Theresa May's Big Day

[Laker]

What progress has been made?

Because they have the stronger hand we have to dance to their tune, that’s the way it is in negotiations.

And there it is, it’s all the EUs fault.

My point is that they keep saying we need to make progress on these areas. Well we are trying but they don't seem interested. So yes, frankly it is their fault.

You're moaning about lack of progress, well you need to direct your anger at your beloved EU rather than the UK.

 

[Abertawe]

My point is that they keep saying we need to make progress on these areas. Well we are trying but they don't seem interested. So yes, frankly it is their fault.

You're moaning about lack of progress, well you need to direct your anger at your beloved EU rather than the UK.

Nah the blame is solely on the UK government. Even I can see that.

 

[smat]

EU won't negotiate trade until UK confirms financial settlement, citizen rights and Irish border. Why not? Because they say so?

Well... We did actually agree to this structure: https://euobserver.com/uk-referendum/138280

And now we've changed our mind. So who are you really complaining about?

 

[Laker]

Well... We did actually agree to this structure: https://euobserver.com/uk-referendum/138280

And now we've changed our mind. So who are you really complaining about?

It's V complaining about the (lack of) progress, I'm merely pointing out its the EU's lack of desire in wishing to actually settling these that's actually holding it up.

 

[smat]

It's V complaining about the (lack of) progress, I'm merely pointing out its the EU's lack of desire in wishing to actually settling these that's actually holding it up.

The EU is entirely to blame for the hold up, even though the UK agreed to this process months ago?

 

[Laker]

The EU is entirely to blame for the hold up, even though the UK agreed to this process months ago?

When we agreed to this process, we assumed the EU would want to actually try to reach a settlement on these points as they led us to believe they wouldn't punish the UK for leaving. As these negotiations develop, it's becoming more apparent that they aren't interested in settling.

We agreed to the terms with goodwill and trust in the EU. In hindsight, our faith in the EU was entirely misplaced.

Yes, it's their fault. We thought better of them than they're actually behaving now.

 

[smat]

I don't think that's right though?

 

[Cornish Piskie]

I hope for a civilised, sensible discussion on this matter. I respect the views of Brexiters even if I don't agree with them. I hope they will show me the same courtesy. Let's keep it grown up, please.

OK... Cards on the table. I voted Remain and am of the opinion that Brexit can still be stopped. Whether the political climate that enables that to happen occurs or not is yet to be ascertained. But Brexit isn't a done deal yet.

The Leave campaign orchestrated by the likes of Johnson and Gove was based on lies which have been exposed, and false promises of a Utopia which are now being shown to be undeliverable.

The negotiations are a shambles. The Leave campaign were hoping that a British departure would trigger similar dissent in other member states which would lead to a collapse of the Union but the reverse has happened. Macron saw off Le Pen in France and that threat is now a dead duck. The EU has become invigorated, they are dealing with their problems, the Euro is on the up (whereas Sterling has had a huge slice of it's value wiped out).

The EU has done, or is in the process of securing, trade deals with Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Japan and China. Britain would have benefited from those deals, but won't if we leave the EU.

Liam Fox has been criss-crossing the Atlantic Ocean, trying to get something out of Trump's "America First" administration for months and has yet to achieve squat.

The EU has strengthened in the 15 months since the Brexit vote while Britain has become weaker. Much weaker.

Bearing these things in mind, we have to now ask ourselves "What is the way ahead for Britain?"

Our government is in disarray. The PM called a General Election to strengthen her hand and ended up with it being weakened. UKIP is dead. Corbyn is also a "Leaver" but is more pragmatic and less doctrinaire than the Tories. Both the mainstream parties want to leave the EU, and claim to be acting in the interests of the People. But are they really..?

The Cabinet can't agree on anything. The in-fighting and jostling for position is very public and very visible despite their stage managed attempts to display unity. They're not fooling anybody. The Prime Minister is politically a dead woman walking. She is only still in her job because nobody has decided that the time is right to stab her in the front. Yet.

As Brexit progresses and David Davies' inability to deal with the likes of Barnier and Juncker become more glaringly apparent, the British people are waking up to the knowledge that the dream of a promised land of plenty for everybody is - was always - a fantasy that the Remain campaign said it would be.... and were told we were scaremongering.

So.... what can be done about it..?

The pivotal time for Brexit will occur in October 2018 when the deadline for a deal with the EU is scheduled to be reached and has to go before Parliament. The Government tried to prevent Parliament from having a say in the matter (so much for Brexit as a democratic process) but failed. The Commons will get their vote. And then the House of Lords (overwhelmingly Remain) get to chip in.

In my opinion, in October 2018 every MP should be asking themselves: Is the deal on the table the one that the Leave Campaign told us they would deliver? We were told that the rest of the world would fall over itself to give us advantageous trade deals. We were told our borders would be closed and there would be no migration. We were told the economy would be strong, wages and living standards would rise and inflation and interest rates would fall.

We were told we would have all the benefits of membership of the EU without paying for them because Europe NEEDS us. We were told we could dictate our own terms and the EU would agree to them because they had no choice.

How much of that looks likely at this time?

Try this little test. 1. Put a cake on a plate. 2. Eat it. Now ask yourself. Is the cake still there..?

And will all.... or indeed, ANY..... of what was promised be delivered by October next year? If it isn't, then it won't be the Brexit that the British people were promised they would get and voted for. Parliament would have to consider whether the deal that is presented to them is what their constituents really want and will settle for.

If it isn't, then there is no alternative but for Parliament to vote against acceptance of the proposal on the table.

And what then? Well, when a people make a choice based on lies and false promises, and those lies and false promises are exposed for what they are, then those people are entitled to change their mind. And that IS democratic.

The possibility exists for a second referendum. A vote against the deal proposal in October 2018 would enable that process to start. We would still have five months until the March 2019 deadline for Britain to leave the EU to organise it. Plenty of time for another campaign, this time with a population better informed and more aware of the true consequences of leaving the Union.

At this moment in time, talk of a second referendum is being pooh-pooh'd by the Brexiters and I would agree that right now it is quite a distant option. Unlikely to happen as things stand. That's a given.

But politics doesn't stand still. Harold Wilson once said "A week is a long time in politics." There are about 54 weeks between now and when the proposed Brexit deal has to be presented to Parliament.

A lot can happen in that time.

We should all watch with interest.

 

[Laker]

Without meaning to state the obvious, the largest party to offer a second referendum is the Lib Dems. They won, what?, 12 seats in the last general election. The option for the British people to have that second referendum was rejected pretty conclusively.

I've said this previously but I didn't vote based on the campaigning of either side which lets face it was pretty shocking all over - I gave up with it months before the actual vote and came to my decision by reading articles, journals and pieces online. I strongly believe many voters on both sides did the same.

In fact, I'll ask now - did the voters on this board vote remain because of Cameron et al's campaigning? Or was it because of other reasons? If you really voted remain because of what Dave and George's arguments then I'll be surprised.

So I'd question whether your assumption that leavers were "duped", if you like, is true.

On the whole your post is very good, I just disagree with most of it and haven't got the energy, desire or willingness to create another argument on all the points to answer in full.

 

[Nostracarmus]

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/mar/18/nhs-eu-nurses-quit-record-numbers

I voted remain because I work for the NHS.

Yeah, I know. Lol@me, things are getting worse and worse and worse.



Only 96 nurses joined the NHS from other European nations in December 2016 – a drop from 1,304 in July, the month after the referendum.

 

[Super_horns]

I guess the question is are they being replaced by British nurses or jobs just not being filled?

If its the former the Brexiters will probably say its working but if not...well we will have a major crisis on our hands.

 

[.V.]

I guess the question is are they being replaced by British nurses or jobs just not being filled?

If its the former the Brexiters will probably say its working but if not...well we will have a major crisis on our hands.

Given this government removed the bursary for nurses a few years back, and have not signaled that they intend to reintroduce it...

Also, they’re talking about setting income limits inline with non EEA nationals, which also happens to be above the rate of pay for nurses.

 

[Nostracarmus]

I guess the question is are they being replaced by British nurses or jobs just not being filled?

If its the former the Brexiters will probably say its working but if not...well we will have a major crisis on our hands.

The answer is: There's a reason we needed a crapload of nurses from Europe in the first place. The demand is much higher than when that happened.

The NHS, to put it mildly, is going to be completely shafted if things carry on. It was at breaking point this time last year, and things have only got worse since.

In the most case, the only options left are to go private or risk the lives of service users, also known as the tories wet dream.

 

[Aber gas]

ahh, but don't forget about that extra 350 million going into the NHS every week. We'll get a few nurses with that #longtermgains

 

[smat]

www.forbes.com/sites/francescoppola/2017/03/31/the-european-union-lays-out-a-greek-trap-for-the-united-kingdom/amp/

Swear I read this about thirty fucking years ago but it's somehow only from March, and just further rams home how inept and ill-prepared we have been in these negs.

 

[silkyman]

I hope for a civilised, sensible discussion on this matter. I respect the views of Brexiters even if I don't agree with them. I hope they will show me the same courtesy. Let's keep it grown up, please.

OK... Cards on the table. I voted Remain and am of the opinion that Brexit can still be stopped. Whether the political climate that enables that to happen occurs or not is yet to be ascertained. But Brexit isn't a done deal yet.

The Leave campaign orchestrated by the likes of Johnson and Gove was based on lies which have been exposed, and false promises of a Utopia which are now being shown to be undeliverable.

The negotiations are a shambles. The Leave campaign were hoping that a British departure would trigger similar dissent in other member states which would lead to a collapse of the Union but the reverse has happened. Macron saw off Le Pen in France and that threat is now a dead duck. The EU has become invigorated, they are dealing with their problems, the Euro is on the up (whereas Sterling has had a huge slice of it's value wiped out).

The EU has done, or is in the process of securing, trade deals with Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Japan and China. Britain would have benefited from those deals, but won't if we leave the EU.

Liam Fox has been criss-crossing the Atlantic Ocean, trying to get something out of Trump's "America First" administration for months and has yet to achieve squat.

The EU has strengthened in the 15 months since the Brexit vote while Britain has become weaker. Much weaker.

Bearing these things in mind, we have to now ask ourselves "What is the way ahead for Britain?"

Our government is in disarray. The PM called a General Election to strengthen her hand and ended up with it being weakened. UKIP is dead. Corbyn is also a "Leaver" but is more pragmatic and less doctrinaire than the Tories. Both the mainstream parties want to leave the EU, and claim to be acting in the interests of the People. But are they really..?

The Cabinet can't agree on anything. The in-fighting and jostling for position is very public and very visible despite their stage managed attempts to display unity. They're not fooling anybody. The Prime Minister is politically a dead woman walking. She is only still in her job because nobody has decided that the time is right to stab her in the front. Yet.

As Brexit progresses and David Davies' inability to deal with the likes of Barnier and Juncker become more glaringly apparent, the British people are waking up to the knowledge that the dream of a promised land of plenty for everybody is - was always - a fantasy that the Remain campaign said it would be.... and were told we were scaremongering.

So.... what can be done about it..?

The pivotal time for Brexit will occur in October 2018 when the deadline for a deal with the EU is scheduled to be reached and has to go before Parliament. The Government tried to prevent Parliament from having a say in the matter (so much for Brexit as a democratic process) but failed. The Commons will get their vote. And then the House of Lords (overwhelmingly Remain) get to chip in.

In my opinion, in October 2018 every MP should be asking themselves: Is the deal on the table the one that the Leave Campaign told us they would deliver? We were told that the rest of the world would fall over itself to give us advantageous trade deals. We were told our borders would be closed and there would be no migration. We were told the economy would be strong, wages and living standards would rise and inflation and interest rates would fall.

We were told we would have all the benefits of membership of the EU without paying for them because Europe NEEDS us. We were told we could dictate our own terms and the EU would agree to them because they had no choice.

How much of that looks likely at this time?

Try this little test. 1. Put a cake on a plate. 2. Eat it. Now ask yourself. Is the cake still there..?

And will all.... or indeed, ANY..... of what was promised be delivered by October next year? If it isn't, then it won't be the Brexit that the British people were promised they would get and voted for. Parliament would have to consider whether the deal that is presented to them is what their constituents really want and will settle for.

If it isn't, then there is no alternative but for Parliament to vote against acceptance of the proposal on the table.

And what then? Well, when a people make a choice based on lies and false promises, and those lies and false promises are exposed for what they are, then those people are entitled to change their mind. And that IS democratic.

The possibility exists for a second referendum. A vote against the deal proposal in October 2018 would enable that process to start. We would still have five months until the March 2019 deadline for Britain to leave the EU to organise it. Plenty of time for another campaign, this time with a population better informed and more aware of the true consequences of leaving the Union.

At this moment in time, talk of a second referendum is being pooh-pooh'd by the Brexiters and I would agree that right now it is quite a distant option. Unlikely to happen as things stand. That's a given.

But politics doesn't stand still. Harold Wilson once said "A week is a long time in politics." There are about 54 weeks between now and when the proposed Brexit deal has to be presented to Parliament.

A lot can happen in that time.

We should all watch with interest.

Can someone write this on the side of a bus please?

 

[silkyman]

Without meaning to state the obvious, the largest party to offer a second referendum is the Lib Dems. They won, what?, 12 seats in the last general election. The option for the British people to have that second referendum was rejected pretty conclusively.

I've said this previously but I didn't vote based on the campaigning of either side which lets face it was pretty shocking all over - I gave up with it months before the actual vote and came to my decision by reading articles, journals and pieces online. I strongly believe many voters on both sides did the same.

In fact, I'll ask now - did the voters on this board vote remain because of Cameron et al's campaigning? Or was it because of other reasons? If you really voted remain because of what Dave and George's arguments then I'll be surprised.

So I'd question whether your assumption that leavers were "duped", if you like, is true.

On the whole your post is very good, I just disagree with most of it and haven't got the energy, desire or willingness to create another argument on all the points to answer in full.

I voted remain because I understood and agreed the same arguments the remain side were making. I saw what the experts were saying and was utterly astonished when Gove wrote them all off - and so many of the public agreed with him. And the way that 'project fear' is becoming 'project reality' is incredibly frustrating.

The question isn't whether one person or another believed what lie or other, it's whether on balance the absolute tirade of dishonesty and xenophobia swayed enough people for four measly percent of the electorate to vote leave rather than remain.

And people did believe it. The way you know that people believed it is because they kept using that message start to finish. The leave campaign used masses of data from social media to tailor their messages (with, it seems, no little Russian help). They played it very carefully, and you think they'd just leave a message that wasn't working 'out there' for the entire duration of the campaign?

That's not how marketing works. They test analytics, they have focus groups, they listen to the feedback.

Look at the general election. They wanted to do the same thing with 'strong and stable', but it was mocked rather than hitting home, so it changed. They had more than one 're-launch'. The Tory team weren't as good at this as the Leave campaign had been so they couldn't make a message stick.

The leave campaign also used their friends in the media and their bots on twitter and facebook to really ramp up the anti immigration rhetoric through the campaign ready for the final hit of Farage's poster two days before the election. Using the same systems, they knew that theer were plenty of people primed to be receptive to it. And by doing it two days before the vote, there was enough time to give a final boost to the anti-immigration campaign, but not long enough to be debunked with anything other than a few quick accusations of racism which were swatted away by UKIP in their usual way of shouting about it.

You might not have believed a word that came out of any of their mouths and voted on some other principle. But if even a fraction of the 17 million people who voted to leave did so because of these messages, be it the long-term bus lie or the short-sharp shock of the racist poster at the death (and they did, as explained above) then the referendum was won on lies and racism.

#democracy.

 

[Abertawe]

I voted remain to prevent round three.

"Can we be so sure peace and stability on our continent are assured beyond any shadow of doubt? Is that a risk worth taking? I would never be so rash to make that assumption,” said Cameron. Touching upon Britain’s warring past, Cameron continued by saying: "what happens in our neighbourhood matters to Britain. That was true in 1914, 1940, 1989.... and it is true in 2016." “We should listen to the voices that say Europe had a violent history, we've managed to avoid that and so why put at risk the things that achieve that?" Cameron continued.

 

[Indian Dan]

I voted remain because I understood and agreed the same arguments the remain side were making. I saw what the experts were saying and was utterly astonished when Gove wrote them all off - and so many of the public agreed with him. And the way that 'project fear' is becoming 'project reality' is incredibly frustrating.

The question isn't whether one person or another believed what lie or other, it's whether on balance the absolute tirade of dishonesty and xenophobia swayed enough people for four measly percent of the electorate to vote leave rather than remain.

And people did believe it. The way you know that people believed it is because they kept using that message start to finish. The leave campaign used masses of data from social media to tailor their messages (with, it seems, no little Russian help). They played it very carefully, and you think they'd just leave a message that wasn't working 'out there' for the entire duration of the campaign?

That's not how marketing works. They test analytics, they have focus groups, they listen to the feedback.

Look at the general election. They wanted to do the same thing with 'strong and stable', but it was mocked rather than hitting home, so it changed. They had more than one 're-launch'. The Tory team weren't as good at this as the Leave campaign had been so they couldn't make a message stick.

The leave campaign also used their friends in the media and their bots on twitter and facebook to really ramp up the anti immigration rhetoric through the campaign ready for the final hit of Farage's poster two days before the election. Using the same systems, they knew that theer were plenty of people primed to be receptive to it. And by doing it two days before the vote, there was enough time to give a final boost to the anti-immigration campaign, but not long enough to be debunked with anything other than a few quick accusations of racism which were swatted away by UKIP in their usual way of shouting about it.

You might not have believed a word that came out of any of their mouths and voted on some other principle. But if even a fraction of the 17 million people who voted to leave did so because of these messages, be it the long-term bus lie or the short-sharp shock of the racist poster at the death (and they did, as explained above) then the referendum was won on lies and racism.

#democracy.

Oh come on, grow up. Since when did anything any politician said in any sort of election/referendum stack up? You can't just pick Brexit as the only example. No matter the small majority in favour, that's how democracy works - even if some voters can't write their own names.

I voted out cos I honestly believe, long term, we will be better off out of it. The EU is a vile, corrupt and dishonest amalgam that will, eventually, lead to a violent end. It's strange reading the views of some on here who are obviously Labour supporters yet want to remain in such a union where entire countries are made to bow down to the arch capitalists of the German state. Nobody gives a damn about the huge percentage of youth unemployment of the so-called PIGS countries.

 

[Jockney]

Forgive my manifest ignorance on this, but wouldn't a more realistic Remain strategy be to push for as many concessions as possible; focus, in the interim, on building a strong (presumably liberal) domestic policy programme; and once in power, or once ideological hegemony has been re-secured, propose a referendum to rejoin the EU and campaign on a platform that actually makes a positive case for EU membership.

I suppose the problem is that post-2008 liberalism can't make a particularly compelling case for itself without pilfering social democratic ideas and watering them down. As a single issue, the Remain cause can't make a positive case for itself at all. I don't think the situation is likely to change for a long time, either.

 

[Stringy]

Forgive my manifest ignorance on this, but wouldn't a more realistic Remain strategy be to push for as many concessions as possible; focus, in the interim, on building a strong (presumably liberal) domestic policy programme; and once in power, or once ideological hegemony has been re-secured, propose a referendum to rejoin the EU and campaign on a platform that actually makes a positive case for EU membership.

I suppose the problem is that post-2008 liberalism can't make a particularly compelling case for itself without pilfering social democratic ideas and watering them down. As a single issue, the Remain cause can't make a positive case for itself at all. I don't think the situation is likely to change for a long time, either.

It's a big gloopy mess. In spite of a poor campaign being run by both sides, in particular a very dubious campaign from the Leave side, I think the outcome of the referendum should be respected. If on balance we want to stay in the EU, we'll get a soft-Brexit. If on balance we think it's a pants deal, we'll get a hard-Brexit.

That said, the big issue, which I think will support the case of the hard-Brexiteers and soon become apparent is this. To stay closer to the EU will cost more, not less. If we want access to the market and the customs union then we will have to pay a tremendous sum in the divorce bill. People are short-sighted and once they see a divorce bill running into the tens of billions will feel outraged, and it'll be easy for the hard-Brexiteers to sell it as EU bullying. The soft-Brexiteers need to make it clear early that soft-Brexit will cost more.

There's going to be more arguments; and of course it's impossible to say right now exactly how it will develop. Personally, I just wish the referendum had never been allowed to properly enter the public discourse. I remember a time when I thought anti-EU folk were a funny, outraged for no reason, minority fringe group. I was once at a meeting where a 50ish, greyish bloke grumbled 'bloody EU'. I remember at the time smiling to myself thinking how bizarre it was that someone had made it this far being so insecure and afraid about his position in the world.

I voted out cos I honestly believe, long term, we will be better off out of it. The EU is a vile, corrupt and dishonest amalgam that will, eventually, lead to a violent end. It's strange reading the views of some on here who are obviously Labour supporters yet want to remain in such a union where entire countries are made to bow down to the arch capitalists of the German state. Nobody gives a damn about the huge percentage of youth unemployment of the so-called PIGS countries.

We need to put ourselves in the EU's position. From their point of view the ones who been dishonest are at the opposite side of the negotiating table. They had no say in the referendum (granted, not their place) and by voting to leave it looks as if we are abandoning our obligations. We have offered to pay to the end of the budget cycle but there are projects which run past this date, for which we are now asking the EU to foot the bill. I do perceive the EU to be somewhat unwilling to compromise, perhaps even petty, but I can to some extent understand their stance.

In what way are we bowing down to German arch capitalists? I was under the impression that the British market was hugely important for German car manufacturing exports, with perhaps 750,000 jobs in Germany reliant on the UK market. In the EU negotiations it will be in the interest of Germany that our economy remains strong. If there's an opposite argument here I would be interested to hear it.

In what scenario would leaving EU eventually lead to violence? I can't envisage violence; perhaps small-scale trading conflicts and arguments, but not violence. For all the criticism of the EU, it's worth remembering that countries in this age have more to gain from trading with one another than fighting, which is why predictions of WWIII are, in my opinion, misplaced.

 

[Indian Dan]

My points about Germany were concerned with the Southern European countries who are under their jackboot financially, alienating and abandoning hundreds of their young people to long term unemployment. This is what I think could lead to violence.

 

[Stringy]

My points about Germany were concerned with the Southern European countries who are under their jackboot financially, alienating and abandoning hundreds of their young people to long term unemployment. This is what I think could lead to violence.

That makes more sense. I don't buy into the other argument about the EU being needed to stabilise power in Europe. Undoubtedly it would be problematic if it disappeared entirely but not right now with just one country leaving.

 

[silkyman]

Oh come on, grow up. Since when did anything any politician said in any sort of election/referendum stack up? You can't just pick Brexit as the only example. No matter the small majority in favour, that's how democracy works - even if some voters can't write their own names.

I voted out cos I honestly believe, long term, we will be better off out of it. The EU is a vile, corrupt and dishonest amalgam that will, eventually, lead to a violent end. It's strange reading the views of some on here who are obviously Labour supporters yet want to remain in such a union where entire countries are made to bow down to the arch capitalists of the German state. Nobody gives a damn about the huge percentage of youth unemployment of the so-called PIGS countries.

You can't just write it all off as 'meh, thick people believe stupid lies'. For all the cries of 'democracy!' this referendum was a gerrymandered mess. An advisory vote which was badly planned from the start and is now slavishly being forced through by the right wing nutters in the Tory party for their own ends.

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2017/09/28/the-eu-referendum-was-gerrymandered/

This isn't how democracy works in this country and it never has been.

 

[Laker]

Oh come on, if you really thought it was only going to be advisory in practice then you're living in a dream world.

If the vote had gone the other way and the government decided to leave the EU anyway then there would have been uproar. Silky, your comment is farcical.

 

[Aber gas]

22 percent of the uk population voted to leave cos they believe stuff written on buses. Thick as fucking mince tbh.

 

[Indian Dan]

And a vast % of young people voted for Corbyn cos they believed he'd scrap tuition fees.

They are all lying scumbags. If Labour got in power they'd never be able to make good on hardly any of their promises. It's all cloud cuckoo land stuff

 

[Aber gas]

Mate, Labour is going to make the transition to fully automated luxury communism. This country is never going to be the same again. Get on board comrade.

 

[TheMinsterman]

And a vast % of young people voted for Corbyn cos they believed he'd scrap tuition fees.

They are all lying scumbags. If Labour got in power they'd never be able to make good on hardly any of their promises. It's all cloud cuckoo land stuff

Citation?

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/07/11/why-people-voted-labour-or-conservative-2017-gener/

Only 4% of those asked voted because of the tuition fees, if the youth surge was so important to Corbyn why isn't it much higher considering the "vast %" did it for the fees?

 

[Aber gas]

Citation?

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/07/11/why-people-voted-labour-or-conservative-2017-gener/

Only 4% of those asked voted because of the tuition fees, if the youth surge was so important to Corbyn why isn't it much higher considering the "vast %" did it for the fees?

Imagine my shock etc..
What folk don't understand is that we're going to transform this shite tip of a country.