Brexit - Time to scrap it and start again?

[Daruwind]

They only hold them for as long as our weak leaders allow them to. It was enlightening how quickly the EU shifted its position when the prospect of no deal was a real possibility.

No deal scenario was only possible good card. Problem is, the value is going down with time. It is shock that it could possibly happen....right now, everybody know that even for Uk no deal scenario is not the best one. Uk can of course do it, but it is like madmat with gun pointing at his own legs. And EU is being prepared more and more. By Autumn, consequences of no deal would be way milder than no deal scenario two years ago...

Not "the UK's own fault", our traitorous Prime Minister's fault. She's owned everything that has come to pass since Chequers last year.

I know the fault is always with politicians and May have done tremendous amount of wrong turns...still for me as for continental EU citizen... if we just generalize...it is UK fault. For me, Uk home politics is not relevant..that is Uk home issue.. we just need the international cooperation. For that purpose, all britons are one team. Team brexit troubles...:-)

It's Camoron's fault alone , for proposing Brexit in the first place without any contingency planning whatsoever. The PM is hampered by her own incompetence and is bound by the will of Parliament. Parliament is not minded to pass Brexit without a deal favorable to the UK.

Not only Cameron´s fault. May has also triggered article 50 without any major plan, idea in hand. I mean viable plan. Like come on, if you are UK...big state, one of biggest in EU and you would like to leave. Why not send all your peons to gather all possible info and troubles ahead of time. Irish question, Scotland, Uk politics. You can quite easily expect whose. Gibraltar, why not spend a few years doing trading negotiations to know what we can expect in different scenarions (no deal..WTO..)

[QuintusSertorius]

It's Camoron's fault alone , for proposing Brexit in the first place without any contingency planning whatsoever. The PM is hampered by her own incompetence and is bound by the will of Parliament. Parliament is not minded to pass Brexit without a deal favorable to the UK.

No, Parliament is not minded to pass anything remotely like leaving at all. In spite of voting 6:1 in favour of triggering Article 50, they thought they'd find a way to derail things before we got to where we are now. Clearly they didn't know what they were voting for, back then.

No deal scenario was only possible good card. Problem is, the value is going down with time. It is shock that it could possibly happen....right now, everybody know that even for Uk no deal scenario is not the best one. Uk can of course do it, but it is like madmat with gun pointing at his own legs. And EU is being prepared more and more. By Autumn, consequences of no deal would be way milder than no deal scenario two years ago...

The shock value is immaterial, what matters is leaving without any of the snares built in to the EU's preferred option. The Withdrawal Agreement is a terrible deal for the UK, though a nice one for the EU.

I know the fault is always with politicians and May have done tremendous amount of wrong turns...still for me as for continental EU citizen... if we just generalize...it is UK fault. For me, Uk home politics is not relevant..that is Uk home issue.. we just need the international cooperation. For that purpose, all britons are one team. Team brexit troubles...:-)

Not only Cameron´s fault. May has also triggered article 50 without any major plan, idea in hand. I mean viable plan. Like come on, if you are UK...big state, one of biggest in EU and you would like to leave. Why not send all your peons to gather all possible info and troubles ahead of time. Irish question, Scotland, Uk politics. You can quite easily expect whose. Gibraltar, why not spend a few years doing trading negotiations to know what we can expect in different scenarions (no deal..WTO..)

You appear to be operating under the misapprehension that May is actually trying to leave. As was made clear from Chequers onwards, she's a liar who's been doing no such thing. Her aim is to produce something that looks like a "deal", but in reality keeps the UK as closely bound to the EU as possible. So a later government can re-join the EU as smoothly as possible.

If we had a government actually trying to leave, there are a host of things they could have been doing all this time. Lucky for the EU they have a confederate on their side in the negotiations, there's no other way they could have arrived at such a sweetheart deal in the execrable Withdrawal Agreement.

[chriscase]

Please keep in mind that references to moderation activities and staff are off topic in this portion of the site.

[mongrel]

I know the fault is always with politicians and May have done tremendous amount of wrong turns...still for me as for continental EU citizen... if we just generalize...it is UK fault. For me, Uk home politics is not relevant..that is Uk home issue.. we just need the international cooperation. For that purpose, all britons are one team. Team brexit troubles...:-)

It''s not even a UK issue, it's largely a Northern English one.

No, Parliament is not minded to pass anything remotely like leaving at all. In spite of voting 6:1 in favour of triggering Article 50, they thought they'd find a way to derail things before we got to where we are now. Clearly they didn't know what they were voting for, back then..

As mentioned by the wise forum member earlier it was daft of May to lay the the Article 50 legislation. It wasn't necessary and was counter to the leave campaign's own promise to get a deal before considering to leave the EU.

The shock value is immaterial, what matters is leaving without any of the snares built in to the EU's preferred option. The Withdrawal Agreement is a terrible deal for the UK, though a nice one for the EU.



You appear to be operating under the misapprehension that May is actually trying to leave. As was made clear from Chequers onwards, she's a liar who's been doing no such thing. Her aim is to produce something that looks like a "deal", but in reality keeps the UK as closely bound to the EU as possible. So a later government can re-join the EU as smoothly as possible.

If we had a government actually trying to leave, there are a host of things they could have been doing all this time. Lucky for the EU they have a confederate on their side in the negotiations, there's no other way they could have arrived at such a sweetheart deal in the execrable Withdrawal Agreement.

Lets have some fact-based discussion rather than stock cliches.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

Huh I thought you were a center-left Labour boi.

I get that a lot , but i think its because i don't tend to comment in a wide-breadth of threads- I think the only time i've ever talked about gender equality for instance it was in terms of economics and class... same with when i've commented on Islamophobia/tolerance of Islam, i come at it in terms of very traditional British individualism, with conceptions of a right to privacy from prying eyes of the state and others providing what you do, does not harm others- thus immigration, their private lives and their private lives, and the Conservatives current erosion of that conception is something i find absolutely indefensible. I'm pro-Corbyn simply because economically in the UK's short term context his plan makes actual sense (The Conservatives have already to generalize borrowed the same kind of amounts, hence why debt has been driven up, but completely failed to utilize it in a meaningful way, instead they've used it to plug the gaps created by their own mis-administration and they've dealt with the deficit in a way that simply is not sustainable as we're seeing, the next Conservative or Labour government will be forced to scrap the fiscal discipline lest council administration and education collapses completely in the long term- so when you see Corbyn as a government or two of path-finding investment, its actually one of the smartest options out there). Essentially i'm with you in disliking identity politics, and promoting a class-based view of society, it warmed my heart to see your comments about that . But i am absolutely not a socialist haha. That doesn't leave me much scope in the UK political spectrum, so i thus tend to tactical vote- Blair i did indeed support, but then by the second term he'd run his course and was beginning to get the 'in too long syndrome', thus Conservatives were my pick then. Anyway another of my indulgence of my self but yeah, i'm not really Blairite, or 'progressive' left-wing (Again the identity-based politics you are spot on, divides and tends to actually factionate groups who under a capitalist structure only have real clout when they work together in regards to a collective bargaining position- partly, though not of course entirely by any means, why wealth inequality has been driven so high, so fast in a historically unprecedented manner has been the removal of effective 'working class'/average person opposition in any meaningful way to 'force' change- thus you get radicalization of politics stemming from identity politics and far-right and far-left crazies begin to take root).

Quick history lesson. Until the DUP was formed in 1971, the UUP were the only Unionist Party. Even then, it took the DUP a long time to from a fringe loyalist party, to overtaking the UUP in 2004. Thus the UUP and SDLP created the Good Friday Agreement, but it was DUP and Sinn Fein who reaped the rewards. Many UUP politicians such as Arlene Foster jumped ship from the UUP to the DUP at this time. I don’t know what the story is for Nationalists, but somehow or other Sinn Fein replaced the SDLP as well. So you had the two parties that signed Good Friday, not actually in the government.

The DUP, incidentally, opposed the Good Friday Agreement.

So if you’re say an elderly Unionist and have been voting UUP all your life, why change now? At least that’s how some of my family feel. My family aren’t all keen on the Orange Order and neither am I, thus UUP is the natural, less sectarian choice.

You see, the Orange Order is mostly a product of the working class Protestants in this country. Now that’s mostly, not completely (it’s a generalisation chill out). You read up about Unionist opposition to Home Rule in 1914 and it’s the same exact thing: Unionist elites which included a lot of Catholics; and working class, Protestant Orangemen and women. At this time the franchise had recently been expanded, so a more popular kind of politics emerged. Thus, sectarian populist politics was born and continues to this day. The UUP don’t appeal to the working class because they don’t hammer home the whole Protestant identity thing, and appeal to the middle class for the same reason.

That’s not to say the UUP isn’t more or less Protestant. It is, but only passively Protestant (it’s okay to be white Protestant), not actively shouting about how Protestant it is from the rooftops.

Haha that was told most eloquently i will say, but also very though. I really appreciate it. Good conception too i think of perceiving sectarian politics within the identity politics framework- i'm not sure what you're doing, but if you haven't yet- there's a damn good thesis paper in that waiting for you mate. I know i'd be interested.

Are you asking me if remainer Unionists would vote for remainer nationalist parties because of Brexit? The answer is always, eternally, no.

Ahh cheers for that, i felt as much. It stems into something that David Edgerton essentially formulated and i've run with a bit further (i know i've mentioned it before- but check his work, he's a very much a bull...and terrifying as one of my supervisors, but he's not wrong) that Brexit is indeed very much a crisis of the 'English' in terms of what it means, and what it means for Britain and the world that has been complicated by different areas of both England and N.Ireland, Scotland, London, Wales and indeed within the North and South, who have far more pressing issues. If we take the premise (that has a fair amount of support) that in terms of 'political culture', but also national identity pre-1945 there was no 'British nation'- it was an imperial metropole, the creation of an empire having bound together English, Scots, Irish and Welsh- and who all had totally different conceptions of what that empire actually was and there places in it, that it was overall free-trade, pragmatically laissez faire (i.e. foreign investment was welcome- but the British Empire had a competitive advantage which meant its commercial financiers and industry), but that post-1945 a protectionist, Techno-Nationalist state emerged, who in the process of disrobing from Empire, emerged as a tight-knit welfare/warfare state with high standards of living, technological progress and the prestige of looking after the new 'citizens' were its key remit, which was dismantled by Thatcher who far from being 'radical' (as my recent paper has argued- coming soon all ) actually merely re-internationalized Britain along the lines of its pre-1945 Imperial metropole...but this time without the Empires competitive advantage- thus where British investment companies and manufacturing would once have been capable of holding their own, not Britain was a recipient of European and Japanese investment (in the 1980s) as opposed to its former role. This internationalization, carried on by subsequent governments naturally frayed the bonds that held 'Britain' together (especially as techo-nationalism apparent still in Thatcher's form of Patriotism i.e. 'Buy British', and various 'British' science projects- usually military like the TSBR2 farce, fell out of popular use) weakened as the 'driving force' of having a coherent state, or unifying imperial project were no longer so present- thus SNP, and of course the complex issues in N.Ireland you've put forward so well have been ongoing for a long period of time, but the Westminster way of dealing with the conflict changes fairly significantly starting with Thatcher with the peace process, something a techno-nationalist Britain would not countenance, but an internationalist one whose borders are no longer a unifying factor, or important indeed, would.

The trouble of course being with Thatcher's internationalism is that there isn't any unifying core in place for Britain, and we begin to realize just how politically different various areas of the UK are. Brexit thus is among its many other facets an opportunity/part of the debate about the future of the UK, as Thatcher's internationalism runs its course. Its interesting indeed Boris and many of his group of Tory brexiteers always paint the UK in terms of a 'Global Britain', except that is Thatcher's Britain, and the high-tech' aspect they apply to it, was paradoxically the Techno-nationalist Britain, that Thatcher's overturned, they are two wildly opposite visions that aren't compatible in any serious way- and that's just like the British identity currently, many different conceptions of it, with none now having a monopoly. While Remain voters also talk about an internationalized Britain, heading a global order, which is right out of the inter-war playbook of the Imperial Metropolis, all these facets have little to no grounding in reality (For instance in the 1960s iirc Britain spent around 3-5% GDP depending on how you measured it, and the vast majority of that being done in the public sector, the departments of state broadly doing applied science, while the Uni's and research councils through state grants doing 'pure', while the MoD did both and indeed had the lions share, Thatcher's reforms to this completely failed, as private business just did not invest in R&D to make up the shortfall, thus we fell to around 1.5-2% and the Government by 1989 was only doing 'pure research'. Well May's brexit- apparently Britain is a world-leading 'science-power' (her own words) who on brexit will capitalize on this... by spending a poxy 1.8% on R&D. South Korea today spends 5%, but that is nowhere near Britain's 'historic' funding anyway, which was done not by a 'global' state, but a national-protectionist one. Its a weird disconnect of myths).

But aye slightly off the Irish subject i know, but its interesting to both see as you've outlined what the 'real' problems are for different peoples and groups across the UK, and just how indeed out of touch the political class currently are from those concerns. For instance, the Scots unionist-Independence issue... its primarily based on economics, the 'leave' vote are the patriotic ones, and thus for us unlike in N.Ireland a 'bad' brexit, or a brexit that can be successfully spun as 'bad' for economic prospects would in all likelihood mean that Scotland leaves the UK, particularly if the EU do as they currently are, and dangle investment subsidies and 'sure-fire' membership. Its why Scottish Conservative MP's have been so desperate to try and show they are 'different' from the other Conservatives in Westminster by 'fighting Scotland's corner' to show Scottish unionist voters that the UK still 'works'. Though it'll be interesting to see if this is working at all, as far as i can tell (anecdotal from other Scots), its not working much.

So +rep when it'll let me for you reply here and the details mate. Really interesting stuff .

[Daruwind]

Just watching Yes Minister....finally realized what went wrong in UK. Uk stopped being good at politics!

[Elmetiacos]

Just watching Yes Minister....finally realized what went wrong in UK. Uk stopped being good at politics!

This was Harold Macmillan's view, 'We will embrace it destructively', and why de Gaulle was right to veto British entry the first time, but for the wrong reasons. It had long ceased to be policy by the time Yes Minister aired, though.

[The Wandering Storyteller]

So here's what I don't get:

1) Brexit Party - watched a video about the fact that Nigel Farage and his party of Brexit only really intend to make it about Brexit - because Nigel loves the camera - its why so many politicans are jealous of him, because he has direct access to the President of the United States, he's charming and all - no other politican maybe Macron has that acess. But can the Brexit Party really secure a vote in the general election? The Conservatives over-spent to make sure Nigel didn't get in, but I think many Conservatives want Nigel as the leader. He's the typcial Conservative you'd meet on the street. I mean there isn't anything special about Farage apart from the fact that he says things that Conservative MPs wouldn't say. Labour and Conservative seats still recieve a great share of votes in them - the general mood is now they'll be wiped out. The first past the post system is designed to keep the two parties in power - there hasn't been any change in this. Apparently a lot of Conservatives are moving towards the Brexit Party - its a safety party to protect what remains left of the Tories. So can Nigel do it? I think he wants to be become PM. He's failed 7 times but you have to give this guy credit. He's done what no other British politican done(which is why they're all jealous of him. They may oppose him, but deep down the reason why Westminister flops is that Nigel Farage has more personality than all the 650 mps combined.) I used to like Nigel but he's become too greedy for power now. At this point, will the Conservative Party be destroyed if the EU withdrawal deal is passed? Theresa is still sticking there hoping she can make some sort of last resistance, but its useless. Nigel's like a shark, as soon as he sensed the problem, he's used the tactics that he learnt from the Trump Campaign and just did it. Mind you he sounds and looks like a politican from the 1980s. What might happen, is that Westminister is preparing plans for the short term to protect itself against Nigel. They know the people aren't happy, and they are trying to get the deal done as quickly as possible - even the EU wants this - before Nigel Farage can be allowed to take power. So Brexit Party does extremly well in EU elections - great. That won't have an impact on domestic politics, but what it will do is allow Brexit Party MEPs to downvote EU leglisation quite a lot - which will be hampering EU politics. Farage knows this, but he's doing this for another reason. He wants the Italians on their side - they have become far more Eurosceptic and are ironically much better with dealing with the EU than Greece has at the moment. I remember watching a interview where EU knows of Italy having some sort of treasure bonds or something - So Italy is waiting for the right moment it can challenge the European Union. Brexit election is meant for one thing; wake up other eurosceptic parties that were squashed in 2017.

If Brexit party gains a huge majority of votes, that opens the chance for other Euro-sceptic parties to come in. This man really thinks for the long term. If General election comes, Theresa May will need to resign - the Tories have done everything in their power to remain in power and will always have a corrupt government in charge. They don't want their power being shifted - but now thanks to Brexit blunder I don't think they can stay anymore tbh. Say for example, Jeremy Corbyn still remains in power (for all the local election blame, they've done much better than the Cons, and the Lib Dems...plz.) This man is a Brexiteer but can't do anything because half his whole party is remain. I do sympathize with him on this - but on the other hand, he will still retain a share of Labour majority votes. He wants to repeat the success of 2017 but has to be very careful. The whole tory party will dissolve, many going to Nigel Farage. What you might see is something never seen before: The Conservative MPs will resign from the Tory Party and defect their votes to Brexit Party. Much like the two MPs of the Cons did for Ukip. Except this time it won't be one or two mps, you could have as many as 100 of them defecting. So the map will look like Brexit Blue rather than Con blue. What may happen is you'll see a Conservative Party reduced to 150 seats, a Labour party with over 236 or 294 seats, still not enough to form a majority, and the Brexit Party 289 seats. Of course this is not a accuracte prediction - the Brexit Party has to overcome the problem of first past the post - it prevented Nigel Farage at 2015, but we shall see. What is clear that many of the Tory Brass want Nigel at the helm, because he knows all the European Leaders whereas British Politicans don't even know them, and Nigel can really only win with defections from the Tory Party.

We may see for the first time Nigel Farage become Prime Ministers. Deep down he's always wanted to become the Prime Minister. At least with him, he knows what he wants.

Then again this could be a whole load of tosh, pot black and kettle. We won't know what will happen until May 23rd and until the October Extension is finished. And could the Brexit Party's image be finished by October? Change my mind! Prove I'm wrong, but if I saw Labour and Cons - I wouldn't bother touching them with a barge pole tbh. High time British politics got a good scrubbing.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

An interesting analysis there. From the lib-dems surprise dominance at the Local level today (They've also been Local council solid, but its been dramatic, as have the rise in Greens), who knows what the following months will bring .

I think the issue with putting too much onto the brexit party is that A) European Elections are a completely different ball-game to a domestic General Election (I mean the Green's actually have decent representation comparatively at the EU Parliamentary level for the UK) and B) They do not have a domestic agenda, it doesn't exist yet and as 2017 proved this is what wins or loses a GE. Also a minor fact is C) as i think you've rightly identified, May and the Conservatives will do everything and anything to avoid a General Election as best-case has them currently being tied with Labour, and if anything the 2017 GE proved that Corbyn whatever his faults as a party leader, is a very good campaigner.

You've rightly identified as well that FPTP is an issue, its not merely a stumbling block. A mass Conservative split as you highlight would solve this, but there is not nearly 100 MP's who will defect, if you want a semi-reliable source, look at the numbers who tried to topple May last time, iirc its around 20-40 ERG members. The rest of the Conservatives are not ideologically bothered enough about brexit (ironically), beyond either towing the party line, or maneuvering for the best place within the Conservative party by supporting the 'radicals' of either remain or hard-brexit factions.

Another key point is that it is unlikely many conservative MP's would be willing to associate with Farage, not just because of his politics personally, but also 'The Brexit Party' aren't technically any sort of 'wing'- Farage has allied with genuine former British communists for instance- https://www.theguardian.com/politics...s-brexit-party.

While she's no longer a communist, she does 'only agree with Farage on one thing'- brexit. The brexit party simply does not have the ideological cohesion to be successful in a GE, nor to attract the defectors it would need to sustain itself (Change UK arguably also have this issue being composed of traditional Conservatives, 'Blairites' and Social Democrats). Brexit is not a strong enough unifier to hold these disparate groups together when it comes to tackling the UK's severe domestic issues.

A final comment about Conservative-Brexit party relations, in the unlikely event of an early GE (it might happen of course) and that May does 'go' prior to its calling as promised, the replacement for the Conservatives is likely to be a 'unifier candidate', this is because the group most likely to split (who has openly stated so) are Conservative remainers if a brexiteer like Boris Johnson succeeds May. So the Brexit Party won't in any case get much of the needed inflow, Change UK though might do (and this might be the only way it survives a GE).

In terms of the domestic trumping brexit, we already saw this in 2017. Labour succeeded because the Conservatives messed up their domestic policy, Corbyn has actually very popular policy ideas (its just him that is divisive, most Conservative voters for instance support nationalization of trains, water et al) and the Conservatives wrongly tried to use Brexit as their main focus, while Labour were quite easily able to turn the focus onto the effects of austerity and other domestic ills. In this the Brexit Party has no stance, it also will be unable to get one so long as its supporters are drawn from such diverse backgrounds. It's not comfortable ground for Farage and co to fight on, it was also UKIP's biggest failing was the lack of a popular domestic agenda- as such a one was either filled by the Conservatives, or their more 'radical' ideas such as rumors of NHS privatization and an insurance policy were enough to kill them politically.

Essentially brexit is just not big enough for a new party to challenge the big two- it has to provide 'sweeping' reforms, from a coherent base, with a popular message. In a UK context that would essentially mean adopting many of Corbyn's policies, adding in though elements of decentralization of the powers Westminster has hoarded from local councils (pre-1979 Tory policy) and building a campaign based on domestic issues. This is something that i just can't see the Brexit party being realistically able to achieve- it is also something they themselves have essentially said they have no interest in. They are for promoting brexit through pressuring the big two by eating into potential vote share (something FPTP does allow for). Essentially Nigel has a lot of influence with the Brexit party over EU elections, and no hope at all assailing Westminster by directly planting his flag in the ground in any meaningful way.

A source of current evidence for that would be the recent local elections. UKIP (who have a domestic policy and a similar brexit stance to the Brexit Party) lost out, now sure local and General are not really to be seen as too linked, but they do share more in common than European Elections and a GE does. There just isn't the opportunity for the Brexit Party to 'Go domestic'. Especially as i assume Farage would be running on a similar platform to his previous UKIP days in any purported 'domestic' manifesto- which has a large streak of libertarianism, which is something that the British public have never actually really gone for electorally, from the 1910s 'New Liberalism', through to the 'One Nation' Conservatives that have been around since the 1950s, and indeed were back with Cameron and May, who take a paternalistic attitude to state intervention, Even Thatcher was not a libertarian- Hayeck despaired frequently as she centralized control within the state and enlarged its parameters ironically, even in newly 'privatized areas'. Very little was actually 'left to the market' in the libertarian sense. Then of course Labour with its Fabian traditions and social democratic or indeed socialist leanings, the British public have all voted for these things in large numbers, but never for a truly libertarian option (The mere whiff of private healthcare is enough to ruin government popularity and lose elections).


A caveat i would say though for using the local election results and UKIP as an example above,- many commentators are taking the fact that the Conservatives have had a disastrous showing in the local election results, that UKIP is also down and that Labour as well has actually made losses and not gains, as a sign that 'Brexit' is being rejected by the electorate- this they cite as being confirmed by the 'big winners' being the Greens and especially the Liberal Democrats- who both have made massive gains, directly at the expense of the Conservatives and both are firm pro-remain parties. The argument being that if it was a protest vote by those who want brexit, they would have voted for UKIP (where they stood- which they didn't), and certainly would not as seems to have happened, change their vote to the lib-dems (i.e. Remain central).

However local elections as i've mentioned also have a domestic element to it, and have compared to a GE a very low turnout, though this turnout (around 29%) is similar to Britain's typical showing in the EU elections- so it'll be interesting to see how that plays out. But Remain parties doing massively well in the local elections directly at the expense of parties who support brexit (or seem to in the case of Labour) should not be read as a commentary on if a second referendum needs to be had.

[Aexodus]

Claire Fox is a supporter of the IRA (what is it with communists and the ira?) which should have disqualified her from Farages party. She’s not just a minor candidate, she’s top of the list. Meaning when the votes start counting for the proportion-based election, the first MEP’s worth of votes to Brexit™ will be electing her.

[The Wandering Storyteller]

@Dante

You may be right in this regard. However reason, why I say Nigel will do well in GE as opposed to 2015, is this man knows the public mood. He has the LBC radio station, he knows what people want. Much as not many like Gerrad Batten, he does make sensible points. Nigel is going to copy the tactics of the Trump campaign mark my word. In UKIP he made it about Independence day, this time he will go to Make Britian Great Again. The candidates will attack him - saying he's just copying - Nigel may remark that the both parties did nothing for Brexit.

Farage said he wants to fight GE. Now how will he do this? He needs mass defections. Without that there's no point. I could start a party with the same amount of funding Farage is getting and yet it would make no difference in the general election. But Nigel has three important factors; one the BBC media love him. Two, he gets the most media coverage and is active on social media, and three - he will get the endorsements of other parties. Nigel winning those seats is what makes him relevant. I've said it before and I've said it again - Before 2014, no one even bothered to take notice of Nigel Farage. He was booed and shooed back then. The 2014 EU elections put him in a position to challenge the Conservatives, and mind you those people will do anything to stay in power. But back then there was no general election. In 2015 Nigel reasonably estimated that they'd get 10 mps, but that's nothing. Just look at his last election resort - the Tories spent a lot more money. This time Nigel will have funding, support and a lot of people defecting to his side. So there's hope that he can get something in GE - but later down below I'll discuss this.

This time - Nigel Farage is waiting for a GE and that what scares Theresa May but not Corbyn. With all the amount of difficulty JC has had over the past few years, I remember the romantic days when back in 2015 it was the rise of socialism, and it seemed everything was rosy. Look how bad its become. However you can't get rid of Corbyn because as you say he's a good campaigner - he can win the people back very easily. Labour wants to get rid of him - but honestly he's the only decent leader they have now. His cabinet is something else. I don't know who can lead the labour party anymore tbh. Corbyn had a chance to sort out the mess when he should have declared a vote of no-confidence along with the Tories ousting. That would have him put into a more powerful position. And the last time a vote of no confidence happened - it came very very very close to him.

As Barry Gardiner said, Labour is actually saving the Conservative Party. Ironic. I think Labour must be so glad that they're in this position - its the closet they'll ever come to power and sure you can blame them for being greedy - but when you've been in opposition for nine years won't you fall into temptation? The Conservative Party which used to mock the Labour Party is now begging Labour to save them. They're equally frighetened. One, they had only one headache named JC. They should have easily won the 2017 election - but their manifesto was horrendous. Nasty. The guy who wrote it lost his seat, talk about Posh Tories.

Instead they attacked JC, just like the Democrats did with Trump and boom. Trump is going to get re-elected and alot of people call him stupid but he's very much like Boris Johnson. On the outside they appear buffoons but actually look at their old clips of their younger days and you will realise that they're actually very intelligent. So I would not under-estimate them. The Americans are keeping a close watch on this new political scandal.

JC still has time to put the party back together, provided that some form of Brexit happens. But Theresa May does not want to resign - purely because like all rotten Tories she thinks that they do a great service - wrong. None of their policies benefit people massively. They're actually quite a socalist economic party mind you following the perils of neo-liberal economics. They kept on using austerity, pay packets, pay salary, wages. This is all stuff the real Labour party members would say. Theresa May is scared. She's done enough to damage UK's global rep, and then she's resigning what is a weakened Tory Party to the perils of Nigel Farage's BP, and JC's Labour Party. Those two parties are waiting for the moment to get their revenge on the Tories. That is why the Tories don't want to hold a GE. They have to fight Labour Party and BP. Not a good combination.

Trust me, the only reason why Nigel would do well is because the Government did a spectular job of undoing Brexit as it was originally intentioned. Batten said in an interview that he wasn't happy because the establishment would do everything in their power to stop it. I mean sure when you get benefits from EU why would you stop it? And that's a perfectly resonable reason - lots of people have benefited from the EU. A lot of people will vote for Nigel because he has personality - Nigel will do exactly what Trump did and turn this into a sort of presidential election (everything he's doing so far is imitiating American Politics) UKIP will get a surge of votes - but the mainstream media is attacking them too much while giving comfortable coverage to Nigel Farage because he's the less racist of them all. UKIP isn't racist, but they don't have many members that have the same charm as Nigel has. I mean the former communist member - Part of BP - Media raises no question on that. UKIP candidate Carl Benjamain - Media raises questions as if they're the patrons of world peace. The politics of now has given this Nigel Farage a chance to take revenge. Gerrad is alright, sensible, but he doesn't have the power of the media behind him and while he has charm, he's old. There's no one like a Nigel Farage figure to help, and Farage did nothing to save UKIP from being turned into a crap-hole by Henry Bolton (who had as much charm as a dog in a park.) - Even his first question time was so disappointing no one was caring. Oh and I just discovered - he has a NEW PARTY!

The man that destroyed UKIP and had a grand bloody time with his personal life has now launched his own political party for Brexit.

This is a circus!

Never liked Lib Dems after they went back on the 2010 policy of tution fees. Worst Party ever.

I never liked the Tories, and they deserved it.

Concur with all the comments said so far. It is truly shocking to see the Westminister Govt collapse.

The remain side lost and should just keep it that way. I didn't see such a big protest when Labour lost the election in 2017 (they actually won it in the moral sense.)

Real test is when will a GE be called. It can happen any time, and it can happen anywhere. Even the EU is like, yo wth? EU thought they'd be scared of Nigel Party coming back but oh no - they're scared that his BP has become so popular, that they're literally sending warning glances to the UK Political establishment: Get your act together or else Nigel farage - the man we've consistently tried to stop will arise back again!

Apparently France has their own frexit party. Would be good as it'd restore French pride to a good boost well needed.


Trust me, the EU and the Americans on both sides of the political spectrum are watching this with keen interest. Nigel has so many connections and establishment connections than he had in 2015. This is what might work for him.

UKIP needs to keep growing steadily otherwise they might just end it. They don't have the same traction of numbers as Nigel managed to get them in.

I think he may adopt Trump economic policies instead if he wants to stand a chance.

Why do you say JC's plan is quite good? Everyone thought it was bad?

[The Wandering Storyteller]

The EU is not "holding all the cards" and never did so. Not until the PM systematically gave away the UK's negotiating leverage. The top ones being:
1) Budget contributions, being the second largest net contributor (after only Germany).
2) Trade deficit, being the largest customer of many of the bigger and more influential Member States.
3) Defense and security co-operation, being the only other nuclear power (besides France), with global military reach and a blue-water navy, plus membership of Five Eyes (which is where all the useful counter-terrorism intel comes from).
4) More EU citizens in the UK than UK citizens in the EU.

We could have been properly prepared for leaving without a deal two years ago, if the PM hadn't prevented us from doing so.

Absouteley right. 100%.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

Why do you say JC's plan is quite good? Everyone thought it was bad?

Elements of it are spot on, the government acting as a 'pathfinder investor' is sensible economics, arguments over borrowing are rather null as the Conservatives have borrowed heavily, but alas have used said borrowing to prop up the holes left by their poorly implemented austerity cuts. In broader terms though, the majority of the electorate actually agree with large elements of Corbyn's manifesto:

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics...on-public-view

https://fullfact.org/economy/do-publ...enationalised/

There is majority support for most 'sensible' nationalizations (Sensible being rail, water, Schools- i.e. not the academy trust model the Tories have applied, Royal Mail).

Its for instance why we've seen the Conservatives shift to a more social-interventionist model (or at least promise to, Energy price caps and rent controls are something the Conservatives attacked Milliband for, calling him 'Red Ed', but have since adopted or toyed with themselves).

The issue is ironically that while Labour's manifesto had broad appeal, the party under Corbyn does not (In terms of Corbyn is a polarizing figure, which means substantial support from certain voter groups, but for instance unlike Blair he won't be able to bridge the divide himself and steal the Conservative voters needed to win a GE). Its the ever-question at the moment, if Corbyn were to step down soon as leader, would it ensure that Labour win the next GE outright providing they broadly stuck with the same policies? Who knows, though i tend to agree with your point indeed that Corbyn is a good campaigner and generally is what the core Labour voting base is built around currently, especially as it is not obvious that they have anyone else who could replace him without major upheaval.

You may be right in this regard. However reason, why I say Nigel will do well in GE as opposed to 2015, is this man knows the public mood. He has the LBC radio station, he knows what people want. Much as not many like Gerrad Batten, he does make sensible points. Nigel is going to copy the tactics of the Trump campaign mark my word. In UKIP he made it about Independence day, this time he will go to Make Britian Great Again. The candidates will attack him - saying he's just copying - Nigel may remark that the both parties did nothing for Brexit.

Farage said he wants to fight GE. Now how will he do this? He needs mass defections. Without that there's no point. I could start a party with the same amount of funding Farage is getting and yet it would make no difference in the general election. But Nigel has three important factors; one the BBC media love him. Two, he gets the most media coverage and is active on social media, and three - he will get the endorsements of other parties. Nigel winning those seats is what makes him relevant. I've said it before and I've said it again - Before 2014, no one even bothered to take notice of Nigel Farage. He was booed and shooed back then. The 2014 EU elections put him in a position to challenge the Conservatives, and mind you those people will do anything to stay in power. But back then there was no general election. In 2015 Nigel reasonably estimated that they'd get 10 mps, but that's nothing. Just look at his last election resort - the Tories spent a lot more money. This time Nigel will have funding, support and a lot of people defecting to his side. So there's hope that he can get something in GE - but later down below I'll discuss this.

This time - Nigel Farage is waiting for a GE and that what scares Theresa May but not Corbyn. With all the amount of difficulty JC has had over the past few years, I remember the romantic days when back in 2015 it was the rise of socialism, and it seemed everything was rosy. Look how bad its become. However you can't get rid of Corbyn because as you say he's a good campaigner - he can win the people back very easily. Labour wants to get rid of him - but honestly he's the only decent leader they have now. His cabinet is something else. I don't know who can lead the labour party anymore tbh. Corbyn had a chance to sort out the mess when he should have declared a vote of no-confidence along with the Tories ousting. That would have him put into a more powerful position. And the last time a vote of no confidence happened - it came very very very close to him.

As Barry Gardiner said, Labour is actually saving the Conservative Party. Ironic. I think Labour must be so glad that they're in this position - its the closet they'll ever come to power and sure you can blame them for being greedy - but when you've been in opposition for nine years won't you fall into temptation? The Conservative Party which used to mock the Labour Party is now begging Labour to save them. They're equally frighetened. One, they had only one headache named JC. They should have easily won the 2017 election - but their manifesto was horrendous. Nasty. The guy who wrote it lost his seat, talk about Posh Tories.

Instead they attacked JC, just like the Democrats did with Trump and boom. Trump is going to get re-elected and alot of people call him stupid but he's very much like Boris Johnson. On the outside they appear buffoons but actually look at their old clips of their younger days and you will realise that they're actually very intelligent. So I would not under-estimate them. The Americans are keeping a close watch on this new political scandal.

JC still has time to put the party back together, provided that some form of Brexit happens. But Theresa May does not want to resign - purely because like all rotten Tories she thinks that they do a great service - wrong. None of their policies benefit people massively. They're actually quite a socalist economic party mind you following the perils of neo-liberal economics. They kept on using austerity, pay packets, pay salary, wages. This is all stuff the real Labour party members would say. Theresa May is scared. She's done enough to damage UK's global rep, and then she's resigning what is a weakened Tory Party to the perils of Nigel Farage's BP, and JC's Labour Party. Those two parties are waiting for the moment to get their revenge on the Tories. That is why the Tories don't want to hold a GE. They have to fight Labour Party and BP. Not a good combination.

Trust me, the only reason why Nigel would do well is because the Government did a spectular job of undoing Brexit as it was originally intentioned. Batten said in an interview that he wasn't happy because the establishment would do everything in their power to stop it. I mean sure when you get benefits from EU why would you stop it? And that's a perfectly resonable reason - lots of people have benefited from the EU. A lot of people will vote for Nigel because he has personality - Nigel will do exactly what Trump did and turn this into a sort of presidential election (everything he's doing so far is imitiating American Politics) UKIP will get a surge of votes - but the mainstream media is attacking them too much while giving comfortable coverage to Nigel Farage because he's the less racist of them all. UKIP isn't racist, but they don't have many members that have the same charm as Nigel has. I mean the former communist member - Part of BP - Media raises no question on that. UKIP candidate Carl Benjamain - Media raises questions as if they're the patrons of world peace. The politics of now has given this Nigel Farage a chance to take revenge. Gerrad is alright, sensible, but he doesn't have the power of the media behind him and while he has charm, he's old. There's no one like a Nigel Farage figure to help, and Farage did nothing to save UKIP from being turned into a crap-hole by Henry Bolton (who had as much charm as a dog in a park.) - Even his first question time was so disappointing no one was caring. Oh and I just discovered - he has a NEW PARTY!

The man that destroyed UKIP and had a grand bloody time with his personal life has now launched his own political party for Brexit.

I likewise can in the scenario you paint see where indeed this could follow through as you've painted. Though i would emphasize that without mass defections (as you've correctly identified being key) it is essentially impossible under FPTP for any new or small party to get anywhere. Another caveat though is that theoretically even if the brexit party did gain momentum and appear in Westminster in a meaningful way, it will for the first time in around a century split the 'right-wing' vote, between it and the Conservatives. This is the main strength of why the Conservative party as the broad-church it is tends to be in power more often than not, When Labour has been in power, especially after the 1970s (Though i would argue post-Attlee actually) it tends to have been the Conservatives fringe voters punishing them for something they've messed up on as opposed to a real split. With such a real split however with a new and large right-wing party in the political scene, the issue that has plagued Labour since 1906 (I.e. Those damn Liberal, and then Liberal Democrats and then the Green party) which has broken up the 'left-wing' vote in the UK will be on a more even playing field. In that context you might get a steadier cycle of Labour-Right-Wing-Labour etc governments than the start and stops we've had, so it'll be interesting in that scenario who actually benefits.

It also relies on the public at large still being interested in a particular form of brexit, as opposed to (what arguably the local elections have shown) just wanting it 'over' in some form. While their are always those core voting and political groups with a specific vision for brexit (or not), the majority of the public have shown frustration that brexit is taking up all the time over domestic issues. In for instance May somehow gets her deal through sometime this month (Highly unlikely ), it might kill the steam Farage would need for any kind of GE, especially due to lack of the aforementioned domestic policy. At this point any kind of 'sorting' of brexit (i.e. it no longer is a political issue taking up Westminster time) would see the electorates main focus shift to the domestic, leaving the core remainers and brexiteers left as they were pre-2016, a vocal minority, its the danger for any Farage bid that he'll have to overcome, as i mentioned previously, its a tenuous thing to do a GE on. However European Elections coming up is an entirely different issue .

So again, the picture you paint with those parameters i can see that being attempted indeed. I think the key part is getting to that point though (the need for brexit to still be unresolved by the next GE, the need for mass defections, and the need for a domestic policy platform that is popular for the electorate, but also very different from that offered by Labour and the Conservatives- which is very difficult, as Labour have the 'nationalization' card in the bag, and the Tories have the 'state intervention' card in the bag, there is not currently much support for a neoliberal model of privatized services to tap into, and libertarian thought in the UK to be successful at all, had to be tied up into Thatcher's version of neoliberalism, which wasn't very libertarian at all. So i can see a lot of hurdle to get to the state where your scenario can be implemented. I think perhaps the first steps, and something we 'might' see after brexit (or during) are calls for electoral reform, a move to PR would certainly see Farage's party established as some kind of political force. However the issue here is that ironically brexit has knocked the public will for a greater degree of democracy in UK politics alas, and certainly has made the two big parties even more hostile to the idea.

I think he may adopt Trump economic policies instead if he wants to stand a chance.

I think that is the key problem for Farage though, Trumps economic policies in practice are essentially traditional Republican neoliberalism/Libertarianism (depending on which Republican you ask), with an element of Nationalism (America First) thrown in. The nationalist element in Britain would play well, and indeed does already- both Labour and the Conservatives steep their rhetoric in it (See Labours industrial policy or the Conservatives 'building Britain' stuff), however the actual practical elements of Trumps economic policy would be electoral suicide in the UK. Further privatization has very little support, and indeed the majority are actually for further nationalization of certain services. Any noting of the NHS ever being privatized is a campaign killer (the equivalent to May's botched 2017 manifesto, which essentially contained large connotations of that). Tax cuts for working and wealthier classes are not currently generating the political capital they should due to the backdrop of misapplied austerity and cuts, The privatized local schools turned academies have been subject to heavy scandal and mismanagement in a very public way. The fact that the bonuses paid to executives, professors, MP's, Financiers and businesses bosses has become headline news for both left and right wing press in the UK is an issue against the traditional Republican model too in a UK context. It just doesn't have the public support needed to provide any electoral traction and will actually hurt the party (or potential party) running on that platform. Bear in mind too that deregulation (A key part of the Republican model) is highly unpopular in Britain, particularly as it is linked to workers rights, and the allowance of things like Fracking, which has next to no support among the UK electorate (https://www.theguardian.com/environm...survey-reveals).

For a broad overview-
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.ne...Policies_w.pdf- From November 2018

Resounding there is majority public support for the government playing a greater role in redistributing wealth from rich to poor- 63% in favour, 17% against. The rest 'Don't know'. There is no scope for a USA free-market, libertarian/Trump style economic model, the public want varying degrees of state intervention in the economy and with rights, not its withdrawal.

The final nail in the coffin for a Trump-style model to being electorally appealing in the UK is 'Britain First' is that there is majority support for Richer nations directly helping through finance, poorer states, and the margin of difference is significant. 57% to only 24%. This is the antithesis of an 'America First' model (and was rather surprising to me to see such an extent).

This is of course because the USA has a completely different political culture to Britain, who since 1906 has had its political establishment steadily shift (rather reluctantly) at the behest of its right and left wing voters towards the mixed market and state interventionist model we currently have. The Techo-nationalist state of the 1950s and 60s solidified this, Britain is essentially a centralized social-economic interventionist state, because its voters support that (Hence partly why Thatcher had no intention of ever following a true Austrian model) through how Britain's particular political culture has developed (Post-1945 has a lot to do with it, but even earlier conceptions of the Victorian and particularly Edwardian states role as the Monarch's tool for the benefit of his/her people, and the image 'Old England' have a lot to do with promoting the necessity of the government to get involved in affairs Trump and the Republicans would and indeed do disdain.

The UK's 'populist' economic model is currently dominated by Corbyn (Hence why the Conservatives are meeting Labour on its own issues as opposed to directing the argument as a government should be doing), its here that Farage if in the unlikely event he gets those mass defections should take ideas from. He can mirrior the Conservatives version of it, but trying to go libertarian in the UK is political suicide, even with brexit having shifted things a bit (its ironically shifted things more to the state intervention side i would note).

However like Corbyn, Farage is also a divisive figure who may not be able to 'bridge' the divide to steal left-wing votes needed to form a government. This is made even more unlikely by the fact that those defectors will be traditional Conservatives, who while advocating the 'One nation paternalism' that justifies state intervention, it will not be on the same scale as that offered by Corbyn, and thus would essentially 'share space' with the existing Conservative party. Which is not a good place to be currently (though they are in minority government saying that ).

If however, the UK adopts a PR vote system first, well while Farage would still be politically suicidal to adopt any of the USA's economic model, he might with a more 'British' domestic model indeed, well things might get interesting here.

Claire Fox is a supporter of the IRA (what is it with communists and the ira?) which should have disqualified her from Farages party. She’s not just a minor candidate, she’s top of the list. Meaning when the votes start counting for the proportion-based election, the first MEP’s worth of votes to Brexit™ will be electing her.

Well damn. This certainly highlights the issues Farage is going to have moving the Brexit party from one of protest to a permanent fixture, that is an ideological gulf and one that would typically be very unappealing for British voters.

Also good point about the IRA and communist- i know they have historic links, but then again, which European power/ideology hostile to Britain doesn't seem to have historic links with the IRA (Thinking Germany in both World Wars) .

EDIT: Just to further highlight, and indeed provide some evidence that might support @The Wandering Storyteller's scenario of a Farage party, The Conservatives heading into any new GE (especially one before brexit has not yet been done) face a monumental challenge, even compared with 2017. The Labour Campaign machine is well-established and pretty oiled, and has been 'at the ready' since 2017. The Conservatives on the other hand have had their own campaign machine fall into a state of somewhat disrepair, there is a serious shortage in funds, apparently they can only budget for 1 type of leaflet from HQ for the upcoming EU elections, and generally are potentially not falling behind Labour in terms of being able to splash the cash-

https://www.ft.com/content/8e553444-...1-8d9ef1626294

https://www.ft.com/content/4323399a-...7-97e4dbd3580d

This is worrying, as the Conservatives tend rely on spending more than their opponents, at least all GE's since 2010, by a massive margin. For the results they've received they are one of the most cost-inefficient campaigners of the big parties. However, it doesn't matter so much as they had the cash to splash.

https://www.electoralcommission.org....ious-elections

This is no longer a certainty, and could if not rectified have a real effect on the outcome of a GE.

There are also problems with their activist base, mainly it might go on strike (as apparently they are threatening at the upcoming EU elections) and they lack the same footfall as Labour now.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...fuse-campaign/

So if there ever was a time (FPTP) permitting for one of the big two parties to receive a permanent knock-out blow and get replaced, the time has never been riper. However this is still a tall order, and a lot of these circumstances can be resolved potentially.

[Daruwind]

Pardon me, but let´s say that in very unlikely scenario in which Farage somehow got enough support to "win" GE and force brexit....his plans so far are only slogans and billboards. Basically hard brexit with no deal. Point is, this is very easy way for marketing stuff, selling to people. Because it is very simple like Trump like any populists...quick direct answers, no brain, no thinking... BUT. Problem is his plans will invevitable clash with reality as soon as he is the PM or whatever. EU said it already that even in wild brexit scenario without the deal, the sooner or later the UK will have to return to the table and close some old questions/stuff. And even he somehow manage to force brexit and get on with it and it happens, his only possible long term victory would be if UK will enter dream land and enjoy being global empire overnight once again....Like if there is no crisis due to brexit,china and if all world countries would somehow accept british perfect trade deals, if Scots and Ireland are no problems....Basically Farage at helm with brexit might be the quickest way to solve this question once and for all. It would be such cluster that voters at the nearest possible opportunity will vote for yet another U-turn and EU will welcome UK back ..diminished but back. I think Dante said it a few times already, that only way how to cancel this brexit idea once and for all is actually to go on with it, enjoy lost decade and once enough people is pissed off by "dream not coming to real" + new generation getting voting rights, then the question would be solved once and for all...

[Cope]

Pardon me, but let´s say that in very unlikely scenario in which Farage somehow got enough support to "win" GE and force brexit....his plans so far are only slogans and billboards. Basically hard brexit with no deal. Point is, this is very easy way for marketing stuff, selling to people. Because it is very simple like Trump like any populists...quick direct answers, no brain, no thinking... BUT. Problem is his plans will invevitable clash with reality as soon as he is the PM or whatever. EU said it already that even in wild brexit scenario without the deal, the sooner or later the UK will have to return to the table and close some old questions/stuff. And even he somehow manage to force brexit and get on with it and it happens, his only possible long term victory would be if UK will enter dream land and enjoy being global empire overnight once again....Like if there is no crisis due to brexit,china and if all world countries would somehow accept british perfect trade deals, if Scots and Ireland are no problems....Basically Farage at helm with brexit might be the quickest way to solve this question once and for all. It would be such cluster that voters at the nearest possible opportunity will vote for yet another U-turn and EU will welcome UK back ..diminished but back. I think Dante said it a few times already, that only way how to cancel this brexit idea once and for all is actually to go on with it, enjoy lost decade and once enough people is pissed off by "dream not coming to real" + new generation getting voting rights, then the question would be solved once and for all...

Imagining a peaceful rearrangement of an existing international relationship isn't a psychotic fantasy with a destructive conclusion.

[TheLeft]

So can someone explain the appeal of Farage's Brexit Party?

They have no manifesto, no policies and refuse to say what unicorn filled, impossible version of Brexit they want.

Empty, meaningless slogans like "Brexit means Brexit", "Leave means Leave" and "derp derp derp" are not reasons to vote for someone...

[Elmetiacos]

So can someone explain the appeal of Farage's Brexit Party?

They have no manifesto, no policies and refuse to say what unicorn filled, impossible version of Brexit they want.

Empty, meaningless slogans like "Brexit means Brexit", "Leave means Leave" and "derp derp derp" are not reasons to vote for someone...

It's essentially a protest vote.

[TheLeft]

It's essentially a protest vote.

Interesting.

I thought it was a declaration of someone being a bit thick and very easily led. It is truly staggering the lengths some people will go to sabotage their own best interests based on zero real information and only Daily Mail headlines...

[Big War Bird]

International outcry over Brexit referendum re-run proposal

An EU spokesperson called on the British Parliment to explain the controversial plan "without delay".

Germany's Foreign Minister Heiko Mass called the re-run "incomprehensible".

The move was also criticised by the French government and by leading MEP Guy Verhofstadt, who said Britain was "drifting towards dictatorship".

The ruling conservative Tory party of Prime Minister lost a referendum to remain in the EU in 2016, but Ms May refused to accept the result.

Remain voters claim that there were irregularities that invalidate the vote. The so called "People's vote" has sparked protests around Britain. Hundreds of people gathered in several districts, banging pots and pans and shouting "Anna Soubry is a Nazi."

"Ensuring a free, fair and transparent voting process is essential to any democracy and is at the heart of the European Union's relations with Greg Britain," the EU's diplomatic chief, Federica Mogherini, said in a statement.

The French government called on British authorities to show "respect for democratic principles, pluralism, fairness [and] transparency".

Mr Verhofstadt, the Belgian leader of the liberal group in the European parliament, said on Twitter that the referendum rerun threatened to make continuing EU membership "impossible".

Brexit advocate Nigel Farage, left Ukip after the referendum, believing the Leave vote would be respected, described the move as "treacherous". Ukip has accused the Parliament of bowing to pressure from salty remainers.

It really makes you think, doesn't it?

[Aexodus]

Haha I was wondering when someone would make the connection