My new Brexit Party, supported by Nigel Farage, will fight for our democracy
 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/...eg?imwidth=700

Is this the day democracy dies? Today may see an establishment coup in the corridors of Westminster designed to overturn the biggest vote in our electoral history.

It was 31 months ago that we were asked as a nation whether we wanted to ‘leave’. We gave a clear answer. Yet now most MPs seem determined not simply to water it down but to reverse it completely.

When young children are losing at board games they demand to change the rules. Yet this same juvenile intent drives the cabal of democracy defying MPs.

Let us remember that it was pro Remain MPs who decided the rules. They decided that there would be a referendum. David Cameron’s leaflet to every household said: “The Government will implement what you decide.” In bold type it stated that we were making a “once in a generation decision”. Yet now Remain MPs want us to believe that “once in a generation” only applied if it was a decision they liked.

To understand how deep their contempt for democracy is let us also recall that in February 2017 overwhelming majorities of both Conservative and Labour MPs voted to set Brexit in motion either through a negotiated deal or WTO terms. In all 498 MPs voted to confirm Brexit. In the General Election that followed four months later both the main parties promised to implement the result of the Referendum. So pro Leave voters across the nation felt safe that Brexit was going ahead.

https://static.independent.co.uk/s3f...n.jpg?w968h681



So brazen has been the betrayal of these voters that the Remain clique is having to resort to risible justifications. These MPs were keen to encourage Leave voters to support them in the 2017 General Election. But now they say that the Referendum question was too complicated for those voters. Especially for the older working class ones whom they believe don’t know what’s in their interests. So how come do these Remainers argue for 16 year olds to be allowed to vote in future referendums?

Then there is the ‘divided country’ ploy. They claim that the country is too divided for the Brexit result to be honoured. At most we should half-Leave the EU. Yet do Tory Remainers demand that because Labour only won the Kensington seat in the 2017 election by 20 votes that Labour should only have half an MP? No. They accept that in our first past the post system tiny majorities win. So why do they not respect the Leave campaign’s 1.3 million majority?

What is the democratic response to such a coup and such contempt? It is to form a new party - and that is what I have done in launching the Brexit Party. With the support of Nigel Farage, I earlier this month filed the application to the Electoral Commission. We will be ready if there is a General Election this year - or if the UK takes part in May’s European Elections because the coup has succeeded. Already the campaign has been gathering momentum with rallies around the country. We know that outside the Westminster bubble is a nation which was strongly for Leave. Of the Referendum votes cast outside London, Leave had an 11 per cent majority. The gathering wrath of the British people will be visited on each and every Remain MP through the ballot box.

https://www.irishtimes.com/polopoly_..._330/image.jpg

The Brexit Party will focus on the democracy question. This includes the right of people outside London to decide what is in the economic and political interests. Those on the left or right who want to draw the debate into questions of race will find no succour from us. Our purpose is to give choice to the British people who are the most tolerant nation on Earth.

Yet what if this response to the Parliamentary putsch does not work? What happens if by passing binding treaties or manipulating referendum questions the 17.4 million votes in 2016 continue to be defied?

The bedrock of our political culture over the last 800 years has been consent to be governed. Year by year, yard by yard, through blood, sweat and tears we have matured our democracy. But in recent decades the EU elite has shown that it will always put the power of Brussels and the interests of big companies ahead of everyone else.

So we have cheap labour from inside and outside the EU surging around the continent with no regards for the impact on individual nations. The consequence has been that across Europe old parties are giving way to the new. The tone deafness of Britain’s elite will result in a further rebuke from British citizens. Our hope is that their anger does not overflow the boundaries of civilised politics.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...ght-democracy/

Who will support this new Brexit party? :amazed:

It might not be needed

he said he hopes it wont be but he is putting the structure together just in case

A party thats fighting for democracy?! The Peoples vote 2019 is cominggggg!

Sure a Back Up
as UKIP is no longer liked by Nigel.

No.

Not enough time

Doesnt sound very democratic for them to just assume what the public want.

Wouldn't it still be democratic though? Surely if it's still what the people want they will just vote no again?

consent and rule

where do we stop, what happens at the next election?

can i have a rerun of ML as I dont think many of the younger members understood what they voted for??

There has been loads of New Polls taken
no one wants a 2nd vote


They just want to get past the date of 29th March 2019 11PM


This is NOTHING like you had in your nation
this is more serious

I think this is a pretty exceptional case though. It's been extremely messy and It does seem like alot of people didn't realise how messy it would actually get?

They're scared of another vote, Niamh. They know it was a fluke

Certainly seems that way

but we have not left yet - all that has happened is the EU have been mean because 1. they can, 2. they know that this is the thin end of the wedge and if they made it easy it would spell the end of their cartel

What have the Eu done to the UK that was so awful? (I'm not talking about the exit negotiations btw, I mean why they're a "cartel" ) :laugh:

The EU has been bad news for us
Your Nation is stuck in it.

We have every right to divorce it

I don't want a re-run of the referendum and I don't think most people do, what would be good would be a vote on how we leave if we are leaving, ie no deal, Mays deal (which apparently is the most likely now according to yesterdays politics shows), a Norway deal ect, its all very well saying people voted out or in but many of us voted on what we knew or what was known in the past, I think now it has been spelled out...sort of ...what might/will happen the decision should not be down to hooray henrys in Parliament, of course Mogg is happy to go with no deal, all his assets are probably offshore.

The British Chambers of Commerce has estimated that the annual cost to the UK of EU regulation is £7.4 billion squid.

Its a bit like the scots arguing against London rule

We have out own numpties who can stitch us up politically so why do we need other twats from other countries?

all the environment protections, workers rights :laugh:
some "businessmen" here would prefer a return of 19th century capitalism
sad thing is that some working classes have been bamboozled to go along with it, turkeys voting for Christmas :hehe:

oh I see insulting people you have never met and dont know is now a legit argument?

:conf:

Indeed; the all-too-frequent argument that holding a 2nd referrendum would have wider implications for British democracy / General Elections etc. is false and disingenuous. Most of the people making the claim know perfectly well that a second vote doesn't degrade democracy and would have no such implication... they just like to pretend that they believe it because they personally support the current result as it stands and want it to stick (with little to no regard for what the majority of the population wants now that a clearer picture of Brexit is available).

It's the opposite of supporting democracy. If there's a clear indicator that public desire has shifted before action has commenced, then the ONLY democratic option is another vote. It's not even vaguely similar to a GE. GE's -are- repeated, by default, every 5 years or less.

If the benefit of being in the single market exceeds £7.4 billion (spoiler: it does) then this figure is utterly irrelevant. Any benefit of leaving is based on the flimsy assumption that we will be able to secure lucrative trade deals that will equal the single market in terms of economic benefit (spoiler: we won't).

It's also nothing like Scotland gaining independence from the UK, as we would have been an independent nation still within the EU single market which makes it an entirely different situation. You know better than to compare Brexit to IndyRef, LT :nono:. It's a lazy and incompatible comparison.

Theresa has to take us out of the EU, if only to get rid of Farage.

stop making things up

if you are saying 7.4 billion quid is irrelevant you need to reread what ever website you just looked up

It's a scream how a people's vote gets such backlash yet the snap election was brushed over :joker:

well that election is part of our democratic process and was done accordingly

re running a referendum because some people did not like to be wrong is not comparable and the fact that it would wield a similar result is the worst kind of masochism

the ref was only advisory and the result far too close to decide something that important
Farage himself said before the ref that a close defeat would not close the matter and he was right :laugh:

I am sorry but that does not make sense

votes are not abandoned because they are close, its first past the post

The turnout was huge and the result was conclusive. I take it you did not make this point at the last 4 elections in the UK?

it does make sense in the context that a ref is advisory where an election is legally binding. Farage was prepared to continue the fight and push for a new ref if he lost .... he said exactly that, so why is it such a shock that the side that lost in the ref want it run again?

There is nothing to say that there is a limit on number of refs, no-one stated that the ref wouldnt happen again (only the SNP made that pledge for the indy ref)

Sorry what "side" are you referring to - who are they as the the politicians for the two main parties voted to support Brexit

Wrong. Nice try, fake news.

A "saving" of 7.4 billion is irrelevant if the changes made to secure that "saving" in themselves cost more than 7.4 billion.

You're a businessman of sorts LT, I have to assume that you know the difference between a gross and net saving? I hope so anyway or the taxman is going to be very annoyed at your next audit :nono:.

:omgno: LT to publish his tax return?

Well not really, people voted to leave, but they didn’t vote for a hard or soft Brexit or no deal either, if those options were included in the first place there’s have been a different outcome all together, leavers don’t want a people’s vote now because the leave vote would be split and they know they’d lose :shrug:

Has anyone on here ever met anyone who voted to leave the EU, and now wants another referendum?

No, neither have I.

Well, I haven't met Isabel Oakeshott but she said as such on Question Time. Ironically, Nigel Farage even warmed to a second referendum at one point.

Not saying I necessarily agree with a second referendum, but there is certainly demand from some Leave voters to have another say because what they voted for the first time isn't what they expected to happen. Not to mention those like Oakeshott and Farage who want the second referendum because they're confident Leave will win again.

We should go with a soft Brexit imo.

I'm honestly amazed at how 48.6% I think it was have been ignored by the Tory party and are deliberately aiming for a hard Brexit.

People don't like to admit that they made a mistake or voted in ignorance but that doesn't mean they wouldn't vote differently in a second referendum when no one can see which box they're ticking.

If you're right then there's no "risk" to leave voters in having a second vote, as the result will stay the same. Its surely that simple. The anger and incredulity about the idea of a second vote suggests, to me, that those who still want Brexit to go ahead think there IS a risk of the vote going differently.