Brexit - Time to scrap it and start again?

[QuintusSertorius]

You don't know what you are talking about. Get a cancer, a cerebrovascular disease, a vascular anomaly, a genetic disease, essential hypertension, type 1 diabetes, a retinal detachment, polytrauma in car accident- etc, etc ad nausea- and do us a favor: treat yourself and your family in a private hospital - and pay.

Lifestyle, genetics and chance. One of those aspects you certainly can control, which often reduces the incidence of those things.

Neither I nor my family require any treatment in hospital. That's the magic of taking responsibility for your own health.

Precisely. Taken together with Farage's record on the NHS, a campaign to 'save the NHS' would make all the difference in a tight race. Hard Brexiteers would still vote Brexit, but of the rest, if the message gets across, I can't imagine many voting Tory. Trump's visit might have done the UK a favour, inadvertently.


True, but the more unthinking Brexit zombies would sacrifice food, water and oxygen and certainly the NHS, for the broken country Teresa May loves. The only gammon that doesn't want curing.

You really can't help yourself, can you? All that projection can't be good for your mental health.

So the elderly, disabled, terminally ill and others who require constant care can just off and die? But of course as a conservative, so long as you're alright, other people are irrelevant...

What does any of that have to do with this discussion? A total privatisation and imitation of the US system isn't on the cards, and Labour have been making the spurious argument that "the Tory's" are going to privatise the NHS since 1948.

But no, beyond paying my taxes I couldn't give a toss what other people do, they're not my responsibility. I don't suffer from undifferentiated empathy, and all the mental health problems that seem to correlate with left-wing views.

[caratacus]

Precisely. Taken together with Farage's record on the NHS, a campaign to 'save the NHS' would make all the difference in a tight race. Hard Brexiteers would still vote Brexit, but of the rest, if the message gets across, I can't imagine many voting Tory. Trump's visit might have done the UK a favour, inadvertently..

This is nothing more than another attempt at media spin by the Remain establishment. The questions by the press after Trumps speech was clearly a set up. A president who quite obviously hadn't been briefed about the questioning, walked right into the trap when asked by the inclusion of the NHS within trade negotiations. He responded by stating the obvious, that he thought everything would be included, and therefore not undermining the American position in such talks

A more experienced clever person would have handled it rather differently by saying, "I didn't know it would be, are you aware of something I'm not? If you are asking me to provide a cast iron guarantee about trade negotiations that haven't begun yet, I'm afraid I cannot. Ask again when the UK has left the EU, and we are at that stage, and perhaps I'll be in a better position to answer your question.”
Instead he just blurted "everything is on the table" which may be a fair answer, but is the sort of thing the press love to grab a headline and they certainly did.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

It is disgusting how the National Health Service has become a political football and yet at other times it gets forgotten about until signs of a crisis emerge, when it recieve knee jerk reactions by those in government.

On another aspect of the state visit, anybody notice how much more relaxed and comfortable Corbyn seemed yelling at the anti Trump protest meeting, than the time he is in Westminster as leader of the opposition, where he seems almost like a man held hostage. It is essentially what he has always done in his political career and significantly at odds with the role he is now playing.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

It is disgusting how the National Health Service has become a political football and yet at other times it gets forgotten about until signs of a crisis emerge, when it recieve knee jerk reactions by those in government.

I do agree here, i dare it happened prior, but i think it was since the early 2000s, the NHS became 'the' political smoking gun to be used and abused by Government and opposition at times of crisis in a very interesting and stilted way. Essentially, despite the NHS being able to 'make or break' at Elections (and indeed it has done), between that and crisis (and here essentially both government and opposition are slow to recognize the problem and then spin it so much in both attack and defense that an effective solution tends to be lost in the politics of necessity) it is left to its own devices. PFI at long last, for instance has been recognized politically as a mistake, and we had even the Conservatives rolling back on this somewhat (Though that was prior to the 'drop everything and lets fail at implementing brexit for three years), but its taken, what a decade or so? Publicly funded healthcare on the model of the NHS has a lot of benefits, it is better than average compared to the other 'top 11' developed states, and indeed for some reports outstrips the rest in most areas (I actually have 0 idea about China's healthcare set-up, so i'm sticking to western comparisons), but it has issues and it needs to be 're-orientated' in terms of its service scope for an ageing population, for instance more focus on mental health and well-being as well as management conditions i would expect- though i haven't bothered to read the entirety of the King's report yet... some things i really have to be in the mood for.. But it needs government input, not merely fleeting 'hit and runs' by all sides.

On another aspect of the state visit, anybody notice how much more relaxed and comfortable Corbyn seemed yelling at the anti Trump protest meeting, than the time he is in Westminster as leader of the opposition, where he seems almost like a man held hostage. It is essentially what he has always done in his political career and significantly at odds with the role he is now playing.

Totally agree here, i think its something we both spotted in 2017 too iirc. Corbyn is a sterling campaigner. 2017 proved that, as while Tory screw-ups helped, Labours vote share rose higher (insanely so from the lead the Tories had) compared to how the Tories fell (which was mostly to lib-dems). He campaigns and demos better than any other politician.

However, he's sort of wasted as Labour leader (as weird as that sounds maybe), Westminster is stuffy and by all accounts crass. Corbyn doesn't deliver 'knock out' blows in a Parliamentary context (PMQ's for instance) that are expected because he's uncomfortable, his 'cover' for this (or a less of cynic might say morality- i'm open to either) was the 'kinder politics' of no personal attacks... which doesn't work in that environment. He'd be far better on the ground, make him the center-piece of a traditional Labour platform for GE's, let him do rallies while someone else leads the party, that way indeed Labour may have shored themselves up against the negative press coverage for Corbyn as he's not leader, while also getting all the benefit of a relatively unscathed, but great campaigner who could be transported around the country. However, i get that there was at the time no one else to do this, but i do believe Corbyn when he says he doesn't want to be PM, especially not for more than a term...which is also an issue lets be honest .

But aye, you can see his natural environment, his skill set is being poorly used...by himself ironically. Though i would not be surprised if after the 'reforms' of the parliamentary labour party are finished that would open it up to the input to its more traditional voting membership, he steps down in the near future.

[TheLeft]

This is nothing more than another attempt at media spin by the Remain establishment.

1. Here's a video of Brexiteer Jesus, Nigel Farage, openly calling for the state funding of the NHS to be replaced by an insurance-based system run by private companies.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...vate-companies

2. Tory leadership candidate, former Health Minister and walking cockney rhyming slang Jeremy Hunt co-authored a book on how to privatise the NHS.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a6865306.html

3. The Brexit Bus's spurious claims of £350m a week for the NHS which duped so many of the gullible to vote for Brexit shows that neither Boris, Gove or any Brexiteer can be trusted to tell the truth about the NHS. As I'm sure you're aware, Boris is due in court to answer for his NHS-Brexit related lies.

But yeah, it's all spin by remainers...

[caratacus]

But yeah, it's all spin by remainers...

The politisation and mishanfdling of the NHS goes back years. Lets not pretend that the Labour Party have had nothing to do with the threat of privatisation, as anyone who remembers the Blair years could argue otherwise.

The Dirty Dozen -12 people who ruined the NHS
It’s free, it’s cheap to run, it’s in a right mess.
https://www.politico.eu/article/12-p...ng-lists-debt/

"When he was health minister under Blair, Burnham implemented all sorts of market-based reforms to bring competition into the NHS and put pressure on hospitals to improve their performance. As soon as Labour lost power, he started opposing any private-sector involvement in treating NHS patients – calling it ‘privatization’, even though it was nothing of the sort. It was a shameless bid to appeal to Labour activists in the leadership election that he knew would follow Ed Miliband’s defeat in the May 2015 election"

It is spin to worry those who voted for the Brexit party!
Today, an American privatised threat to the NHS isn't an issue. Yet those same voices who spread this concern, remain silent when it comes to the urgent need to support the UK steel industry.

Instead of asking Trump whether a new trade deal after Brexit would facilitate UK steel exports to the US, in the wake of tariffs on EU steel. We have a pathetic attempt to place words in his mouth an create an issue to fill headlines.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

A fantastic and easy to digest guide to why FPTP is a nightmare when it comes to any polling on vote share being realized:

https://sluggerotoole.com/2019/06/02...longer-useful/

It goes into how such things as:

-Labour's advantage over the Conservatives in 'Super-majorities'. Essentially the Conservatives do not have them. Which means potentially even if Labour were trailing massively in the polls (18% or less), they would surprisingly actually come out rather well (hence why current polling, even with the brexit party having a higher vote share, seats wise potentially Labour will be the ones to 'form a government' through coalition).

-Knife-edged Conservatives- As conservative 'safe seats' compared to Labour are essentially no such thing, their vote is far more volatile. However as they have more 'breadth' than most other parties, it means that their vote share, even at its lowest might still under FPTP return them as the second, or even first largest party, despite the Brexit parties vote share being higher currently- what it would mean is that the Conservatives lack significant majorities in their constituencies... something that their actually quite used to. Its the difference between 'building tall' and 'building wide' for those Paradox players .

-inefficient voting which vote share polling cannot model well in FPTP- The lib-dems and Brexit party- neither's vote share, even being so high in the polls, may translate well into seats thus under FPTP (Must as UKIP found), they may find their higher vote shares being squandered on the walls of unnecessarily large Labour 'strongholds', or engaged in a bitter battle of breadth with the Tories where literally it could be on a knife edge whether the Conservatives sink into oblivion or indeed come out with very few seats lost, majorities diminished, but intact for another 5 years.

This is why FPTP is very undemocratic, but also how it to a large extent props up political stability by given an advantage to the two big 'invested' parties and why new-comers find it difficult.

An example though of a party who did break the mold, was the SNP- they are actually the most efficient party in terms of turning vote share into 'effective' votes. However, the extent the Scottish specific context could be replicated for lib-dems or the Brexit party is up in the air. Its by no means impossible that we'll see a radical break, but it is difficult.

It also is why though polling currently is A) so volatile, but B) could lead to a big shock for voters who either expect the Brexit party or Lib-dems to turn that vote share into seats, or indeed for the current establishment (Though again this is mostly at the Conservatives expense due to lacking any 'real' 'safe' seats unlike Labour). Add to this my framework of a GE (Domestic alongside brexit) and you get a very messy picture in which potentially 'vote share' for the brexit party or lib-dems can get a clear lead, and yet it not actually have that much of an impact upon the Westminster arithmetic.

What is for sure though is indeed as the author states, the next Conservative leader will want to try and avoid a GE at all costs.

An interesting point raised by the author too is this-

Conveniently, there will be a by-election in Peterborough that could serve as an indicator as to whether the mooted realignment in British politics is real. The simple model outlined above predicts that the Brexit Party will win the seat with 25%, with the Lib Dems second on 24%, Labour on 23% and the Tories on 21%. Should all four parties be within touching distance then it could serve as an indicator that the next general election could be an unpredictable free-for-all.

So everyone await the outcome of tomorrow, it'll be an interesting one potentially.

[Basil II the B.S]

That's a very interesting article. I'll give it a more accurate look in the evening.

[Cope]

Not a Baby Boomer (but my parents are) not a Gammon (I'm not white, thanks for asking); though I don't need the NHS, because I actually look after my health. I've never been overweight, I exercise regularly and eat healthily. I ensure my family does the same. None of that requires money, just prioritisation.

People need to take responsibility for their own bodies, not live in sedentary gluttony and assume the state will pick up the tab when they're broken in their 60s. But of course as a lefty, the state is your saviour...

While personal responsibility is an important aspect of healthcare, its far more complicated than that. People rarely make unhealthy lifestyle choices deliberately and ill-health is an inevitability, irrespective of the decisions you make. Taking care of your body only increases the probability that it will maintain its proper functionality for longer: it doesn't prevent it from degenerating eventually.

[TheLeft]

It is spin to worry those who voted for the Brexit party!
Today, an American privatised threat to the NHS isn't an issue. Yet those same voices who spread this concern, remain silent when it comes to the urgent need to support the UK steel industry.

Wow. We are getting into the realm of conspiracy theories and alternative facts. I've provided a video of your Lord and Master, Nigel Farage openly calling for the NHS to be privatised, and it gets called 'spin'. In the absence of a manifesto (or even policies for that matter), not to mention the lack of any internal democratic leadership election or policy group, I have to assume that any direction the Brexit Party takes is entirely beholden to Farage. So how wrong can it be to assume that because he wants to privatise the NHS, the Brexit Party won't want to?

Here's another link where he calls for private firms to 'relieve the burden on NHS'. As a side note he also defends his disgracfully racist 'Breaking Point' poster.

[Basil II the B.S]

If Farage wants to win the GE, then his economy manifesto should remove the NHS privatisation. Otherwise it's suicide. 2/3 of Brexiteers are lower class social conservatives. They'll vote for BP as long as it's a single issue. As soon as it becomes a vote for government, then there are multiple priorities at hand.

He should also make his calculus well, because Lib Dems are surging just like he is. Lib Dems have the problem of Greens stealing their votes, otherwise they have the same potential as the Brexit Party, just with the Remain electorate. If Farage doesn't run with a good platform, then he risks Lib Dems winning the GE and cancelling Brexit altogether. Then he'd be mad.

[Daruwind]

Nah, he will just start brexit party 3.0

[mongrel]

The politisation and mishanfdling of the NHS goes back years. Lets not pretend that the Labour Party have had nothing to do with the threat of privatisation, as anyone who remembers the Blair years could argue otherwise.


It is spin to worry those who voted for the Brexit party!
Today, an American privatised threat to the NHS isn't an issue. Yet those same voices who spread this concern, remain silent when it comes to the urgent need to support the UK steel industry.

Instead of asking Trump whether a new trade deal after Brexit would facilitate UK steel exports to the US, in the wake of tariffs on EU steel. We have a pathetic attempt to place words in his mouth an create an issue to fill headlines.

As you know Farage is on record as wanting to open the NHS up for privatisation. But even if I was to indulge your viewpoint, yes just mention of NHS privatisation exaggeration or not, would put the fear of God into anyone who isn't a totally unthinking Brexiteer. The Brexit Party would not survive a General Election if the public decided it is not worth dying for Brexit. Cynical but no more cynical than saying that Turkey would join the EU the following year.

If Corbyn had any sense, instead of speaking to demonstrators at Parliament Square, he should have blitzed the media with the gift Trump offered him.

[caratacus]

Wow. We are getting into the realm of conspiracy theories and alternative facts. I've provided a video of your Lord and Master, Nigel Farage openly calling for the NHS to be privatised, and it gets called 'spin'. In the absence of a manifesto (or even policies for that matter), not to mention the lack of any internal democratic leadership election or policy group, I have to assume that any direction the Brexit Party takes is entirely beholden to Farage. So how wrong can it be to assume that because he wants to privatise the NHS, the Brexit Party won't want to?

Here's another link where he calls for private firms to 'relieve the burden on NHS'. As a side note he also defends his disgracfully racist 'Breaking Point' poster.

Firstly Farage isn't my "Lord and Master" and secondly he is nothing to do with the US trade talks. It is spin, designed to scare the Brexit voters off supporting the Brexit party. The same elderly and sick Brexit voters of course they are so concerned about, that previously many Remainers were wishing an early end, in the hope might turn it around in another vote.

But even if I was to indulge your viewpoint, yes just mention of NHS privatisation exaggeration or not, would put the fear of God into anyone who isn't a totally unthinking Brexiteer. The Brexit Party would not survive a General Election if the public decided it is not worth dying for Brexit. Cynical but no more cynical than saying that Turkey would join the EU the following year.

But according to many, most Brexiteers are unthinking, so I guess it woudn't work would it! I think you will find most people just want to be able to see a doctor to be able to be referred to hospital, let alone what comes after with treatment.

NHS crisis forces 500,000 patients to find new GP after mass surgery closures
The number of *qualified GPs in England fell by 1.5% to 28,697 in March, according to alarming new figures
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-new...ients-16230205

[mongrel]

But according to many, most Brexiteers are unthinking, so I guess it woudn't work would it! I think you will find most people just want to be able to see a doctor to be able to be referred to hospital, let alone what comes after with treatment.

I'm a bit more pragmatic when it comes to the qualities of Brexit voters. If we assume that UKIP is the repository of such people ,that's only 3 % of the electorate.

I expect people who have health insurance know how it works, particular if you insure a pet. Whole lifetime insurance is pointless for some vulnerable breeds of dog, it's cheaper to pay the bills as they come. Any reasonable person would know that private insurance is next to useless or unaffordable to people with ongoing conditions, or, as I'm increasingly finding, simply creaking with old age.

[TheLeft]

Firstly Farage isn't my "Lord and Master"

Apologies. I saw your blind obedience to the Cult of Farage (aka The Brexit Party), and just assumed he was.

secondly he is nothing to do with the US trade talks.

I know. He's currently having a temper tantrum about not being able to run the entire Brexit process himself, despite never having been elected as a Member of Parliament, or serving in any government role, or even being bothered enough to turn up to serve the only elected position he has.

It is spin, designed to scare the Brexit voters off supporting the Brexit party. The same elderly and sick Brexit voters of course they are so concerned about, that previously many Remainers were wishing an early end, in the hope might turn it around in another vote.

Really?? Let me run this past you again...

The Brexit Party is a party with no policies, no manifesto, an unelected leader, no internal means of removing the aforementioned leader and no democratic policy making apparatus. It's essentially an autocracy run by Farage. You are basically saying that it's spin and scaremongering to suggest that if 'Dear Leader' is in favour of something (the Privatisation of the NHS in this example) the Brexit Party won't obediently follow suit?

Riiiiight...

BTW... I can get you a great deal on some magic beans I have for sale...

[mongrel]

I see that Labour held the Peterborough seat. If the Brexit Party couldn't win there (60% leave), it will struggle elsewhere.Wondering if Trump's coveting the NHS proved decisive.

And if you hear anyone say WTO rules would allow us to do favourable deals with other nations, you are being lied to. Watch Andrew Neill completely own this pundit on no-deal Brexit.


https://twitter.com/Patrick76158207/...59441582411776

[mongrel]

duplicate

[95thrifleman]

I see that Labour held the Peterborough seat. If the Brexit Party couldn't win there (60% leave), it will struggle elsewhere.Wondering if Trump's coveting the NHS proved decisive.

And if you hear anyone say WTO rules would allow us to do favourable deals with other nations, you are being lied to. Watch Andrew Neill completely own this pundit on no-deal Brexit.


https://twitter.com/Patrick76158207/...59441582411776

It held by just under 700 votes. Allot is going to depend on the landscape between now and the next general election. What is interesting is tories came third. Looking at the voting history in Peterborough it tends to be a swing seat between tory and labour and now it's labour/brexit?

also Labour only got 30% of the vote which is telling. 70% of the electorate voted against labour, good thing for labour that the vote was split as Brexit got 28% of the vote.

	Labour	Lisa Forbes	10,484	30.9	-17.2
	Brexit	Mike Greene	9,801	28.9	+28.9
	Conservative	Paul Bristow	7,243	21.4	-25.5
	Liberal Democrat	Beki Sellick	4,159	12.3	+8.9
	Green	Joseph Wells	1,035	3.1	+1.8
	UKIP	John Whitby	400	1.2
	Christian Peoples	Tom Rogers	162	0.5
	English Democrat	Stephen Goldspink	153	0.5
	SDP	Patrick O'Flynn	135	0.4
	Monster Raving Loony	Alan 'Howling Laud' Hope	112	0.3
	Independent	Andrew Moore	101	0.3
	Common Good	Dick Rodgers	60	0.2
	Renew	Peter Ward	45	0.1
	UK EU	Pierre Kirk	25	0.1
	Independent	Bobby Smith	5	0
Majority			683	2.0
Turnout			33920	48.4

[95thrifleman]

The remainers like Mongrel see this as a victory, but is it? The leave vote was split between Brexit and Tories with 400 votes still on UKIP. Labour LOST it's voteshare compared to the previous election by 17%.

If Tories get brexit wrong as they are almost certain to do, they could get wiped out in the next election by brexit party. Next government could conceivably be a labour, lib dem, tory, brexit party hung mess.

Also Labour's brexit policy is a bloody mess, promising everything to everyone, what happens when they are forced to pick a side and a have policy other than "we will do anything for everyone, please vote for us"?

[Dante Von Hespburg]

Indeed, the Peterborough by-election has highlighted some interesting things

Background sources from across the spectrum on the Labour victory-
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-possible.html

https://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...s-nigel-farage

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48532869

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a8948091.html

I use across the spectrum because its interesting the reactions- just last night prior to this the spin from these different media was from the Mail and Express, that it would be a stomping victory for the Brexit Party, and from the Independent and Guardian, that Labour needs to go 'full remain' if it wants to get into government.

Peterborough is the 'mother of all marginals' (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...shire-48300812). Its switched hands between Conservative and Labour rather frequently, with neither party ever having anywhere near a safe majority. In 2017 Labour won it by 600 odd votes, what's interesting this time is that Labour have won it by 700 odd votes- still a marginal, but as we've all mostly thought- the Brexit Party is splitting the 'right-wing' votes, allowing Labour a greater lead- Its a micro-example, but could be significant.

-The real significance though is that for Labour, despite Corbyn's very foggy stance on brexit, and in a marginal seat that voted 61% leave, Labour won. Internally this means the party at the coming conference are going to lose some of their impetus potentially for clarifying either a remain or leave position. Indeed they actually got 100 odd more votes than 2017.

-This seat Labour was in terms of 'traditional' politics handicapped. Their previous MP has been jailed for a criminal offense over tying to mislead a court, and their current candidate had an anti-antisemitism scandal blow up during her campaign. Despite this, Labour managed to pip in first.

-General elections are multi-issue events for voters. While with a by-election brexit indeed dominated more than it would have in a full-blown GE, it still was not enough to run on to secure victory. The Brexit party here lacked any real form domestic manifesto (and nor really could make one up, as only Farage alone has that power in their party structure) and that's going to be a handicap when we come to any GE. Farage has commented this morning that the Brexit party manifesto is (from memory currently, so paraphrased) a 'simple, straightforward message of do brexit' and that is it.

-To compound this as mentioned the seat was 61% leave to merely 39% Remain (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48532869), Its clear that the Brexit party needs more to pip to the post than brexit, but it is still a fairly good result for them as they've beaten the Conservative party for second place. However this is not a 'secure' win against the Tories (Though Boris and other Tory big-guns did visit the constituency- though May did not, and it had little effect seemingly).

-Polling- This result while keeping within margins of error for most polls, does highlight how volatile things are, the Brexit party in nearly all polls and predictions was on course to win (Sometimes significantly), what's more interesting though is that the Conservatives are not 'out' the running (if you haven't yet do look at the FPTP article i linked previously, its really interesting for this). The Conservatives are less than 10% behind the Brexit party here, and so as the chap states quite well, its going to be a hard-fought battle at any GE between the two as despite overall the Tories trailing in vote-share far behind the brexit party in nearly all polls, this could translate to either a horrid GE result for the Tories... or they could (Best case scenario) actually lose very few of their seats to the Brexit Party and Lib-dems (a significant factor for the Conservatives, is they have a key, though small group of remain voters they rely on for their majority, the lib-dems on current polling have nicked this, meaning even if they get their Brexit party voters back, they may not be on track to remain in government- Labour have this dilemma the other way around, though unlike the Tories, their more ambiguous position seems to be holding up as shield). FPTP warps vote share polling significantly.

The remainers like Mongrel see this as a victory, but is it? The leave vote was split between Brexit and Tories with 400 votes still on UKIP. Labour LOST it's voteshare compared to the previous election by 17%.

If Tories get brexit wrong as they are almost certain to do, they could get wiped out in the next election by brexit party. Next government could conceivably be a labour, lib dem, tory, brexit party hung mess.

Also Labour's brexit policy is a bloody mess, promising everything to everyone, what happens when they are forced to pick a side and a have policy other than "we will do anything for everyone, please vote for us"?

For Labour, it is indeed a victory, in terms of number of votes they've actually increased it by 100 odd. Peterborough is a very marginal seat, so this is a very good result for a Labour party who as you rightly say, have no clear brexit policy, whose previous MP is in prison, and whose current candidate made the mother of all anti-Semite gaffs.

What is significant indeed is that the right-wing vote is now split. So to your previous point, it doesn't matter that 70% voted against Labour- we're in FPTP, its how it works. This would lead to (if extrapolated- and of course its silly to extrapolate it, but to highlight the point) if replicated across all Tory constituencies (their nightmare scenario) to a Labour dominated Parliament by huge majorities. Again FPTP warps vote share.

What it does highlight is that we're sort of talking about the wrong thing- 'Remain/Leave'- in a seat that was 61% leave and moreover is a marginal- not even a Labour safe-seat- Labour with as you rightly mentioned, no clear brexit policy, still won. It doesn't thus matter that Labour's brexit policy is a mess (it is), but its enough to secure them 5 years in power, and potentially due to the right-wing split, a majority for those five years.

-As mentioned above, The GE is going to be more than brexit (as this shows), the Conservatives could still potentially by this result, and indeed due to FPTP with current polling, not lose any of their seats during a snap-election do the Brexit party, alternatively worst case, the Brexit party indeed could become the the official opposition. However it will need a convincing domestic platform for that. The single-party issue is not enough to get them over the line in a marginal, Leave-voting constituency.

EDIT: Final point of significance- Voter turn out, was down massively from 2017. It is only 48.4% compared to 67.5% previously. Now this is probably due to it being a by-election (Without the massive investment parties put in at a GE), but it further highlights the issue i picked out above, that brexit as a single issue is not going to have the pull required potentially to 'get in' at Westminster.