23rd March - ?Put It To The People March? - central London

[IlonaM]

Join us on 23rd of March for the ?Put It To The People March? to make the calls for a People?s Vote too loud to ignore.

On the 23rd of March, just six days before the Government hopes to take Britain out of the EU, hundreds of thousands of people will march on Parliament offering a solution to a crisis that threatens their living standards, businesses and jobs. We demand a People?s Vote, and come 23 March, it could be a case of now or never.

Please sign up to join us. We will be congregating from 12pm, high noon in Park Lane, and marching to Parliament Square to make our voices heard. Our demand is a simple one: that any Brexit is put the people so that we can have the final say. This will be a day to tell your children about, to tell your grandchildren about.

Join us.

See website at: https://www.peoples-vote.uk/march

Details

When?

Saturday 23rd March 2019.

Assemble at 12pm noon for 1pm start.

Where?

Meet on Park Lane (southbound carriageway), north of the Hilton Hotel. Click here for map

How?

If traveling by Tube, please exit at Marble Arch or Hyde Park Corner.

[Sue]

Thanks for posting this, I hadn't heard of it before but will hopefully be going.

[JohnL]

Only announced a few days ago. Needs support but will be ignored by the government and maybe the media.

Maybe a few who go on politics shows can talk it up :)

[dbboy]

Which bit of democracy don't you seem to get?

democracyDictionary result for democracy

/dɪˈmɒkrəsi/Submit

noun

a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.

"a system of parliamentary democracy"

synonyms: representative government, elective government, constitutional government, popular government; More

a state governed under a system of democracy.

plural noun: democracies

"a multiparty democracy"

control of an organization or group by the majority of its members.

"the intended extension of industrial democracy"

In terms of the EU referendum result, you voted, the country reached a majority decision to leave, the Government are trying to (badly) implement the result. A further referendum will only muddy the waters. You may or may not agree with the outcome of referendum, but that is the result be that right or wrong.

[JohnL]

A march is not undemocratic.

You can march for almost anything you want to show what you support - that's freedom. Many on the march are trying to persuade the powers that be a soft Brexit is a better compromise option - many want to express their feelings of loss and grief.

Nothing in the original post is undemocratic even from a leavers point of view IMHO.

[uncleglen]

On 23rd June 2016 the PEOPLE had the final say...stop reading the so-called 'Independent'.....the trouble is with remainiacs is they thought they had it in the bag because they ALL live in areas where NO-ONE was suffering- (instead quite the opposite)- because of the EU single market rules....

[JohnL]

uncleglen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> On 23rd June 2016 the PEOPLE had the final

> say...stop reading the so-called

> 'Independent'.....the trouble is with remainiacs

> is they thought they had it in the bag because

> they ALL live in areas where NO-ONE was suffering-

> (instead quite the opposite)- because of the EU

> single market rules....

I really really really don't want to quote Norman Tebbit at you Uncle .. but it's so tempting.

[JoeLeg]

uncleglen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> On 23rd June 2016 a very slim majority of the PEOPLE had the final

> say based entirely on a protest campaign run by very rich people who will not lose anything if Brexit goes badly, and founded on the basis that it?s easy to be against something when you aren?t required to come up with an actual solution to it ...stop reading the 'Express'.....the trouble is with hard Leavers

> is they thought they don?t actually have to have a plan because

> some of them (NOT ALL) live in areas where NO-ONE really cared about the fact that while London et al can certainly be accused of being an echo chamber, parts of the U.K. are still backward socially and are rife with outdated prejudices and beliefs, including an instinctive distrust of foreign people, but they refuse to admit thisanout themselves. They also seem to have a lot of British people who are quite happy to remain on benefits while refusing to take hard jobs that then go to immigrants, such as hospital cleaners/porters.

> (it?s amazing how hard it is to be gay or black in some parts of the UK, but that?s ok because apparently they know more about real life than us here in London) because of the EU

> single market rules, which won?t seem so bad once Trump gets his savage one-sides trade deal which will flood us with cheap American products that subsequently increase pressure on the NHS that will have been half-sold to American healthcare! ..of course if it all goes wrong they?ll still blame the EU because it stuck up for itself. Blitz spirit! Plucky Britain! Traitors talking down the country!

Your spellcheck must be playing up Uncle, fixed it for you, no charge...😉

[Angelina]

what exactly does this mean? "offering a solution to a crisis"

If there was another vote...

Is there a concrete and explicit outcome they want?

If there is a vote, what are the options? Remain/ Leave? Well that's not a solution

If Remain won, how would that work given we have already held a democratic vote and this would be against the spirit of democracy (best of three, perhaps?)

If Leave won, what would happen then that is different form what is happening now?

It's all quite a big "IF"

[JohnL]

Angelina Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> what exactly does this mean? "offering a solution

> to a crisis"

> If there was another vote...

> Is there a concrete and explicit outcome they

> want?

> If there is a vote, what are the options? Remain/

> Leave? Well that's not a solution

> If Remain won, how would that work given we have

> already held a democratic vote and this would be

> against the spirit of democracy (best of three,

> perhaps?)

> If Leave won, what would happen then that is

> different form what is happening now?

>

> It's all quite a big "IF"

It would have to be more specific than remain leave - it would need to be "Do you support this specific deal brought back by Theresa May ?"

The issue is what is the default if the public say No - many want to remain as is now in that case.

[Angelina]

Any vote on the details of a leave agreement are still open to negotiation with EU, unless EU is involved at the outset and there is pre-agreement that one of the vote-able options would be enforced.

It's therefore in no way a solution - it's just adding options.

If it was a majority Remain, well that in itself is a problem, as there are then two contradictory democratic votes - which is farcical.

[Alan Medic]

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> uncleglen Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > On 23rd June 2016 the PEOPLE had the final

> > say...stop reading the so-called

> > 'Independent'.....the trouble is with

> remainiacs

> > is they thought they had it in the bag because

> > they ALL live in areas where NO-ONE was

> suffering-

> > (instead quite the opposite)- because of the EU

> > single market rules....

>

> I really really really don't want to quote Norman

> Tebbit at you Uncle .. but it's so tempting.

Does it involve cycling?

[JohnL]

Alan Medic Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> JohnL Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > uncleglen Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > On 23rd June 2016 the PEOPLE had the final

> > > say...stop reading the so-called

> > > 'Independent'.....the trouble is with

> > remainiacs

> > > is they thought they had it in the bag

> because

> > > they ALL live in areas where NO-ONE was

> > suffering-

> > > (instead quite the opposite)- because of the

> EU

> > > single market rules....

> >

> > I really really really don't want to quote

> Norman

> > Tebbit at you Uncle .. but it's so tempting.

>

> Does it involve cycling?

Yes

[JoeLeg]

I loath Tebbit with every fibre of my being...and yet there?s a grain of truth in that statement, sometimes people expect the world to come to them - unfortunately in the context of the time it was spoken it?s pretty bad, and even today it?s by no means true that anyone and everyone can up sticks and hunt down employment elsewhere.

E

[Blah Blah]

People have a democratic right to march, just as people have a democratic right to lobby parliament. That did not stop with the referendum. The truth is that leave voters know they won by the skin of their teeth and are terrified of losing it in a 2nd ref. So who can blame remainers for smelling that fear and fighting for what they believe in. No true democrat would.

The last People's Vote march got 500-700k out (depending on who you believe). By any measure, that is a huge demonstration for London.

[Passiflora]

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> People have a democratic right to march, just as

> people have a democratic right to lobby

> parliament. That did not stop with the referendum.

> The truth is that leave voters know they won by

> the skin of their teeth and are terrified of

> losing it in a 2nd ref. So who can blame remainers

> for smelling that fear and fighting for what they

> believe in. No true democrat would.

>

> The last People's Vote march got 500-700k out

> (depending on who you believe). By any measure,

> that is a huge demonstration for London.

Hope you have a good march but to say that leave voters won by the skin of their teeth is totally uncalled for.

[JoeLeg]

Really? Why?

It was a pretty close vote, and there were some pretty dodgy claims made by the Leave campaign.

I?d say ?skin of their teeth? is fairly close to the truth. YMMV, as the yoof say...

[Passiflora]

Not sure what you are trying to say JoeLeg or what YMMV means?

Leave voters voted to leave the EU by over one point two million voters in 2016 so that is not a 'skin of their teeth vote'.

[civilservant]

JoeLeg Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Really? Why?

>

> It was a pretty close vote, and there were some pretty dodgy claims made by the Leave campaign.

> I?d say ?skin of their teeth? is fairly close to the truth. YMMV, as the yoof say...

yes, pretty close to the truth - closer than most of the Leave campaign's claims, even

[Passiflora]

Oh come on civilservant, what are you a leaver or remainer?

[tiddles]

Alot of the leave voters made their decision based on untruths

The difference was very close - factor in the people who did not vote and

Then it means the majority of the country did not vote to leave. As the question time audience member suggested - you would not amend a golf club constitution based on such a slim majority.

Most people had no idea of the implications and knowing what we do know and the emergence

Of the ramifications it is likely that people would vote differently.

My concern is that the govt is ploughing on regardless as they dont want to lose

Face.

[Blah Blah]

Passiflora Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Not sure what you are trying to say JoeLeg or what

> YMMV means?

>

> Leave voters voted to leave the EU by over one

> point two million voters in 2016 so that is not a

> 'skin of their teeth vote'.

4% IS by the skin of the teeth. If you factor in (as tiddles points out) the electorate that didn't vote at all (almost a third) then that drops even lower. Your offense at use of that term demonstrates my point perfectly in fact. The reason why there is such a bitter and entrenched ongoing battle over this is precisely because of that very narrow margin of difference. And also as tiddles writes, Quorums are par for the course (no pun intended) in all kinds of democratic processes.

A more honest campaign might have led to a different result. Ever thought about that?

[Angelina]

You can't discount the ones who didn't vote and use them in your stats against those who did.

Those who didn't vote also didn't vote to remain, so like for like, you could say even less people voted Remain than the actual results.

Gets a bit cloudy, doesn't it.

[JoeLeg]

Passiflora Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Not sure what you are trying to say JoeLeg or what

> YMMV means?

>

> Leave voters voted to leave the EU by over one

> point two million voters in 2016 so that is not a

> 'skin of their teeth vote'.

Well, given how many people actually voted, and the fact that the Leave campaign used some pretty dodgy arguments, and that Nigel himself declared that it wouldn?t be over if Remain won by 52%, I feel pretty comfortable agreeing that it was a very slim majority for Leave. Cummings himself said that the ?Turkey? lie alone got them in the region of 650,000 votes.

The vote is over, Leave won (and is merrily f?ing it up and blaming everyone else), but they didn?t win by very much st all.

[Blah Blah]

But I have not tried to presume how those people would have voted have I Angelina. I simply made the point that as a percentage of the electorate things are a lot more even that leave voters seem to want to accept. \in other words, the debate was never really won and that is why it is ongoing in the way it is.

I also wonder Joeleg, who those leave voters will blame when they see how those global markets do us over in trade deal negotiations too. Has anyone even read the terms of CETA for example? Do they know that Canada, in return for that trade deal, had to agree to open up her internal services for tender from EU countries? Because that is the issue when a small market tries to get a trade deal with a massive one. We are going to be a small player. There is no getting away from that.