And is it any wonder???
The reason why this saga is still going on, is purely down to the politicians, who in many cases, don't represent, and have ignored/run rough shod against the views of the majority who elected them in. Couple that with an extremely poor negotiating tactic, when dealing with the EU, it is no wonder this mess is unresolved. It's a fact that May & her crew were and are, not up to the job, of delivery of what they 'promised'.
No matter who was in Prison, or taking the dog for a walk or whatever ... the country voted, and that vote is being ignored!It is not the electorate who have weakened the perception of this country, it is our feeble, lack-lustre politicians, along with a poisonous media.
Love her or loathe her, if Thatcher had been around, things would have gone very differently! Her sheer arrogance made her at times loathsome, but that's what was needed to play hard-ball in the situation that this country finds itself. We went in offering a good old British cup of tea & a biscuit, and while we were pouring, we were getting our pant's pulled down and being greased up.
It went wrong as soon as the result was announced, when Cameron the damp squib cut & run. Then there was his old mate George, soon to become editor of the Evening Standard, using his new found job to continually meddle & undermine the result of the very process that his crew helped create. What with Boris opening his mouth, without carrying out the courage of his convictions, to stand and occupy the big seat, & all the other countless court jesters who have had their input, it is no surprise that the odious Juncker looked up from his empty wine bottle, and reached for the Vaseline!
It's a measure of what we are dealing with, and how the people of this country have been treated, that good old Jean Claude then decided to go in, leaving the pot full & untouched!!!!!
No matter how you voted, the damage has been done. There is no going back in the eyes of many. It's just so unfortunate that they are by and large, being ignored.
I can't say I'm surprised ..... :-(
The so-called 'will of the people' has nothing to do with Brexit. Brexit was instigated because it was voted for in a referendum - the electorate voted:
Leave: 17,410,742
Remain: 16,141,241
However, judging from the antics within the Westminster bubble it is unlikely the Brexit parliament is heading towards is the Brexit the electorate voted for.
Such is the nature of Westminster politics. Bearing in mind democracy is more complicated than simply carrying out the result of a referendum and using naïve terms like 'Brexit is Brexit' or 'the will of the people'.
Really?
They had their chance!
If you don't wait at the bus stop, you're walking!
Simples.
.
Well let's roll with some of that. Good thing we had a general election then and the people reinforced their desire for Brexit. As far as I can remember only the Lib Dems and greens were explicitly against Brexit. But they didn't get (statistically) any votes.
So what is your point now?
Couldn't agree more.
Parliament is now refusing to give up its power to the executive. Hence the executive increasingly resorts to the 'will of the people' rhetoric. But the 'will of the people' is only the mantle worn by those who are interested in anything but the will of the people. Although the UK is only a latecomer to the party as the article re the situation in Australia in 2014 illustrates.
The Abbott government, when faced with opposition over the past year, has commonly resorted to two lifeline statements. The first is that it’s carrying out the “will of the people”. And the second is that “the people have spoken”. These are words taken from the vocabularies of demagogues, not democrats.
Frontbenchers...use these phrases to delegitimise their opponents both within parliament and more broadly. In effect, they’re saying if you disagree with government policy you are at odds with the “will of the people”. This is a serious claim.
The 'will of the people'? It's the bastardisation of democracy
the UK has never had a 'we the people' moment. There has never been a moment in our history where we've been included in defining the UK's constitutional settlement - what the limits on government power should be, what the executive can and cannot do in our name, which rights and freedoms we hold to be inalienable and therefore free from interference.
That is perhaps why it has been so easy for nebulous concepts like the 'will of the people' to so quickly become a force of nature in our politics. When the rules aren't well defined, let alone written down, the executive is given free rein to act in the name of the public with little constraint.
The popular sovereignty that was injected uneasily into our political debate as the result of the referendum is now being used to undermine parliament and further weaken our constitution. Taking back control has materialised as the unchecked exertion, frightening in its breadth, of executive power over the British public, acting in our name without consultation. Parliament, too paralysed to claim its own sovereignty, has given it away.
The will of the people shattered our constitution
Democracies today are in the grip of a myth – the myth of the will of the people. Populist movements use the idea to challenge elected representatives. Politicians, content to invoke the will of the people, fail in their duty to make responsible and accountable decisions. And public contest over political choices is stifled for fear that opposing the will of the people will be perceived as elitist.
In this book Albert Weale dissects the idea of the will of the people, showing that it relies on a mythical view of participatory democracy. The definition of ‘the people’ is vague and shifting. As soon as a choice between more than two simple alternatives is involved, there is often no clear answer to the question of what a majority favours. Worst of all, because governments have to interpret the results of referendums, the will of the people becomes a means for strengthening executive control – the exact opposite of what appealing to the people’s will seemed to imply.
Book Detail | Polity
Instead of mystifying what takes place with the rhetoric of the Will of the People it would be preferable to recognise the practical contingency of having to take a decision in the absence of consensus. If there were consensus, there would be no need to take a vote. The current situation is that neither major party is able or willing to resolve internal differences with a vote, and the parliament as a whole seems equally hamstrung. This is a dangerous state of affairs for our political institutions
The Will of the People? | Jesuits in Britain
Why do you need to go all the way to Australia?
/proxy.php?image=https://i.ibb.co/r5YzJ4Q/Screenshot-from-2019-04-09-22-22-12.png&hash=f6f6c16a79370a61b6babb30e1b2b60d
"This is your decision. The Government will implement what you decide"
deleted
Just so I'm clear.
In one post a lot of scare stories about what certain MPs will do.
In another post, MPs not delivering.
Put those two together.
And what were the odds and polling at the start of the 2016 referendum campaign?
But by all means persist pushing this. The British love being told they are stupid and have to vote again. I can see no reaction against this at all.
That depends on if we believe polls today. 
Besides it was rejected.
MPs reject call for second Brexit referendum
Interesting idea though. Have a vote, pretend it's democracy, but engineer what you actually want.
Spend millions on propaganda to tell people how to vote.
Do nothing till another vote goes your way.