Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 39,145
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Apr 8, 2019 10:19:15 GMT
So was ours. Thats the problem. Ed Miliband was against the referendum When it came to the referendum itself, announced under Harman's leadership, only the SNP opposed it - I accept we made a mistake and I have already stated my total opposition to all referendums in all circumstances in any case. But the LibDems voted for the referendum in parliament, as did my party.
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Apr 8, 2019 10:32:04 GMT
I think that's called 'wriggling on the hook' But all three parties went along with having a referendum after the 2015 election. All of them agreed to implement the outcome of the result. None of them recommended any thresholds, whether that be based on vote percentage or all four parts of the UK having to vote to leave. Its rather pathetic to hear people try and forget that they didn't do these things - from all the parties. It has been firm party policy for all three parties on more than one occasion with none of them ever fleshing out the particulars in strong detail as to the mechanics of 'what happens next'. I think the focus was always on the factor of choice and the embracing of a definitive affirmation by the public so as to head off any trouble later, and always against a background of not wanting to leave and not thinking there was any possibility of there ever being a solid majority to leave. It is now quite obvious why the blunt question Referendum was such a very bad idea. The enormous complexity of the problem demands a very careful policy in advance and a set of indicative questions or a more definitive and structured question? Or indeed pointing out that Leave will present difficulties and challenges as well as opportunities, and that we would have to leave and face perhaps two years of disruption and collateral problems as we negotiated a way past those difficulties. The two massive mistakes made by the whole political community were not thinking through the logistics and mechanics of a complete leaving strategy first and delivering it to the public in a document, and not seeing that it had to be about leaving first with memoranda of continuance and then painstaking negotiation AFTER the event, because nothing else could possibly work without a massive disadvantage to the party leaving.
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Apr 8, 2019 11:45:54 GMT
Its easily forgotten that it was actually the LibDems who initially proposed having a Leave/Remain referendum. Of course, they thought Remain would walk it. Of course! That was our cunning plan all along, while we were preventing Cameron having a referendum during the Coalition years. It's obvious now, looking back on it. Isn't it? Well, no, and Mike you are twisting the truth somewhat, and not for the first time. We *did* suggest a referendum back in 2008, on the Lisbon treaty. But that was passed into law, and became a dead issue. That is a rewriting of history. The Lib Dems ditched support for a referendum on Lisbon when it was going through Parliament, opting to abstain on this. Tim Farron was one of several frontbenchers to resign over the issue. The Lib Dems tabled an amendment for an in/out referendum then staged a hissy fit walkout when it wasn't called. www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/mar/05/euwww.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/liberaldemocrats/1579987/Lib-Dems-walkout-over-Michael-Martins-ruling.htmlGiven the way the Lib Dems have gone all over the place on this it is hard to not see it as cynical positioning to try to be in favour of an EU-related referendum of some kind that wouldn't actually be delivered. Where exactly in this infamous leaflet does it say that you were only in favour of an in/out referendum at a time of treaty change? The rationale given is that it had been over thirty years and the EEC/EU had already changed heavily in that time. Here's the relevant bit of your 2009 Euro elections manfiesto: Again no strings attached, no "only when there's a treaty in the offing", just a clear cut statement of support for a referendum on membership. But the Lib Dems never make promises that they don't expect to deliver and be held accountable for, do they?
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Apr 8, 2019 11:50:30 GMT
I suspect the Lib Dem support for an in/out referendum was largely positioning, because they were aware many of their voters in rural seats (especially the South West) did not share Lib Dem enthusiasm for EU membership. Offering a referendum was a good way of reassuring these voters which did not lose them support from people who were pro-EU.
|
|
|
Post by LDCaerdydd on Apr 8, 2019 12:44:17 GMT
Where exactly in this infamous leaflet does it say that you were only in favour of an in/out referendum at a time of treaty change? You mean the leaflet that went out in the summer of 2008 regarding the Lisbon Treaty which was ratified by the UK Parliament in July 2008. Whilst it wasn't explicitly mentioned in the terms and conditions of the leaflet, at the time it's pretty bloody obvious given what was in the media on a near daily basis. That said the Lib Dems are as guilty as other parties in using short sentences and sound bites on leaflets/websites. when I was a campaigns orgainser I had numerous unsuccessful arguments with the campaigns department in Cowley Street over their simplistic lefalets templates.
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Apr 8, 2019 12:57:46 GMT
No it is not "pretty bloody obvious" that this only applied to the time of Lisbon. Here's some of a longer piece, that didn't give into short sentence, sound bites and unmentioned terms & conditions: It is very clear that this is an argument in principle for the current generation to vote on the question of membership as the 1975 result had receded too far into history and the underlying question had not been resolved. Who wrote this piece? It was Nick Clegg. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/feb/25/eu.liberaldemocrats
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 13,607
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Apr 8, 2019 13:10:11 GMT
I was always concerned about that leaflet as soon as I saw it. It looks like it was positioning us as a Leave party. "The EU is rubbish, I want to leave, ooo look, the LibDems are promising we can have a vote to leave."
|
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 39,145
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Apr 8, 2019 13:20:57 GMT
So, its very clear that in fact the campaign for the referendum was, indeed, started by the LibDems, who then also voted for it in 2015
|
|
|
Post by LDCaerdydd on Apr 8, 2019 13:29:58 GMT
No it is not "pretty bloody obvious" that this only applied to the time of Lisbon. Not at the time of Lisbon at the time of any future treaty change. So, its very clear that in fact the campaign for the referendum was, indeed, started by the LibDems, who then also voted for it in 2015 Heaven forbid a democratic organisation changing it’s policy. Remind me again of labour’s policy on Europe in the 1983 GE?
|
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 39,145
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Apr 8, 2019 13:47:45 GMT
So, its very clear that in fact the campaign for the referendum was, indeed, started by the LibDems, who then also voted for it in 2015 Heaven forbid a democratic organisation changing it’s policy. Remind me again of labour’s policy on Europe in the 1983 GE? Which as I said above is fine. I have also said that there are things about what my own party did which I don't agree with. However, the problem is that the LibDems are presenting themselves as entirely blameless in this whole process as if they didn't both call for the referendum first of all as clearly demonstrated here, and then voted for the referendum in parliament in 2015
|
|
|
Post by LDCaerdydd on Apr 8, 2019 14:05:42 GMT
Heaven forbid a democratic organisation changing it’s policy. Remind me again of labour’s policy on Europe in the 1983 GE? Which as I said above is fine. I have also said that there are things about what my own party did which I don't agree with. However, the problem is that the LibDems are presenting themselves as entirely blameless in this whole process as if they didn't both call for the referendum first of all as clearly demonstrated here, and then voted for the referendum in parliament in 2015 The Conservatives were elected with a significant mandate in 2015 against most people’s expectations on a clear understanding that Cameron would renegotiate our relationship with Europe then call an in/out referendum. Whilst not a treaty change it was billed as a significant change (for the UK, not for other nations). Cameron didn’t say he’d campaign in favour in any referendum during the GE as his vote would depend on the outcome of his renegotiation. The Lib Dems however said they would campaign for remain (and for all his faults come the referendum Farron campaigned vigorously for remain). I’m afraid I think we’re going to have to agree to disagree on who was to blame for the referendum. (Athough I’m sure we can all agree on who to blame for the current mess).
|
|
Izzyeviel
Lib Dem
I stayed up for Hartlepools
Posts: 3,279
|
Post by Izzyeviel on Apr 8, 2019 14:05:51 GMT
No it is not "pretty bloody obvious" that this only applied to the time of Lisbon. Here's some of a longer piece, that didn't give into short sentence, sound bites and unmentioned terms & conditions: The debate about Europe has been a thorn in the side of British politics for decades. Now the wound has become infected. Europhile and Eurosceptic trading blows about the Lisbon treaty in grand rhetoric that obscures the facts. If you're pro-European, as I am, you're accused of being a sellout. If you're anti-European, like most Conservatives, you're accused of being a headbanger. It isn't new, but it isn't edifying either. It's time we pulled out the thorn and healed the wound, time for a debate politicians have been too cowardly to hold for 30 years - time for a referendum on the big question. Do we want to be in or out? Nobody in Britain under the age of 51 has ever been asked that simple question. None of them were eligible to vote in that 1975 referendum. That includes half of all MPs. Two generations have never had their say. ... A national debate would show that Britain is immeasurably better off in the EU. We want a referendum on Europe with substance. This generation deserves its chance to say where we stand on Europe - in or out. We didn't have a debate though. We had one side saying it was a bad idea and the other screeching 'Project fear' at every opportunity whilst promising it would all be sunshine and unicorns if we left. & lets not forget circumstances changed over the past decade. The EU wasn't even a top ten issue in the 2010 election. The EU question had been settled, it was an opportunity for the Lib Dems to make some noise different from the LabCons. It took a massive global financial crisis and a huge anti-immigrant campaign run by Brexiteers for the EU to become a big issue.
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Apr 8, 2019 14:20:15 GMT
The Lib Dems however said they would campaign for remain (and for all his faults come the referendum Farron campaigned vigorously for remain). This piece suggests that Tim Farron could have taken lessons from Jeremy Corbyn on how to be visible in a referendum campaign: The Liberal Democrats: the EU Referendum's invisible party
|
|
|
Post by LDCaerdydd on Apr 8, 2019 14:39:34 GMT
The Lib Dems however said they would campaign for remain (and for all his faults come the referendum Farron campaigned vigorously for remain). This piece suggests that Tim Farron could have taken lessons from Jeremy Corbyn on how to be visible in a referendum campaign: The Liberal Democrats: the EU Referendum's invisible partyEven though the media were doing their best to paint us as an irreverence given the Lib Dem’s had just eight out of 650 MPs I’d say Farron and the Lib Dem were a hell of a lot more visible than a party/group with 1.23% of MPs should have been...Let alone United, which is more than can be said for the parliamentary party and grassroots of the other two parties.
|
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 39,145
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Apr 8, 2019 14:48:37 GMT
Do you still not grasp just how useless the remain campaign was? How they entirely failed to understand that it wasn't about throwing around lots of statistics and facts, and that people who voted leave largely did so because of how they felt, not what they thought?
|
|
|
Post by LDCaerdydd on Apr 8, 2019 15:09:06 GMT
Oh the remain campaigning was dreadful. Sorry if I’ve implied in previous posts that I thought it was good (or better)!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2019 16:16:53 GMT
A real referendum as opposed to?
|
|
|
Post by rivers10 on Apr 8, 2019 16:36:17 GMT
Oh the remain campaigning was dreadful. Sorry if I’ve implied in previous posts that I thought it was good (or better)! Indeed it was dreadful and its why I'm incredibly nervous about a 2nd one. I not only think Leave would win again I think they'd win by a bigger margin and this will be entirely due to (more so than the 1st ref) the awful campaign the Remain camp will inevitably run. It will again be dominated by corporate suits and politicians NOBODY likes who will repeat the same bland statistics that lost them the 1st ref but with an added patronising flourish of "now don't be stupid and vote to leave again ok"
Meanwhile the Leave campaign can just run on a "Tell them again" platform and paint the whole thing as an establishment stitch up, they won't even need to mention a single supposed benefit of Brexit, instead just focus on the "Us vs the Elite" rhetoric and they'll win with 56-59% of the vote me thinks and that sadly is a mandate for something approaching a hard Brexit.
|
|
|
Post by middleenglander on Apr 8, 2019 16:54:48 GMT
It is not often a complex situation can be described by a few specific words. But I consider the current Brexit kerfuffle can be adequately covered by just six words. Most MPs are lying little sh1ts.
|
|
|
Post by LDCaerdydd on Apr 8, 2019 17:06:59 GMT
Oh the remain campaigning was dreadful. Sorry if I’ve implied in previous posts that I thought it was good (or better)! Indeed it was dreadful and its why I'm incredibly nervous about a 2nd one. I not only think Leave would win again I think they'd win by a bigger margin and this will be entirely due to (more so than the 1st ref) the awful campaign the Remain camp will inevitably run. It will again be dominated by corporate suits and politicians NOBODY likes who will repeat the same bland statistics that lost them the 1st ref but with an added patronising flourish of "now don't be stupid and vote to leave again ok"
Meanwhile the Leave campaign can just run on a "Tell them again" platform and paint the whole thing as an establishment stitch up, they won't even need to mention a single supposed benefit of Brexit, instead just focus on the "Us vs the Elite" rhetoric and they'll win with 56-59% of the vote me thinks and that sadly is a mandate for something approaching a hard Brexit.
For the record I’m not and never have been in favour of a second referendum.
|
|