Legacy of the fraudulent referendum

In September 2021, UK goods trade was 11.2 per cent, or £8.5 billion, lower than it would have been if the UK had stayed in the EU’s single market and customs union.

For many months the CER’s cost of Brexit model model has found that UK goods trade is between 11 and 16 per cent lower as a result of leaving the single market and customs union. Using the data for September 2021, the model puts the cost at 11.2 per cent.

www.cer.eu/insights/cost-brexit-september-2021

He certainly was.

He was chillaxed Gill.

Cunco, interesting figures, and I agree with most of what you have posted. I have always maintained that the blame for this distressing state we find the country in is down to David Cameron. Not only was he too weak to take control and sort out the ERG mob, he set out the referendum without proper guidelines as to acceptable percentages etc., and then ran an extremely week and complacent Remain campaign, assuming in his ignorance and arrogance that of course he would win and all will be well. The only small consolation is that he has, as far as I can see, made himself an outsider politically and something of a pariah in business after the Greensill business. But, bottom line, I blame Cameron, he knew Cummings, knew, or should have known what he was capable of, but presumably thought he knew better.

Just to finish off a previous discussion, the 1975 EC Referendum was a clear win to remain by 67.2% of those voting to 32.8%. The vote to remain was 43% of those registered to vote (and, if it is of interest to some) just 31% of the UK population.

Comparative figures for Leave in 2016 were 51.9%, 37% and 26%.

What I had not realised was that, despite the 10m rise in population between 1975 and 2016, the actual number of votes to remain fell from 17.4m in 1975 to 16.1m in 2016. To me, that is a staggering demonstration of how poorly successive governments and ultimately the Remain campaign failed to convince the public of the benefits of EU membership. As opinion polls showed, Euro-scepticism ebbed and flowed after 1975 but never went away.

Of course, people have said that the 2019 result was affected by lop-sided media, a questionable claim especially when set against the clear media bias of 1975. There have been other objections to 2019 but I think we all know that if the Remain powers-that-be had evidence to rule out the 2016 Referendum, they would have. There was no shortage of attempts to discredit the result and order a re-run.

More interesting Brexit news - 500 jobs in Newcastle to go from the Rolo/ Smarties plant and moving to the Czech Republic. So any more Rolos will have to imported from the EU.
Now just waiting for the energy price cap to go….

What was the vote tonight that gave bankers a multi million pound tax relief? This when the government won’t cut VAT on fuel. This is the sort of thing a government can do when they have a massive majority….

Presumably Boris was getting rid of the red tape when he held all those parties. He partied while others died alone and uncomforted and the bereaved grieved unconsoled while he stuffed birthday cake down his throat at his birthday party.

The reference in the BBC link is under a photo of a young lady at a Polling Station. I wondered if any chance it might be you.

Yes, the EC was mentioned in the main manifestos, most enthusiastically by the Liberals, but it wasn't a big election issue. The economy predominated. From memory of past searches, I think the polls showed a majority of voters were eurosceptic and remained so until the Referendum campaign in 1975.

MaizieD: according to the BBC, the voting age in 1970 was dropped to 18 for the first time. It seems many younger voters failed to register.

Oooh, you're right (though it wasn't mentioned on your link, I had to look elswhere). Perhaps I did vote in 1970 then. Not that I would have voted tory. I have never voted tory..

Interestingly, the BBC link makes no mention of joining the EC being an issue in the election campaign.

Why not. I totally can get that. I almost did not myself.

In 1970, I was 19, but not elegible to vote as a foreigner- became British in 73.

MaizieD: according to the BBC, the voting age in 1970 was dropped to 18 for the first time. It seems many younger voters failed to register.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/politics97/background/pastelec/ge70.shtml

I thought my point was simple enough. If, as is claimed, there is a democratic deficit in our leaving the EU, by the same token there was a democratic deficit in our joining.

I am well aware of the 1975 Referendum result and I may do a similar comparison with 2016 sometime. It was very lop-sided affair but the issues were better addressed by politicians and the media than in 2016. Even so, many voters thought they were joining a Common Market' whereas the EC was always far more.

I do think Bo-Jo should go but I am not so dismissive of the 2019 result. If you are given two choices and one is Jeremy Corbyn, it is no wonder people voted Conservative. I don't expect you to agree.

I have voted every single time then- knowing 100% that my vote would go straight in the bin due to where I lived and the First Past the Post system, which is totally undemocratic and leaves huge numbers knowing their vote will never, ever count.

I didn't either, as it was my first year in UK, and not elegible to vote. I took on British nationality in 73.

In the election of 1970, the Conservatives won 330 seats, achieved through 13.1m votes. This was 46.4% of the UK vote (around a third of the electorate and, if you insist, about 24% of the population.)

I didn't vote in the 1970 GE, being too young by 1 year (voting age still at 21 then) Was membership of the EC an issue in that election? I don't recall it being so, but I'm ashamed to say that I didn't take much interest in politics at that age.

(I do remember being very happy that we were joining the EC )

Which makes comparison with the 2019 GE quite difficult as it was, for the tories, a single issue, Get Brexit Done, which really skewed the voting. However, it is noticeable that 57% of the voters didn't vote to 'Get Brexit Done'. If the 2019 GE is being treated as a 2nd Referendum (which I have seen it argued) then the considerably more voters were against than for.

(You've missed the 1975 membership referendum, untainted by foreign influence, dubious funding and 'dark ads', when 67% of voters approved our membership.)

So I'm really not sure what you are 'proving' here.

However, as you appear to be a thinking sort of person I sincerely hope and trust that you are appalled at the government and PM that 2019 GE has unleashed on us.

On a serious note....

The Leavers clearly got more votes in the referendum than the Remainers.

However "half the population" didn't vote to leave.

Just call me a pedant.

And in 1707 Scotland entered Union with England based on the bribery of a few aristocrats.

Your point?

These comments about the democratic deficit of our leaving the EU has prompted me to examine the position when we joined the EC.

We joined the EC without a Referendum on 1 January 1973. After the surprise Conservative win in 1970, Prime Minister Heath signed the Treaty of Accession on 22 January 1972, introducing a Bill in Parliament a few days later. The important Second Reading of the Bill passed with a majority of just 8 [309 to 301] after Heath made it a vote of confidence.

In the election of 1970, the Conservatives won 330 seats, achieved through 13.1m votes. This was 46.4% of the UK vote (around a third of the electorate and, if you insist, about 24% of the population.)

In the election of 2019, after an EU Referendum, the Conservatives won 365 seats, achieved through 14.0 m votes. This was 43.6% of the popular vote (around 29% of the electorate and, if you insist, 21% of the population).

Interestingly, in 1970, the Liberals under new leader Jeremy Thorpe lost half theirs seats to just 6, achieved by 2.1m votes or just 7.5% of the UK vote. Nevertheless, in the Second Reading of the European Communities Bill, those 6 votes may have made a great difference to the passage of the Act, the future of the government and our membership of the EC (now EU).

Cunco

Oh do leave off. A 'scant quarter of the population' including around 20m people not entitled to vote!

At the time of the Referendum, there were 46.5m people registered voters of whom 72.2% or 33.2m cast their vote.

"A scant quarter of the population" is, strictly speaking, correct. The population of the UK is approximately 66 million, of whom just over half of 33.2 million voted to leave the EU.

Current 18 year olds were only 12 or 13 at the time of the referendum and didn't have a chance to vote on their own future.

One of the things that I took away from my politics lectures at uni is that Parliamentary Sovereignty and democracy are closely entwined. I am truly shocked to find that MPs are willing to surrender their powers to the Executive (which represents the crown, whose 'tyranny' the Civil War was fought to remove) and return us to basically a dictatorship.

Are they totally ignorant of their powers as part of the Legislature which holds the Executive to account? Many of them have PPE degrees. I can only assume that they learned very little from the Politics element.

Thanks for posting that article MaizieD One of the main concerns I had about Brexit was the removal of a second stage of guidance/checking on the actions of our government. I always felt before that the eyes of the EU watching each country helped to protect us all from any actions by nefarious governments. All protection gone now and, as the article says, the PM is taking his chance to dismantle our basic rights & protections without the inconvenience of having to do so even through the ordinary legislative process.

This is why the likes of Cummings, Johnson and Rees Mogg drove Leave. They want all the power without being answerable to anyone. Brexit gave it to them.

1000s and 1000s of BRITISH citizens living abroad were NOT allowed to vote.

varian

Cunco

Oh do leave off. A 'scant quarter of the population' including around 20m people not entitled to vote!

At the time of the Referendum, there were 46.5m people registered voters of whom 72.2% or 33.2m cast their vote.

At the time of the fraudulent referendum it was estimated that there were around 3 million EU citizens living here, many for most of their lives, working, paying taxes and contributing to our country in many ways, who were not entitled to vote.

That estimate has now been revised to around 5 million.

Of course we don't know for sure how they might have voted but I can tell that of the many I have spoken to, I have not heard one of them support brexit.

There are only a few European countries that allow non citizens to vote in either major elections, or referendums, no matter how long they have lived or worked in said country, France Germany and Spain being amongst those that do not allow this. Most allow local voting, as we do.

Thank you so much for this Maizie. Prof Dougan is the most experience academic on International Treaties- and he has been warning of severe consequences for the UK from the beginning. Huge respect for him.

Interesting thread from Prof Michael Dougan which touches on the concerns Coastpath mentions

Start

Easy, today of all days, to let other important developments slip by without critical attention they deserve. But let’s not underestimate serious threats contained in Johnson’s “Brexit Freedoms Bill”. A short thread, starting with his usual lies, then highlighting 2 key threats:
1) we can take it for granted that this announcement is shrouded in the same deceptions and distortions as every other initiative from Johnson’s Regime. E.g. we’re told many EU rules carried over into UK law upon withdrawal are completely lacking in any democratic legitimacy...
2) ... an outrageous claim, not least since all of those EU rules (even whatever minority UK itself did not positively vote for) were adopted under a system explicitly & repeatedly endorsed by Parliament itself. But then, Johnson doesn't hold Parliament in much regard: see below!
3) E.g. we’re told those retained EU rules have a “special status” that is incompatible with UK’s sovereignty & independence – even though it was Parliament itself that positively decided to create that “special status”, not just during UK membership, but also upon UK withdrawal.
4) E.g. it's amazing that, although Johnson's Regime hasn't finished its review/brought forward any concrete proposals, they can already provide an exact figure (£1 billion) for how much their plans will “save”. Presumably, that's not all from putting crowns on pint glasses...
5) ... and as many others have already correctly said: whatever figure for "red tape savings" Johnson makes up here, will still pale into utter insignificance compared to the vast and unnecessary costs & disruption created across UK economy and society by his Extremist Brexit
6) E.g. it’s surprising to read that, among fields Tories regard as a triumph of “Brexit freedom”, is public procurement – obviously no mention of the vast & shocking scale of corruption, nepotism, fraud & negligence with public money that led one of their own ministers to resign
7) But all those lies & propaganda are there just to distract us from main content of what they are planning. Because this sketchy, shady proposal for a “Brexit Freedoms Bill” contains 2 main threats – each individually worrying but which together should seriously concern us all
6) 1st threat: making it easier for ministers to change law of the land under their own authority. Apparently “taking back control” is very boring: imagine have to wait for Parliament to make the rules! Surely Johnson's Regime should have even more powers to legislate for itself?
7) 2nd threat: the potential scope of such powers. What Johnson snidely dismisses as “red tape” is capable of covering our individual rights & regulatory standards across every imaginable field: employment, environment, consumers, oversight in fields from finance to chemicals…
8) Even though we're offered little detail, it's clear from scope of their official review & from range of concrete examples that they do reference, that this is not intended to be an exercise covering only a few fields or limited to some minor / technical details. Far from it.
9) Put those two threats together = Johnson is suggesting that he & his Brexitists be given even more powers to dismantle even more of our basic rights & protections, but without the inconvenience of having to do so even through the ordinary legislative process. I.e. a power grab
10) When this Bill is published, we need to scrutinise scope of powers Johnson wants to grab, degree of scrutiny Parliament might still exercise, impact on devolved institutions & their competences… & then every single proposal it enables will demand equal scrutiny of its own.
This “Brexit Freedoms Bill” is no mere circus bread for gullible Brexit zealots & no red herring to distract from Partygate. This has all the signs of another deliberate prong in the multifaceted attack by Johnson & his Hard Right Tories on liberal democracy in the UK. Vigilance!

End

twitter.com/mdouganlpool/status/1488202524364529665