My complaint which has now been upheld was that both Tory and Labour official policy at the time was pro Brexit and the chart did not reflect that.

I challenged why the nationalist parties and the Lib Dems had been included in the remain camp and got the ludicrous response that this was their main policy whereas the Tory and Labour parties have other policies. Try telling an SNP supporter the reason their party exists is to oppose Brexit, Scottish independence has nothing to do with being an SNP supporter?

There were only 2 parties that can be said to exist because of Brexit and that is UKIP and the Brexit party all other parties have other policies e.g. the Greens are about the environment. So lumping Remain parties into one group but not lumping all Brexit parties into another was simply nonsense and the BBC has finally recognised that.

As another poster said at the time even if the BBC had done that it was still a nonsense chart because there will be Green supporters who voted for Brexit and yes Tory and Labour supporters who voted to Remain.

In other words apart from the Brexit party and UKIP you can only speculate as to voter intentions for the other parties.

Anyway the BBC has now admitted it was a mistake in the scheme of things it wasn't that important.

One more point

He doesn’t, which is a point in its own right

But he does know that the referendum campaign never even mentioned a no deal Brexit so nobody can have actively voted for that. In fact the campaign always spoke about ‘the deal’ so if a no deal happens the referendum will have been fought on misinformation. Who’d a thought it

I voted remain for stability.
I find the people going around with EU flags cringeworthy.
The EU project is a mess.
Always said there was a chance the Brexit would be much better for Britain than remaining. The slow down in house prices and low unemployment are a example of that. However, our politicians are likely to f*** this up.

Fair enough although I would point out that the EU is planning more integration and greater central control. If we stay we either accept this or we try and veto it which will lead to us being further out of step with our partners. So in this case stability is really continuing the fraught relationship we have had with the EU since the early 1990's.

Personally if I was going to vote for the EU it would have been to embrace the whole EU project, euro Schengen etc, as the saying goes better to be inside the tent....

Edited by Badger11 (23 Aug 2019 9.05am)

One more point

Simple. Because a "no-deal" Brexit wasn't on the table.

No-one really understood what the complexities of us leaving were going to be, or the difficulties it would cause in Ireland. We were all promised that new arrangements on maintaining tariff free trade would take a matter of hours to negotiate because the Germans would be so desperate to continue to sell us their cars.

The harm is not my reaction. It's the consensus view of those professionally involved at the coal face of industry. I am not interested in semantics. Any harm, great, small or medium which can be avoided must be avoided. If the political will is that we cease being a member of the EU then we need to do so in a way which causes all parties the least possible damage.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

You mean all those that want to remain

You should have told Tony Blair that!

For sure those who voted to remain did so for various reasons. That though misses the point.

Those who voted to leave would also have done so for a variety of reasons. Like gaining £350 million a week for the NHS, reducing immigration and "regaining control". However, only a very few of the most ardent Eurosceptics would have even known what a "no-deal" Brexit meant, let alone been in favour of it.

Whilst an argument in favour of "respecting the referendum" result can be made with honour (as can the counter argument), leaving without a deal cannot be.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

You're surely inoring Treaty of Lisbon - Article 50 which provides up to 2 years to negotiate a deal.

I am inoring nothing

The leaflet states:

We have a new UK-EU Treaty based on free trade and friendly cooperation. There is a European free trade zone from Iceland to the Russian border and we will be part of it.

That is what people thought they were voting for. If in fact it proved impossible to negotiate a deal in the time available, that is not the fault of the voters - nor something they could have been expected to predict - who were clearly sold a pup.