Panorama - Why We Voted to Leave: Britain Speaks

Indeed!

May's history is relatively well-known. Leadsom is less well-known.

www.theguardian.com/business/nils-pratley-on-finance/2016/jul/04/im-still-waiting-for-andrea-leadsoms-apology-to-mark-carney?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

www.politics.co.uk/news/2016/07/05/minimum-wage-maternity-pay-scrapped-plans-andrea-leadsom

politicalscrapbook.net/2016/07/andrea-leadsoms-team-claim-overrun-by-foreigners-tweet-never-existed-heres-proof-it-did/

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/anger-tory-mp-andrea-leadsoms-237463

She's a trustee of a children's charity and IDS says she's 'deeply compassionate' (just like him, I suppose).

Hmm.

2 things
...we got on with thinking about how to make it all work.

Shouldn't there have been a well though out plan for that before the referendum?

we need a leader who can pull us all together and get on with sorting things out whatever you voted for.

Which will happen when Hell freezes over. What we're about to get is a choice between two quite unpleasant Right wing women.

Good point, Margaret. It's strange that Corbyn has had so much criticism for 'talking' to Hamas and the IRA. Maybe he was trying to find some kind of common ground and 'work together'.

Do you mean that we could get together with other like-minded nations and call it...errr...the European Union?

WEll 'rose' we could get going with that and as the years went by and it became more diffcult to govern in the modern world with cyber crime and IS, we coud think of coming together with like minded nations to have more of a global voice.

It really isn't possible to 'work together' when people still keep peddling these myths. It works both ways, roses.

I found it on youtube.

The UK is already a sovereign state.

rosesarered I so agree with you. This country is now divided even more and we need a leader who can pull us all together and get on with sorting things out whatever you voted for.

Reality Check: Five new countries to join the EU shortly? Errr...no! Add that to the Leave Project Fear tactics.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36355138

What channel was it on, anya? I'd like to hear it if poss.

Did anyone see the interview with Clive James last night. He exactly expressed my views.

Eloethan's post - my views exactly. We were listening to James O'Brien on LBC at lunchtime, and he gave some examples of the newspapers mis-quoting Corbyn. Their aim was so blatantly obvious - to present him as a raving loony leftie racist. The papers have done him a lot of harm, and TV is almost as bad.

Let's be fair and honest about all this, people voted Leave for all kinds of differing reasons and so too on the Remain side.For Leave, worries about immigration, which means immigration without any numbers being put on it, so that anyone from the other 27 countries ( shortly to be about 32) can mosey on down to the UK , with or without a job, also losing our own Sovereignty, wanting to be able to trade more easily with other countries of our own choosing, and for some, no doubt it was a protest vote only, with a smattering of xenophobia thrown in.For Remain, there were those hoping to maintain the status quo, those hoping to reform the EU ( some hopes!) those who had grown up being in the EU who couldn't imagine there would be a life outside it, those terrified of any change at all etc etc.
It would be far better for us all as a Nation now, instead of making tv programmes beating breasts or sneering about the results, we got on with thinking about how to make it all work.

As long as people keep voting for national governments that, in essence, want - perhaps with a little tinkering around the edges - to maintain the status quo, I feel that coming out of the EU will not yield the sort of results that many Brexiters and the progressive changes that the radical left of the Labour movement were seeking.

As the Leave campaign focused largely on immigration and the removal of "red tape", supported by some ridiculously jingoistic sloganising and, some would say, downright lies, it legitimised racism and a very inward looking and backward view of the world. This is no doubt the result that some people wanted but I truly hope that the vast majority of people are appalled by it.

However, when a politician like Corbyn comes along who everybody acknowledges is a genuine, honest person who wants to improve conditions for everybody in the country but particularly for the poor who always lose out whoever is in government, because he is not a master of spin and deception, he is deemed ineligible for high office. This is, I feel, largely because the right wing press and media definitely do not want anyone to get into power who might challenge the idea that ordinary people should keep working their socks off in order to line the pockets of the super rich or pay for their "mistakes". Labour to some extent capitulated on this point - largely accepting the blame for the 2008 crash (despite the fact that it occurred throughout Europe and the US), and going along with austerity measures.

In my view, we need a leader who stands for fairness and peace and who respects and values everybody and wants to maintain our public services. I expect, though, that so-called charisma will beat integrity every time and we'll carry on with the same old, same old ad infinitum.

We can almost guarantee that the poor will not benefit at all. One person was asked how he would feel if things hadn't changed in 3 or so years. His reply.

Very very angry.

Enter UKIP side right.

It wasn't my view that this was about the anger people felt Daphne it was the view of the people interviewed. In a way that was why I felt so sad. They were good people, some had very specific reasons for leaving but I was left with the feeling that no one would actually pay any attention to the lack of investment where more pressure was on them; no one would look at the areas where the industry that gave them not only a job but a job they were proud to do and no one would stop the sense that people were a commodity to be used for the growth of wealth of others.

I like what Jonathan Sacks has to say usually and it sounds as if he can see the problem. I just worry that no one is offering the solution and that those who try are beaten back by the need of those in power to return to the status quo.

Anya you think it will all change then and society will become more inclusive?

Perhaps if someone had taken the trouble to talk to these people sympathetically and taken their views however irrational seriously it could all have been so different. They see everything being run for bankers, intellectuals and the wealthy, while they are relentlessly unheard, disregarded and shoved to the bottom of the pile. The don't read the b....y Guardian, they read the tabloids and feel they're despised for it. They hear about rich land owners getting massive subsidies from the EU, Lord Astor for one, and people really wonder that the poorest in our society feel the way the do. How arrogant is that?

This seems very relevant at the moment, written I think in 1980

“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”

Isaac Asimov

Rabbi Jonathan Sacks wrote a good article at the weekend in which he commented on a growing tendency in the US, in Europe as well as here, towards a loss of faith in leaders - in politicians, who seem increasingly remote from the everyday life of the majority, CEO's who take huge salaries and golden handshakes but their company goes down the pan along with thousands of jobs (cf BHS) bankers of course and even economic or scientific acknowledged experts in their field. There is a dangerous vacuum in society, how else can you explain the rise of Trump who decries politicians but aspires to be one, and indeed the almost identical unpopularity of Trump and Clinton in the US.
I think that for many it was indeed a "protest" vote and sadly the consequences are likely to be much farther-reaching than the original issue.

Sigh Anya- would you care to expand a bit on that?

www.facebook.com/Channel4News/videos/10153842562976939/

Sigh

I didn't see the programme (will try to catch up on iplayer), but it was all so inevitable.

Crispin Odey, a hedge fund manager who supported and partly financed Leave, made over £200 million (that's not a typo) from the turbulence in the markets last week.

Osborne has announced reducing corporation tax in a desperate attempt to keep business in the UK, but someone is going to have to pay for the reduced tax. It doesn't take a genius to work out who that will be.

It's tragic, because those who voted against bureaucracies and unfair London-centric economic distribution, are going to find out that they'll be losing even more. The EU redistributed wealth in the UK (via regional grants, etc) far more than the UK's own government has ever done.