversation…

 

You believe it. Or, more likely, you’ve deluded yourself into believing that you believe it because it suits your existing political prejudices. But I didn’t write my post specifically to talk about what you believe.

 

My point is that not many people actually believe it.  If they did, there would be an uproar. It’s just much more likely that he was in the cemetary doing what he said he was doing.

 

And those who do believe it (eg YOU!) wouldn’t vote for him anyway.  I said this in my previous post.

 

When you compare him to regimes in Venezuela, most people think you’re being completely OTT.

 

Corbyn worries me as he seems to be being sleep-walked into power without actually doing anything positive.  

[Fox Ulike]

6 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

 

Oh it's alright people. The man that wants to be PM doesn't know what he's actually doing when he attends these things and is gullible enough to go along with whatever. It's alright that he doesn't mean to be a ****, he's just too stupid to be anything else. PM material.

Absolutely. I couldn't agree more. The problem is that this isn't what he's being accused of!!

 

If this story was actually reported like this it would probably be more accurate, and, ironically, would do Corbyn more damage.

 

He constantly emerges from these things with more credit rather than less. THIS IS WHAT WORRIES ME!!

[Voll Blau]

1 hour ago, Fox Ulike said:

Absolutely. I couldn't agree more. The problem is that this isn't what he's being accused of!!

 

If this story was actually reported like this it would probably be more accurate, and, ironically, would do Corbyn more damage.

 

He constantly emerges from these things with more credit rather than less. THIS IS WHAT WORRIES ME!!

Quite. Right-wing media are sort of reaping what they sow for going in so hard on the bloke for literally anything early doors in his leadership ("snubbing" tickets to the rugby when he was at a constituency meeting and being accused of "dishonouring" some official Remembrance event when he was actually talking to veterans are the two that spring to mind).

 

Sadly that breeds a herd/siege mentality among his hardcore support, and a certain apathy among those who are neither here-nor-there with him but broadly support his policies because they can't be bothered to decipher what's genuine criticism from what's bollocks purely designed to rile up Express/Mail/Sun readership etc. Obviously that's not right by any stretch of the imagination, but you can see how it's happened.

 

If certain journalists and editors had picked their battles more wisely over the past three years he'd have been long gone by now, I reckon.

[Strokes]

5 minutes ago, Voll Blau said:

Quite. Right-wing media are sort of reaping what they sow for going in so hard on the bloke for literally anything early doors in his leadership ("snubbing" tickets to the rugby when he was at a constituency meeting and being accused of "dishonouring" some official Remembrance event when he was actually talking to veterans are the two that spring to mind).

 

Sadly that breeds a herd/siege mentality among his hardcore support, and a certain apathy among those who are neither here-nor-there with him but broadly support his policies because they can't be bothered to decipher what's genuine criticism from what's bollocks purely designed to rile up Express/Mail/Sun readership etc. Obviously that's not right by any stretch of the imagination, but you can see how it's happened.

 

If certain journalists and editors had picked their battles more wisely over the past three years he'd have been long gone by now, I reckon.

Yeah fair cop,

Its very similar to the left wing anti brexit press.

I can’t see how Corbyn could survive this in a sane world but we aren’t in one now are we?

[Guest MattP]

42 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

I can easily believe this. The right-wing propaganda is enabling Corbyn in the same way as the left-wing media enabled Trump in 2016. He’s a public punchbag, and most people are sympathetic to him now.

 

No-one really believes that he deliberately and knowingly put a wreath on the grave of one of the Munich terrorists!  The people who do pretend to believe this would never vote for Corbyn anyway, so he’s absolutely nothing to lose. The rest of the electorate are drawn to him as the dignified old man, who is the victim of outrageous lies and bullying.

 

It’s quite frightening really. Corbyn never makes the news for anything positive that he’s done or said. He’s only ever in the news as a Russian Spy, Terrorist sympathiser, Jew hater, Traitor, supporter of Serbian genocides etc etc etc.

 

If they want to stop Corbyn, they need to stop lieing about him!!

You were saying @Carl the Llama

 

Anyway, this post -

 

First line - Not true, only 22% in the last Yougov poll said he would make the best PM, people appear to be voting for Labour in spite of him.

Second line - Laughable, he wrote an article about it in the Morning Star where he was quite explicit about why he was there and what he laid the wreath for, his story only changed when the mainstream media picked it up as he had become Labour leader, he knew what he was doing, he would't have written about it had he not.

 

Third line - That goes for all high level politicians, yoy never see any of them in the news for something good, people don't buy papers for that.

 

Fourth line - Not sure what they are supposed to do, not report that he changed his story three times? Seriously not report on his press office telling blatent untruths to the public? Let's be clear, on this story, the press have not lied about him, all the lying has came from Corbyn himself and he deserves everything he gets on this particular story.

[Strokes]

Corbyn is either very silly or absolutely stupid. 

[Fox Ulike]

22 minutes ago, MattP said:

You were saying @Carl the Llama

 

Anyway, this post -

 

First line - Not true, only 22% in the last Yougov poll said he would make the best PM, people appear to be voting for Labour in spite of him.

Second line - Laughable, he wrote an article about it in the Morning Star where he was quite explicit about why he was there and what he laid the wreath for, his story only changed when the mainstream media picked it up as he had become Labour leader, he knew what he was doing, he would't have written about it had he not.

 

Third line - That goes for all high level politicians, yoy never see any of them in the news for something good, people don't buy papers for that.

 

Fourth line - Not sure what they are supposed to do, not report that he changed his story three times? Seriously not report on his press office telling blatent untruths to the public? Let's be clear, on this story, the press have not lied about him, all the lying has came from Corbyn himself and he deserves everything he gets on this particular story.

 

and talking of right-wing propaganda machines. Hello Matt.

 

Well good. If he was 'explicit' and the untruths are 'blatent', then you should have had no trouble in quoting them in your post... Epic Fail.

 

So now we arrive at the point where I have asked you to quote the primary sources that inform your opinion, and you go quiet and duck your nose back into the Daily Mail...

 

Every single time.

[Strokes]

16 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

 

and talking of right-wing propaganda machines. Hello Matt.

 

Well good. If he was 'explicit' and the untruths are 'blatent', then you should have had no trouble in quoting them in your post... Epic Fail.

 

So now we arrive at the point where I have asked you to quote the primary sources that inform your opinion, and you go quiet and duck your nose back into the Daily Mail...

 

Every single time.

The Morning Star, it says in his post. 

[Fox Ulike]

1 minute ago, Strokes said:

The Morning Star, it says in his post. 

Oh it says does it?

 

:p

 

 

[Strokes]

Just now, Fox Ulike said:

Oh it says does it?

 

:p

 

 

Christ, you’re on one today seamus.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

Old Corbyn has been posted about 5 times saying different things on the last few pages, all of them contradictory. The man is an absolute shambles. How ayone can think he is fit to run a country is beyond me. 

 

Apparently you cant call him anything bad due to it being 'abusive' so I wont go further but my thoughts on the man are well known.

[Buce]

2 hours ago, leicsmac said:

This was a poll of Labour voters (and Conservative and LibDem) across a variety of demographics taken just a couple of weeks ago. I know it was posted here but I can't seem to find the thing.

 

 

 

This latest analysis is probably more relevant - I can't think why it's not already been posted...

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/11/more-than-100-pro-leave-constituencies-switch-to-remain

 

More than 100 seats that backed Brexit now want to remain in EU

Major new analysis shows most constituencies now have majority who want to Remain

 

More than 100 Westminster constituencies that voted to leave the EU have now switched their support to Remain, according to a stark new analysis seen by the Observer.

 

In findings that could have a significant impact on the parliamentary battle of Brexit later this year, the study concludes that most seats in Britain now contain a majority of voters who want to stay in the EU.

The analysis, one of the most comprehensive assessments of Brexit sentiment since the referendum, suggests the shift has been driven by doubts among Labour voters who backed Leave.

As a result, the trend is starkest in the north of England and Wales – Labour heartlands in which Brexit sentiment appears to be changing. The development will heap further pressure on Jeremy Corbyn to soften the party’s opposition to reconsidering Britain’s EU departure.

Researchers at the Focaldata consumer analytics company compiled the breakdown by modelling two YouGov polls of more than 15,000 people in total, conducted before and after Theresa May published her proposed Brexit deal on 6 July.

 

t combined the polling with detailed census information and data from the Office for National Statistics.

 

The 632 seats in England, Scotland and Wales were examined for the study. It found that 112 had switched from Leave to Remain. The new analysis suggests there are now 341 seats with majority Remain support, up from 229 seats at the referendum.

One seat has switched support in Scotland and 97 have switched in England, while 14 of the 40 seats in Wales have changed from Leave to Remain. Overall, the model puts Remain on 53% support, with 47% backing Leave.

It suggests that there is now a majority for Remain in Scotland and Wales – meaning greater pressure on the union following the UK’s departure. Young voters and those from ethnic minorities have also driven the switch to Remain.

It comes with the prime minister still having to negotiate Commons votes over Brexit later this year and also the prospect of a parliamentary vote over the final Brexit deal. Plans are already being drawn up by May’s opponents to try to force a new referendum or election.

On Saturday Liberal Democrat leader Sir Vince Cable said those opponents had to work together to bring about a chance for people to have another say. “We have to work across party frontiers,” he said, speaking in Bristol at the first of a series of regional rallies in a planned summer of action by the People’s Vote campaign.

Data scientists compiling the study used a technique known as multi-level regression and post-stratification, similar to that used by YouGov in its pre-election model, which proved far more accurate than conventional opinion polls. However, the polling sample used by YouGov for its election model was much bigger, covering some 50,000 people.

Among the constituencies to switch from Leave to Remain is that of Boris Johnson, the former foreign secretary and face of the Leave campaign. Support for Remain in his Uxbridge and South Ruislip constituency has risen from 43.6% to 51.4%, according to the new model.

Surrey Heath, the constituency of the other Leave figurehead, Michael Gove, also emerged as having a pro-Remain majority. Support for Remain increased from 48% in 2016 to 50.2%. There was also a 12.8-point swing to Remain in shadow chancellor John McDonnell’s seat of Hayes and Harlington.

 

The seats of three pro-Leave Labour MPs switched to Remain. Birkenhead, Frank Field’s constituency, now has a 58.4% majority in favour of Remain. Graham Stringer’s Blackley and Broughton constituency now has a 59% in favour of Remain. Kelvin Hopkins’s Luton North seat now has 53.1% backing Remain.

The doubts among Labour Leave voters have been accompanied by a less dramatic hardening of Brexit support among Tory voters. While no constituencies saw a switch from Remain to Leave, support for Brexit went up in some constituencies.

Of the seats that have switched to Remain since the referendum, some of the most dramatic swings have taken place in Liverpool Walton, where support for Remain has risen from 46.2% to 60.5%, Knowsley on Merseyside, where Remain has increased from 47.6% to 61%, and Swansea East, where Remain has risen from 37.9% to 50.7%.

Remain campaigners said that the findings should give more MPs the confidence to back a Brexit rethink. However, some pro-Remain MPs are still doubtful that there has been a significant shift and think a second vote would be a huge risk.

Eloise Todd, the chief executive of Best for Britain, said: “This groundbreaking research shows that Brexit is still not inevitable. People across the UK have witnessed the last two years of uncertainty with dismay and are thinking differently – 112 constituencies have switched to majorities that back staying in our current bespoke deal with the EU.

“The sands of public opinion are shifting and politicians risk falling behind. Our research shows that the deal must be put to the people. Westminster should legislate for a people’s vote on the Brexit terms, giving the public the option to stay and build our future on our current deal with the EU.”

Nick Lowles, head of Hope not Hate, said: “Our data shows a clear shift in public opinion against Brexit and people’s growing anxiety over how leaving the EU will affect themselves and their families. This cannot be ignored.

“The rate of change appears to be quickening as the realities of what Brexit would mean become more apparent and the fears of a no-deal Brexit grow, especially for Labour Leave voters who initially believed that leaving the EU would improve their economic prospects. Brexit is failing these voters and the country as a whole. Politicians need to understand that public opinion has changed.”

[breadandcheese]

24 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

 

and talking of right-wing propaganda machines. Hello Matt.

 

Well good. If he was 'explicit' and the untruths are 'blatent', then you should have had no trouble in quoting them in your post... Epic Fail.

 

So now we arrive at the point where I have asked you to quote the primary sources that inform your opinion, and you go quiet and duck your nose back into the Daily Mail...

 

Every single time.

Matt's quoted in previous posts from Corbyn's own article in the Morning Star from 2014. Presumably you are trolling?

[Buce]

‘They don’t know what they’re doing’: Leave-voting Swansea turns on Brexit

New data suggests voters in the city, an anti-EU bastion in 2016, now back Remain. We ask why

 

John takes a brief break from sweeping the polished floors in Swansea’s celebrated indoor market to ponder his momentous decision to vote Leave in the EU referendum.

 

“If I had the chance, I’d change my vote,” he says. “There has been talk of a lot of job losses and I’m not happy with that. It’s just a mess. I don’t think they know what they are doing.”

He is not the only Welsh voter switching sides amid dire warnings of economic turmoil, food shortages and threats to jobs if Britain leaves the European Union without a deal next March. A new constituency-by-constituency model by data scientists at Focaldata, which uses new YouGov polling, has found that 14 Welsh constituencies swung from Leave to Remain this year, putting Wales firmly in the pro-EU camp.

One of the biggest shifts was in Swansea, a solidly Labour city which saw a near-13% swing to Remain in its deprived east. This would give EU supporters 51% in the Swansea East constituency, which voted 62% for Brexit in 2016, and deliver a Remain vote of 56% across both the city’s constituencies.

In a cafe near the market, Geraint Davies, the passionately pro-EU Labour MP for Swansea West, puts the dramatic swing down to voters’ frustrations with the tortuous negotiations, and a growing realisation that the tempting promises about inward investment and jobs will come to little in the end.

“People voted to leave the EU on the promise of more money for the NHS from the membership fee, access to markets and more trading opportunities, and taking back control of our borders,” he says. “People are now realising that a lot of those promises won’t be delivered.”

Davies also points to a growing feeling that Swansea is losing out rather than benefiting from Brexit. Recent plans for a £1.3bn tidal lagoon in Swansea Bay to generate renewable power and proposals to electrify the rail line between Cardiff and Swansea have both been dropped by the government.

 

“The overall amount of capital expenditure is being constrained because we have to pay a €40bn divorce bill for leaving the EU. People are beginning to see that some of the big promises about investment are evaporating, and that is feeding into this feeling that we are being left out in the cold again,” he says.

 

he city’s Brexit voters are increasing bewildered and disillusioned. Rachel Jones, who has been selling sweets from the family stall in the market for seven years, is so fed up with the uncertainty she says she wouldn’t bother to vote if she got the chance again. “I think it was a wasted vote, 110%. If I knew that it was going to be like this, I probably wouldn’t have turned up to vote,” she says over the piped pop music echoing around the cavernous market hall. “You understand it is going to take time, but it doesn’t seem to be going anywhere.”

She says she wanted to register a protest vote by putting her cross in the Leave box: “Swansea is having a really hard time at the moment. If you walk around you just see boarded-up businesses and charity shops.” But she says that now uncertainty around Brexit risks the very future of the market. “People are frightened to spend money. Things have gone up in price but wages haven’t gone up. None of us knows what is going to happen.”

Butcher Peter Mills, who voted Leave, says many people would vote differently given another chance. “I think the country would vote Remain now. Everybody is fed up – it’s gone on and on,” he says from behind his meat chiller. “I know a lot of money is coming from the EU, but whether we will have the money from Whitehall when we go out is another thing.”

One of his customers, Mal Guard, who also voted Leave, says he wouldn’t vote again. “I probably wouldn’t bother because the government doesn’t listen to Joe Bloggs in the street. They listen to their own cronies and that’s it,” he says.

Some of the clues as to why the Labour-voting city opted Leave in such large numbers can be found at Eastside food bank in the Mount Zion Baptist Church on Swansea’s post-industrial eastern fringe. Demand has grown by about 40% a year since the food bank was established in 2014. And between May 2017 and May 2018 the number of people referred to the charity by frontline professionals such as health visitors and social workers surged by about 70%.

 

Chris Lewis, the Swansea-born and bred Baptist minister who runs the food bank, says the city has never fully recovered from the decline of heavy industry in the 20th century. “It is a significantly deprived area. Regeneration hasn’t really replaced the industrial base that employed people in this area,” he says as a steady stream of people come in to pick up emergency food parcels.

Lewis, who voted Remain, says many Leave voters were angry about the state of their community, which had been further impoverished by benefit cuts and austerity. “Some of it was a protest vote. They felt alienated by sort of every elitist, privileged government,” he says. “There was a degree of racism too – some people felt threatened by immigration.”

But he believes Leavers are now switching sides as the reality of a Tory Brexit dawns on them. “Some of the people who voted as a protest have flipped. They think these posh idiots are leading us to disaster in a charge of the light brigade.”

On the main shopping street in the east of Swansea, there is still considerable support for Brexit. Michelle Whitton, who works in an insurance call centre, says it is not going well but she would still vote the same way. “I’m glad I voted Leave, but whether we are going to get what we wanted I don’t know,” she says.

But other Leave voters would choose differently now. Kaywan Ahmad, who is cutting a boy’s hair in a barber’s shop in Woodfield Street, says he feels as if he was tricked. “I read on Facebook that a vote for Leave was good for the NHS. But afterwards I realised it’s bad for the NHS,” he says. “I’d vote to stay if there was another vote.”

Brexit has already hit his business. “I had about 12 Polish customers who used to work in Swansea. They would come every two weeks, but now they’ve gone back home,” he says.

[Guest MattP]

29 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

AWell good. If he was 'explicit' and the untruths are 'blatent', then you should have had no trouble in quoting them in your post... Epic Fail.

 

So now we arrive at the point where I have asked you to quote the primary sources that inform your opinion, and you go quiet and duck your nose back into the Daily Mail...

The sources are all over the place, he wrote the article himself in the Morning Star as I said.

 

http://time.com/5365475/jeremy-corbyn-munich-massacre/

 

Quote

Corbyn’s own writings from soon after the visit. “Wreaths were laid at the graves of those who died on that day and on the graves of others killed by Mossad agents in Paris in 1991,” he wrote in the Morning Star socialist newspaper.

He meant 1992 obviously, as that's when it happened.

 

He then trotted out this as an excuse, which is almost comical given the difference between the years, the towns and difference between the air strikes and Mossad agents.

 

Quote

Corbyn later claimed that the ceremony, held in 2014, was to commemorate those who died in an Israeli air strike on the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) headquarters in Tunis in 1985.

Now lets's get onto the actual wreath laying. This piece has been written an Irish lawyer,

 

 

 

https://medium.com/@anyabike/corbyns-open-secret-22a70fa03254

 

 

 

As you can see, the monument he is at on that is clearly nothing like the one he is claiming. More lies.

Edited 14 August 2018 by MattP

[Guest MattP]

No idea how that has happened at the bottom, anyway, the lies on which grave he was at exposed.

https://medium.com/@anyabike/corbyns-open-secret-22a70fa03254

[Fox Ulike]

5 minutes ago, MattP said:

 

 

He meant 1992 obviously, as that's when it happened.

 

As you can see, the monument he is at on that is clearly nothing like the one he is claiming. More lies.

 

 

Obviously. Soo it's "explicit" as long as you can assume that he meant something other than what he actually said?

 

 

 

I must of missed the bit in the Morning Star where Corbyn describes the monument.

 

 

[Guest MattP]

2 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

Obviously. Soo it's "explicit" as long as you can assume that he meant something other than what he actually said?

 

 

 

I must of missed the bit in the Morning Star where Corbyn describes the monument.

What? He's been denying all week he was at that monument. Have you even read anything about this? If this just you trolling now I really can't be bothered.

Maybe you are right, maybe he got confused between the different events, the different people, the different countries, the different incidents, then accidently remembered it all for his Morning Star article a few weeks after apart from the year and then just forgot about it all again until he was questioned years later when he decided the visit had been for an entirely different reason, if you want to feel better believing that then it's a free country. It would be more believable though if you just claimed he was on holiday in Tunusia, stumbled across the grave by accident and then got terribly unlucky as a gust of wind blew the wreath into his hands as someone took a picture.

Surely you realise how ridiculous you look defending this to anyone who has actually done any research whatsoever into what has happened?

[Fox Ulike]

3 minutes ago, MattP said:

What? He's been denying all week he was at that monument. Have you even read anything about this? If this just you trolling now I really can't be bothered.

Maybe you are right, maybe he got confused between the different events, the different people, the different countries, the different incidents, then accidently remembered it all for his Morning Star article a few weeks after apart from the year and then just forgot about it all again until he was questioned years later when he decided the visit had been for an entirely different reason, if you want to feel better believing that then it's a free country. It would be more believable though if you just claimed he was on holiday in Tunusia, stumbled across the grave by accident and then got terribly unlucky as a gust of wind blew the wreath into his hands as someone took a picture.

Surely you realise how ridiculous you look defending this to anyone who has actually done any research whatsoever into what has happened?

You said it was "explicit", you said the lies were "blatant". If that were true then I wouldn't need to do any "research" would I??

 

Honestly. I really don’t understand why you come on here to make to just repeat Daily Mail headlines that  just crumble the first time somebody questions them. 

 

I mean, No, I haven’t done any research, and usually that would mean you have the whip hand, but you’ve still ended up on the wrong side of this one somehow!!

 

As I said at the start, most people don’t believe this story. And your convoluted and confusing explanation (“He meant 1992”!!) explains why.

[Guest MattP]

1 minute ago, Fox Ulike said:

You said it was "explicit", you said the lies were "blatant". If that were true then I wouldn't need to do any "research" would I??

 

Honestly. I really don’t understand why you come on here to make to just repeat Daily Mail headlines that  just crumble the first time somebody questions them. 

 

I mean, No, I haven’t done any research, and usually that would mean you have the whip hand, but you’ve still ended up on the wrong side of this one somehow!!

 

As I said at the start, most people don’t believe this story. And your convoluted and confusing explanation (“He meant 1992”!!) explains why.

 

Now I know for sure at least.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

Bizarre. The Corbynista Loyalty knows no bounds. The man is an imbecil and should resign so his party can actually set some serious agenda. 

[Guest MattP]

1 minute ago, Foxin_mad said:

Bizarre. The Corbynista Loyalty knows no bounds. The man is an imbecil and should resign so his party can actually set some serious agenda. 

I always try to imagine it in in reverse, think Boris going onto television next year claiming with a straight face that he didn't say that the women in the veil looked like a postbox, but he said it was nuns and how they looked like Guinness.Then after the press report it with the Postbox quote, a load of his supporters screaming at them, calling it a left-wing smear and claiming he's been misunderstood.

Just wouldn't happen surely. Corbyn, Trump and their supporters have taken this to a totally new level.

[leicsmac]

6 minutes ago, MattP said:

I always try to imagine it in in reverse, think Boris going onto television next year claiming with a straight face that he didn't say that the women in the veil looked like a postbox, but he said it was nuns and how they looked like Guinness.Then after the press report it with the Postbox quote, a load of his supporters screaming at them, calling it a left-wing smear and claiming he's been misunderstood.

Just wouldn't happen surely. Corbyn, Trump and their supporters have taken this to a totally new level.

TBF most of those supporting Boris don't seem to care about what he's said or think he's right in his attitude anyway so I think there's a little difference in the way the situations have been handled - embrace the attitude rather than deflect from it.

 

That being said, I would definitely like to see some clarification regarding the position of Labour as a whole on Brexit; if they do win next time around, it's their ball.

 

NB. I can see where you're coming from wrt populism driving both Corbyn and Trump, but once again, only one of them is in a position to set policy and only one of them is in the most powerful position on the planet and can give the order to end civilisation itself if he so desired. Ideological belief has to be twinned with sufficient power to make it affect lots of people to be really worthy of note IMO.

[Buce]

British expats in EU launch Brexit legal challenge

Group says leave campaign broke electoral law, making 2016 vote unconstitutional

 

British expatriates have launched a fresh legal challenge against the 2016 referendum, arguing that the result has been invalidated by the Electoral Commission’s ruling on leave campaign spending.

The judicial review against the prime minister, Theresa May, has been submitted to the high court in London by the UK in EU Challenge group, which represents Britons living in France, Italy and Spain.

It argues that the recent Electoral Commission findings on BeLeave and Vote Leave – which resulted in two officials being reported to the police and punitive fines being imposed – means that the referendum to leave the EU was not a lawful, fair or free vote.

 

The government is resisting the action on the grounds that it is out of time and that a similar challenge has already been dismissed.

Nearly 80% of the estimated 1 to 2 million Britons living overseas in EU countries are of working age or younger. Many fear Brexit will threaten their livelihoods and make it far harder to travel across the continent.

The expatriate claimants are represented by Croft Solicitors, Patrick Green QC and Jessica Simor QC, all of whom acted for successful parties in the article 50 legal case at the supreme court. They maintain the legal claim is not out of time because the Electoral Commission only recently, in July, found that BeLeave spent £675,000, which should have been declared.

Rupert Croft, the managing director Croft Solicitors, said: “Our clients contend that the prime minister’s decision to trigger article 50 and start the Brexit process was based on a factual error, namely that the referendum truly represented the will of the people following a lawful, free and fair vote.

“They argue that the decision to trigger article 50 to withdraw from the EU was therefore not in accordance with the UK’s constitutional requirements. We look forward to having this important constitutional case considered by the court.”

Elinore Grayson, one of the four named claimants in the action, lives in France. She said: “It is fundamental that illegal intervention in British elections does not go unchecked. The principle of nullity when a decision was made on incorrect or misleading facts is a longstanding one and we wish to ensure that continues to apply at this crucial time.

“Many people across the EU, myself included, are reliant on bestowed rights to live their daily lives; there must be zero tolerance when it comes to cheating, misrepresentation and non-disclosure of information.”

Sue Wilson, who is chair of Bremain in Spain and another of the four claimants, said: “We hope to demonstrate that you cannot win by cheating. If there is another referendum, there must not be a repeat of the illegal activity witnessed last time around.

“We have not taken back control – we have been put in the hands of those that care more about their careers and political party than their country. The UK deserves better, we deserve better, and we will not stop fighting until we succeed.”

 

 

[urban.spaceman]

Why have I only just discovered this Owen Jones parody?!!