Anna Soubry

The LibDems were not wiped out in 2017 but increased their representation by 50%. Everyone knows that under the abominable FPTP system it is virtually impossible for any party other than Tory or Labour to gain a majority. The Tories lost so much support that they have to rely on the DUP.

The Labour Party leadership let down their ,membership and their voters by saying they would support brexit. Most LP supporters (currently more than 70%) want to cancel brexit.

Theresa May has kow-towed to the ultra-brexit brigade in her party and refused to listen to anyone else, setting out ridiculous "red lines" which were logically incompatible. That is why we are in this mess.

It is high time that the sane Remainers and the bregretters, who are in the majority, were heard.

Both main party's went to the country in the GE, on the promise of delivering brexit.

And a lot of Remainers, jabberwock held their noses and voted Labour on the strength of their social plans. And, I suspect, because they felt that Labour might make a better fist of negotiating Brexit than May's bull in a china shop approach.

The biggest anomaly in the 2017 GE was between UKIP and the SNP.
SNP 997,508 votes 35 seats
UKIP 557,390 votes 0 seats.
Not that I'm a UKIP fan, but it does seem inequitable.

Good point Fennel.
Varian we do seem to have gone off your topic! Apologies.
Are you cross or does morphing into another topic just become acceptable?
I’m relatively new to GN and not sure how posters feel about it when this happens!
What do you think .... or does that start another thread haha!

I believe that the threat of a "no deal" Brexit has receded somewhat in the last two day, and perhaps the prospect of Brexit not actually taking place at all has increased.

In the above, it has also been good to witness that the power of no more than forty hardline Tory Brextiers that have held this government to ransom for the last two years and in that the whole of parliament does now seem to have been broken.

It has also been good to see that the thugs that now lead the UKIP campaign have now been outed, but we have still to hear condemnation of their actions from the main Tory Brexit leaders.

There is still a way to go in securing the future of many thousands of well-paid jobs in manufacturing, the higher service industries and many professions in the face of the continuing Brexit uncertainties. However, I feel that parliament has taken a number of steps in the right direction in the last two days to the credit of many MPs in the face of threats to their personal safety.

Jacee5 Tue 08-Jan-19 12:16:01

"Anniebach No female MPs needed protection at the Labour party conference.

The police put out a statement confirming that.
There was a photograph shown that happened to have the MP who was trying to suggest this in the vicinity of a policeman but he was not there to protect her and it is shameful of her that she did not correct the false impression.
Luckily though, as I have said, the Police did correct it for those who wanted to know the actual facts.

Jaycee5 Tue 08-Jan-19 12:27:48

"Here is a link which contains the statement from Merseyside police. Of course the main stream media which had already published the propoganda, did not correct it.
zelo-street.blogspot.com/2018/09/luciana-berger-and-police-protection.html"
----
Jaycee I am not surprised you are promoting the likes of Zelo Street and Squawkbox to make your point.

There were many photographic publications and written reports that show Luciana Berger did indeed have Merseyside Police Officers with her albeit at times only one officer.

What Merseyside Police did not provide was 'armed' police protection.

Here is just one other link and I purposely chose a left wing paper.

www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/jewish-mp-luciana-berger-flanked-13298354

' Jewish MP Luciana Berger flanked by police protection at Labour conference after months of antisemitic threats'.

'Merseyside Police confirmed that the officers with Ms Berger are not armed.'

In a statement they said: "Merseyside Police has not provided Wavertree MP Luciana Berger with armed protection officers.

"The force has a highly visible policing operation in place for the duration of the conference.

"We are continually assessing risk and as a result we have given some additional support to a number of people attending the conference."

Thank you posting the truth POGS

Yes, the truth is a rare commodity!

For heavens sake abuse, hatred and vile rhetoric does NOT belong to the left nor right of politics.

End of.

In the case of Anna Soubry and the harassment she obviously had to deal with it would be a nonsense to not assume they were probably far right/or Brexiters.

But it cannot be so easily said as some posters are saying the right wing are worse than the left wing.

God knows I have taken to task gransnet posters who have chosen to make their point against other gransnet posters by using the words such as Brexshitters/Road Kill /Vermin /Natzis/Racists /Xenophobic.

Some of the links posters put up to known sites that are known for their partisan views and jokes about MP's that have crossed the line of decency have been sadly rife over the past 2/3 years on Gransnet, albeit things have settled down a tad of late.

Indeed whilst I abhor the treatment Anna Soubry received I am aware of some of the things she has said both inside and outside of Parliament that has crossed a line so I think MP's should take a hard look at themselves too.

It should make no difference because of who is on the receiving end of threatening behaviour / abuse ! Whether it be say Farage /Jim Murphy/ Soubry/Rees-Mogg / Ruth Smeeth/Luciana Berger/John Mann or any other politician past or present who has found his/herself to have been on the receiving end of threatening behaviour.

There is nothing wrong in debating facts or making your view known but ' Abuse and Hatred ' are not 'fair play' and politicians deserve better , even from their own parties.

And yet again. Great post POGS. thank you.

Well said POGS

How did this tag "advisory" become attached to the referendum? It was an INSTRUCTION by the majority of the electorate. Not advice or an invitation to a bunch of pampered politicians to waste billions wafflig for over two years. For those that do not understand what majority means it is the result of democracy....something Remoaners like Anna Soubry trot out with demented swivel-eyes to express their anger at being beaten at the ballot box. Yes, DEMOCRACY whether you like it or not. If you do not accept that democracy is what makes the UK a good place to live you can always move to China or Russia. (Or Spain, thinking of Catalonia and how their democtacy was trampled underfoot by the thugs in Madrid.)

God knows I have taken to task gransnet posters who have chosen to make their point against other gransnet posters by using the words such as Brexshitters/Road Kill /Vermin /Natzis/Racists /Xenophobic.

God might know, POGS but I don't think many of the regular posters on Brexit themes would actually confirm this image you have of yourself as the forum politeness monitor.

I've always been quite impressed at the level of civility we've managed over the past 2 years. Compared to Mumsnet and twitter...

max the law on this is quite clear. Referenda in the UK are preconsultative or advisory. DC took it upon himself to say the Government would act upon the result but this was not a legal position. In Ireland it is enshrined in law that the results of referenda are legally binding eg the recent abortion referendum which has now been passed into law

Maxdecatt yes, we do live in a democracy which is the reason we should have another vote. This time it should be on facts not fiction and all campaigners she stick to the rules. That would be true democracy.

Over some time and on several threads I have asked Leavers why they are afraid of another vote. If they are so keen on democracy and so sure that the people want to leave the EU, what are they afraid of? So far I have not had a single reply. Interesting.

I think you'll find max, that the referendum in Catalonia and the subsequent attempt to break away from Spain was in defiance of the Spanish constitution and therefore illegal. Like Scotland needing the permission of Westminster before holding a referendum, Catalonia needed the permission of Madrid to do the same. This they clearly didn't have, and unilateral independence is simply not a goer as it could lead to the break up of a nation which is certainly not desirable unless its done in a proper legal fashion.

maxdecatt

I refer you to my post yesterday (9th Jan: 17.55) where I copied and pasted exactly what the House of Commons Library briefing report said about the status of the 2016 referendum.

In fact, let's see it again in case you can't be bothered to look back a page:

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

You say that another referendum would be run on facts not fiction, and of course run with scrupulous honesty! How can we the electorate be certain of this when points of view differ so greatly, how can you know that information won't be as slanted as before? How can anyone be certain of anything anyone says or writes when own agendas are alive and well on both sides?!! Who do you believe?!! Will it be a surreptitious fix?!!! Questions on the ballot paper slanted, Who on earth are these people that you can you trust to give a fair and balanced view on both sides?!!

I can be certain of one thing and that is that 'brexit' isn't working and this country can't carry on the way it is when parliament is almost totally taken up with trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. And maybe, if there is a second referendum the gutter press will not be allowed to run front pages full of blatant lies and Farage won't have posters showing him standing in front of swarms of refugees stating that they are 'migrants'. Oh, and maybe the Irish question will be commented on and not swept under the carpet as it was last time.

No press freedom Labaik ?

Only if press freedom means a lie is shown to be a lie and when newspapers apologise for doing so the apology is on the same page and the same size as the original. Does anyone remember the full page article saying the Queen supported Brexit? It astounded me back then and does so to this day, because, sadly, some people believe the lies.

Fair point Jabberwok. Yes Labaik the BBC was sadly lacking last time continually showing that bus and not challenging what it said.

I do think though that a lot more information is now available and it has become clear to all but the really dim or people with entrenched views that what was promised will never happen. Some may still want to leave and that is fine but if they are given more information some of them will make informed decisions. It is also possible that some who wanted to stay may now want to leave. The only way to avoid splitting the country is to give us all a chance to vote on any available options.

No press freedom Labaik ?

Are you defending the freedom of the press to tell lies, Annie?

What worries me the most are the targeted 'dark ads' which are on social media and only seen by the people who the campaign thinks will be receptive to them. With mainstream media 'lies' at least they are there for everyone to see and can be challenged. Whereas 'dark ads' can't be challenged because only the 'target' knows what they say. To me this is a very dangerous and undemocratic practice.

Maizie the press are free to print what they wish, within the law, it is up to the public to decide if true or a lie.

Some of lies posted on this forum with links , should they be banned ?

Some of lies posted on this forum with links , should they be banned ?

Any examples, Annie?