...to ask you to support this event?

[Niamer]

www.uniteforeurope.org

• we are about to spend £120 billion extricating ourselves from the EU. That money is desperately needed in health and social care sectors.
• many Leave campaign promises, voted for in good faith are untrue
• millions of people directly affected by Brexit were not allowed a vote.

-the referendum was advisory. To have been binding, a supermajority would have been needed to make such a huge constitutional change.

• Brexit is likely to result in the permanent break-up of the UK.
• we are turning our back on our friends and allies of 40 years
• EU citizens in the UK are uncertain of their rights and in many cases feel unwelcome.

I don't like particularly enjoy going to London, I hate crowds, but I HAVE to be at this march. Please consider attending and sharing this event. We are all victims of a fraudulent campaign and are facing a Tory hard destructive unopposed Brexit. I will NOT let this happen to my children without a fight.

Lass

Tip - look up the meaning of the phrase "per capita" in a dictionary.

Can't wait till you all march and Theresa turns to boris and says "you know what them marching changed my mind" Pointless excercise that taxpayers will have to pay to police.

I would genuinely like to know, if you are prepared to undermine a decision taken by our democratic process, what you would put in its place.

Naimer Thanks for your reply to my question, but you have misunderstood my point. The decision how to proceed has been taken by the referendum and by parliament debating and voting (obvs House of Lords still to go but I think it likely they will undo what has been decided).

You might not like what has been decided, by the democratic process. And you ate quite entitled to feel upset, angry etc etc. But if you start trying to undermine the democratic process you need, I think, to say what process (not outcome) you will put in its place.

I don't want to live in a country where a group of people can decide and succeed in overthrowing a decision reached through our democratic process. I find the thought of it very scary.

I dont agree with brexit but do agree with the democratic process therefore will never this. The people of the uk have voted therefore we have to leave the uk!!! End of story. To not will be morally and democratically wrong. I dont want the uk to ever ignore what most people vote for. Yes i know it was less than 50% but if people thought it important they would have voted. We had a vote..

Therefore never support this... (ipad correction)

Brexit won the vote - what part of that is unclear? Whether you agree with it or not, that is what was voted for so that is what is happening. Serious question: how long will people continue protesting about this? And what do they think they will achieve? Just curious.

LasswiT I completely agree with you, however I fear many in Scotland do not see things this way, and many original no voters have turned to independence as they see it as a solution to brexit. As you have explained, it's not that simple.

wrongtrouser. Well in the case of the referendum I don't think it was a question that should have ever been put to the electorate without a viable plan which would not make us all poorer.

For other questions, elections etc, H of Commons, H of Lords system Ok, but I do think politicians must be held accountable for lack of integrity and probity because "alternative facts" have no place in a democracy.

Serious question: how long will people continue protesting about this? And what do they think they will achieve? Just curious

Who knows? There is much to protest about. The long term goals are to help people understand the benefits of EU membership and shed light on many of the myths spread by the eurosceptic press.

Well the protests have already served to show our EU neighbours we do not all support Brexit (that means a lot to many of us with links in Europe). If we had just accepted the vote on day 1, we not be seeing the parliamentary scrutiny leading up to the triggering of Article 50 that we are now (such that it is, but that's for another thread).

Brexit won the vote - what part of that is unclear? Whether you agree with it or not, that is what was voted for so that is what is happening. Serious question: how long will people continue protesting about this? And what do they think they will achieve? Just curious

Miss exactly. SO many remoaners have shown themselves to be petulant brats. I'm a Brit expat but may return to live in the UK one day. I hope to god they've all stopped whining by then.

*we would not, I mean

There will be a parliamentary vote on the final deal.
If there is so much anger/regret about losing, it is dead easy to solve. Everyone will vote Lib Dem in the next GE and we can apply for membership again (assuming they have it i their manifesto), or start a pro-EU party. If you genuinely believe only 37% want out, and not the out we are getting, then the 63% should easily carry a massive majority at the next GE and waltz back in - problem solved.

wrongtrouser. Well in the case of the referendum I don't think it was a question that should have ever been put to the electorate without a viable plan which would not make us all poorer

You are still not addressing my point. Okay, you thought the referendum should never have been held. Fine, you are quite entitled to think that. But it was held, following a decision by our parliament. It was run according to our laws, and the result has now lead to parliament voting to trigger A50.

You can be unhappy about all of these things. But if you try to undermine them, you are undermining our democracy and I think if you are going to do this, you need to be able to say what system you would like to replace it.

Or do you not want a system for collective decision making? Shall we just have anarchy or dictatorship? I know that sounds a bit hyperbolic but really, if you are not happy to accept the results of our democratic process, you need to say what you are going to replace our democracy with when it has been ripped to shreds.

This topic has been done to death. The facts are, we had a vote and the majority went with Brexit. It was a democratic vote, and I just can't understand what people would want as an alternative. It's like certain people want us to have the right to vote as long as the result goes their way. There have been lots of protests and lots of very vocal objections against Brexit, so Theresa May and the whole country know that not everyone is happy, so I can't see what yet another March will achieve? Apart from disrupting people trying to go about their business without having yet more placards waved in their faces and blocking their route home.

Wrongtrouser I am not intending to miss the point. I am happy with the voting system as it is but I believe
a)everyone adult affected by Brexit should have been allowed a vote
b)the electorate should be given accurate information about what they are voting for.
A favourite argument of leavers is that we don't question the results of a football match. No, but we would if the referee was drunk and Wayne Rooney was caught playing for an U14 girls' team. Politicians must be held accountable for claims they make. Anyhow the NHS bus will haunt the Tories for years to come no doubt.

No chance.

HTH

The NHS bus was not the Conservatives (who supported Remain), so why should they care.
May is just implementing what was voted for - leave the EU. Leaving without leaving the single market and customs union would not change anything, so the only logical answer to leave is leave the whole lot.
It is up to the rest of the EU what that means in terms of tariff barriers/non-tariff barriers/people rights etc. If they want to be difficult and anti-UK, that is their prerogative.

Looking at train tickets and seriously considering it, OP. And as for how long people will complain or protest for: we had over 40 years of anti-EU moaning after the 1975 referendum, so please come back in 2056 and tell me I've gone on about it for too long, and then I might consider listening. Farage himself said he wouldn't have accepted it if the result had been as close but reversed, so why should we?

Lass

Tip - look up the meaning of the phrase "per capita" in a dictionary

Still not convinced by any one claiming Scotland supports England.Barnett formula? EU regional support?

Butterymuffin

Anyhow the NHS bus will haunt the Tories for years to come no doubt

And by that you have just proved you have little idea what you are talking about. I'm as unhappy as can be by the result. Goodness knows, as a Unionist Remainer I'm sick to the back teeth of Sturgeon's posturing.

I know that sounds a bit hyperbolic but really, if you are not happy to accept the results of our democratic process, you need to say what you are going to replace our democracy with when it has been ripped to shreds.

If you try to blend direct democracy with representative democracy, things are going to get messy. By introducing this by-popular-request, one-night-only, ain't-we-good-to-you election-bait of a nationwide referendum on a contentious subject, Cameron instantly undermined elected representatives, parliamentary sovereignty and the judiciary ('the people have spoken!' = if you act contrary to the 52%, you can be defined as 'enemies of the people').

Now direct democracy's done its bit, we're tasking these elected representatives with enacting the people's will - except the practical application of the decision, which was offered as a simple yes/no, has a thousand different permutations. FoM, passporting rights, the single market, subsidies, rights of EU residents of the UK... I could fill an entire page with these issues, and - judging from everything I've heard and read from Brexit voters - there would be a huge diversity of opinion. How are they supposed to divine the people's will?

Ok - fine. Not a disaster. It's a one-off referendum, the people get to make the big decision, and then we'll return all authority to our elected representatives to hammer out the details. That should be an excellent way of making sure a wide variety of concerns are heard, including those of the 48%, who are still, obviously, people, and constituents of the elected representatives. If the will of the 52% counts for so much, then the 48% must be acknowledged.

Except our own politicians then descend into an undignified, self-interested power-struggle. The opposition are in an absolute shambles, and the right-wing end up with a leader who is set on moving forward with a hard Brexit, with as little debate or discussion as possible. She has to be prodded, at every stage, to allow fundamental parts of the parliamentary process to occur.

This is democracy at its most ineffectual and dangerous; when it is not particularly respecting our own democratic system of checks and balances, but any dissent - lawful dissent, such as a peaceful protest march or a fecking court case - can be shouted down as 'an assault to democracy' and 'disrespecting the people's will'. As is typified by your post. People are 'ripping democracy to shreds' by engaging in their democractic right to legal civic protest.

I'm glad you have such a full, unconditional and absolute respect for democracy. How would you stand on a 52/48 referendum to ban abortion? 52/48 we'll bring in US-style capital punishment? To basically any issue which runs contrary to your own personal conscience?

Lass And by that you have just proved you have little idea what you are talking about.
Gee thanks.

ARum

Your thoughts on why the situation we find ourselves in could be dangerous for our democracy are really interesting.

I think you are somewhat misrepresenting my position. I have not suggested anyone shouldn't be marching - I was arguing with another poster about whether you can disregard the referendum result because you don't agree with the way who gets a vote is determined and whether the decisions made by parliament should be undermined.

My comment about ripping democracy to shreds was because I think some people are so incenced about Brexit that they don't stop to think about the implications on our democracy of certain actions. I am not suggesting that a march is an assault on our democracy. But we can set off down a track without thought for where it will take us, which worries me. I don't think I am unreasonable to ask people who are challenging a democratic decision, what they would put in place of democracy. If they can argue how they are not damaging democracy, all well and good.

I haven't shouted anyone down - I am having a polite conversation.

I'm glad you have such a full, unconditional and absolute respect for democracy. How would you stand on a 52/48 referendum to ban abortion? 52/48 we'll bring in US-style capital punishment? To basically any issue which runs contrary to your own personal conscience?

Thank you for your patronising comment. If these things were brought in following a referendum and the democratic process being followed, I would be very sad but would accept this. I would campaign for these to be changed back, through the democratic process, not by blocking the democratic process which brought them in.

Lass Ok I know it's only Sky news, but they seem to share my view.
news.sky.com/story/sky-views-brexit-pledge-on-nhs-will-haunt-may-10760825