Government must have vote on Brexit

In a way that suggested a very offensive wishing for the deaths of those who disagree with you. A post which was at best vulgar, at worst hate speech.

Nonsense; complete and utter nonsense.

Talking about percentages of this that and the other doesn't help anything.The fact is, we had the vote last June, we have voted to Leave, we will be leaving.
Saying that many younger people don't feel that there is a Party to represent them is excusing their lazyness in not going to vote.
Why should any Party represent 18 to 25 year olds? Political Parties represent all ages.I used to go out and vote, didn't you?

I know, Maizie. Totally pathetic! Don't blow a gasket too!

Nonsense; complete and utter nonsense. angry

#cheerleaders'r'us

I think the 'oldies' also remember the poverty post war as the country was rebuilt. I certainly remember the rationing post war. Just look at the cost of rebuilding cities like Aleppo and restoring confidence that you are back in business.
As for the cartoons - a time honoured way of highlighting situations and long may it remain.
If they vote on March 31st for Article 50 it is somewhat amusing, to me anyway, that it comes into force on 'All Fools' Day'.

Mair it may be 'sensible' but there is no doubt that it affected the numbers voting and needed a more open and pro-active publicity campaign to ensure all young people knew what was happening. It is a valid reason why the number of young voters dropped 'sensible' or not.

Nobody actually knows for sure how many people in age group voted, because age wasn't asked in some polls. The results can only be extrapolated from the known age profiles of the areas involved. Even they aren't that accurate, because the reported areas didn't correspond with parliamentary constituencies.

However, there have been numerous polls and the results can be collated. It's almost certain that a higher percentage of working people voted to Remain than non-working people. The cut off age seems to be about 50. A higher percentage of under 50s voted Remain, whereas a higher proportion of over 50s voted Leave.

It would appear that about 75% of 17-24 year olds who did vote, voted Remain. However, there are few of them, compared with other age groups. Even if they'd all turned out, they couldn't have matched the number of over 50s.

I can vouch for the difficulty some young people had in registering to vote. Both my children assumed they were registered. However, my son had never been registered and it was only as a result of my enquiries that I found out that he wasn't. He had lost his NI number, so it took a couple of weeks to get him registered. My daughter wasn't registered either. She was subletting in Manchester at the time and remembered filling in a form, but it would appear her landlady hadn't posted it. She only discovered she wasn't registered, because I kept nagging her to check.

"The cut off age seems to be about 50. A higher percentage of under 50s voted Remain, whereas a higher proportion of over 50s voted Leave"

You've just been slagging off as 'unreliable', polls showing that more over 65s voted remain than did under 25s; now you choose an arbitrary poll statistic that you seem to like!
Does it make you feel part of the 'cool crowd'?

Mair it may be 'sensible' but there is no doubt that it affected the numbers voting and needed a more open and pro-active publicity campaign to ensure all young people knew what was happening

The job of the NUS I'd say, not for tax payers. In fact I'd be amazed if the highly political NUS hadn't made students aware. Most students one can only presume just do not care.

Bbbrrrr! I wondered why it was a bit chilly!

BTW Do you have a different version of GN? I haven't been 'slagging off' any polls.

Who knows what version youre seeing on Planet Bremain DD!

May is recognising Parliamentry sovereignty, and publishing a white paper.

At last! But TM had no intention of doing the right thing without being forced. They would have rushed headlong into the unknown on a path planned by the three stooges behind closed Westminster doors.

Leaving the EU is a mammoth task based on a vote on a very simplistic in/out premise, with no reference to just how severance was going to be achieved, whilst maintaining the promised access to a single market and a good relationship with Europe after we leave. Latterly we find that the single market is not an option on that exit route.

Yet they planned to do so whilst bypassing a parliamentary vote. It was sheer arrogance and they now have to put it to the vote, which is as it should have been done in the first place, without this costly court case. They knew they'd lose why did they persist? Arrogance again.

This should never have gone to court. We are not a country ruled a handful of the elite - or conversley by mob rule. We are a parliamentary democracy and decisions about the future of the country are taken by parliament, not just the cabinet.

Mair I have always loved that quote by Mark Twain.

The Supreme Court has confirmed that the UK is a Parliamentary democracy. We do not have a fully democratic voting system, as first-past-the-post does not result in the proportion of MPs reflecting the proportion of votes, however what is entirely clear is that our MPs are entrusted with exercising their best judgement as to what is in the best interests of the constituents that they represent. They are not spokesmen who must follow the instructions of their constituents.

In last year's referendum, 477 out of the 650 MPs (73%) voted to Remaim in the UK. These are people who know a great deal more than the average person about the EU, the advantages of membership and the disadvantages of leaving. In other, even less important matters we have to trust their judgement. The minority (27%) of MPs who supported Leave is an even smaller proportion than the 37% of the electorate who chose to vote Leave.

Nothing we have learned since 23rd June has made the prospect of Brexit more palatable. Indeed all the signs are that the outcome of Brexitting could be far worse that even the most pessimistic forecasts.

If these 477 MPs have, since the vote , been persuaded to revise their considered view the leaving the EU would not be in the interests of their constituents, I would like to know what has changed. It seems to me that if any of them now vote to enact Article 50, they are either bowing to the pressure of their party whips because they don't want to lose their seats, or kow-towing to the right wing press which has tacitly threatened violence and civil unrest if the "will of the (37%) of the people" is thwarted.

Sadly, I anticipate that many Conservative and Labour MPs, who care more about their jobs than what might be in the best interests of their constituents will not hold to their principles but will acquiese in a move which they know will damage our country.

If you want to stop this madness, please google the list of Remainer MPs and email them to remind them to stick by what they truly believe.

Have emailed mine. But I think he's thinking of rejecting it anyway.

I wasnt about to blow a gasket about the daphnedill figures.

It was about the post about by whitewave saying We CAN and must reach an agreement that ALL can accept. Through compromise.

My mistake for not making my last post on here clearer.

Why would that upset you, Ankers?

Off-the-scale unrealistic.

Sir William (Bill) Cash is a eurosceptic extraordinaire. Even he wants the government to be more transparent and recognise the sovereignty of Parliament. This is a letter he has written to David Davis:

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2017/01/25/parliament-is-sovereign-as-bill-cash-has-rightly-noted/

I don't know if this has been mentioned already, but I think it was a big mistake for Corbyn to put a 3line whip on this forthcoming debate/ vote.
I had been hoping the Supreme Court would confirm that Parliament had to debate the issue. Now they have the opportunity, each MP should be able to go back to his/her constituency and ask them for any change of views since the referendum. That's what democracy is about. MPs should reflect the view of their constituency, as well as their own view.

ps just read your last post, varian.
I entirely agree with you on this.

Thank you Tricia I am sure that there are now more than 48% of us who think like this, but can our voices be geard?