Paphos Life

This is an interesting site, for all those who want to remain.

https://www.remainvoter.com/

"We provide Remain Voters with clear, independent advice on how to maximise the impact of their vote in the European Election on 23 May so together we secure Remain parties the highest number of overall seats. "

The only issue I have is that if we do eventually decide to remain in the EU, who will represent us?

Let's face it, the Brexit party will get a sizeable chunk of votes. I would imagine an awful lot of the people who voted LEAVE in the referendum will vote for the Brexit party now. So if they get a sizeable amount of seats, but we don't leave the EU, what happens in a year's time?

I think the concept of most of the MEPs from the UK opposing the U.K., but taking salaries and disrupting business there, is wrong.

I’d rather we agreed to leave before they take up seats - if that’s what we do.... although I still want a second vote. If there is a second vote and the overwhelming majority want to remain, then there should be another European election as this is purely tactical and Farage, apart from being a fool, is a dangerous and lying malcontent who will always be anti anything.

Jimgward wrote: ↑Mon May 13, 2019 8:10 pm I think the concept of most of the MEPs from the UK opposing the U.K., but taking salaries and disrupting business there, is wrong.

I’d rather we agreed to leave before they take up seats - if that’s what we do.... although I still want a second vote. If there is a second vote and the overwhelming majority want to remain, then there should be another European election as this is purely tactical and Farage, apart from being a fool, is a dangerous and lying malcontent who will always be anti anything.

What’s the point of having a second vote if the first one is to be ignored?

Alan
The referendum was only advisory; if you read the attached link it confirms that because it was only advisory the courts could take no action in voiding it even though their was ample proof of criminal and corrupt activity by the Brexit groups. The same article can be found in many newspapers.
I know you support the democratic process but what's gone on hasn't been very democratic don't you think?

Jim

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... court-told

Lots of people/parties wanting a second referendum or disguising it as a 'people's vote'. (Who else other than people would vote amuses me). However, couldn't these EU elections be considered as some sort of second referendum? Add up the percentages gained by 'Brexit' or partially 'Brexit' parties and if that achieves more than 50% then there you have it.

The EU MEP voting will have a very, very low turnout. People do not regard it as a thermometer of people’s opinion of Leave/Stay.

The Brexit party will do well, but nobody regards them as a serious party or that they will ever be representative of anything. Farage appeals to many people who like his simple messages (often repeated) that also verge on the racist or anti-immigration levels they like. For sure, brexit has exposed just how racist England in particular is. Tommy Laxley-Lennon (Robinson) standing as an MEP. God give me strength.

If say for arguments sake, we had a second referendum, and if the result was still 'leave', would the remainers still be shouting for a third, or would they accept once and for all, that Brexit means Brexit ?

If you didn't win the lottery last week, would you call for a re-run so that you could win ? No, it's a silly idea, and so is a 'people's vote' unless I'm mistaken, wasn't it people who voted in the first referendum. And please do not insult my intelligence by telling me that I didn't know what I was voting for.

Just read this re Prime Minister May, She is rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, couldn't of put it better myself.

Firefly wrote: ↑Tue May 14, 2019 11:50 am If say for arguments sake, we had a second referendum, and if the result was still 'leave', would the remainers still be shouting for a third, or would they accept once and for all, that Brexit means Brexit ?

If you didn't win the lottery last week, would you call for a re-run so that you could win ? No, it's a silly idea, and so is a 'people's vote' unless I'm mistaken, wasn't it people who voted in the first referendum. And please do not insult my intelligence by telling me that I didn't know what I was voting for.

I would only want a second referendum when we knew what the vote was for. So, once a deal has been decided, the public votes. The vote is simple:

1. Yes - we take the deal.
2. No - we remain in Europe.

If the people vote Yes, then we leave on whatever terms the deal is. Simple as that.

If the people vote No, then we stay.

Until we know exactly HOW we are going to leave Europe, there is no point having a vote on it. That would just be a refun of the referendum.

I can't see anywhere I personally called for a second referendum. I would suggest that the first which was only advisory, corrupted and involved criminal actions should be revoked. The courts have stated that the criminal activities would have voided the referendum only that as it was advisory rather than legally binding it's hands are tied. A democratic vote is not democratic if it's won by criminal means.
Now if it's agreed to start again and have a legal and honest referendum without the corruption and lies then I can't see what the problem would be and I do believe if Brexit won again (Which I doubt) then the result would be accepted.
Jim

Dominic, Your solution does not take into account those that want to leave but don't like the deal but want to leave the EU. According to you if they don't like the deal then their default option is to stay.

Dominic

I would prefer 'no deal', just leave, only paying what we must to the EU.

Jim

What criminal actions, and why would a second referendum not be advisory also, surely the law would have to be changed, wouldn't it ?

Varky wrote: ↑Tue May 14, 2019 1:03 pm Dominic, Your solution does not take into account those that want to leave but don't like the deal but want to leave the EU. According to you if they don't like the deal then their default option is to stay.

Well, parliament has (I believe) ruled that no-deal just isn't an option, so those would be the only two options.

But when I said "deal", I wasn't talking about May's deal. I meant whatever deal parliament finally comes up with. Now, if there was an about turn, and Parliament decided that no-deal was the only viable deal, then the vote would effectively be to remain or to leave with no deal.

My point is, the government have to decide how we are going to leave first, and then we should vote on that. That way, we are voting on a known quantity.

Jackie

You are correct, all referendums are advisory and a guide to the government of the day to the views of the electorate and a second referendum would be exactly the same.
Gove and Johnson were recently fined for breaking electoral law and the Electoral Commission has reported certain activities to the police.
There are hundreds of links (I posted three) regarding criminal activities.
Jim

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 12331.html

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opende ... -round-re/

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/why- ... -1.3568256

Jim B wrote: ↑Tue May 14, 2019 7:42 am Alan
The referendum was only advisory; if you read the attached link it confirms that because it was only advisory the courts could take no action in voiding it even though their was ample proof of criminal and corrupt activity by the Brexit groups. The same article can be found in many newspapers.
I know you support the democratic process but what's gone on hasn't been very democratic don't you think?

Jim

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... court-told

I appreciate that it was only advisory. But when the vote was held, there was no mention of deal/no deal, merely in or out. I find it distasteful in the extreme that there is now a call for a "people's vote" Who on earth do they think voted the first time?! There seems little point in holding any sort of vote or referendum if its going to be ignored because it wasn't the correct outcome.

Jim

The remain side have also been fined for irregularities, it makes them no more holy than the leave side, but why spoil a good argument with the truth.

Jackie

Jackie
I don't doubt Remain broke the law but two wrongs don't make a right though the Electoral Commission disagrees with you.

https://amp.businessinsider.com/the-ele ... law-2018-8

Alan

By being advisory it means it isn't legally binding. Whatever they call it, "A Peoples Vote", "Second Referendum, is only semantics; maybe a fair and honest referendum would be a better title because that is what most Remain voters want.

Jim

Jim

I quite agree with you that two wrongs don't make a right, but I do find it strange that links to articles which only criticise the leave side are posted, as if the remain side are totally innocent of wrong doing, Electoral Commission or not, members of remain have been fined. It's easy enough to 'Google'.

Jackie

Firefly wrote: ↑Wed May 15, 2019 12:00 pm Jim

I quite agree with you that two wrongs don't make a right, but I do find it strange that links to articles which only criticise the leave side are posted, as if the remain side are totally innocent of wrong doing, Electoral Commission or not, members of remain have been fined. It's easy enough to 'Google'.

Jackie

Post some links then!

Why ?