Labour’s u-turn on supporting the Brexit Referendum result.

Since I am not in the know about how this all works, I can only go on what I think and yes I am sure these are all being worked on, but at some point our involvement in the paying of Green issues should and will stop, as we already fund many project from our own budget you can't say we are neglecting Overseas AID.
If you were selling a company you part owned would you not want to know what the value of your share was and how it was being worked out... There will always be assets and liabilities...

Um no, its part of the EU and under the ECJ

scientists were warning about it well in advance of the vote
but they were "experts"
so ignored

and unless its sorted the NHS cannot offer radiotherapy to cancer patients
among other things

Was the question about leaving Euratom on your ballot paper? It wasn't on mine, and there was no reason for it to be so, because it was part of a completely separate treaty and was nothing to do with the EEC/EU.

mummy
What deal do you want the EU to make ?
Euratom ?
International Aid?
Fisheries?
Regional aid?
Customs Union?
Reciprocal Health Care?
Medicines Agency?
Monetary trading?
Cross border transfers of manufacturing goods?
Cross border transfers of finished goods?
Customs clearance for people and goods?
Passported workers?
Seasonal workers?
The le Touquet agreement?
Northern Ireland ?

as only once all of those are settled can the divorce bill be quantified

and despite David Davis and Liam Fox saying so, the UK cannot do a trade deal with BMW after brexit

So far in the small print,, we have to pay for...
Bears.
Re roofing huts.
Replanting Grass....

One third of the UK electorate did not bother to vote for or against Brexit

Even that hides different reasons. You may recall there was severe flooding in parts of Britain that day and I imagine if you have been flooded out of your home, voting might not be your first priority. In other cases, Southern trains were playing up and people couldn't get to the polling stations on time. Other people felt that they were not fully qualified to vote, which is what we have a Parliamentary democracy for. Some people were ill and passed away between the postal vote being applied for and polling day arriving. And of course, some didn't feel strongly either way.

Some how this has all turned into a cast iron vote for leaving the single market and the customs union.

As a forriner, I've been on the wrong side of the UK Border Force

Theresa May's view of the world is narrow, xenophobic and devoid of evidence
see the debacles of the drugs bill or the student visa data
for that alone she should be ignored

Peregrina did I also not say and gathered enough support to get votes through in Parliament.
Were Labour not also trying to gain enough votes to do the same as had happened in 1951.
If the EU were willing to make a deal instead of saying PAY THE BILL all the time I am sure there would be more progress, and to be honest my view is and always has been from the first day we knew how the EU intended to play their cards, that we will leave no deal, and then we will work out a trade deal, because no matter what the negotiations come out as, that are going to be presented to the MEP's as a Deal to vote on, it's never going to be what all 27 countries want, and someone is going to throw it out of bed.

Mummy - If you are trying to suggest there is a mandate for Theresa May's preferred version of Brexit - whatever that may be, because it is not at all clear and Barnier has pointer that out frequently, you are 'very brave' as they say.

Trump got less votes than Hillary ......

Dubya got less votes than Gore ......

One third of the UK electorate did not bother to vote for or against Brexit
the legislation clearly stated that it was advisory -
parliament is well within its right to grow a pair and call the whole thing off

There are times mummmy when the party with the most votes doesn't get the most seats - e.g. the October 1951 election. It didn't mean that Labour could say that they should still have been in power.

Had Theresa May not stitched up her deal with the DUP this time, we could still have had Corbyn trying to lead a minority Government, as Wilson did, when Heath squandered his majority.

But 17 million voted to Leave, expecting it to happen, and if it's not doing you need to take the matter up with May and her chums who seem to be making a complete hash of things.

How is it that 17 Million of us voted to Leave, expecting it to happen if we voted for it.
Once it happened and we were told that was going to happen then we had a GE in which the Tories won, by getting the most votes. It doesn't matter how many or how few they won by they did win.
They then do the same as was done with Liberals and gather support to make sure they can gets votes through in parliament, and go on to form a government, and yet still you can't see that this is the country voting for us to leave.
Had Labour been able to gather enough votes to govern do you really think they won't be in power right now?
Just because some MN think we shouldn't proceed, doesn't mean we won't. Even the EU think we are leaving..
This should be about how we move forward, not looking backwards.

mathanxiety
if anybody wants to know how important the UK is to the USA, start to read the US news websites
I suggest
The New York Times
The Washington Post
USA Today
The LA Times
then you will see how important or utterly not a trade deal with the UK is to the USA

Maths we all understand that your still bitter about the vote, but that is how things are done in the UK.

A further post from me. Anyone who has been involved in running an election, either Parliamentary or Local, know that the rules are well defined. There is e.g. a clear procedure laid down about what to do in the event of the voted being tied. As far as the relative handful of Referenda we have had in the UK are concerned, my understanding is that the rules have been different each time. This does not support the statement, 'this is how things are done'.

"Labour's U-Turn"
could you post a link to where Corbyn supports a soft Brexit?
or where McDonnell does?
or Milne does?
as until those three change their lifelong loathing of the EU, no policy change will happen

much as most of us wish it would ...

I could add that I believe mathanxiety is Irish, so will be well informed about governing by Referenda.

but that is how things are done in the UK.

Primarily, it's not how we do things in the UK. Switzerland, Ireland, yes, both govern by Referenda. We have a Parliamentary democracy.
With the exception of war time we accept that a Parliament's mandate lasts either until the Govt loses a vote of Confidence or for five years.
With the Referendum it appears that the advice the General Public gave to Parliament of a slight preference to leave the EU, has gained the status of being like the Ten Commandments, handed down from on high. Yet in the subsequent and unnecessary election, May's loss of a majority would leave many to believe that her version of Brexit is not wholly acceptable. As yet, we haven't been offered an alternative.

As far as I am aware countries which do govern by Referenda are quite happy to do some more negotiation and then go back to their electorate to ask their opinions on the revised terms. Either they get agreement or the proposed change dies a death. It's not a question of xxx years ago, people wanted this, and tough luck to the current electorate.

I am not at all bitter. It is no skin off my nose whatever way the vote went.

You did not actually vote to have a referendum by voting for Cameron's government.
The points of Cameron's 2015 manifesto were:
(1) An economic plan to help you and your family
(2) Jobs for all
(3) Cutting your taxes, making welfare fairer, and controlling immigration
(4) The best schools and hospitals for you and your family
(5) Securing your home and your neighbourhood
(6) Dignity in your retirement
(7) Keeping our country secure

Buried on page 72 is the commitment to the Referendum.
Also on page 72 is the following:
"We are clear about what we want form Europe. We say: Yes to the Single Market. Yes to turbo charging free trade. Yes to working together where we are stronger together than alone. Yes to a family of nation states, all part of a European Union - but whose interests, crucially, are guaranteed whether inside the Euro or out. No to 'ever closer union'. No to a constant flow of power to Brussels. No to unnecessary interference. And no, of course, to the Euro, to participation in Eurozone bailouts or notions like a European Army...

...We will protect our economy from any further integration of the Eurozone. The integration of the Eurozone has raised acute questions for non-Eurozone countries like the United Kingdom. We benefit from the Single Market and do not want to stand in the way of the Eurozone resolving its difficulties. Indeed, given the trade between Britain and the Eurozone countries we want to see these economies returning to growth. But we will not let the integration of the Eurozone jeopardise the integrity of the Single Market or in any way disadvantage the UK...

...We want an EU that helps Britain move ahead, not one that holds us back. We have already succeeded in exempting our smallest businesses from new EU regulations, and kicked-off negotiations for a massive EU trade deal with the USA, which could be worth billions of pounds to the UK economy. We will build on this. We want to preserve the integrity of the Single Market, by insisting on protections for those countries that have kept their own currencies. We want to expand the Single Market, breaking down the remaining barriers to trade and ensuring that new sectors are opened up to British firms. We want to ensure that new rules target unscrupulous behaviour in the financial services industry, while safeguarding Britain as a global centre of excellence in finance. So we will resist EU attempts to restrict legitimate financial services activities. We will press for lower EU spending, further reform of the Common Agricultural Policy and Structural Funds, and for EU money to be focused on promoting jobs and growth."

So as you can see, there is either outright lying going on there, or a case of a manifesto deliberately promising something for everyone in full knowledge that an In/Out vote could leave a large chunk of your own membership gnashing their teeth while another group danced in the streets.

You chose to see the Tories championing Brexit, and that is a huge pity.

Incidentally, how do people in this day and age fall for a manifesto that includes the header 'Jobs for all'?

s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/manifesto2015/ConservativeManifesto2015.pdf
Read it and weep.

In March, tories were on 45% Labour on 26%

Now:
LAB 43% (+2)
CON 38% (nc)
LD 7% (-1)
UKIP 4% (-2*)

Tory conference should be good for a few more Labour percentage points.

Maths we all understand that your still bitter about the vote, but that is how things are done in the UK.
We voted to have a EU Referendum by voting in the Torys.
We voted in a Referendum.
We didn't vote in Labour when we could a have.

How many more chances do you want to get the future to fall the way you wish?

www.cnn.com/2017/09/01/opinions/uk-us-brexit-david-davis-oped/index.html

It is also a good example of sucking up to someone you are desperate to do business with.

The US will drop the UK like a hot potato once Brexit is accomplished. The only reason the so-called 'special relationship' exists (and even at that, mainly in the delusions of the UK) is that the UK was always America's back door into Europe, both in political and business terms. Once passporting goes, and once the UK loses its seat in Brussels, the US will no longer be interested. President Obama did not warn against voting to Leave the EU on a whim.

I don't want it 'both ways'.

I don't care what Labour wanted or might have done in the past.

I don't care about the petty party-political point-scoring you are determined to engage in.

Hanging onto power by the skin of your teeth by bribing a reprehensible party whose voters burn effigies on enormous bonfires every year, while stamping your foot and insisting that your MPs toe the hard Brexit line, insisting that this is 'the will of the people' when the vote was actually 48-52 is a spectacle that is making the UK look like a banana republic.

IT was a remainer who posted the rant about the DUP, and how they were not to be trusted, just reminding you that Labour wanted to share with them to hang on to power, you can't have it both ways.

Also Labour seem to be able to say anything and it's allowed, or a mistake, a perk of not being in power.

The conclusion I draw from this relentless focus on Labour, including silly speculation on the Labour leadership, is that the Tory Brexit hawks are spooked by the possibility that the opposition stance on Brexit has popular support, and that the Labour stance mirrors the less frothing-at-the-mouth position of a good few Tories.

newsthump.com/2017/08/31/theresa-may-drunkenly-announces-intention-to-fight-general-election/ It's funny because it's so close to the bone.
The only party leader whose position is built on the proverbial sands is Theresa May. Corbyn led Labour to a most unexpected position in the GE, which was a disastrous miscalculation on the part of May from start to finish, and on top of that the election campaign delayed negotiations with the EU. May is only hanging on because a leadership race held in public would damage the party.

What is the Jacob Rees-Mogg publicity of recent times all about? Clearly it is designed to keep up pressure for the hawkish positions on Brexit, to be followed by a massive assault on the powers of Parliament once Brexit is accomplished. It is also designed to keep TM from doing what the electorate really wants, and what is in the best interests of the people and businesses of the UK.

newsthump.com/2017/09/01/liam-fox-claims-he-is-being-blackmailed-into-paying-mobile-phone-contract-he-voluntarily-entered-into/
Wrt that divorce bill...

Even the Express thinks the bill will be paid.
www.express.co.uk/news/uk/849117/David-Davis-UK-Brexit-bill-pact-EU
This is because everyone knows deep down that Brexit will be a disaster without some continued trade on reasonable terms with the EU, which is the UK's biggest trading partner, the fulminations of the Rees-Mogg faction and Farage notwithstanding.

Math, you know its bad form to chase posters round threads

Yes it is, Carolines, but I am not chasing anyone. If Thea had not brought up the matter of her unintelligible posts I would not have mentioned them unless I ran across an egregious example. The length is not the problem. I would love to understand what she is saying. I do not inhabit her echo chamber so I can't join the dots as you can.