Sadiq Khan: 'Brexit can still be stopped"

Even I say it's time to let this drop, there has a been a referendum and you can't reverse a democratic vote because you don't like the result, it's getting really unsavoury now from the likes of Blair as well, and tedious. If the result was the other way there would be no call for a second referendum from Khan or Blair, Britain has made its bed, lie in it.

good sense from scandanavian, Britain should be careful to reverse the decision of the referendum would be the greatest act of treason in Britains history.
Even if the ref. had gone the other way we shouldn't have opposed it in any simple way.
I would have been ashamed to death to do so.

Should he not be opening fairs and fetes ,rubber stamping bookies licences and providing secure bike/scooter parking and helping old ladies over the road ect

I don't think he's English.

Sparkhill's finest

sorry... wong Khan

The thing is a lot of Labour voters voted out, which is why Labour tried to look both ways last election and still do. Even the SNP say Brexit means independence but I think the stat was 40% of SNP members voted out (something pretty high anyway!).

London seems to exist as a bubble on this issue and don't get the rest of the UK. Just look at all the london based journalists, comedians etc. They are surrounded by people who are hugely pro EU and just dont understand the rest of the country, and worse, are very patronising to them.

The scandalous way the BBC have been so aggresively anti Brexit .. I'm surprised there hasn't been a mass campaign by leave voters to stop paying the license fee...

Even I say it's time to let this drop, there has a been a referendum and you can't reverse a democratic vote because you don't like the result

You can if you have another vote. That's how democracy works. It is also what happened last year. In the 1975 referendum, we voted to stay in. In the 2016 referendum we voted to come out. In the next one, well, it is too early to say.

I cannot see it as an affront to democracy if at the end of the process, the government puts the deal on offer (or deals) to the public.

that would depend, you can`t have another referendum unless there is the option to stop freedom of movement.

that is what was voted for, and that is what they are determined to reverse.

so that is why scandanavian is correct to say it would be an affront to democracy, worse than that.

the EU will not offer any deal that does not maintain freedom of movement. Many of the British politicians, including every one in the Labour party will try to engineer that it remains..
But the British people want it stopped, are you not sure?
ask them.

yes we voted out so out it is unless they want annokee in the uk

@lfc1971 -- that would depend, you can`t have another referendum unless there is the option to stop freedom of movement.

that is what was voted for, and that is what they are determined to reverse.

No it was not. There was no mention of freedom of movement on the ballot paper. It might be your bete noire but you cannot presume to know why others voted as they did. For what it is worth, the leave campaign thought the deciding factor was not FoM but £350 million a week for the NHS. 

it doesn't matter if it was on the ballot paper or not, the referendum was run on the basis that leaving the EU meant stopping freedom of movement.
that is the basis on which everyone voted, and understood.

and that staying in the EU meant freedom of movement would continue, that is what the British people voted against.

of course if the question on the ballot paper had been do you wish to stay in the EU and maintain freedom of movement

or do you wish to leave the EU and stop freedom of movement.

there may have been a different outcome, I don't know.

lets have a second referendum, if you wish, and ask.

No !

That's what they (Remoaners want) !

* That's what they (Remoaners) want !

and if the British people vote to maintain freedom of movement?
that's fine, there is nothing that can be done about that.

its ok leopard, they would not have been happy with the question, even on the first ballot.
they are essentially dishonest, in that way.

Perhaps he should do something about the awful traffic congestion and pollution in his city.
The exemptions on congestion charges for low emission vehicles have got to go for starters. Also the blue badgers should be paying.

If he wanted to stop Brexit he should become an MP, a member of that Parliament that the majority think should get to decide things - listen up Sadiq, you're not an MP, your choice, but for crying out loud grow up and start living with the choice you made.

Remoaners probably had a nanny when young....they don't like to think there is no large entity looking after them....they are scared of facing the outside world and looking after themselves on their own 2 feet....even if that entity is feeding them horse-manure all day every day

With Khan interfering in UK's relations with the American president, and considering his poor efforts so far to deliver on his election promises.
Perhaps we should have a second vote on the election to be Mayor of London?

He seems more concerned with political and international events that doing the job he was elected for.
Are we now seeing the true agenda of a man whose ultimate aim is the leadership of the Labour party?

I love a mayor who believes in the democratic process.  But only when it goes his way.
A Blairite to his very core.  But then his diaspora are not so keen on the idea of open discussion of certain issues pertaining to their cult rules.

20,000 per constituency.  300 constituencies equals 6,000,000.  That will swing it for Khanism.  Already have 25 of them with 20 percent or more.  It will only grow.  Labour will lap this up

It will come to a head sooner or later moisok. The quisling types think they can facilitate the takeover with smooth words and smiles. The silent majority will speak one day.

You can if you have another vote. That's how democracy works. It is also what happened last year. In the 1975 referendum, we voted to stay in. In the 2016 referendum we voted to come out. In the next one, well, it is too early to say.

I cannot see it as an affront to democracy if at the end of the process, the government puts the deal on offer (or deals) to the public. ]



No it's not.

You don't keep voting on the same thing in quick succession because you don't like the first answer. What happens if it's a Remain vote, do we go for a third and final decider Clearly time has to be given for people to decide whether they like the effects of Brexit, that will not be able to be determined for many years to come. Personally I think it end of free movement will have a negative effect but only time will tell.

You don't keep voting on the same thing in quick succession because you don't like the first answer.

Ireland did that very thing. In 2008 the people of Ireland voted no; in 2009 yes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_European_Constitution_referendum

But what many advocate is another referendum once the shape of the final deal is known, so people can see more precisely what they are voting for or against. This is sometimes called a Noel Edmonds referendum (deal or no deal).

There was no announcement or declaration before the Brexit vote that another vote of the terms would be the case so it wont happen unless the Tory's make it happen, which it wont so just a non talking point and why Khan and Blair are wasting their time. Can you really see the Tory's giving everyone a second vote?

so to keep us in they get the country the worst possible deal?

Can you really see the Tory's giving everyone a second vote?

I've really no idea. The Conservatives seem to have agreed Brexit means Brexit but beyond that are quite split on what that actually means. In just the last couple of days, the Chancellor has been talking about transition arrangements, including on freedom of movement, and Liam Fox, one of the Brexit ministers, has said there will not be any such arrangements.

So for me it is a nonsense to be dogmatic about how things will look in two years time, or even further out if, and again there have been contradictory signals, the Article 50 timetable is extended.

There might or might not be another vote in 2019 or beyond. I'm just saying we can't rule it out as being undemocratic or even as a matter of practical politics.

Precisely Terry. If there is no "accept" referendum the EU have to work in good faith and produce the best outcome for all concerned as they'll all have to live with it. If there is an "accept" referendum the EU have a huge incentive to be totally d1cks about it, deliberately construct the worst possible deal, make the UK gov look as bad a possible etc, to try and ensure the deal is so bad that it's not accepted.

The fact the Libs and others like Blair refuse to publically accept this simple obvious fact when a child can see it, it just shows what a shower of slimy slipper untrustworthy boll-locks merhants they now are. They know it would happen which is why they want the second referendum. Oh and clegg wants to give younger folk double votes to further rig it!

I used to like Clegg, really dislike him now, Tim Farron I got the measure of day one, such a loathsome man.

The Tories should not give another vote on the final terms, they have been given a job to do and we should accept the result. You can give your opinion of the terms at the next General election. Should we also have a referendum on the terms of a trade deal with the USA or Australia or japan? Of course not, the EU is no different.
Middle finger to Clegg, Miller, Khan and all remoaners is my verdict.

that sneak blair being told to say we can still do a deal,then there more to it than meets the eye

Hello Terry yes m8 i work on the assumption that if
it is good for Blair then it's awful for everybody else
Turns up with his waving arms and window salesman trust me smile

how are you wits? yeah got it in one buddy

Even I say it's time to let this drop, there has a been a referendum and you can't reverse a democratic vote because you don't like the result

You can if you have another vote. That's how democracy works. It is also what happened last year. In the 1975 referendum, we voted to stay in.

Yet, as a corollary, flowing from the 1975 vote have been things that were never ever contemplated by the electorate who understandably were content to maintain a Common Market in 1975.

Now we have voted to come out of the EU, it can hardly be surprising that we proceed to come out of the single market and the customs union and end free movement and porous borders. At least these issues were addressed in last year's referendum, unlike the Common Market transmuting into the full blown EU which was not contemplated at all in 1975 by the voting public.

Well said SH.

The obfuscators (?!) are a disgrace to parliamentary democracy. Odd how Blair wanted to promote democracy across the middle east but rejects it here.

Let's just get out of the EU whatever it takes. These delays are appalling.

At least these issues were addressed in last year's referendum

Nothing was addressed in the referendum. It was a farce. World War 3 versus being overrun by millions of Turks. Both sides were a disgrace.

what ever you do don't look on the evening standard site

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/southwark-gangster-who-evaded-police-for-three-years-finally-jailed-over-gun-and-drugs-offences-a3599636.html

He has 1 in Every 2 robberies Committed in England on His patch, Nutters on scooters Flying Round Throwing acid and Killing People ,Multiple Murders ,Riots and Terrorist attacks and he is focusing on another Brexit Vote 

Nothing was addressed in the referendum.

There was an awful lot of nothing then.

Issues may have been addressed with excessive hyperbole on both sides - but the issues were addressed.

Everything was addressed in the referendum.

Leaving the Single Market was a direct consequence of a Leave vote (see Cameron, Osborne, Labour..) https://youtu.be/4MaYV778kgU

End to free movement and control of borders was set out as an absolute of leaving.

Bi lateral agreements with countries outside of the EU was set out as the plan. Trade with the EU would continue due to our trade deficit (they sell us more than we sell them).

What's not clear??

Fine Terry not much too report otherwise
Wife on hols in Spain i'm still working what not to like

sure i never heard the words hard brexit or soft brexit for that matter before the referendum. it was just brexit. everyone knew what that entailed when they voted

obviously the totally out of touch political class never comtemplated for a second they wouldn't get the result they wanted. hence all the remoaners doing everything to possible to stop it happening

" everyone knew what that entailed when they voted " - totally true. But remain voters keep saying different as they apparently know better, also as in the ahove: "the leave campaign thought the deciding factor was not FoM but £350 million a week for the NHS." The only people who ever bring that £350m are not leave voters, it's sore loser remain voters as a straw man.

Another day, another set of headlines describing differences between various ministers on freedom of movement, transition arrangements, relations after Brexit and so on.

Now, obviously negotiations are still going on, and will be for months and years, so we do not know where we will end up.

But look again at the voting paper posted earlier in this thread. Leave voters voted to leave. That's all. They did not vote for an end to immigration, for better hospitals, lower taxes or anything else other than to leave the EU.

everything is a pack of lies,none of thesr ba4tards and bitch"s are worth voteing for anyway,
happy days wits

He has 1 in Every 2 robberies Committed in England on His patch, Nutters on scooters Flying Round Throwing acid and Killing People ,Multiple Murders ,Riots and Terrorist attacks and he is focusing on another Brexit Vote 

FFS casemoney get with the program it's just part and parcel of living in a large city

A lot of countries without democracy are Muslim..................just saying

Gotta love the left "Do as we say"

Ramruma, you are wasting your time with the Brexit bullies. Everyone knows that the lines were totally blurred on what Brexit meant. There was plenty of talk by leave campaigners of having a system like Norway or Switzerland for example. There was plenty of talk of staying in the single market. There was no clear way forward. But since we choose to leave you can't  disagree with a hard brexit without being bullied and labelled as a 'leftie' or a 'remoaner'. It's all rather pathetic but the leave campaign was always based on lies and scaremongering so it's no surprise really.
As has been clearly pointed out on this thread the only question answered was do you want to stay in the EU or leave. The terms of leaving were never decided.