Current Affairs EU In or Out

[Barnfred 55]

If it's this one https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39075244

I've read it. What's your point?

That the BBC, in the second paragraph, was trying to mislead the public by implying the Leave campaign outspent the Remain campaign.

Very clever misuse of information.

 

[Jebus_lives]

That the BBC, in the second paragraph, was trying to mislead the public by implying the Leave campaign outspent the Remain campaign.

Very clever misuse of information.

Was it correct at the time of the article?

Because the Electoral Commission didn't account for all spending until some time after the referendum. Which according to the Belfast Telegraph article you reference would have fallen on the same day. Perhaps an oversight.

 

[Barnfred 55]

Will the electoral commission do

Electoral Commission | Designation of lead campaigners for the EU referendum

www.electoralcommission.org.uk

The official campaigns?

"all round, Remain spent more than the Leave campaign". Word for word from Joey's post.

No mention there of "official campaigns" whatever they actually are, nor Stronger In or Vote Leave.

Joey was right. You were wrong. Why are you seemingly unable to acknowledge that?

I've assumed he's talking about remain and Leave official campaining as we were talking about lies told throughout the campaigns and the specific fraudulent activity from Leave campaign. If he's talking about complete spending across all campaigns, then I've no idea what the overall spending was. Perhaps you could link it up.

I know @Joey66 seems to operate in a state of complete confusion, so it's hard to know precisely what he actually means - he doesn't understand the difference between binary and binding - so I'm surprised that you or I can fully understand what he's actually talking about. We use our best guess.

I'm not sure whether he knew he was right it not, I didn't know the actual figures, I replied to what I assumed he was talking about which were the official campaigns and government spending. I very much doubt he has ever looked at the electoral commission breakdown as he would have to look fir it on the internet and I know he hates that.

But there were no official campaigns as such. Each side was to decide on a lead campaign that would be awarded the largest budget of £7m. Remains lead campaign spent barely a third of remains total spend.

What did you think of that BBC article?

There were official Campaigns. They are officially designated by the electoral commission.

Vote Leave named as official Brexit campaign in EU referendum

Electoral Commission chooses group fronted by Michael Gove and Boris Johnson over Nigel Farage-backed Grassroots Out

www.theguardian.com

I haven't read the BBC article yet.

I dont believe anything I see in the Guardian until it is backed up by another source. They are called lead campaigns everywhere I've seen

The BBC article is very short. You can read it in less than a minute.

For the nth time, there are no Official Leave or Remain campaigns. There are numerous campaigns for each of which one on each side was designated as a lead campaign and was given the larger budget of £7m. That last link you did inly confirms this. It doesn't mention Official Campaign anywhere because it doesn't exist, except in the Guardian of course.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Have they included how much the Kremlin spent?

 

[Barnfred 55]

Was it correct at the time of the article?

Because the Electoral Commission didn't account for all spending until some time after the referendum. Which according to the Belfast Telegraph article you reference would have fallen on the same day. Perhaps an oversight.

The BBC said £32m in total has been spent in the campaign. A figure which we know to be correct so they would also have had the breakdown of which side spent what.

It then goes on to say that Leave raised £16.4m "outgunning" the remain side's £15.1m. Figures which are also correct and also, coincidentally, amount to just under £32m.

Whoever wrote that article knew exactly what they were doing, and it would be extremely easy to read the wrong way. ask @Moomin

 

[Jebus_lives]

For the nth time, there are no Official Leave or Remain campaigns. There are numerous campaigns for each of which one on each side was designated as a lead campaign and was given the larger budget of £7m. That last link you did inly confirms this. It doesn't mention Official Campaign anywhere because it doesn't exist, except in the Guardian of course.

This seems an incredibly pedantic point considering the overall context and how widely used 'official' was within media circles.

But since we are being pedantic

Brexit campaign group Vote Leave quietly drops appeal against £61,000 fine for breaking electoral law

Official Brexit campaign says it has run out of money to pursue appeal after Electoral Commission found it coordinated illegally with another group

www.independent.co.uk

Brexit: Vote Leave broke electoral law, says Electoral Commission

The Brexit campaign group is referred to the police by the Electoral Commission and fined £61,000.

www.bbc.co.uk

Vote Leave quietly drops appeal against referendum spending fine - on Brexit Day

The official Brexit campaign has "withdrawn its appeal and related proceedings" against the Electoral Commission, the watchdog announced tonight

www.mirror.co.uk

And I'm not sure it detracts from the point to use the term 'official' rather than 'lead' or 'designated' for that matter.

 

[Jebus_lives]

The BBC said £32m in total has been spent in the campaign. A figure which we know to be correct so they would also have had the breakdown of which side spent what.

It then goes on to say that Leave raised £16.4m "outgunning" the remain side's £15.1m. Figures which are also correct and also, coincidentally, amount to just under £32m.

Whoever wrote that article knew exactly what they were doing, and it would be extremely easy to read the wrong way. ask @Moomin

Did they?

If you check the Electoral Commission website and look at the account if the spending, there was a significant number of remain spending post poll date.

In any event, I didn't write it and I didn't cite it as fact, if you've got an issue take it up with James Harding.

 

[Barnfred 55]

Did they?

If you check the Electoral Commission website and look at the account if the spending, there was a significant number of remain spending post poll date.

In any event, I didn't write it and I didn't cite it as fact, if you've got an issue take it up with James Harding.

Oooooooohhhhlol

 

[Barnfred 55]

This seems an incredibly pedantic point considering the overall context and how widely used 'official' was within media circles.

But since we are being pedantic

Brexit campaign group Vote Leave quietly drops appeal against £61,000 fine for breaking electoral law

Official Brexit campaign says it has run out of money to pursue appeal after Electoral Commission found it coordinated illegally with another group

www.independent.co.uk

Brexit: Vote Leave broke electoral law, says Electoral Commission

The Brexit campaign group is referred to the police by the Electoral Commission and fined £61,000.

www.bbc.co.uk

Vote Leave quietly drops appeal against referendum spending fine - on Brexit Day

The official Brexit campaign has "withdrawn its appeal and related proceedings" against the Electoral Commission, the watchdog announced tonight

www.mirror.co.uk

And I'm not sure it detracts from the point to use the term 'official' rather than 'lead' or 'designated' for that matter.

Yes I am being pedantic, purposely so. As you have been continuously with Joey over the last few weeks.

Just making a point really.

 

[Jebus_lives]

Oooooooohhhhlol

Am I responsible for everything that's written about the referendum if it purports, in your opinion, to favour Remain?

Still waiting on your assessment of if the referendum was binding or not as you believe I made it up.

 

[Jebus_lives]

Yes I am being pedantic, purposely so. As you have been continuously with Joey over the last few weeks.

Just making a point really.

There is a difference between being accurate with respect to facts and just being a pedantic over yhings which offer no practical benefit to the conversation.

 

[Eggs]

....I voted remain but I don’t get the calls for a 2nd referendum. I suspect there’ll be a massive anti-establishment vote to leave which I fear will open the door for the right-wing Conservatives to get their way regarding a hard Brexit.

 

[Jebus_lives]

....I voted remain but I don’t get the calls for a 2nd referendum. I suspect there’ll be a massive anti-establishment vote to leave which I fear will open the door for the right-wing Conservatives to get their way regarding a hard Brexit.

I personally think the referendum was a shambles and I can understand why people would call for a second one based on the 'illegality':

• Interference from foreign states.
• Electoral fraud
• Misinformation

And, legally, had it been a binding vote, it would have been void.

But, accepting the legal position, I see no issue with giving a range of options for the type of Brexit and taking the public direction from that. It doesn't undermine the initial vote and provides more power to the electorate to determine the direction.

 

[Barnfred 55]

....I voted remain but I don’t get the calls for a 2nd referendum. I suspect there’ll be a massive anti-establishment vote to leave which I fear will open the door for the right-wing Conservatives to get their way regarding a hard Brexit.

What the People's Vote/2nd referendum campaigners are calling for Eggs, is a referendum where the question is heavily biased towards remain. They want it to be whatever deal is on the table versus remain. Given that probably less than 10% of leavers support May's deal, and even less would support the most likely softer Brexit that could emerge from the cross party talks, the vast majority of leave voters would be disengaged from the vote. I imagine that most of these would rather boycott the second referendum rather than vote for a deal they don't support, so it would be a landslide victory for the remain side. If it were a straight forward leave v remain vote, I think you're right, it would be very close, although I think the change in demographics since 2016 could still probably give remain the edge now.

I actually believe a confirmatory vote will not take place, although it's such a hung parliament there may be inly a couple of votes in it either way. Not sure what the answer is to be honest. Common sense from both the EU and the UK seems to have removed the threat of a hard Brexit, for now at least. I can't see Parliament having the balls to revoke Article 50 without the perceived mandate of a confirmatory vote, and, as I said, I do think there are enough fair minded MPs within parliament to stop a loaded people's vote happening. So the only option is a continued state of limbo as the EU keeps granting extensions until we have a parliament that can agree on something.

Personally, I hope that is some form of soft Brexit, with neither side seen as either winners or losers. I think it's the only way that our divided country can ever come together again and rebuild. At the moment, the continued uncertainty is hurting us more than Brexit itself.

Bottom line is it's a complete mess. A referendum should never have been used to decide on EU membership and, IMO, one shouldn't be used to reverse it either. Two wrongs do not make a right.

 

[Frang]

That the BBC, in the second paragraph, was trying to mislead the public by implying the Leave campaign outspent the Remain campaign.

Very clever misuse of information.

@Bruce Wayne laps all this up.. straight out of the non-biased BBC !