Brexit mega thread part 15a - looking forwards

[Talkinpeace]

Just rebooting the most recent thread

At the moment the UKs issues are rather over shadowed by events elsewhere
but maybe that is a good thing.

The German election on Sunday is worth watching
Right wing European politicians pulling out of CPAC speeches because they realise its not a good look
Farage floundering to stay relevant

and the possibility of the return of free movement for our kids if not us

Relations between mainland Europe and the UK remain a worthy topic for discussion

Given that it was an advisory referendum; we've taken the advice, and realised that it was utter rubbish.

About time to undo the mess that was created by the likes of Putin and Global...

@MaybeNotBob

They would never have made that decision had the advisory" referendum, won with great Russian interference, had the result it did^.

What evidence do you have that proves MPs were swayed by the result of the 2016 referendum? If advisory only, why did MPs not ignore it.

Is there evidence of Russian involvement in the vote cast on 23 June 2016? I would like to know how people choose where to place a tick on a ballot paper can be controlled when the events takes place in secret.

Is there evidence that Russia were able to prevent 16.1 million voting for the Liberal Party in the 2019 and 2024 general election?

As per Talkin, Russia are not interested in the UK. So, what benefit was it to Russia for the UK to leave the EU?

Your constant harping on about it being the decision of MPs is utter rubbish.

I suggest you read Peregrina post which confirms Parliament is sovereign.

Given that it was an advisory referendum; we've taken the advice, and realised that it was utter rubbish.

The current Parliament has 538 MPs from parties who support Brexit. Up by 40 from the number who voted to trigger Article 50 in 2017.

Lets see what happens in 1 May 2025

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/apr/23/keir-starmers-realignment-with-europe-will-be-a-low-key-one

I do have to laugh at Globetrotter's convoluted logic at times, but I am glad to see the agreement that Parliament is sovereign.

So, what benefit was it to Russia for the UK to leave the EU?

The Cambridge Analytica scandal investigated by Carole Cadwalladr indicated that there may have been a link between Russia and social media campaigns spreading disinformation to push a leave vote. Why would Russia do that? Quite simply in the hope of weakening both the EU and the UK (which it has considered hostile for a long time). Divide and rule, basically. For the same reason and around the same time, similar campaigns pushed for a Trump vote (Trump 1.0). Without going into the conspiracy rumours of potentially direct links between Trump and Russia, Trump was always a divisive polarising character and that alone suits Putin fine.
Why the timing? Since 2014 and the ousting of the Ukraine leader at the time (Yanukovych, who was pro-Russia) Putin has considered the West as a threat which is encroaching on what he has always considered to be his natural sphere of influence. There was nothing he could do about the Baltic States or Poland joining NATO but he'll be damned if he lets Ukraine go (what Ukrainians want does not feature in his reasoning). So since 2014, he has invaded the Crimea and has been keen to weaken the West by any means possible, which includes using social media disinformation as a weapon.

As a counterpoint, much though I disliked what I perceived to be the motive behind her action, I think Gina Miller was right in her legal case and I'm glad she won. Making sure it was a decision of Parliament to enact Brexit was the right thing to do. We'll see what position the various parties take at the next GE, for the local elections I really don't think Brexit figures too highly in who people entrust to run their local councils, though of course it motivates many people's thinking about politics generally.

@StandFirm

…indicated that there may have been a link between Russia and social media campaigns spreading disinformation to push a leave vote.

So, it’s all speculation as opposed to provable fact. The underlined text says it all.

I am careful with stating it as an absolute fact, yes, but Carole Cadwalladr has an excellent track-record as an investigative journalist and put forward very compelling evidence.
As for the reasons why Russia would have done that, which I stated in my post, they're pretty well-known and follow a clear logic.

Re Putin and Trump
the Manafort connection has all of the spiders web

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-nhs-death-eu-nurse-b2742598.html

Before the 2024 general election, Labour estimated that cutting the winter fuel allowance would result in 4,000 deaths. Since Labour came to power in July 2024 they have reduced the winter fuel allowance.

Brexit has lead to deaths, cutting the winter fuel allowance may well lead to deaths. Do you think that's some sort of gotcha? Two wrongs don't make a right.

Whataboutery at it's finest...

@Peregrina

Brexit has lead to deaths

Where is the evidence to prove that statement?

Read the thread two posts above yours.

@Peregrina

The article states:

It estimates that in the three years after the 2016 referendum the NHS faced a staggering 34 extra deaths per hospital with what the authors termed “average exposure to the Brexit shock”.

It’s yet another estimate as opposed to a provable fact. Bit like the 500,000 to 800,000 jobs that would be lost just by a vote to leave as specified in the April 2016 treasury report. Nine years later and it still hasn’t happened.

However, if there is any truth in the estimate, does it not add weight to the argument that uncontrolled immigration is detrimental? Cheap labour is allowed to enter in preference to investment in the UK.

Your posts are all either estimates or rehashes of things which happened ten years ago, and really not worth reading.

Someone has to keep beating the brexit drum, their numbers are dwindling

@Peregrina and @DuncinToffee

Next you will be saying the outcome of the local elections does not mean anything.

Reform have taken over Durham, a place which has historically been a Labour stronghold due to its mining history. So, I am pleased my vote yesterday counted.

Where I live, Oxfordshire, Reform are taking votes from the Tories, and from the results declared so far, are usually letting the Lib Dem or Green candidate in. There aren't actually all that many Labour voters in Oxfordshire.

I once lived in Staffs Moorlands, Reform have won, but guess who had control of the Council before? One guess only and it wasn't Labour.

Just watching the BBC national results, so far Reform is taking chunks of votes from Labour but most votes from the Tories, which is not unexpected because there were more Tory seats up for grabs.

It doesn't mean anything to you Globe unless you have moved back to the UK?

I could add that the local Tories aren't even happy to stand under the Conservative banner - They are Local Conservatives.

Having said that I know some of the beaten candidates and they are perfectly reasonable, old fashioned Tories, who would work hard for their electorate.

@Peregrina

Watch BBC QT episode 9 May 2019. Nigel Farage stated the two party system was failing the UK. He hoped the Brexit party, as it was called then, would facilitate the break up of the two party system.

So far, the results of yesterday’s vote shows that it’s Conservatives and Labour are the biggest losers and all other parties are making gains.

Yes, Farage jumped onto the voting reform bandwagon.

Ten years ago there were a lot of UKIP councillors. Virtually all of them only lasted one term - they weren't very good and the electorate booted them out.

As UKIP leader he was quite fond of the AfD

https://news.sky.com/story/germanys-far-right-afd-party-officially-classified-as-extremist-organisation-13359754

The UK is now politically quite aligned with the EU