Liberal Democrats

Oh I do understand why the Liberals can't back Labour although I can't understand why they think Corbyn has dithered - that just sounds like lazy politic to me. Again, agree or disagree, he has been totally consistent. The LP recognise that basically half the country voted leave and half voted remain. He has said they would negotiate to leave the political EU while basically staying in the trading arrangements in order protect jobs and livelihoods. Having done that a LP government will put the agreed "leave" or remain to the country. What could be simpler and it hasn't changed over the years.

What Corbyn and each of the other parties have is a problem getting the necessary agreement. Tories with their "leave with nothing", Liberals with their "never leave" are each only talking to half the country, half or less of Parliament and not at all to the EU. Perhaps their leaders are so inline to simplify down to yes or no that the don't see that this could split the country. If they are that blind they probably don't get what the LP is trying to do.

The media are. as always, keen to write off the Liberal Democrats, but we should remember that in the last national poll, for the EU parliament this year, the number of LibDem MEPs elected was more than the total number of Labour and Tory MEPs put together.

GracesGran I don't know whether the LibDems thinks Corbyn has dithered. It's me who thinks he has - maybe just my perception.

But Labour isn't likely to win an election (not with an absolute majority anyway), so won't get a chance to hold a referendum.

I must be blind because I don't get what the Labour Party says it's trying to do either.

I think Swinson has said she doesn't want to work with the current Labour leadership. I thought that's what you were complaining about.

There are two reasons: firstly, as I said, former Conservative voters won't vote LD is they think they're going to make Corbyn PM; secondly, the current Conservative "rebels" wouldn't serve under Corbyn, although they would serve under a more centrist Labour MP.

I've worked quite closely with my local LD party and have spoken to hundreds of people. This is a rock solid Conservative seat and I don't really expect that to change. However, of the people I've spoken to directly, a number are interested in the LDs (and some have joined). I don't think any of them have ever had a good word to say for Corbyn. That's what anybody wanting to get rid of the Tories is up against.

I don't think you are the only one to say it growstuff. It's a bit more of the propaganda we hear day after day. It's also a bit more of the limiting our language in order to limit discussion and thinking. It goes along with Brexit means Brexit and The Will of the People. It irritates me a little as you might have guessed. One side throws a non-phrase and the other throw one back. Just as you do kindly explained how the Liberals are boxed in it is true of each of the parties. The only party who could have done anything are the Tories as the were the government.

My, my are we going to be battered with Liberal rhetoric now growstuff. First it's the Tory Brexiteers, and while I may not agree I do understand what they want. Then it's the Liberals and while I may not agree I do understand what they want. Along side both is Labour and while I may not agree I do understand what they want.

If you don't I am both surprised and sorry for you. It seems a bit late to try and start sorting the out after three years, three months, whatever.

I'm not saying I agree with it, but I'm trying to be pragmatic. I'd like to see a Labour government in some kind of agreement with the LDs, Plaid, the SNP and the Greens. It would take a very good and professional politician to hold it all together, but I believe it's not impossible.

I agree with you that Corbyn has an unfair press, but there's not much I can do about it. Nevertheless, I'm afraid I don't agree with quite a lot that he says - and certainly not on the EU - but I would accept him as the better option. Unfortunately, the majority of people wouldn't and I really do believe he's a liability.

No, you're not going to be battered with LD rhetoric, I promise.

Don't be sorry for me. I believe 100% that the best option for the UK is to stay in the EU. My dream is that somebody will say "OK, chaps (and chapesses) that was a silly idea - let's get on with sorting this country out - but from within the EU".

I sincerely hope that politicians have taken note of why some people are so unhappy, although as many of them won't actually say, it's difficult to know.

I'd love politicians to get their heads together and work out strategies for reviving our former industrial towns, which would include investing in infrastructure and better apprenticeships, etc. We mustn't be allowed to carry on as we have been doing, so we have to stop relying on property as a way of making money and we need to make sure people are paying their fair share of taxes - even if that means some of them leave the country.

I think Labour's idea for being out of the EU politically, but still to have trading agreements is bonkers. What that means in reality is leaving, then renegotiating from a position of weakness.

None of the parties has changed their position as far as I can see. One for out, one for in, one offering voters a vote either for leaving the political EU while remaining in the trading EU, or remaining and reforming.

I notice Benn has said that parliamentarians could take control once more on 19 October and add a confirmatory vote to anything the Tories bring back.

I think Labour's idea for being out of the EU politically, but still to have trading agreements is bonkers. What that means in reality is leaving, then renegotiating from a position of weakness.

What would they be renegotiating?

How do you you know people wouldn't vote to stay in?

gacesGranMK3. The evidence, admittedly is fluid at best, but it does suggest that you are wrong in your assertion that people would not now vote remain. However tomorrow they say is another day

Where did I say that, absthame I don't mind believe Nguyen challenged on what I do say but please don't make it up.

believe Nguyen being

I apologise if I misread you GraceGranMK3. But I took it that you were saying that a vote would produce a similar outcome, and the evidence of that view is dubious at best. I accept that's not you was saying. SORRY

The trouble is that Labour is unlikely to win a GE with Corbyn as leader, so the British people won't get a chance for a new referendum.

I still don't get the idea that the UK can leave the EU politically but not for trade. The EU would never agree to that. The UK would have to leave completely and then negotiate a trading agreement, which is what will anyway, whatever kind of government the UK has. It's likely to take years and jobs will already have gone and th economy trashed.

Not Mystic Granny yet absthame. I do appreciate the apology.

its a temporary caretaker government that I meant,thats what Jo Swinson wont back UNLESS its Tory led.Which leaves us in exactly the same situation we're in already .IF she was bright enough to understand that having a temporary alliance with Labour.Greens and SNP it would give the country breathing space from the madness she might ..just MIGHT gain from it.Saying that she wont co operate with anyone but the tores will remind voters of the last disatrous coalition that merely pushed through ALL the tory policies even the ones the LD's said they would never support.LOOK AT HER VOTING RECORD!!

I still don't get the idea that the UK can leave the EU politically but not for trade. The EU would never agree to that.

I think the idea, originally proposed by Dr Richard North in his 'Flexcit' plan was for the UK to rejoin EFTA (European Free Trade Association) and thus stay in the EEA (European Economic Area). This would mean remaining in the Single Market (with the 4 'pillars' of 'freedoms' associated with it) but not being part of the EU's political project.

www.eureferendum.com/documents/flexcit.pdf

It's a 'plan' that a number of people think cold have worked although there was some doubt expressed about whether:

1) EFTA would want us back (as we abandoned EFTA when we joined the EC)

2) whether the acceptance of a country with an economy far bigger than that of the other members and a lot of muscle (remember that the UK was one of the Big Three in the EU) would unbalance relationships within EFTA and the UK force it to go in directions the rest of its members didn't want.

This plan was completely marginalised. I think because the Leave campaign depended on whipping up anti EU hysteria and, having been well and truly whipped up, nothing that smacked of any connection at all with the EU found any favour in the eyes of the Leaver population.

Of course, it also doesn't please the disaster capitalists and those who have an interest in selling off the NHS to the USA.

I don't think the LP are suggesting EFTA are they Maizie? Isn't that why they emphasise "a" single market. It would, it seems to me, work in much the same way as the EFTA countries though.

No, I don't think they are, either, GGMK2, as they initially agreed with no freedom of movement.

I was really just responding to growstuff's musing.

I think the LD’s are about to (mostly) become irrelevant again. Their main position for a GE ‘Revoke Brexit!’ is about to be blown out of the water. So Remainers will (on the whole) have no use for Jo Swinson unless some of their other policies are appealing to them.

Do you know if they are still suggesting it could/should be done without freedom of movement Maizie? It seems to be talked about less than it was on all sides.