Michael Heseltine has cast doubt over Theresa May securing a Brexit deal that can pass the Commons as he threw his support behind The Independent’s campaign for a new EU referendum.
Okay, let me get this right. The plebiscite was only a recommendation. Got it. So parliament must have the final say, because parliament is sovereign. Got it. Now the people must have the final say.
Er…
Bear in mind this is the same “people” who voted to leave. Who were too stupid and ill-informed (and old) to make a rational decision. Those people?
His remarks came as The Independent’s campaign for a Final Say referendum on any Brexit deal reached by the prime minister in Brussels, gathered pace, with more than 700,000 people having signed the petition.
Is that hypocrisy I can smell? Or is it just going to be an advisory referendum that parliament can ignore and the remainers will decry as flawed because old fogeys are too ill-informed to vote properly so it shouldn’t be implemented if it goes against them?
“There has never been in my view such an unpredictable, calamitous set of events facing us.”
No? You sure about that?
Heseltine is fully sighned up to Maybot project fear. The scaremongering is utter nonsense. The entity that can prevent/hinder UK Imports from EU is UK Gov’t.
Article 8 of the Lisbon Treaty dictates that the EU has to have special relationships with neighbouring Non-EU countries, it is defined in their own rulebook and this means that they will not be able to punish us for leaving by imposing unfair trade restrictions on Britain.
No 10 angry about Hammond’s leaked project fear letter to Nutty Nicky Morgan? Yer havin a laugh aint ya?
gathered pace, with more than 700,000 people having signed the petition. Not really ‘gathered pace’ when compared to the millions who voted in the first plebis-cide . Worrying that such a well respected ‘player’ as Heseltine has come out for it though. Does rather make one wonder if there isn’t more to the People’s Vote campaign than just a stick for May to threaten the BrexSShiteurs with.
And just when do they think this new referendum will take place? We are leaving at the end of next March, only 7 months away. If they lose again, do we have yet another until we get it right?
Do they think that the EU will let us back in on the same terms or will we be new boys and have to negotiate ( be dictated )new terms ?
What would the question be? These people seem to think that a second referendum would offer the opportunity to stay in the EU, but why would it? The question would be along the lines of: do you accept the terms of the exit agreement negotiated between Her Majesty’s Government and the filthy foreigners? If the vote is yes, then the agreement it is, if no, then it is no deal Brexit. What won’t be an option will be remaining in the EU.
Yes. I think that is what they believe – that they can stop Brexit. Article 50 has been invoked. We are leaving.
That, as they say is the $64,000 dollar question. If they phrase it as “Do you accept the terms of the deal as an essential condition of leaving the EU” then NOT accepting the terms implies that we are happy to remain and don’t leave the EU. Accepting the monumental turdburger that the deal represents means that Britain is screwed anyway. A Win/Win for the remainers.
I’d be interested in the way that the weasel words will be presented
On 30th March we will no longer be a member. Rejecting the deal means we leave with no deal. What else can it mean?
Mr potato head went there for “renegotiation” before the referendum, desperate to surrender. All he wanted was some bullshit, some token “concession” he could spin and sell. This was something they could have easily given and Mr potato head might have got a vote for remain. 50.01% was all that was needed to shut it down for good. And when the lies were subequently revealed? So what, like there would have been a second referendum?
But no, for whatever reason – their utter contempt for this country, fear of encouraging other dissenters, or maybe they are just as thick as week old shite (I do favour this last. Heinlein’s law: Don’t attribute to malice that which can be better explained by stupidity)- they didn’t.
You should always think of what a remain vote would have meant and where we would be now had it occurred. I do all the time.
Had it happened, I’d have accepted it with good grace, despite being personally annoyed by it. That being democracy and all that.
That’s the way they do things, yes.
This hasn’t come from May. If anything, it adds to her woes.
No it hasn’t come from May, however it has been a useful stick with which she can threaten the likes of the ERG: “either get behind Chequers or risk a 2nd referendum”.
You what? May, Hammond, Hesiltine et al are in cahoots. If they weren’t Hammond would have been sacked long ago.
The faux No 10 “outrage” is a smokescreen.
The referendum gig comes from the Indy.
Hmm, nope can’t see how that addresses my point in response to your “This hasn’t come from May. If anything, it adds to her woes.“.
No.10/May tacitly approved it; if not Hammond would be long gone.
She has enough on her plate as it is. This is a distraction she could do without. The initiators aren’t doing it to help her, they are doing it to undermine her.
Hammond, a devout remainer, is trying to undermine remainer May? Seriously?
There has never been in my view such a massive opportunity for future economic prosperity. Germany has a successful economy but it is hobbled by them having to support the crappier economies within the EU. Free of these kinds of burdens we could be at a huge competitive advantage if our government weren’t so utterly worthless.
The flip-side of that is that Greece, for example, should have bailed out. By now, they would be in recovery.
+1 with minor change “Germany and UK have a successful economy but are hobbled by them having to support the crappier economies within the EU”