Forum Topic

Oh dear, Brexiters are panicking :-) Firstly, I thought Jonathan's comment about the "Daily Express" was meant in a jocular way, not with an intention of being rude. However, I know from mediating between email senders and recipients at work, getting the intended tone appropriate for the mood of a recipient can be difficult.Secondly, whatever Burnham's previous intentions regarding the EU, having got into office, he's might have looked at the detailed state of the UK's Trade and Finances, and decided we need to review and renegotiate our relationship with our EU partners. Thirdly, our other major ally, the US, is proving unreliable and inconsistent, so when its closest trading partner, Canada, is considering associate membership of the EU it would be irresponsible of the UK government not to reevaluate our EU association. Fourthly, I seem to recall one of Farage's options mentioned in his pre-Brexit campaign was to remain in the single market (or was it the Customs Union, or both - can't remember and too busy to check - I'm sure someone else will!). Hence, talk of betrayal is rather emotive and extreme!Finally, I think Burnham has said any change (or was it significant change?) would be after the next election so people would be free to vote on it as a manifesto pledge.Obviously, there is unrest in some EU countries but something is always happening. Hungary has returned from its right wing 'blip' as has Poland from a smaller 'blip'. The French and German right are popular at present but in spite of their closeness to the Russian dictatorship I don't think either really wants to leave the EU. (I think Le Pen's representative at Farage's party conference said that.) Let's face it, the President of our biggest ally seems to be acting like a Russian asset - the words of some US news commentators and Democrats, not mine!So it's time to sit down and review the UK's best options with it's geographically closest allies and trading partners in light of changing global politics and trading options irrespective of previous decisions which may no longer be relevant in the currentglobal political and trade environment. Perhaps what the EU is lacking is the guidance of the UK as a member? :-)

Michael Ixer ● 5d

Hello Steven,I think you now have experienced the impertinence and abuse from some people saying that my views are based on the Guardian's reports.  Nonsense!The fact that the real motive of Burnham's stance is political is not surprising - he is a politician after all!The underwhelming economic performace of the Labour party in two years follows the "underwhelming" performance of the Conservative party during 14 years, particularly after the so-called Brexit agreement and the COVID pandemic.  I find the Baroness Mone's enrichment with PPE contracts particularly offensive.  Let us not forget the unforgivable contracts signed by Failing Grayling for ferry contracts with a company that never dealt with ferries!Following the above level of dishonesty, Burnham's current dishonesty to reverse the result of the dishonest Referendum is questionable.  Even Farage said the 52% vs 48% was not an acceptable difference.What we have today is a very volatile US president.  He has almost dismantled the US-UK Economic Prosperity Deal (EPD) (as opposed to a Free Trade Agreement) which came into effect in June 2025. So, cutting this post short, the dishonesty started with the Brexit campaing (how many millions for the NHS weekly?), the questionable agreement signed by Johnson (as opposed to the one proposed by Theresa May which amounted to a free trade agreement with the EU) followed by the catastrophic economic decline of the UK.  This is where we are today.But, and I would greatly appreciate a response to this, the Brexit "agreement" was signed in 2019.  Are no protest votes ever cast to show dissatisfaction to the present government?Also, it has been 10 years since the Brexit referendum and we all have a right to change our minds and/or insist that matters are improved economically for British citizens?I think we should all sit back and think what is true dishonesty.

Ivonne Holliday ● 5d

Mr Ixer'Sue, I remember a discussion about this before the referendum and it could be considered to be advisory'. Who said 'it could be considered advisory' ?If such advice seeking measures are to be considered part of our democratic process then perhaps a referendum should be held on immigration.The Brexit proposition voted on and the conclusion reached was -"Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?"Pretty straight forward ?Binary in mathematical terms ?Don't try to obfuscate by showing off a veneer of mathematical reference that is irrelevant and makes no sense.The immigration one could perhaps be just as succinct -"Should firmer measures be taken to reduce immigration into the UK and remove those not entitled to remain".Remember -'The United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union, with 51.89% voting Leave and 48.11% voting Remain.The Brexit referendum was held on 23 June 2016 across the United Kingdom and Gibraltar. Out of 33,577,342 people who voted, 17,410,742 (51.89%) chose to leave the EU, while 16,141,241 (48.11%) voted to remain, giving a margin of 3.78% or 1,269,501 votes in favor of Leave (Wikipedia) The overall turnout was 72.2%, reflecting strong voter engagement (House of Commons Library) According to a poll by Ipsos MORI released on 18 May, issues identified by voters as being very important to them in deciding which way to vote were headed by the impact on Britain's economy (33%), the number of immigrants coming to Britain (28%), and Britain's ability to make its own laws (15%).Issues identified as important by voters who said they were likely to vote leave were headed by the number of immigrants coming into Britain (49%), Britain's ability to make its own laws (30%), the impact on Britain's economy (25%), the cost of EU immigration on Britain's welfare system (16%), impact on public services/housing (11%), the number of refugees coming to Britain to claim asylum (10%), Britain's ability to trade with countries in the European Union (9%), cost of EU membership fees (9%), regulations by the European Union on British businesses (8%), the impact on British jobs (7%), and Britain's status in the world (7%).Issues that had been identified as important by voters who were likely to vote remain included the impact on Britain's economy (40%), the number of immigrants coming into Britain (15%), Britain's ability to trade with countries in the European Union (12%), the impact on British jobs (11%), the impact on the rights of British workers (10%), Britain's relationship with other countries (7%), the impact on British national security (7%), the ability to travel in the European Union (7%), the ability of British citizens to live and work in other European countries (6%), and Britain's status in the world (6%). Other issues were identified by 5% of respondents or less. This collection of issues is broadly in line with the findings of other surveys published during the campaign'.When will people like you ever accept the views of the people democratically arrived at ?Your attitude to ordinary people seems to be - "Sorry, you're a bit thick unlike me and don't understand the issue. That's not the right answer so try again.And we will keep asking till you come up with the response we are looking for"

John Hawkes ● 3d