Starmer: No to a Second Referendum

[Andy_W]

We can't have a system where 44% of votes going to the Tories, gives a 56% majority (365/ 650).

For example, the greens (whilst I think their polices/manifesto would be unrealistic) got ~3% of vote (nearly a million people) yet only have one MP, which is not right. Realistically if PR was in the greens would get around 10% of votes, and should get 10% of the say at the table.

It's not a large enough chunk that would mean we go 100% green, too quick and wreck the economy in the process, but it would mean we do have to listen to that 10% and would probably end up better for it. The same as there may be some other smaller parties who I might not agree with, but then at least they get their say.

It opens the door for more coalition between parties, to get changes through, providing we did it the right way.

The last thing we want though is no majority/ coalitions, so we can't get through any changes, but if laws/ policies were roughly split the way the entire UK wanted them (on average), then I think more people would be happier overall. Of course, it would not be good for the far right Tories who want to gain at everyone else's expense, but our system should not allow this, like it has done for the past decade or whatever.

 

[Lefty]

I think/hope this is just clever tactics from Labour.

Don't mention Brexit, claim the issue is done, point out it has been another incompetent Tory fiasco of implementation. It means there is not only no rallying point for the them vs us scenario Johnson thrives on, but any mention just brings up Tory ineptness.

Meanwhile, most importantly, Labour intend implementing every measure necessary before rejoining eg aligning with the Single Market, easing bureaucracy, mending relations with the EU, without mentioning rejoining. These measures would have to be taken anyway, so just take the measures, then mention rejoin, rather than the other way round.

Lets face it, Brexiters are too ignorant of what Brexit and the Single Market/Customs Union means to realise that we will have rejoined in all but name. All that then remains to debate is whether it was economically better when we were in the EU and are again once realigned, compared to the Johnson/Tory brexit interval, which will be an easy thing to show, followed by -so do we want to have a say in setting the rules again, or continue to have not taken any control? The Brexit campaign lies eventually come back to haunt the Brexiters, because they always said we didn't have to leave the Single Market anyway, so it's still Brexit and moreover the one that most Brexiters actually wanted, even though they didn't understand it enough to know it. Well, they knew about the migrant labour aspect, but now they know it was a good thing to have it.

 

[Andy_W]

This rather well explains the Labour strategy on Brexit/Rejoin and why it is best that way

That's bang on

 

[Ziggy]

IMHO the earliest we could have a referendum on rejoining is around 2040, this has to be a generational thing as Sturgeon is failing to see over Scottish referendum, you can't keep voting until you get the result you want or else democracy is further devalued.

That would be worrisome.

Luckily for us, we don’t live in a democracy

.

 

[WeeGord]

There is no completely foolproof or perfect system for elections. However, PR or various forms of it tend to be the systems in place for the majority of the more progressive countries with the higher standards of living and a fairer society.

FPTP in Europe extends to the UK and Belarus I believe so make of that what you will.

 

[Ziggy]

Can’t imagine the EU entertaining any idea of us being allowed back in while this government or any residue of it could hold, or return to power in the near future.
It’s not only the government who talk to the EU.
Labour will have been to talking people close to the commission and EU Parliament. So they know what to expect if Labour win an election.

 

[changingman]

There is no completely foolproof or perfect system for elections. However, PR or various forms of it tend to be the systems in place for the majority of the more progressive countries with the higher standards of living and a fairer society.

FPTP in Europe extends to the UK and Belarus I believe so make of that what you will.

Yep, in my albeit limited experience of living and travelling abroad, a functioning PR system tends to "round out" legislation and ultimately give individual laws wider appeal. This function doesn't really exist in our system (although to be fairs the Lords have done decent job over the last 5-10 years) - the FPTP approach tends to result in legislation either being approved or binned (or in some limited circumstances, tinkered around the edges). PR gives a much more collaborative approach.

That said, PR also requires excellent statecraft and realpolitik from those we elect, I'm not 100% sure many of the current HoC are best placed for that.

 

[newyddion]

Will this help Labour?

It would have done in 2019.. but too late low after scuppering two general elections and bankrupting the party!

 

[Lefty]

Clearly not one person has read what Starmer has said!

I've read yesterday's FT article on what he was going to say today. Starmer actually tweeted the link, so I guess he's happy with the gist of it.

 

[ThePrisoner]

Lets face it, Brexiters are too ignorant of what Brexit and the Single Market/Customs Union means to realise that we will have rejoined in all but name.

Call it the 'Trade Boost Accord' and we're golden.

 

[MoggasDog]

I am and always will be 100% adamant that brexit was a stupid act of self destruction. It should have always been subject to a minimum majority either way. But it was a democratic decision that I have had to learn to accept. We have to let the dust settle before turning the house upside down all over again. Changing the current outdated political system has to be the priority - getting rid of FPTP and the shame that is the house of lords.

I would like to see heavy prison sentences for corruption in high office. This cu.nt and his lapdogs we have now are eroding the whole system and it stinks to high heaven. Trying to give the dentists wet dream a job in the Foreign Office for a blowie - that should be time in prison and thats just ONE thing this turd has done. He did something similar with that ugly septic when he was Mayor of London.

The current public acceptance of lies, corruption and deception frightens me to death. The system needs to be fixed as a priority. Corruption in any government should be dealt with strongly and with serious jail time.

 

[Jedi boro]

Lets face it, Brexiters are too ignorant of what Brexit and the Single Market/Customs Union means

There’s your answer.

That’s why you don’t debate before an election it as it’s just too divisive.

 

[newusername]

This rather well explains the Labour strategy on Brexit/Rejoin and why it is best that way

It's important to understand the path. It has stages, each of which MUST be completed before the next.
1: Denial;
2: Acknowledgement of harm;
3: Attempt to mitigate within existing arrangements;
4: Seek new deal (something like Norway);
5: Finally rejoin.
UK is clearly now out of stage 1 and well into 2.
....
We're on track to rejoining in the early 2030s.

But that is just when we will start to reap those Brexit benefits...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1543733648138051584

 

[Lefty]

There’s your answer.

That’s why you don’t debate before an election it as it’s just too divisive.

It's been 6 years and I've yet to encounter any, apart from those involved with Richard North's group that actually wrote a plan, who actually have the sort of all round understanding that they should. I include Lord Frost, Boris Johnson and every cabinet minister in that. Even the Flexciters knew not to leave the SM and half of them have since changed their minds, acknowledging that they hadn't appreciated the complexity, the effect on NI and the disgusting toxicity and racism it unleashed.

 

[Lefty]

But that is just when we will start to reap those Brexit benefits...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1543733648138051584

Lillico is another who has shown himself to be an idiot.

How do these people get the jobs and influence they do?

I'm convinced it's 70% who you know and the rest a posh accent.

 

[Jedi boro]

That’s the point I’ll always argue leaving was not the issue it was how we left that I disagree with.

As you say leaving the single market was insanity.

 

[The Ruthsayer]

I think/hope this is just clever tactics from Labour.

Don't mention Brexit, claim the issue is done, point out it has been another incompetent Tory fiasco of implementation. It means there is not only no rallying point for the them vs us scenario Johnson thrives on, but any mention just brings up Tory ineptness.

Meanwhile, most importantly, Labour intend implementing every measure necessary before rejoining eg aligning with the Single Market, easing bureaucracy, mending relations with the EU, without mentioning rejoining. These measures would have to be taken anyway, so just take the measures, then mention rejoin, rather than the other way round.

Lets face it, Brexiters are too ignorant of what Brexit and the Single Market/Customs Union means to realise that we will have rejoined in all but name. All that then remains to debate is whether it was economically better when we were in the EU and are again once realigned, compared to the Johnson/Tory brexit interval, which will be an easy thing to show, followed by -so do we want to have a say in setting the rules again, or continue to have not taken any control? The Brexit campaign lies eventually come back to haunt the Brexiters, because they always said we didn't have to leave the Single Market anyway, so it's still Brexit and moreover the one that most Brexiters actually wanted, even though they didn't understand it enough to know it. Well, they knew about the migrant labour aspect, but now they know it was a good thing to have it.

There’s your answer.

That’s why you don’t debate before an election it as it’s just too divisive.

Labelling all people as ‘thick’ because they don’t concur with your views is not how to resolve the pernicious divide. There may be reasons why one would vote for Brexit that are carefully considered: a fundamental dislike of supra-National entities imposing their view of Europe on the populace (have you noticed how all EU funded seafronts from Palermo to Palma look the same?), an understanding that Freedom of Movement (according to peer-reviewed studies by UCL and LSE) worked against the bottom 20 percent of those in work; a dislike of the obvious corruption (see half built bridges in Greece).
What happened to reasoned argument? I spent a long time reviewing what facts I could before voting to remain, but approximately 30 percent of my ex-colleagues in the City (accountants and economists), voted to leave, though I doubt they contemplated the relationship Billy Bunter has engendered. If you want to persuade people of your viewpoint, don’t insult them first.

 

[Ziggy]

38 posts so far and still nobody can put their finger on what the reasons for, or what the obvious benefits of leaving would be …add this to literally 100’s of post on the board on the subject.
The same people, and money, lots and lots of it who funded the leave campaign are exactly the same people who put Trump into the White House. Using exactly the same methodologies. Why? What was in it for themselves and others.
It’s a view

Charter Cities: The Real Reason for Brexit and the Bigger Picture

With our economy in tatters and the frightening roll back of our democratic rights now beginning to expose the true nature of Brexit, some…

medium.com

 

[Chris_Boro]

38 posts so far and still nobody can put their finger on what the reasons for, or what the obvious benefits of leaving would be …add this to literally 100’s of post on the board on the subject.
The same people, and money, lots and lots of it who funded the leave campaign are exactly the same people who put Trump into the White House. Using exactly the same methodologies. Why? What was in it for themselves and others.
It’s a view

Charter Cities: The Real Reason for Brexit and the Bigger Picture

With our economy in tatters and the frightening roll back of our democratic rights now beginning to expose the true nature of Brexit, some…

medium.com

We have left, it caused deep division in our country and still causes division. It was an ideology of a few that convinced millions of a better tomorrow, its all lies.

Regardless of the pain Brexit causes, going back is simply not feasible within the next parliament, even probably the one after. It may take a generation to repair the divisions that will allow the idea of rejoining to be floated.

Then there's the EU countries themselves, I very much doubt we are high on the welcome list after we've just spend the past 7 years or so trashing them.

It's all a mess, but it's a Tory mess and all Labour can realistically do is attempt to ease the pain they caused.

 

[TeaCider]

As much as I wish the result had went the other way, and as much as I'd like us to rejoin, it's probably the right decision to try and win back the votes.

There are still millions of die hard Brexit supporting voters, and plenty of them will have been former Labour voters that need to be convinced to vote Labour again to oust the Conservatives.

Labour running on a campaign to rejoin right now would just provide the Tories with ammunition to try and deflect from the **** show they're currently putting us through, whilst not getting us any closer to actually rejoining or ousting them from power.
Likewise for not outright denying any potential policy to rejoin or "reverse" Brexit.

I suppose there's a risk of some extremely pro-European voters switching to minor parties and diluting Labour's chances, but most will hold their nose over this.
I know I will.

Hopefully it's something that can be revisited in years to come, but it's not feasible right now.