New UK PM must put Brexit plan to second referendum - Labour's Corbyn

[snoop1130]

New UK PM must put Brexit plan to second referendum - Labour's Corbyn

 

FILE PHOTO: Britain's opposition Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn leaves his home in London, Britain July 3, 2019. REUTERS/Peter Nicholls

 

LONDON (Reuters) - Opposition Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn on Tuesday said Britain’s next prime minister must put their Brexit plan to a second referendum on European Union membership, saying his party would campaign to remain.

 

In an email to members, Corbyn said Labour would campaign to stay in the EU to stop a new Conservative Party leader, who will be chosen later this month, taking Britain out of the bloc without a divorce deal or to stop what he called a “damaging” Brexit.

 

The move by Corbyn inches the opposition party closer to heeding demands from many Labour members and some lawmakers to unequivocally embrace a second referendum to break the impasse in parliament over how to leave the EU.

 

But it might not be enough to satisfy all in his party, falling short of campaigning for a second referendum in any circumstance - a position some wanted to adopt to counter a challenge from the pro-EU, smaller Liberal Democrats.

 

Brexit has brought down Prime Minister Theresa May, who failed three times to get the divorce deal she agreed with the EU ratified by parliament.

 

Former foreign minister and London mayor Boris Johnson is battling current foreign minister Jeremy Hunt to replace her as party leader and prime minister. Johnson, who says he will take Britain out of the EU with or without a deal, is favourite.

 

“Whoever becomes the new prime minister should have the confidence to put their deal, or no deal, back to the people in a public vote,” Corbyn said.

 

“In those circumstances, I want to make it clear that Labour would campaign for Remain against either no deal or a Tory (Conservative) deal that does not protect the economy and jobs.”

 

What he did not say in his mail was what his party would campaign for in a parliamentary election - something the veteran socialist renewed his call for by saying: “We need a Labour government to end austerity and rebuild our country for the many not the few”.

 

More than three years since voting 52% to 48% to leave the EU, Britain’s two main parties, its parliament and cities and towns across the country are still deeply divided over Brexit, opening the way for smaller parties to grab some share of the vote.

 

With Labour struggling in some opinion polls, some in the party want it to adopt a clearer message to tackle the twin challenges from the pro-EU Liberal Democrats and the Brexit Party, led by veteran eurosceptic Nigel Farage.

 

Corbyn, an instinctive critic of the EU, has so far resisted calls to make his party a wholesale supporter of a second referendum, keen to keep on board Labour Brexit supporters.

 

Chuka Umunna, a former Labour lawmaker who has joined the Liberal Democrats, said on Twitter: “Yet another fudge, where the Labour leadership keep open the door to standing on a pro-Brexit platform in a general election or supporting it in government.”

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-07-09

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

[petermik]

What a blaady idiot this man is.....

[Justgrazing]

9 minutes ago, snoop1130 said:

New UK PM must put Brexit plan to second referendum - Labour's Corbyn

No he shan't .. Voted once 3 yrs ago to leave .. Now let's get on with it ...

[vogie]

Labour has played a blinder into the hands of the leavers, Corbyn a 38 year Europhobe. Here's what Labour Leave says about it.

 

[Bluespunk]

1 hour ago, snoop1130 said:

Opposition Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn on Tuesday said Britain’s next prime minister must put their Brexit plan to a second referendum on European Union membership, saying his party would campaign to remain.

Tick tick tick...pressure’s building. 

[Bluespunk]

1 hour ago, snoop1130 said:

Whoever becomes the new prime minister should have the confidence to put their deal, or no deal, back to the people in a public vote,” Corbyn said.

Absolutely correct. 

Edited July 9, 2019 by Bluespunk

[evadgib]

Get on with it! ????

[Reigntax]

2 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

Absolutely correct. 

Absolutely incorrect.

The people voted in the referendum. The majority have spoken.

The fault lays with The politicians who have failed to represent those who voted for them.

A 2nd referendum? Really?

And if the 2nd doesn't provide the desired result maybe a 3rd? Or 4th?

Because you can be sure that if a 2nd referendum reverses the results, the Brexits would require a 3rd on the same precedence as those who want the 2nd.

 

And that's why there won't be a 2nd and shouldn't be. Never.

[Bluespunk]

Just now, Reigntax said:

Absolutely incorrect.

The people voted in the referendum. The majority have spoken.

The fault lays with The politicians who have failed to represent those who voted for them.

A 2nd referendum? Really?

And if the 2nd doesn't provide the desired result maybe a 3rd? Or 4th?

Because you can be sure that if a 2nd referendum reverses the results, the Brexits would require a 3rd on the same precedence as those who want the 2nd.

 

And that's why there won't be a 2nd and shouldn't be. Never.

Can’t agree. 

 

Brexit has been taken to a place where it is clear what it means, the people deserve a vote on any final deal in light of the consequences of accepting it. 

[Basil B]

Seems to me Labour would push for a referendum if it is a Tory Brexit on the table, so therefore I assume should there be a GE and Labour had a majority government then we will have Corbyn's Brexit without a referendum...

[elliss]

4 hours ago, Justgrazing said:

No he shan't .. Voted once 3 yrs ago to leave .. Now let's get on with it ...

 

 3 years a long time ago . Opinions have changed , for the better .

 

 

 

[elliss]

44 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Can’t agree. 

 

Brexit has been taken to a place where it is clear what it means, the people deserve a vote on any final deal in light of the consequences of accepting it. 

 

   Exit Brexit , cannot be achieved ..

 

 

[elliss]

4 hours ago, petermik said:

What a blaady idiot this man is.....

 

Same same . boris bonkers .   All is lost, Left and right , failure .

 God help UK , worse is yet to come ..

 

 

 

Edited July 9, 2019 by elliss
spelling

[Reigntax]

1 hour ago, Bluespunk said:

Can’t agree. 

 

Brexit has been taken to a place where it is clear what it means, the people deserve a vote on any final deal in light of the consequences of accepting it. 

It doesn't matter whether you agree or not, or whether anybody, for and against agrees or not.

The democratic system in place has been enacted, the people voted and now it is the politicians duty to make that happen.

The naysayers think it will be the end of the world, just as they did with y2k, climate change and every other issue that they either don't fully understand, or that goes against their opinions.

Britain will survive no matter what occurs. The EU was and is a failed experiment at globalisation and countries like Greece are laughing all the way to the bank about how for 30 odd years they have managed to milk partner countries in order to afford their socialist economy.

The only thing affecting Britain is the non decision caused by the non Brexits holding out hoping to change the decision.

[Bluespunk]

1 minute ago, Reigntax said:

It doesn't matter whether you agree or not, or whether anybody, for and against agrees or not.

The democratic system in place has been enacted, the people voted and now it is the politicians duty to make that happen.

The naysayers think it will be the end of the world, just as they did with y2k, climate change and every other issue that they either don't fully understand, or that goes against their opinions.

Britain will survive no matter what occurs. The EU was and is a failed experiment at globalisation and countries like Greece are laughing all the way to the bank about how for 30 odd years they have managed to milk partner countries in order to afford their socialist economy.

The only thing affecting Britain is the non decision caused by the non Brexits holding out hoping to change the decision.

I don’t agree with your opening premise or your arguments after that. 

 

There is absolutely no reason there cannot be a vote on any final deal, and no reason a remain option cannot be included. 

 

After all, the arch brexiteer himself, farage, himself said a close vote should require a second referendum. 

[Reigntax]

Just now, Bluespunk said:

I don’t agree with your opening premise or your arguments after that. 

 

There is absolutely no reason there cannot be a vote on any final deal, and no reason a remain option cannot be included. 

 

After all, the arch brexiteer himself, farage, himself said a close vote should require a second referendum. 

Both Democracy and referendum have a clear definition under both the law and people's rights to vote, be heard and represented.

If the anti Brexits failed to present their case to to people, they failed in their duty. 

The referendum is finished. There is no second referendum, no second deal, no final say about the consequences. It's over, decided, finished.

Now the politicians have to make it happen. They are legally obliged to do so. 

[Reigntax]

"After all, the arch brexiteer himself, farage, himself said a close vote should require a second referendum."

 

Every election is a close vote by subjective opinion.

 

And if close again, another vote? Where does it stop ?

 

A one vote majority is a decision. There is no minimum or maximum majority that has to be achieved. There is only an obligation to represent the whole population while undertaking the decision or the majority. That doesn't mean satisfying everybody.

[Justgrazing]

56 minutes ago, elliss said:

 

 3 years a long time ago . Opinions have changed , for the better .

 

 

 

There is a fundamental principle here that would be washed away if a 2nd vote was enacted .. 4 yrs ago for better or worse Cameron proposed the referendum and despite all the negative spin about what would happen if we left the population of Britain voted to leave ..

For that to be undone now by a 2nd vote would be an insult to those who voted out and make a mockery of the Democratic principle .. 

And where does a 2nd referendum that might tip the other way leave Brexiters who would feel not unjustly rather outraged and who then might then call for a decider .. 

Where does it then end .. 

[beautifulthailand99]

^{The British people voted to have 27 baht to the pound now let them have it. Got a new low today not long to go. Missus complained when I transferred 3mill at 42  - but what if it goes up she whinged. Don't worry I said trust in the British people after all you trusted to marry me and move to the UK. #bringonBrexit} 

Edited July 9, 2019 by beautifulthailand99

[beautifulthailand99]

3 hours ago, evadgib said:

Get on with it! ????

Agreed Brexit Now no more idling or excuses. Bring it on. 

[Reigntax]

3 minutes ago, Justgrazing said:

There is a fundamental principle here that would be washed away if a 2nd vote was enacted .. 4 yrs ago for better or worse Cameron proposed the referendum and despite all the negative spin about what would happen if we left the population of Britain voted to leave ..

For that to be undone now by a 2nd vote would be an insult to those who voted out and make a mockery of the Democratic principle .. 

And where does a 2nd referendum that might tip the other way leave Brexiters who would feel not unjustly rather outraged and who then might then call for a decider .. 

Where does it then end .. 

Yes, best out of 3.

But it wouldn't end at 3. It would mean that every future vote could be subject to a new vote. Just the suggestion is comical.

[Bluespunk]

20 minutes ago, Reigntax said:

Both Democracy and referendum have a clear definition under both the law and people's rights to vote, be heard and represented.

If the anti Brexits failed to present their case to to people, they failed in their duty. 

The referendum is finished. There is no second referendum, no second deal, no final say about the consequences. It's over, decided, finished.

Now the politicians have to make it happen. They are legally obliged to do so. 

That is your opinion. 

 

Fortunately, for all the citizens of the U.K. who wish a say on any final deal, you do not have the right to impose it upon them. 

[Bluespunk]

15 minutes ago, Reigntax said:

"After all, the arch brexiteer himself, farage, himself said a close vote should require a second referendum."

 

Every election is a close vote by subjective opinion.

 

And if close again, another vote? Where does it stop ?

 

A one vote majority is a decision. There is no minimum or maximum majority that has to be achieved. There is only an obligation to represent the whole population while undertaking the decision or the majority. That doesn't mean satisfying everybody.

Are you replying to my post here, because you did not quote me and therefore did not post a notification you were responding to my post...

 

Regardless, my reply to where you did quote me above, applies to this post as well. 

Edited July 9, 2019 by Bluespunk

[Reigntax]

Just now, Bluespunk said:

That is your opinion. 

 

Fortunately, for all the citizens of the U.K. who wish a say on any final deal, you do not have the right to impose it upon them. 

I'm not imposing anything on the citizens of the UK.

The citizens had their say. They chose, they decided.

How is this clear to you?

 

[Bluespunk]

1 minute ago, Reigntax said:

I'm not imposing anything on the citizens of the UK.

The citizens had their say. They chose, they decided.

How is this clear to you?

 

It’s clear you believe there can be no vote on a final deal.

 

I would hope it is equally clear I do not agree with you. 

[Reigntax]

1 minute ago, Bluespunk said:

Are you replying to my post here, because you did not quote me and therefore did not post a notification you were responding to my post...

 

Regardless, my reply to where you did quote me applies to this post as well. 

I was responding to small portion of a quote you included. It is not important as the mere statement from anybody, let alone those who represent the people, that any close vote should be followed by a revote is nothing short of absurd

[Bluespunk]

1 minute ago, Reigntax said:

I was responding to small portion of a quote you included. It is not important as the mere statement from anybody, let alone those who represent the people, that any close vote should be followed by a revote is nothing short of absurd

No, any further vote on a final deal, where the consequences of brexit are crystal clear, is very sensible idea. 

 

I support the right of those citizens resident in the U.K. to call for such a vote.  

[Reigntax]

Just now, Bluespunk said:

It’s clear you believe there can be no vote on a final deal.

 

I would hope it is equally clear I do not agree with you. 

We seem to be repeating ourselves. I dont have an opinion either way as it doesn't matter what I believe or what you think. The people voted according to the laws.

The decision was made. It's over.

There won't be any 2nd vote.

[Bluespunk]

Just now, Reigntax said:

We seem to be repeating ourselves. I dont have an opinion either way as it doesn't matter what I believe or what you think. The people voted according to the laws.

The decision was made. It's over.

There won't be any 2nd vote.

There is nothing in the british system of democracy that precludes a vote on any final deal. 

[Reigntax]

Just now, Bluespunk said:

No, any further vote on a final deal, where the consequences of brexit are crystal clear, is very sensible idea. 

 

I support the right of those citizens resident in the U.K. to call for such a vote.  

The people have exercised their rights. They decided.

The vote was completed 3 years ago. It's over, finished, completed.

The consequences are not crystal clear. No one knows how successful it will be. Everyone is just making the case to support their opinions.