Panorama - Why We Voted to Leave: Britain Speaks

I thought Andrea Leadsom came across as very personable, pleasant and "together" during the EU debate. Though not originally a supporter of Blair's bid for the Labour leadership, in the initial stages at least he too appeared to be OK and was popular with the electorate.

Andrea Leadsom's voting record, however, paints a different picture. She has almost always voted for raising VAT, consistently voted against restricting the provision of services to private patients by the NHS, consistently voted to end financial support for 16-19 year-olds in further education, consistently voted for overseas military action, generally voted against regulation of gambling, generally voted against restrictions on fees charged to tenants by letting agents, etc, etc.

All of these proposals seem to me to negatively affect the less well off while promoting the interests of the better off.

Now there is a suggestion that she wishes to curtail maternity pay and that she referred to the UK as being "overrun by foreigners".

In my view, this demonstrates to me that she is a fairly unpleasant woman but I accept that those who think the government does not have a role in promoting fairness and combating poverty will think differently.

The fact that there are people in this country who feel left out of the mainstream in spite of their best efforts must surely not come as a surprise to us all. We all know that the underdog has been ignored for decades and had to watch the bankers and others pocketing their bonuses. What did the government expect would happen?

Of course you think that Eloethan as you espouse Socialist principles and support Corbyn ( or used to?) that's all fine, but just now we need somebody as PM who can not only unite the two factions but is a strong personality who will if neccessary, take tough decisions, these are not normal times after all.I hope that Theresa May will be PM, and think she probably will now as the votes for her are quite high.

I thought Andrea Leadsom was dreadful in the deabates and I saw her in at least two. I must admit I had never heard of her before but aparently she was a banker during the banking crisis then entered parliament, where she became a junior minister with a pretty poor record.

She seemed to me a very unconvincing Thatcher impersonator and aparently fancies herself as the new Thatcher. She kept a sickly smirk on her face throughout the debates, kept repeating "we've got to take back control" and telling us she was a mum (dig at the childless Theresa May)

She is much further to the right than Thatcher, Utterly ghasty woman

It always amazes me too Luckygirl that all sides of the political spectrum just fail to see what is plain to everybody else , Westminster it really is a bubble.

Whichever of them ends up as PM they will not unite the country. They can't, they're just Tories. Neither would a Labour PM be able to 'unite the country'. The only time the country has been 'united' recently was in WW2 when we had a coalition government and everyone shared the shortages and hardship.

I apologise if I have offended any friends of the two women in contention for the Tory leadership. What I should have said was that they were politically unpleasant. For all I know they may be utterly charming in everyday life.

So what do you suggest roses? Westminster is a bubble and always has been. All I ever pick up from anti-EU/anti-establishment people is negativity. What do you want?

I agree with you, Maizie, that these women might be totally charming. For what it's worth, I think that Cameron is probably charming. However, from a damage limitation exercise perspective, Leadsom is totally untried and her history suggests that she is divisive and I certainly wouldn't trust her with the future of the country. She seems like a parish councillor, who's got a bit too big for her boots.

May is the best of a very bad bunch.

I think my bet will be on May. Bang goes Human Rights.

Yup, but the others would have meant bang go human rights and much more. What a choice!

Have I missed something? Which 5 countries are 'soon' going to join the EU?

Not soon as in next week, but five countries are 'tabled' to join the EU, including Albania, Serbia and Croatia.As if 28 countries were not enough.27 countries in it now of course.
What do I suggest dd..... ? nothing to be done about the Westminster bubble except hope that more MP's more in touch with real life get into politics I guess.
Maizie I doubt that anyone here is a friend of anybody in the Cabinet, so nobody would be upset.

5 countries may have applied to join the EU but that doesn't mean they will be accepted. It's a pity that Leavers don't seem to have understood this (or could it be that they don't want to understand it?) Every member state has the power to prevent their entry through exercise of their veto (I hope that you all know what a veto is). If one member state says "No" then they don't get in. It has to be everyone agreeing. Britain could have kept any one of them out indefinitely had it felt inclined. Of course, if we end up with EU lite, which looks to be on the cards, we'll not be able t do that.

Of course, this doesn't fit with the 'we're ruled from Brussels with no say in the matter' narrative, does it?

Exactly, Maizie.

It's all part of diplomacy. Look at where those countries are situated. The last thing anybody needs is for them to fall under Russian influence and that's a real possibility, if the EU turns its back on them.

There are 30 (?) conditions a country must meet before it can finally apply for EU membership. The EU is currently working with those countries on the conditions, such as human rights, etc. It makes sense to do that to keep diplomatic channels open. Turkey has so far met one (I think) of the conditions and it took years for it to get to that stage, so it will be decades before it satisfies all of them. Albania is nowhere near, but given its history and the fact that it is a country which has only recently opened itself up to the rest of the world, it really does make sense to try and influence it.

Nigglynellie,Spot on.they won't though,arrogance,one of the worst traits,that and pure bleddy greed.

I think Croatia is already in the EU.

Just been a debate about EU nationals in the UK.
The opposition won, so they will be allowed to stay and have all the rights they have now, despite Brokenshire wanting to use them as bargaining chips.

durhamjen Re eu nationals allowed to stay. I think you'll find that that is what most Brexiters expected to happen.
So that's one part of gloom and doom squashed.

So Brexiters are not the ones who are daily telling foreigners to go home, or putting leaflets through the doors of Polish people, then.

www.theguardian.com/healthcare-network/2016/jul/06/eu-workers-nhs-faced-racial-abuse-head-home

Somehow I do not think the Remain side are doing this.
These are the people who have been given the right to stay according to parliament today.
I hope Brexiters take note.

Actually I watched the debate also and I urge others to watch the proceeding to see for themselves the 'tone' of the debate/motion.

Perhaps the vote gives some idea .

The Ayes 245
The Noes 2

www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/0d3f95e0-11d4-46a2-b62e-1317ce9d3e34

MaizieD
www.express.co.uk/news/politics/599473/EU-Britain-five-years
Veto? What Veto, the article says.

Just because they did not use the veto doesn't mean they couldn't have done if they had wanted to.

What I found interesting about the programme was that most of them hadn't voted before.
They were complaining about having been ignored, but did not vote.
Adrian Chiles comment at the end was that they were demanding change, but what would happen if they did not get it? Who would they blame?

Obviously if they did not get change they would blame immigrants again.

The narrow boat couple were talking about natural people being squeezed out. They would not mind so much if the immigrants spent their money in this country, but they all sent it back to their own country. That's not true, and those who do not spend their money in this country are tax dodgers. They did not get a mention in this programme.

Everybody who voted out mentioned immigrants.
Somebody mentioned the government not putting enough back into councils, but still blamed immigrants! Can't work that out.