24-April 2023 : LAB 44% / CON 29% / LDEM 11% / GRN 5%

[Deleted]

May 15, 2023 10:21:25 GMT domjg said:

May 15, 2023 10:11:43 GMT colin said:

Too kind ❤

Who  do I think I am ?.

Just an unexceptional old critic of the self important twaddle you peddle here.😀

I am never specifically rude to another poster without previously being provoked. You are rude and unpleasant to others often, without due cause and it's says a great deal about your character. Don't talk to me like that again. If you do I will respond in kind and then some. Being critical is one thing, being so rude to someone who has not addressed you specifically just because you don't like what they say is very much another. I may have many flaws but vacuity and taking myself too seriously are sure as hell not some of them Mr Pooter. 

You have chutzpah. I,'ll give you that.

By the way _ which search engine do you use ?

[graham]

May 15, 2023 9:28:16 GMT moby said:

May 15, 2023 8:36:44 GMT Dave said:

Well, I didn't think I'd be on here speaking up for jib today 

Steve - do you accept that there are people that voted for Brexit, not to keep foreigners out of the country because they disliked them, but for a myriad reasons? Principally I think, because of the effect, (real or perceived, or a bit of both) that immigration was having on people already here. If so, then you are accepting, rightly in my opinion that the motivation of a good chunk of Brexiters wasn't a dislike of foreigners but the desire to see themselves, their families, their friends, and people in general do better, in terms of employment, opportunities, access to services, housing, etc, etc, etc..

To be clear there were undoubtedly Brexit voters who voted 'out' because they disliked foreigners and wanted to keep them out of the UK. But all 17 million of them?  Whether you or I agree with their reasons is neither here or there, but there were many, many, many Brexit voters who had their own 'good' reasons for voting 'out'.  Basically, if you are assuming that "people like jib" don't like foreigners then you are making a huge and unfair assumption about his motives and the motives of over half the people who voted that day.

There were no 'good' reasons to vote for brexit though. The reason you give above... 'that the motivation of a good chunk of Brexiters wasn't a dislike of foreigners but the desire to see themselves, their families, their friends, and people in general do better, in terms of employment, opportunities, access to services, housing, etc, etc, etc..' is really just the reverse of blaming foreigners for their assertion that they weren't doing better as things stood? In other words they were still blaming foreigners for perceived ills, even if they were not saying it so directly? I mean if you say....'I actually like foreigners but still see them as to blame for my situation'....it's a bit of a contradiction because what is there left about them for you to still 'like'...because you've just voted for a policy to have less of them here?  

I do think that is far too simplistic in that there were many people  - perhaps a majority -who never wanted to join the EEC in the first place back in the early 1970s when Ted Heath took us in and who wish to see the UK revert to the path being followed pre-1973. Strong arguments were presented at the time of the June 1975 Referendum to justify leaving the Common Market by left wing politicians such as Tony Benn - Michael Foot - Barbara Castle - Peter Shore -John Silkin - Judith Hart et al.I recall no arguments at all from that campaign re immigration etc. The issues centred on economics and preserving peace in Western Europe.

So many appear to forget that until the second half of the 1980s Labour was the most Eurosceptical of the major political parties - a view it shared with the SNP.

[James E]

"Flynn said: "It's increasingly clear that the SNP can hold the balance of power after the next general election - putting Scotland in prime position to pull the strings of a minority UK government."

It looks to me like this is another of those judgements based on UNS - and the false narrative that Labour need a lead of 13% in the overall vote to form a majority.

My own claculations suggest that the point that Labour can get an overall majority is around 4% lead - such as 39/35. Electoral Calculus suggests a little lower with tactical voting. I am working on an assumption of just 5-10 Lab MPS in Scotland: the same dynamics which show Labour doing far better than UNS in England on current polling also suggest that they would underperform against the SNP in Scotland unless they can draw very near to being level in Scottish vote share with them.

It's harder to tell what sort of figures would make it possible for Labour + LDs to get to 326 seats, or near enough to get an effective combined majority. But my best estimate is that this would happen where Labour have a small overall lead (0%-3%). This is based on the LDs winning 15-25 seats. 

This leaves us with the scenario that the Tories have too few seats to govern, even with the DUP. And at the same time, Labour cannot command a majority even with LD support. I think this is what would happen if the Tories have a small lead in the overall vote of 0%-3%. 

The Tories have reduced Labour's polling lead from 21-22% 3 months ago to an average of 17% now - and of course just 7% in the Local Election NEV figures. But that is still a long way from the kind of result which would give the SNP the balance of power.

[steve]

Dave

No I don't know jib personally but given the volume of comments he's made about me you could have been fooled that we did!

That aside we all had the same access to facts when the Brexit campaign took place and were all exposed to the same lies from the leave campaign.

Those who chose to vote leave did so despite the facts, maybe they were gullible, maybe they were stupid, maybe they didn't want to believe the evidence, maybe they were convinced by the lies and promises of the leave campaign and their main stream supporters, maybe they just wanted to give Cameron a kicking or didn't like Corbyn or the inept remain campaign.Maybe they thought somehow despite reality it would be a good idea.
Maybe they thought voting against something that most educated people and professionals clearly wanted to keep would make them feel empowered.

Or maybe they just pre-judged the issue because they thought there were too many foreigners speaking foreign languages that made them feel uncomfortable.

Of course the percentage of leave voters who are going to admit that they were motivated by xenophobia was likely to be far smaller than the number who actually were , but the xenophobic far right regime they enabled has emboldened them to think that the irrational decision they made is somehow now acceptable because the regime is run by racists and apologists for stupidity.

There were no good reasons to vote for Brexit just some which were less appalling than others.

No one got a special referendum ballot showing the type of Brexit they might have wanted , the clusterfuck we've ended up with was entirely predictable.

Unlike brexitanians those who voted remain knew what they were voting for, they already had it.

The reality of Brexit is a lower standard of living, diminished rights for individuals of movement scientific thought, economic participation and democratic mandates and a reduction of the esteem that others and many who
have to live here hold this country in.
We're an international laughing stock of self foot shooters with a regime hell bent in turning us into a pariah of and a main opposition party too frightened of offending it's traditional base to say so.

If those who voted to enable this don't like being reminded.

Tough.

[steve]

graham
I am not sure how you conclude that a majority when we joined the eec might not have wished us to join when just two years later when given the opportunity to leave around 70% who participated voted to remain in.

[Danny]

May 15, 2023 8:36:44 GMT Dave said:

Steve - do you accept that there are people that voted for Brexit, not to keep foreigners out of the country because they disliked them, but for a myriad reasons?

Thats all very well, but the problem we face is to define precisely what those reasons are so we can take effective action. The first problem being that Brexit per se did not reduce immigration to the Uk, and there was no reason to think it would. Most immigration was already coming from other parts of the world, fully regulateable by the Uk government regardless of brexit. What was needed was a change of Uk government policy to not allow immigration, but no such change has happened. and indeed there is massive public demand to let in all sorts of workers because of shortages. So we can see why governments allow in immigants, because its popular. But said governments refuse to seek to reconcile those who do not want immigrants but do want a GP. Or a cleaner. Or a waiter. or a teacher. Or a train driver.

Principally I think, because of the effect, (real or perceived, or a bit of both) that immigration was having on people already here.

But what effect? The areas most concerned with immigration are always those which have least immigration. If you make sure one region has no immigration as it wants, but confine it to somewhere that does want immigration, then the first lot still complain even though they arent getting immigration!

If so, then you are accepting, rightly in my opinion that the motivation of a good chunk of Brexiters wasn't a dislike of foreigners but the desire to see themselves, their families, their friends, and people in general do better, in terms of employment, opportunities, access to services, housing, etc, etc, etc..

Now you are moving onto Brexit lies. Indeed the huge majority who voted leave believed they would be better or no worse off. The huge majority who voted remain believed we would be worse off if we did leave. The remainers have been proven correct.

To be clear there were undoubtedly Brexit voters who voted 'out' because they disliked foreigners and wanted to keep them out of the UK. But all 17 million of them?

I'd agree with you that the emphasis on immigration was encouraged by politicians and especially after the decision was made. This is probably because stopping immigration from the EU was one of the few additional things the UK could do after brexit. Problem remains, we dont want to. Even if 17 million do, that still leaves 50 million who do not. Brexit is something which only a minority of people in the Uk wanted. Its impossible to satisfy the majority by giving them the disdvantges of Brexit.

Basically, if you are assuming that "people like jib" don't like foreigners then you are making a huge and unfair assumption about his motives and the motives of over half the people who voted that day.

Then, really you are saying that Brexit was pointless. If there is no difference between a Uk worker and an immigrant worker then since it is government policy to have more workers, obviously we must allow immigration and those brexit voters will be happy to allow it?

Or would you agree Brexit was irrelevant to the issues of immigration, and it was basically a lie to say it was?

[jib]

@ Steve

"I don't know jib personally but given the volume of comments he's made about me you could have been fooled that we did!"

Comments about the Lib Dems shouldn't be taken as a personal insult. It's part of the "game", it's you who always chooses to play the "man" instead of the "ball".

Look it up, you might learn something.

[graham]

May 15, 2023 10:53:55 GMT steve said:

graham
I am not sure how you conclude that a majority when we joined the eec might not have wished us to join when just two years later when given the opportunity to leave around 70% who participated voted to remain in.

Well this may surprise you but it is based on the polling data of the time which showed attitudes to the Common Market to be very volatile

Throughout 1974 polls showed a clear majority in favour of leaving the Common Market - and the commitment to hold a Referendum worked well for Labour at both the elections of 1974 - as well as leading Enoch Powell to urge voters to support Labour. The polls still showed that to be a likely outcome at the beginning of 1975, but they then swung dramatically following the 'renegotiations' conducted by Wilson's government. In reality, the changes were simply 'adjustments' and amounted to very little, but Wilson skillfully played up their significance and the public - not being well versed with the details - swallowed that message. The Pro- Europe campaign had the support of the Labour government , the Tory Opposition under Thatcher and the Liberals. Opposition was led by leading Anti-Marketeers within Labour ranks and a handful of Tory MPs such as Neil Marten and also Enoch Powell.The political Establishment was firmly behind the Pro- Europe campaign and the result came as no surprise.

Within just a few years the pro-Europe enthusiasm dissipated and the polling evidence suggested that by 1979 a majority had swung back to favouring withdrawl from the EEC.

[Danny]

May 15, 2023 9:48:53 GMT Dave said:

Sorry Moby, I normally agree with you, but not this time.  To agree with what you have written, would mean that I would have to know or feel that none of the 17 million 'out' voters had good or 'good' reasons to vote out and that all of them disliked foreigners.

here you are making a 'reductio ad absurdum' type argument, that surely at least 1 of the 17 million must like foreigners, and so the claim falls.

I just find it hard to fathom how so many people's votes can be dismissed /pigeon-holed/ stereo-typed by people who will never ever meet them.  It has always felt pantomime-esque to me.     

But here you are saying something very different. You are essentailly claiming that most leavers were not motivated by disliking foreigners. Or worse, that not even a substantial minority of the 17 million was motivated by this. This is obviously false too. If you looked at studies on people's views they do not like to admit to being racists, but many want to discriminate on grounds of race. and this group clusters amongst leavers. We undeniably have a racist government, which insists on a strict policy of discrimination against foreigners banning them from living here.

[Danny]

May 15, 2023 10:03:34 GMT colin said:

We have reached an all too predictable destination. After years of QE / ultra low interest rates , post  credit crisis , post pandemic, post energy crisis, post war borrowing  leaves a huge debt overhang just when interest rates return to normal ..........and UK desperately needs infrastructure investment.

Have we? Why are interest rising? It seems to be in the Uk because those in the US have risen and we must copy to prevent flight of investment money.

Which begs the question why i the US they have risen. This seems to be because government has decided there is too much money about and that is inherently a bad thing. Why, exactly? It could create inflation if great wealth chases goods in short supply (as per UK houses), but in general there is no real shortage of goods. What we do have is a temporary shortage of goods caused by world lockdown and suspension of trade. Plus a half baked policy to reduce reliance upon fossil fuels by deliberately reducing their supply....as preicted causing inflation of fuel prices. Plus a failure of international policy which allowed a war to begin in Ukraine which cannot end quickly, by the usual means of allowing the two sides to misunderstand each other. Russia believed we would allow them to win, but then we changed our minds at the last minute.

[Mark]

May 15, 2023 6:02:54 GMT steve said:

neilj

Oddly enough UK citizens in work don't actually much fancy training in these technically quite difficult and not particularly pleasant or well paid tasks.

Primarily because they are already doing something else.

If you could pick three tasks least suitable for the cohort of people currently not working these forms of manual labour with technical skills would be near the top of the list.

Braverman and our very own jib wish to keep those with the requisite skills set out of the country or make the terms and conditions of their stay here so onerous that they couldn't be bothered to apply.

I agree with this....and I will add to it.

A friend of a friend was once a lumberjack.

His hobbies included rock climbing and hiking. A real outdoors-y type person.

It was hard, manual work, but, he loved it.

Due to the seasonal nature of his trade, in the months he wasn't plying his trade, he would take on temporary work when he could get it and sign on when he couldn't.

He would get so much hassle from the job centre, including to apply for jobs that, had he got them, they would be in a period where he already had his usual employment waiting for him.

Incidentally, he now works for Sports Direct and gave up the job he loved for this very reason.

A fair few of those who would come from the EU also did seasonal work such as fruit picking.

As well as the hard, physical nature of the work, any brits undertaking such employment would hit exactly the same barriers as the lumberjack guy....probobly more these days now the job centre can sanction you for next to nothing.

[alec]

"We have reached an all too predictable destination. After years of QE / ultra low interest rates , post credit crisis , post pandemic, post energy crisis, post war borrowing leaves a huge debt overhang just when interest rates return to normal ..........and UK desperately needs infrastructure investment."

Hang on colin - are you telling us that we didn't fix the roof when the sun was shining??

Amazing what a decade and a half of useless governments can do....

[Dave]

I think it's a fairly straight forward point that I made but I'll re-iterate it again and if others as they have above then want to read more into it then crack on. No-one, but n-one knows whether it was none or all 17 million voters who were stupid / racist/ didn't like foreigners. Maybe, just maybe it was a figure in between those two extreme, unlikely impossible figures: Whether that figure be a minority, small or large or a majority, small or large, no one here knows, despite their 'certainty'.

People are evidently convinced that they just know why so many others, (literally) 99.9% of whom they have and will never meet, voted. That's a talent

I will say that I hope that there aren't too many people of influence in loc parties that feel the same way as some on here. Because if there are then how can I, let alone the 17 million believe that their interests/ worries and needs will be taken into account and not just dismissed again? And equally, if some politicians think this way, then I hope they don't get near the levers of power as if they have such a low opinion of such a large proportion of our population, then they cannot be expected to have the motivation or desire to govern in their interests.

[steve]

"Ministers call for immigration and UK food prices to increase"

How peculiar! In a DE article 22 July 2017 Rees-Mogg said food, shoes and wine would be 20% cheaper after brexit.

www.express.co.uk/news/politics/831450/Jacob-Rees-Mogg-Brexit-food-wine-clothes-shoes-lower-20-per-cent.

It's almost like they might have been lying!

[steve]

Dave
I don't think everyone who voted for Brexit were stupid, the decision itself was stupid.

Unless of course you were a disaster capitalist like Jacob Rees Mogg who made a fortune out of shorting sterling.
Or a trader who rejoices in the fact that they can hike the price to their customers by 50% because the less avaricious European trader has decided that the hostile environment and pointless rules associated with remaining here aren't worth the bother.

Or a narcissistic avaricious liar like Johnson who simply used the scheme as a stepping stone to the premiership.

[alec]

Dave - I always maintained (long before we knew we were going to have a referendum on the EU) that dismissing all criticisms of our relationship with the EU as the result of racists or loonies was a grave error. The real target should have been what we would once have viewed as extremist right wing neoliberalism, and the way it distorted the operation of markets such that capital hoovered up far more of the economic gains that labour. Free markets, including in the movement of people, was one of these issues, but it was wrong to blame immigration in isolation, as we can now see.

Instead, it was the combination of immigration alongside neoliberal laissez-faire government that did the damage. Immigration did, without doubt, boost our economy, but in the absence of activist governments ensuring equitable redistribution of those gains, the benefits aggregated primarily to a selective few, which the disadvantages were felt by most.

The left made the tiresome mistake, which it is still making today, of labeling such concerns as fundamentally racist, rather than actually addressing what those concerns were really about. I can't for the life of me see why it is automatically assumed that to limit the rights of foreigner nationals to live and work in your country is a purely racist opinion - it is clearly not, although of course, it can be.

People were unhappy, largely because living standards had effectively stagnated for a couple of decades and none of the mainstream parties had anything to say about that except more of the same. Had the left done it's job, enough voters may had been able to identify the real culprit.

[alec]

This tweet rather caught my eye -

It's odd, how we've accepted being conditioned into thinking that 'endemic' means 'do nothing'. It doesn't. As the tweet explains, endemic actually means learning to live with preventative measures for ever, or at least, until something better comes along.

[Dave]

May 15, 2023 13:19:10 GMT alec said:

The left made the tiresome mistake, which it is still making today, of labeling such concerns as fundamentally racist, rather than actually addressing what those concerns were really about. I can't for the life of me see why it is automatically assumed that to limit the rights of foreigner nationals to live and work in your country is a purely racist opinion - it is clearly not, although of course, it can be.

Good post Alec.  This bit is particularly pertinent - I agree with every word.  

Many of us, myself included, will criticise the excesses of our societal and economic set-up, and how it caters for the powerful at the expense of the rest of society.  However many of those same people don't acknowledge the EU for what it was - a globalist, neo-Liberal, status-quo supporting club.  

To be clear, for the first time in my voting age life, I didn't vote.  I saw both campaigns as two ends of the same Tory shit-stick. Who led the competing campaigns merely confirms that.  Of course people want to change that.  I want that to change, I just didn't see that being achieved by an 'out'.  Or by a remain vote for that matter.  If people believe that Cameron and Osbourne had the interests of people other than their ilk and class at heart, then there's not much I can do about that. 

[leftieliberal]

May 15, 2023 9:44:35 GMT mercian said:

May 15, 2023 6:24:02 GMT Danny said:

After the first big majority referendum to stay in the EU, there was no point holding another because there was no indication the nation wanted to leave. The recent vote to leave was a rather slim win by leave, and as you know polling says the nation now believes it was a mistake.

We might analyses again how the nation was tricked into voting to leave.

But clearly there has been no change of heart by government to involve voters, otherwise we would have held a vote whether we wanted the recent Australian trade deal which seemes to be agreed as bad for Britain, or the others the governnment has negotiated. And indeed be holding another vote on rejoing the EU instead of these.

Firstly of course we didn't vote to stay in the EU in the 70s because it didn't exist. It was the EEC then. Secondly, though support has varied, there have been may times when the public was against the EU.

theconversation.com/polling-history-40-years-of-british-views-on-in-or-out-of-europe-61250

Here are a couple of quotes in case you can't be bothered to read the article:
"By March 1979 the voters were clearly regretting their 1975 decision, with 60% saying they would vote to leave in a referendum and only 32% to stay. A year later, with Margaret Thatcher now prime minister, the gap was even wider: 65% to 26%."

"In the ten years that Tony Blair was prime minister, British attitudes to the EU fluctuated between reasonably comfortable majorities for staying in and narrow leads for the “get out” camp."

Quite true and much of the problem with immigration from the A8 countries came about because Blair was wrongly informed by his civil servants that immigration would be far smaller than it was (Georgina Sturge's "Bad Data" covers this in some detail amongst many other failings of Government policy caused by inadequate information). You end up with Gordon Brown and "that bigoted woman" when a Labour supporter told him the reality.

Of course even the EEC was committed to "ever-closer union"; it's in the Treaty of Rome. Apart from Edward Heath and his 1970-74 Government who were committed to the European ideal, pretty well every UK government since then has seen the EU in transactional terms as a 'zero-sum' game. Originally opposition to it came from the Labour Party where the EU was seen as a capitalist's club and that opposition only weakened when it became apparent that the EU was a more effective way to protect workers' rights than relying on winning General Elections in the UK.

[pete]

May 15, 2023 10:03:34 GMT colin said:

May 15, 2023 9:52:36 GMT jimjam said:

Shevii,

I think the current account under Labour would be constrained but there would be much greater borr0wing to invest.

Green New Deal being perhaps the largest single commitment, maybe something about housing through LAs and some Sure Start investments.

Not usual for me to give an opinion; however, I would prefer a greater stimulus but can live with the likely platform.

I recall the first 2 years after 1997 when credibility was established before subtle redistribution geared up.

We have reached an all too predictable destination. After years of QE / ultra low interest rates , post  credit crisis , post pandemic, post energy crisis, post war borrowing  leaves a huge debt overhang just when interest rates return to normal ..........and UK desperately needs infrastructure investment.

You missed brexit from your list of crisis.

[lululemonmustdobetter]

May 15, 2023 13:38:27 GMT Dave said:

May 15, 2023 13:19:10 GMT alec said:

The left made the tiresome mistake, which it is still making today, of labeling such concerns as fundamentally racist, rather than actually addressing what those concerns were really about. I can't for the life of me see why it is automatically assumed that to limit the rights of foreigner nationals to live and work in your country is a purely racist opinion - it is clearly not, although of course, it can be.

Good post Alec.  This bit is particularly pertinent - I agree with every word.  

Many of us, myself included, will criticise the excesses of our societal and economic set-up, and how it caters for the powerful at the expense of the rest of society.  However many of those same people don't acknowledge the EU for what it was - a globalist, neo-Liberal, status-quo supporting club.  

To be clear, for the first time in my voting age life, I didn't vote.  I saw both campaigns as two ends of the same Tory shit-stick. Who led the competing campaigns merely confirms that.  Of course people want to change that.  I want that to change, I just didn't see that being achieved by an 'out'.  Or by a remain vote for that matter.  If people believe that Cameron and Osbourne had the interests of people other than their ilk and class at heart, then there's not much I can do about that. 

Hi Dave , I completely agree with the point you are making. Politicians, such as Johnson, used Brexit very much as a wedge issue purposely dividing the country. I have always been more in the 'both sides actually have a point' camp, and the genius of the Brexit campaign was actually to make it as a protest vote against austerity/Cameron/the establishment and wrongfully paint the EU as the cause of all our ills. Most people do not really understand economics, nature of trade, investment flows etc so didn't appreciate what impact leave really would have, and to be frank the remain campaign was piss poor and made some basic errors.

There are a number of posters on here, who do genuinely reflect a significant portion of the electorate, who remain very angry and emotional about Brexit. I can in many ways empathise with them. However, the basic fact is there were long running issue to do with the distribution of wealth and opportunity across the country that were not addressed, or even on the political agenda, prior to 2016, which influenced how many people voted in the ref.
 

[Deleted]

May 15, 2023 6:02:54 GMT steve said:

neilj

Oddly enough UK citizens in work don't actually much fancy training in these technically quite difficult and not particularly pleasant or well paid tasks.

Primarily because they are already doing something else.

If you could pick three tasks least suitable for the cohort of people currently not working these forms of manual labour with technical skills would be near the top of the list.

Braverman and our very own jib wish to keep those with the requisite skills set out of the country or make the terms and conditions of their stay here so onerous that they couldn't be bothered to apply.

It will be interesting to see how many unemployed former Conservative MPs, who lose their seats in the next General Election, decide to avail themselves of the opportunities of Brexit and retrain as fruit pickers.

[leftieliberal]

www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/15/keir-starmer-says-it-feels-wrong-eu-citizens-living-in-uk-cant-vote
But why restrict extending the right to vote to EU citizens only. If someone is a citizen of another country, but is living and working (and paying their taxes) here, why should they not have the right to vote. There are many Americans over here too. No taxation without representation seems the only fair way forward.

[domjg]

May 15, 2023 13:38:27 GMT Dave said:

May 15, 2023 13:19:10 GMT alec said:

The left made the tiresome mistake, which it is still making today, of labeling such concerns as fundamentally racist, rather than actually addressing what those concerns were really about. I can't for the life of me see why it is automatically assumed that to limit the rights of foreigner nationals to live and work in your country is a purely racist opinion - it is clearly not, although of course, it can be.

Good post Alec.  This bit is particularly pertinent - I agree with every word.  

Many of us, myself included, will criticise the excesses of our societal and economic set-up, and how it caters for the powerful at the expense of the rest of society.  However many of those same people don't acknowledge the EU for what it was - a globalist, neo-Liberal, status-quo supporting club.  

To be clear, for the first time in my voting age life, I didn't vote.  I saw both campaigns as two ends of the same Tory shit-stick. Who led the competing campaigns merely confirms that.  Of course people want to change that.  I want that to change, I just didn't see that being achieved by an 'out'.  Or by a remain vote for that matter.  If people believe that Cameron and Osbourne had the interests of people other than their ilk and class at heart, then there's not much I can do about that. 

I sure as hell didn't vote remain, campaign for remain, go on marches etc to give succour to Cameron and Osborne. I voted remain to try to save things I took for granted that were suddenly and unnecessarily being put at risk by Cameron and which as someone who had lived and worked in different EU countries, I greatly valued.  I was voting for myself, my family, my own sense of identity and for my many colleagues and friends resident here from other EU countries. 

[steve]

leftieliberal

Starmer didn't specify European union citizens( the right wing media did),although these of course constitute the large majority, the policy would apply to all with settled status as I understand it.

[mercian]

Dave
Good to hear the voice of reason rather than all the partisan sniping.

[mercian]

May 15, 2023 10:28:58 GMT graham said:

May 15, 2023 9:28:16 GMT moby said:

 Strong arguments were presented at the time of the June 1975 Referendum to justify leaving the Common Market by left wing politicians such as Tony Benn - Michael Foot - Barbara Castle - Peter Shore -John Silkin - Judith Hart et al.I recall no arguments at all from that campaign re immigration etc. The issues centred on economics and preserving peace in Western Europe.

So many appear to forget that until the second half of the 1980s Labour was the most Eurosceptical of the major political parties - a view it shared with the SNP.

All the freedom of movement stuff was brought in much later without the people of this country being consulted though referenda were held elsewhere.

[Deleted]

Jacob Rees-Mogg admits photo Voter ID was intended to gerrymander elections to CON advantage, and that it had backfired. He also acknowledges that there was no problem with the previous system in the first place.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65599380

'Mr Rees-Mogg said the change had "upset a system that worked perfectly well."'

"Parties that try and gerrymander end up finding that their clever scheme comes back to bite them, as dare I say we found by insisting on voter ID for elections."'

[mercian]

May 15, 2023 11:37:48 GMT Danny said:

May 15, 2023 10:03:34 GMT colin said:

Russia believed we would allow them to win, but then we changed our minds at the last minute.

Are you seriously saying that the was in Ukraine is our (the West's) fault? 🤣

[mercian]

May 15, 2023 12:36:14 GMT steve said:

"Ministers call for immigration and UK food prices to increase"

How peculiar! In a DE article 22 July 2017 Rees-Mogg said food, shoes and wine would be 20% cheaper after brexit.

www.express.co.uk/news/politics/831450/Jacob-Rees-Mogg-Brexit-food-wine-clothes-shoes-lower-20-per-cent.

It's almost like they might have been lying!

View Attachment

A failed prediction is not a lie.