Anna Soubry

Maybe Moggie that is why the whole referendum idea was ill conceived.

Too many people, like you say you do, stick with what they believe is the truth and ignore facts and figures, reports and information form people with more knowledge or expertise.

Whilst I do not support the ideals of many MPs and probably would not personally like many of them I do have respect for the system of representatives i.e. MPs

To abuse and try to intimidate an MP is not a legal (or moral). I regularly write to my MP and also to other MPs if they are involved in issues I feel strongly about. I am clear about my opinion and ask they consider my point of view.

I have attended protests and marches and campaigns. I may have been part of a crowd shouting slogans at MPs on a platform but not making individual or personal slurs and certainly not in a way to threaten or make anyone feel fearful.

Women MPs get worse abuse. How many male MPs get rape threats?

Strange that most of the ' self serving, money orientated, ambitious, arrogant politicians?!!' that I can think of are all pro Brexit.

Are you a disgruntled Remainer by any chance Labaik

There are many, many MP’s who fit the description both pro and anti Brexit!

Increasing numbers of today's politicians are able to earn far more money outside Parliament and take a pay cut; some actually stand because they wish to be of service.
I am more concerned about the increasing number of lawyers who become MPs, and are beginning to use their legal knowledge to gain their objectives: witness today's debacle.

suzie maybe not rape but one got a death threat yesterday. None of us know what sort of threats they get unless they tell us.

No, I always believed it was advisory. Please show me the evidence that I have been wrong.

lemongrove. ??

Will this do as evidence Nonnie - a direct quote from the leaflet that the government posted (using taxpayers money) to every household in the land:

‘In accordance with the Act and the public duty of the Electoral Commission, a guide was posted to every household in the UK and Gibraltar in the week beginning of 16 May 2016 by HM Government. The leaflet was titled: "Why the Government believes that voting to remain in the European Union is the best decision for the UK". This leaflet clearly stated: "This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide".’

Surely the assurance from our then P.M plus the approval of parliament that the referendum was binding was proof enough of their intentions?!! It was made quite clear on more than one occasion!! The fact that it didn't go according to plan, doesn't make any difference to the original intention, even one born out of arrogance and misplaced thought!!

Thanks for that Urmston.

Why do so many MPs and reporters say it was only advisory, just confuses us all. I also remember that the EU said once we had triggered Article 50 there was no going back but more recently they have said we can stay on the same terms we currently have.

It should have only been advisory or have had a % majority that would have made it more binding. We are not a plebiscite democracy. Cameron was a total idiot to construct it in the way he did.

Probably PECS but this was the dish he served up for us all to vote on IN GOOD FAITH.
I think to be honest that’s why the referendum got such a huge turnout.
We believed our votes counted. ?

Varian

On this thread you posted:-

varian Tue 08-Jan-19 10:26:30

" There is absolutely no comparison between the behaviour of the pro and anti brexit supporters. As far as I know JRM was insuted by one silly old man when he paraded his children for the media. These 100 strong mobs of brexit thugs are violent dangerous ignorant louts, whose behaviour is encouraged by the right wing tabloids with their talk of "treachery" and "bertrayal".
---

You are mistaken as I posted on one of the copious threads
about Rees-Mogg :--

" Vile abusive people are simply that vile abusive people.

Jacob Rees-Mogg and other Conservative MP's have become as much of a target to suffer hate crime and abuse as some of the Labour MP's and Councillors.

This is just the latest incident that the Rees-Mogg family have been subjected to by ironically those who called him ' scum '.

This happened to the family not long ago.:-

" Vandals have spray painted the words "posh scum" on the home of Jacob Rees-Mogg and left a purple sex toy on his car.

The North East Somerset MP is thought to have been on holiday with his family when the vandals attacked his house in West Harptree, Somerset.

The words "posh scum" and "shut up and die" were sprayed across his windows and car during the attack on Wednesday night (August 1).

Condoms were also left near the grounds of the Tory MP’s house.

An anarchy symbol was left on his Range-Rover, together with a purple dildo."
----

Varian one of your posts on that thread duscussing the abuse Rees-Mogg was receiving was as follows:-

varian Wed 12-Sep-18 20:23:27

" They are not fair game but he is. "
-—-—---------

Nobody is ' FAIR GAME' whether they are left/right of politics.

Nobody is 'FAIR Game' because they believe in Remain or Leave.

Whether it is Anna Soubry, Jacob Rees-Mogg, Luciana Berger, Nick Boles, Dianne Abbott it is not acceptable for ANY MP to be harassed or subject to the vile abuse by vile people from both the left and right of politics.

The threads we have now had discussing the abuse, vicious rhetoric, threatening behaviour from death threats to plackards showing politicians with a ' noose' around their neck, burning bonfire effigies of our politicians should not depend on our politics nor our view on Brexit to know that VILE PEOPLE ARE JUST THAT VILE People.

I don't care who I might upset when I say sadly even on Gransnet the rhetoric and ease with which some posters so easily overstep the line of decency to make their point is also a concern and leads to the charge of hypocrisy at best on so many occasions.

Without having access to the government pro remain leaflet, can anyone tell me what was said in it regarding Ireland?

JRM was insuted by one silly old man
I'm sorry, varian, but Ian Bone is not a silly old man - he is an anarchist, and bone-idle - educated to degree level but resolved never to work, only to live off the state which he despises.
In 2006, he told The Guardian: "I never thought about having a job or a career. Jobs and material possessions have never loomed large in my life.

But Bone managed to have five children whom he largely ignored and left to his wife to bring up.
His daughter, Josephine, said:
he is an unprincipled rabble-rouser who just loves a fight.

Thanks for that Urmston

You can quote from that leaflet all you like, Urmstongran but the fact remains that. like the referendum, it was non-binding. The only body which had the right to make such a 'promise' was Parliament and they had been assured that the referendum was only advisory. Cameron was acting beyond his constitutional powers in making the 'promise'. But by the time he did so it was too late for Parliament to alter it.

From the HOC library report on the EU referendum bill:

This Bill requires a referendum to be held on the question of the UK’s continued membership of the European Union (EU) before the end of 2017. It does not contain any requirement for the UK Government to implement the results of the referendum, nor set a time limit by which a vote to leave the EU should be implemented. Instead, this is a type of referendum known as pre-legislative or consultative, which enables the electorate to voice an opinion which then influences the Government in its policy decisions. The referendums held in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland in 1997 and 1998 are examples of this type, where opinion was tested before legislation was introduced. The UK does not have constitutional provisions which would require the results of a referendum to be implemented,

Report which contains this can be downloaded from here: researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-7212

Why do so many MPs and reporters say it was only advisory, just confuses us all.

They say it because that's what it was.
In fact, when the bill was being debated it was proposed that an amendment should be made requiring a super-majority but the Commons were assured that it wasn't necessary because the referendum was only advisory. I can find the Hansard entry or the clip of David Liddington saying this if you like...

So while Leavers, understandably, cling to Cameron's 'promise', Remainers are, equally understandably, not only horrified that Cameron made that unconstitutional promise but also that the result of a referendum in which some Leave campaigns broke electoral law is being implemented. It makes a mockery of democracy to allow one side to 'win' by illegal actions.

they are not fair game but he is
I bet she didn't think that statement was going to come back and bite her.

Both main party's went to the country in the GE, on the promise of delivering brexit. Was this only advisory too?!!! was this yet another vote catching lie?!!
The only remain party, the libdems were as good as wiped out!
How can any of us believe one thing a politician says, referendum, G.E manifesto, whatever?!!

Well said POGS

Nothing in the leaflet Labaik and this - taken from an article in The Irish Times from Matt O’Toole who was chief press officer for Europe and economic affairs in the British prime minister’s office from September 2015 to August 2017.
- explains why not:

varian you posted: These 100 strong mobs of brexit thugs are violent dangerous ignorant louts

This was written about the silly old man Ian Bone a few years ago (2010):

in 1983 Ian Bone founded Class War, an “extremely violent anarchist paper.” Bone was quite clear in that he aimed to put “violence back at the top of the anarchist agenda.

Oops! Sorry Labaik I pressed ‘post’ too soon!
Here it is:

English voters were going to win or lose the 2016 referendum.
They would likely be asked to vote to leave based on a hot-blooded appeal to raw nationhood. The best antidote to that was a cold-blooded appeal to economic interest.
My colleagues on Cameron’s political team were certainly sympathetic – many of them were also angry about Leave’s approach to the Irish question – but the truth was that not enough target voters cared enough to make it a central campaign issue.
And there wasn’t enough time to make them care.

- and so, here we are. Dispiriting isn’t it?