manxman1980

And those African countries don't have strong economies or much money so the young populations of those countries seek to move to Europe for a better life where they are met with racism and hatred.

@ricardo if vaccinations are "fraudulent" how do you explain what happened to; 1. Smallpox 2. Polio 3. Measles 4. Mumps 5. Rubella I will admit that some of these are making a comeback but there is a reason behind that. Can you work it out?

I think I mentioned this earlier, but in the context of Trump possibly becoming the next US President, when did the attitude in the US to the Russian's change sufficiently to elect someone who seemingly openly supports Russia and Putin? I was under the impression that the US citizens were still rather cautious about Russia both in terms of the perceived threat militarily but also politically.

I doubt it will. Arms manufacturers are close enough to Government to have a reliable outlook. Plus they will insist on having a guarantee of minimum orders.

I doubt we would see the return of "The Troubles". Northern Ireland was one part of the UK that was totally ignored by the Brexiteers and the fact that Sinn Fein now hold significant offices in the North and South point to the possibility of reunification.

Well, I suppose at least you admit it wasn't a far better question. What would have much better ? A clear answer on what leaving the EU actually meant. If that had been the case then you may have even got remainers on side.

I would not be surprised if those companies were already planning or have in place the ability to increase production. Under a real threat I am sure Governments would start to waive regulations for those companies. I am also sure that defence ministries will already be in discussion about how to meet future demands

Come on now... You know perfectly well that the military industrial complex will happily increase production to meet a growing market demand if necessary. They just won't be "ready" to do so just yet because they are ensuring that demand far outweighs demand in order to ensure a return for their shareholders. The larger items, such as surface ships etc, will probably be of limited use given the proximity of land bases, the effectiveness of naval drones as shown by Ukraine, and generally being vulnerable to advanced weaponry.

Some reports suggest Alonso would prefer Bayern over Liverpool.

Brexit was absolutely central to the 2019 election. The Conservative Party was struggling to make any progress in the House of Commons due to a very small majority after the 2017 election. In order to break the stalemate Johnson illegally prorogued parliament and had Jacob Rees-Mogg lie to the Queen. The Conservative manifesto at that election contained a guarantee from Johnson that, "We will get Brexit done in January" and also another sentence saying "If Jeremy Corbyn's Labour and Nicola Sturgeon's SNP team up and take control on December 13th, we will have two referendums on Brexit and Scotland in 2020." Both of these quotes are in the opening section of the manifesto and the Conservative Party built their campaign around it. They also formed an electoral pact with Reform UK (or whatever Farage's lot were known by at that point). That stance took away many pro-brexit labour supporters, who "lent" their vote to the Conservatives to "get Brexit Done" and resulted in the collapse of the red wall. I do not concede that it is a "bit off" to have an election pledge to ignore the majority wishes of the recent referendum because it provides choice and that is what democracy should be about. The SNP and Green Party also had remaining in the EU on their manifestos so you are being very selective in your criticism.

Yes!! You finally get the point! I made the point ages ago that that general election was won by the Conservative Party based on "Get Brexit Done". Labour at that time were still divided on the issue and had Corbyn as leader. The Lib Dems were probably the largest party to stand on a "remain" ticket but realistically they had not recovered from the coalition government with the Conservatives. Those who wanted to "remain/rejoin" did not have any party to reliably back. Those on the leave side clearly did.

I can see why they did it. The Lib Dems were hoping that they Alternative Vote referendum would go their way and end FPTP giving them much more of a chance to be at the table. They probably kept in check some of the worst Tory austerity, however, as you point out they rightly compromised too many of their core values. They certainly paid the price at the following general election and much of what we see today had its roots in that coalition Government.

The point I am making is that dragging up an article from several years ago about their manifesto or leaders position then is irrelevant to this discussion. The same goes for the 1997 Tory manifesto. You also argued that Swinson would have been acting undemocratically if the Lib Dems had been able to form a Government. My position is that had they won an election on that manifesto then they would have a mandate to reverse brexit.

Because it, like the Lib Dem one, never had the chance to come into effect as the Conservative Party lost the election.

BUT not if the Country elected a party to Government that said it would call the whole thing off!! That would have been the people saying, "Yea, that referendum? We kinda cocked that up. Can we just stay in the EU".

@The Voice of Reason and @woolley if we are dragging up pointless manifestos from the last this is a link to the Conservative one in 1997. http://www.conservativemanifesto.com/1997/1997-conservative-manifesto.shtml Interesting reference to Britain being the sick man of Europe. The vision for 2020 is interesting as well. Tariff free global trade! Also remarkable of how much of that manifesto could apply to the Conservative party of today. Its almost as if they haven't achieved anything after 14 years in Government!

Once again... if the Lib Dems had won enough of a majority at the election, with that pledge as part of their manifesto, then they would have obtained a mandate from the UK voters to do just that. A non-binding referendum held before they came to power would be irrelevant. But Jo Swinson and the Lid Dems didn't win the election and therefore couldn't take the UK back into the EU. The miners strikes actually happened and of course they will resonate from those who witnessed them. Do you see how the two things are different?

It did. Not sure why @The Voice of Reason dragged that article up. So far no explanation as to why it is relevant years later...

And how will UK business do that without a trade deal? The US is going to be an incredibly difficult market for a UK business to crack. I am sure you or The Voice will point to the service sector. Well, how much of that is actually UK business, and how much is US firms operating in the UK? Outside of the EU, the UK needs a trade deal with the US. Was it Trump who said it would be "the easiest trade deal in the history of trade deals"?

@The Bastard where is that plaque?

Probably not the people of Russia

I agree with you and we don't have to go that far back in UK history to see how opposed Labour and Conservative parties are to changing the system to anything that is more representative of people's preferences. When the Lib Dems got into bed with the Conservatives to form the coalition Government I really think they believed that the public would say yes to the Alternative Vote referendum. But the Tory Party under Johnson gained a sizable majority in Parliament as a result of that election. That campaign was run with the slogan "Get Brexit Done" and, whether or not Johnson really believed in Brexit or not. It also doesn't matter to the Brexiteers who would have voted for anyone (but Corbyn) who made that promise. Just look at what happened to the so called "red wall" and how many of those elected a Conservative MP purely because of Brexit. Unfortunately, the UK is stuck with this stupid first past the post system which always results in a two party system which suits no-one but those in power.

And yet that is how the UK elections work. When Boris Johnson won a large majority on the back of a Brexit agenda there was no complaint.

Whether you agree or not does not matter. It matters whether any party with rejoining the EU as a central policy and who clearly state that they would apply to rejoin without a referendum win enough votes to form a government.

So.... If it was a fundamental part of their manifesto and IF they had won enough seats at a General Election to form a Government then they would have had the required mandate to do just that. As pointed out though you are referring to an article that is several years old. I don't think we will ever see another referendum on EU membership. Rejoining will most likely come after a General Election with a party that has rejoining as a key part of their manifesto. At the moment I don't think we will see any major party do that because the country is still to divided.