People's Vote Brexit debate: Peter Hitchens vs Lord Andrew Adonis
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 17 ต.ค. 2018
- Peter Hitchens and Lord Andrew Adonis have been at it on Twitter, arguing over the validity of a second Brexit referendum. We sat them down side by side to work out the pros and cons. | JOE.co.uk
SUBSCRIBE to JOE: bit.ly/SUBtoJOE
FOLLOW JOE:
► Twitter - / joe_co_uk
► Facebook - / www.joe.co.uk
► Instagram - / joe_co_uk
► Snapchat - JOEcouk
FOLLOW FOOTBALL JOE:
► Twitter - / footballjoe
► Instagram - / footballjoeunited
FOLLOW SPORTS JOE:
► Twitter - / sportsjoe_uk
► Facebook - / www.sportsjoe.co.uk
Round 2: Should the next generation inherit the Brexit mess?
th-cam.com/video/ImqA_lvhilM/w-d-xo.html
My generation inherited the chaos and poverty of post WW2 Britain...We didn't whine, we got on a rebuilt from the ruins. We were not snowflakes.
'Brexit Mess' is a bit one-sided isn't it? I think what would be more of a mess is becoming a federalised state of Europe run by German's helping to line the pockets of the French.
TH-cam provides you a platform free of political influence and hoodwinking so take advantage of it and don't take sides. Otherwise you are no better than the mainstream.
Careful, your bias is showing...
As the "next generation" have done sod all to contribute to this country, I fail to see why they should have a say.
Brexit is not a mess. Those like you make it a mess. Why are you not pointing out that the People knew exactly for what they voted and the No Deal is the fall back position, which would end all of the argument. There is no problem with WTO rules. This re-run is simply because the people made the "wrong choice" forcing a rigged second round. Adonis is not stupid he is simply attempting to change a vote by whatever underhanded methods may be necessary. Second runs always go the other way, ask Ireland France Denmark Holland why ignore all that past evidence?
We are in a mess because we have a useless Prime Minister who never wanted to leave the EU.
Stacey Raven what do you like about being in the EU.
remoaners need nanny Eu to hold their hand
Stacey Raven it isn’t impossible. May should have got cross party Brexiteers and business men such as Digby Jones together ,told them to go away and come back with a proposed deal.
Stacey Raven oh quoting project fear. Ridiculous
So we're a "sovereign" country but we can't leave the sodding EU? Crap!
"Who do you think voted in the first referendum? Squirrels? "
Basically leftists are against any democracy. They believe in telling everyone what they should think.
Or squiwwels according to Adonis!
@Rad Derry
No one does, really.
A "leftist" these days includes the so called "progressive left" who wish to silence any dissenting voice and if you don't agree with them you are branded one of the following...
1. Racist
2. Conspiracy theorist
3. Populist
4. Right winger
Not all too different to 1930s Germany, when you were shot against a brick wall, today you get branded one of the above.
All courtesy of the "progressive left".
Yes, pity it's not Christopher Hitchens debating with this weasel.. he'd have ripped him to shreds.. verbally, of course.
..
Adonis, what a fungal toenail he is...
Fungal toenails are less toxic and easier to get rid of
Peter Hitchens is top man end of story!
Hitchens is generally saying there should be some sort of compromise.
As always, Peter Hitchens is a breath of fresh air. Clear, well thought-out, consistent. Don't agree with quite a lot of what he says, but always worth listening to.
So Parliament voted to have a referendum and they didn't like the result and so now we have to have another referendum because the majority in parliament are against leaving and we have a remain PM who has done everything she can to get a bad deal? It all sounds a bit iffy to me!
If you don't like the answer to the question you asked, why ask?
Iffy or sabotage? She despises democracy.
Their plan is to do Brexit so badly, then say to the people, look what a mess Brexit is, we need another ref. Corbyn would probably honor Brexit. Thereson May will sabotage it.
Exactly. Spot on. Should never have been asked.
David Reeves - You might not have wanted the question asked but the question was asked and there was a decisive answer.
of course adonis loves democracy so much , how many votes from the british public has he ever acheived?
How many times has Farage been an MP? Never. He has NEVER been elected to the House of Commons. UKIP has only ever had ONE MP! Pathetic.
:sunglasses:
farage has been elected to be an m.e.p. by the electorate and not the commons, yet, thats democracy remember? the will of the people, bit more than yer mate adonis, remind me how many votes did adonis get to carry any influence and power whilst in government, i might just as well listen to sid the butcher his point is just as valid as yer mate adonis but never gets to be heard like this freeloading tosser.
Farage has been elected only to the European Parliament - you know, that institution in which Brexiteers and Kippers do not believe and want Britain to have no part of - but there has only been ONE kipper ever elected to the House of Commons - Carswell: and he's now an independent. Like many others, I don't want decisions made for me by head banging Brexiteer loons who would wreck the socio-economic fabric of this country tossing huge numbers of people onto the dole in search of their ill defined, cloud in the sky dreams of "sovereignty" taking back control whereas what they would do would be to make Britain an international pariah with a reputation for trashing deals, walking away and being a completely unreliable partner. And, please don't come back to me with the usual Brexiteer loon bollocks about "trading on WTO terms", something which no other developed country relies upon for its main trading relationships.
i don't care that farage is in the european parliament , good hope he helps bring the whole thing down, who cares he's done a good enough job already lol. all the la di da remainers in london are shiting themselves as it dawns on them their gravy train is coming to an end. they might have to stand on their own two feet .
Andrew Adonis says that No deal would not be an option on a second referendum. The choice would be for Theresa May’s deal or staying in the EU. His arrogance is breathtaking! Maybe some of us or a majority of us want No deal with the EU! It would be chaotic for a couple of years for sure. But in order to become an independent and self sufficient country again, we need to rebuild from the bottom up. It’s called a reset.
Thank your Andrew I thought I was the only one who believes " an end in chaos " is better than " chaos without end ".
Backing these huge, drastic changes on some vague notion of 'independence' and 'self-sufficiency' clearly shows you have no understanding of how the world actually operations. It is run on international trade, only countries such as North Korea are truly self sufficient. We had just as much independence inside the EU as we could actually affect and veto what we didn't like.
Rebuilding the country from the bottum up' - just plain vacuous nonsense. Nothing is getting rebuilt from the bottom up, idealogues who want your money and your public services will rob this country blind, from the top down, if 'no deal' comes to fruition. You've been played like a fiddle Andrew, stop falling for it! Back EEA membership!
@@dudda5000 Yes Nick I largely agree with you Leaving or Remaining will not in
itself solve any of Britain's problems, the north south divide, the rich poor
divide, the young old divide, the remain leave divide. I believe the British eliteshave since 1972 been very good at taking credit when things go right and
blaming the EU when things went wrong "we cannot do anything about it".
I think this is the best reason there is for leaving, make our politicians
accountable for what they do or do not do.
Nick Roxby Self sufficient and independent does not mean isolated. An independent U.K. can strike it’s own trade deals. North Korea is not self sufficient, it relies on it’s closest ally, China!
David Cameron tried for years and fail to get concessions from the EU. The current shit show with Theresa May and Co is just as futile. As Yanis Varoufakis in his book Adults in the Room said, ‘There is no negotiating with the EU’. (I suggest you read it, it’s an eye opener 😉)
Tell me? What country in the EEA is booming economically right now? 🤔 The only entity that is robbing this country blind is the EU with millions of pounds on membership fees.
We voted out! Deal with it! 🇬🇧
@@aaddy5157 Fair point about NK and China and I have a lot of time for Yanis Varoufakis too - I've been planning to read his book :) David Cameron tried for years because he was asking too much! We already had all of the opt-outs - no euro, no schengen, no social chapter of the Maastrict Treaty, the list goes on.
But even Varoufakis, after enduring the brutal financial punishment that was given to Greece in 2015, does not believe that Brexit is the right course of action! Despite his personal experiences with the European establishment, he still believes in the potential for reform at the European level. You should watch many of his interviews about the subject, they're also an eye opener :')
I think we both agree that the EU is very far from perfect, it just seems that you've given up on this potential for reform whilst I'm still holding out hope. You should watch many of his interviews about the subject, they're also an eye opener :')
Andrew Adonis you silly man. General elections are held after a period of time during which the last decision by the people has been implemented. We have not yet implemented the decision to leave. We have to have a period of time after which we have left before we have another decision on it. Peter really should have pointed this out to you.
No, elections are also held on the breakdown of government. If what you said were true, Theresa May would never have called a snap election, because according to your logic she would have had to continue on even without a majority until "the last decision by the people has been implemented". If the government can't implement anything because the people did not elect enough people to form a majority, then according to your logic we can never have another election. tldr what you said is nonsense
well put
Adonis isn't reading your comment, neither Hitchens. Odd to comment thusly, also not correct: see calling 'snap' elections. It was only 18 months ago.
You really ought to think before, during and after commenting.
Well said, Chris.
RichardsVideosWoohoo, We don't have a breakdown of guv. It's an effort to deny Brexit. And if it were a breakdown, we would require a new guv, not a betrayal of Brexit. And anyway, a government cannot break down until it has been implemented. You'd never call another election if the first one produced a clear decision and was not implemented.
Spot on, we are a parliamentary democracy, give the vote to the people and then blame them for the result and outcome, thus washing your hands of any and all responsibility. Parliament needs to be reformed, FOR the PEOPLE!
Reformed to what? More referendums? Terrible idea.
Lord Andrew Adonis, is playing the same game that was played by Europe in Spain and Ireland when they didn’t get the result they wanted. Look who Adonis went scheming to Brussels with.
Adonis has a particular outcome that he believes in, and that is staying in the EU. He is prepared to accept a Norway option. But if Government follows any other course of action, then he insists the people should have another vote. His strategy of a second referendum is to stall the process and then use peoples fear to turn the decision around. Would he advocate a second referendum, if the Government suddenly chose to stay in the EU. Obviously not, therefore his position is totally about achieving the outcome in which he personally believes. Its not about democracy, he doesn't believe in democracy unless it results in the outcome he wants.
Both the conservatives and labour went to last election saying they would respect the referendum and leave the EU. The government has a duty to do what they said they would do. Adonis should shut up and let democracy proceed.
Mika Ham Norway is an awful deal. They pay a lot to be in EEA and get little in return and no rights in the running of the EU
Reading this reminds me of a quote from the movie Speed.
It's a game. If we stay in the EU, he wins.
What happens if Leave wins?
Then tomorrow, we play another one.
Couldn’t agree more. Well said.
Paddy Ashdown, on the eve of the referendum said~ ''I will forgive no one who does not respect the sovereign voice of the British people once it has spoken, whether it is a majority of one per cent or twenty per cent. When the British people have spoken you do what they command. Either you believe in democracy or you do not'' Since the vote Mr Ashdown has been backtracking on his words at every opportunity.
Were you really surprised?
Why do people like Adonis keep referring to it as a People's Vote. It is nothing more than a people who voted to Remain vote
Adonis is just a professional liar. Too many examples in this video but my favourite @9:37 "Jacob Rees Mogg - on the far right!"!!!!
Mogg is far right...
@@donaldderp1602 being a conservative isn't far right by any definition. Compared to most in the commons he appears far right, but that is because most have adopted many policies on the far left without even realising.
Adonis didn't believe the 73 vote needed constant renewal, did he? He freely admits he would have seen no more referenda on the issue ever again.
It was 1975 actually. The entry to the EEC was Jan 1st 1973, and there was no vote on it. Edward Heath did it, but without a vote, and the referendum on whether to STAY in the EEC was June 7th 1975. This was held in order to rectify the illegal/unconstitutional manner in which our joining had been done, but of course it was all done with smoke and mirrors. Nothing honest about any of it.
Adonis didn't see the need for the Treaties of Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice or Lisbon to be legitimised by referenda. The man's a bloody hypocrite
first referendum was may 1975
Peter Hitchens is giving the 'Sir Talmont Buxomley' Argument. I.e. as bad as the result may be, it is still a Democratic result and so must be respected by all. Not to do so would undermine the legitimacy that Democracy offers. And that is a very tough argument to beat.
Does anyone believe our Democracy has been honoured by the lies knowingly told by our Politicians during the Referendum in order to get the result they wanted? How can it be right to respect that result? We should be jailing at least half a dozen of them for political fraud. And throw away the the key for Mr Farage.
Mark Taylor exactly, I’ve been disappointed by many democratic votes in my voting lifetime but have had to accept the result whether I agreed or not. I voted leave but never really thought we would vote to leave and fully expect to awake to a remain vote and would have accepted the result. I too understood that that was how democracy worked.
gotsda
sorry but missed your reply until now. You have been listening to Mr Farage too much. Democracy based on lies is not something we should ever accept, period. Or what’s the point. Especially on a one off decision like this one that will affect our children and even their children’s children. By not accepting it we will send a message to the likes of Gove, Johnson, and Cameron. Eventually they might even listen.
gotsda
The winning margin was very small. We were promised a racehorse and got a donkey. How many people were swayed by the Brexit promises of controlling borders ( including against Turkey!), massive additional support for the NHS, no exist costs, easiest trade deal negotiations ever etc. Wouldn’t have taken much of a swing to have given a different result if the truths that are now known were known then. If, as Farage tells us, the Brexit vote would be even stronger now then what are Brexiters worried about. If that proved the case then I would, certainly as you so eloquently put it, “suck up” that result. Personally I don’t believe the likes of Johnson Gove JRM and Fox ever wanted anything more than the opportunity to cut taxes for the rich (who fund their Party), and cut services and abandon sensible EU standards to pay for it. In any case there is clearly no point in we two debating further because we will never agree.
Lord Adonis’s point about the Munich Agreement is such a stretch I have no idea how one would even begin to make that comparison.
I agree ,that argument makes no sense the Munich aggreement which is a treaty between two sovereign nations would be considered immediately invalid if one of the signatories would break the clauses of the aggreement regardless of whether it was ratified by both or either of the signatories that argument makes no sense.
The UK DID NOT VOTE ON A DEAL.
They were asked whether they wanted to stay or leave.
Because the deal had not been negotiated yet.
Hitchens is spot on.
But it doesn't put bread on the table
Adonis makes the clearer, more pragmatic argument. Hitchen's position is essentially 'the people should never have voted in the first place and I have no opinion on how to resolve the mess we are in, except to say that Parliament should decide how we get out of this mess, the people should not be allowed to vote again, but I advocate the Norway option'. The problem with that is it doesn't get us anywhere, because Parliament is in a shambles, so he can wish for them to fix things to everyone's satisfaction as much as he likes, it wont happen.
@@chubeye1187 neither does the EU, it merely pretends that it does so its political figures can continue to ride the gravy train.
@@RichardsVideosWoohoo so you'd stop Brexit and risk a near Civil War?
Chris is brother us to be but Pete not most of the time.
So the grand plan is we agree on a vote on the final deal and we make sure we don't tell the EU negotiating team about this because if they somehow find out about this state of affairs they could just offer us the worst possible deal imaginable comfortable in the knowledge that the result of this referendum would be we stay in, or have there vile deal they have concocted which would definitely be even worse... A win win for the EU!! DO YOU THINK WE ALL HAVE SINGLE DIGIT I.Q's?
yes John Britton. spot on. single digit I Q s sounds right. The EU is watching this mad circus and will get their opportunity to deal a ruthless blow.
Adonis says he is calling for a referendum because of the position we're in. However, he was calling for a referendum months after we voted to leave.
And in 2011 Mogg said we needed a referendum on the final say. Let's respect his wish.
Wouter
Let's respect the result
@@Bertie22222 Good idea, we voted in in 1975, so we stay in, forrrrevvverrrr! We keep a tory government forrrevvverrr!
Wouter
We are coming out, you know that?
@@woutervanr We voted in 1975, then implemented the result. We voted in 2016 but have not implemented the result yet. Whats your problem...... Oh yes we are out now. Hahahahahahahahahahaha
Its so entertaining to watch Peter speak. And he drops the hammer once again and takes a sip of the water. To give that calm cool belittling look. Vintage Hitch. Hes the man
Hitchens nearly touched on a key point about elections before he got diverted off. The democratic mandate is reviewed periodically. A government gets the chance for 5 years, as long as it commands a majority in parliament, to carry outs it programme and also make a judgement call on the events that come up outside of this. Labour in 2001 did not have the War in Iraq in its manifesto. None of us got a vote on whether to join the war in Iraq.
This was a unique situation where the government had a manifesto commitment for a referendum on the EU and won a majority, parliament voted for that referendum and then the people said 'leave the EU'. Parliament must therefore implement this verdict. The likes of Adonis are then completely free to start a campaign to re-join after we've left - which I'm sure will happen in any case. But trying to overturn this verdict before implementation means that no one has to accept a verdict they don't like anymore. If Adonis ever has a government elected that he likes, that is doing badly in the polls after two years, what argument could he really have to say that their should not be a new general election to decide if the people want to turf them out again? As Hitchens said, he is potentially leading to all sorts of mayhem whilst doing grave damage to our democracy. No, No, No.
"Parliament must therefore implement this verdict." Maybe if everything is black and white and it is clear what "leaving the EU" means. I doubt that, knowing what people know now, parliament would've agreed to THAT referendum. People should've known what they voted for, and as a matter of fact, after more than 2 years AFTER the vote, people nor government are clear about what Brexit actually is. You cannot agree to something you don't know in good faith. The government and parliament are there to do what's best for the country (whatever that means). Making choices that will lead to unknown consequences (but likely very bad), cannot be seen as acting in the best interest of the country.
jakke, if you cannot agree to something you don't know in good faith, then the whole democratic system fails.
You are overlooking the fact that no one knew how we would leave the EU or end up being in the mess we are in. No one knew what leave meant or even now. There's 5 versions of Leave and 1 version of remain. It's enough to make a political case for second referendum. Once we are out of the EU they won't allow is back in with same perks at least. And you are wrong to compare this with having elections every 5 years.
Reptile, No it's not a case of a 2nd vote. The Vote was not about HOW to leave, it was to leave. So what is your case?
It's funny that we (the people) were never asked to decide anything when all these treaties were signed off by politicians taking us deeper into the EU.
For basically 40 years parliament never had these issues on our election ballet paper, we didn't know what the EU was going to end up looking like when we joined re-joined in 75. The 2016 was the first time the public had the chance to really show what it thought and we voted to leave.
Camron tried to negociate with the EU a few years before and got laughed out of Brussels. Hence the referendum decision in their manifesto.
If you think these politicians have your best interests at heart then you must ask yourself, is there a political party you would vote for that REALLY represents your political position(S)?
Adonis acts just like an NPC, absolutist, second vote, democracy, people....urgh, urgh.
Oh Dear LORD Andy Adonis !! An UN-elected politician telling the Sovereign people to vote again for an UN-elected EU Commission, It's not difficult let's leave all EU institutions as what the people voted for, and the likes of old Andy can start a party to join the EU (Just as Nigel Farage had to do, in his case to leave it ) and argue the case, the British people are not supid if they like what he says we can join all tha EU institutions and live happily ever after!!!
And is Hitchens elected? You simplist oaf
My stupid friend, that's the point Hitchen isn't elected and doesn't vote on legislation, Adonis isn't elected and DOES vote on legislation and people like you who don't believe in Democracy are the reason we are in such a state
who voted adonis to be a lord the little trollope
Adonis doesn't answer any questions .
Adonis is so dishonest here. The fact he's saying that "we've wrestled with this for two years". What does he mean by "we've? He means Theresa May, a remain prime minister. Put a prime minister in charge who supports leaving the EU, then sure, criticise away.
Hitchens contrarian nature also made some of his points useless in this debate. Ever since he's taken this stance of "I've always wanted to leave the EU, but I don't like the way we left", it's made his points on this issue completely impotent.
Deep Zepp I agree with you completely. Plus, anyone called Deep Zepp would get my vote any day of the week.
Sovereign power is the people..
And so Adonis and his ilk will ensure that the EU offer the worst deal possible, so he can advise 'the people' to vote to remain.
The potential catastrophe of leaving the EU that Remain predicted was debated at great length in the run up to the referendum. Despite this a majority still voted Leave, because they believed that the potential benefits of leaving the EU were greater than the potential pitfalls. Neither projection can be confirmed until after the UK has left. One of the main arguments for leaving though was over 'taking back control' of the political direction of the UK through reasserting the sovereignty of parliament and democratic accountability to UK voters. One major deciding factor was the ability to end the EU redline over free movement of people during a migrant crisis that has not been resolved, and when we are living under an unprecedented terrorist threat. Leaving then was not just about economics, but about fundamentally changing the direction and the way politics is run in the UK going forward. Voters who were against membership of the EU before the referendum are unlikely to have become more enamoured with it since, as EU leaders have openly humiliated the PM. The majority seems to be behind 'getting on with it' and making the best fist of leaving, the decision having already been made. If a second referendum was to be held and returned an equally close verdict, but this time falling to Remain (e.g not a landslide shift in opinion), then the mandate for remaining would be incredibly weak, and a large number of people would be left feeling cheated of their original vote. They would form a reactionary political base that would feel justified in refusing to accept the result of the second referendum. I would expect civil disobedience and rioting on an enormous scale. Hitchens is right - the danger of undermining basic tenets of democracy by using a referendum to overturn a referendum are probably not worth risking.
Simon Raven writes " I would expect civil disobedience and rioting on an enormous scale" yeah... so would I
its brilliant just why i voted to leave to have the establishment running round like headless chickens i want to see all the present parties to collapse on this so we can have new parties that truly represent the whole of the people in this country
Same here
If we have another referendum, the options should be 1: leave with the deal offered. Or 2: leave without the deal (hard brexit). We shouldn't be voting to overturn the the last referendum, for any reason. As, if the result is the same, then would be in the same situation. So what then? vote again?
If I got a phone call from Lord Adonis I'd think it was some sort of a wind up
Funny how Adonis keeps throwing the word ‘absolutist’ around disparagingly.
That wretched establishment is never going to allow us to leave the superstate.
I'd have more respect for Adonis of he could speak without lying. He doesn't like the result and we should keep going till we vote 'right'in his opinion
Cracks me up when his lordship says ‘Weferendum’ 🤣🤣
Andrew Last haha yes. We should tell him when he can pronounce the word correctly he can have a second referendum
'But you're an absolutist' please at least try and debate like a grown up Mr. Adonis
Adonis is hysterical, what a ridiculous man.
Hitchens won
Adonis is arguing a case which Houdini couldn't escape from.
Is Adonis really Mr Burns from the Simpsons?... he’s about as intelligent
The point of another vote will have a massive affect on public confidence in our electoral system overall. It may well be a slippery slope. If you don't like a result, complain, protest and demand we vote again. The people who attended the 'people's march' in London were majority London citizens who stepped out from their front doors onto the streets within the bubble that is our nations capital. The same people who voted remain. Their reasons are nothing practical but purely virtuous, as usual.
Adonis probably has skin in the game and he's in it for himself. He wants to reverse the 'weferendum' on 'Bwexit'.
It would have been good to hear from Peter a bit more here but unfortunately Adonis hogged the discussion and incessantly interrupted and monopolised. Annoying.
And the rest were bussed in my rich celebrity's .
Slimey politician on likes democrecy when its the result he wants. Smh
Did you listen to this video? Hitchens is hardly pro-democratic if he is arguing that the public should never have been given a say in the first place! These two are both for the idea that all decisions be conducted by Parliament and all we can do as Joe public is to elect our rulers. At least another vote has the possibliity of giving the public an informed vote, something the original referundum did not. I think some leavers are guilty of the anti-democratic attitude you are claiming here, because they must surely haveseen in the news that recent polling suggests that the majority of the public now would vote to remain. So they know that it's no longer the people's will to leave, it was, but probably isn't now. Given that information, if they really cared about democracy (simplistically defined as the will of the majority), then they would at least want another referundum, if not for Brexit to be called off alltogether.
Adonis contradicted himself by claiming these things require `constant renewal`. As for your last point, we don't just keep having new votes on the basis of sample polls, there really does lay the path to chaos.
Yes ,I hate Farrage as well.
Richard VW - I listened to the video and didnt hear Hitchens argue about the "public shouldnt have a say". cut the bs man.
@@RichardsVideosWoohoo We have had the second vote now and I suppose the people were more informed. So I assume that you now respect the democratic decision. In any case we are off yipeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Well done for getting these two on, very interesting conversation wherever you may sit on Brexit.
Lord Adonis was bestowing his wisdom about the German refugee situation on TV recently, the gist was 'Germany should have no difficulty assimilating millions of Syrian refugees when they managed to incorporate 17 million East Germans when the Iron Curtain came down'. This man truly is that big a berk.
Godwin's law at 17:15. Just a heads up.
Out completely...
Lord Adonis is just coming across as a kid who has lost his favorite toy.
Second referendum would cause massive damage. Depending on the outcome the damage would be different but still huge. Remain and Brexit voters would be seething. Leave with a crap deal and everyone would be frustrated and the process would be horrible.
We voted to end free movement snake.
Adonis has no argument. We got into EU by a referendum in first place. We left by referendum. His calling for another referendum is non sensical. His arguments for one have already taken place.
All you did here was assert that Adonis has no argument, then describe things that everyone knows happened, then made another assertion, then provided a grammatically meaningless sentence. Both Adonis and Hitchens have an "argument", because they made statements justifying their positions to some degree, something you failed to do here.
You make it sound so simple. Louis XVI wishes he had you as an advisor.
So if referendum is binding.. why the second one...
@@whenworldsclash7236 because the first was to remain in the EEC, the EU is a completely different entity.
RichardVideosWoohoo - Adonis might have had an argument had he not undermined it with contradictions and inaccuracies.
Now he’s saying ‘Bwexit’ ffs 😂😂😂😂
Leave means leave
Who thought " Adonis" would be a good name for this lord ? He looks like he would struggle to break pastry.
If there is a snap general election I will not vote Labour because Labour want to over turn the democratic vote for Brexit, that is undemocratic.NEVER TRUST LABOUR!
but the tories are doing such a good job. sarcasm.
And Thereson May also wants to overturn it.
how can be undemocratic to overturn a democratic vote with another democratic vote? genuinely curious...
Patrick, it's irrelevant what it is that overturns the first vote. Democracy requires implementing the first one. Would you suggest having a general election and then another one before the winning party is put into power? How would that work? I'm genuinely curious.
You don't exactly get my problem...how could someone call another democratic vote undemocratic?...and yes, daily general elections would still be democratic (not in the UK though as you have FPTP), even though if they are not pragmatic.
I enjoyed this; both make good points and engaged in interesting argument. How refreshing.
agreed
I concur.
There are no valid points from Remain. They lost the vote and we must leave the EU.
Adonis had no argument, he didn’t like the referendum result so wants another one, it’s ridiculous.
At 18 " when asked how long the result of a referendum should last, Hitchens should have responded "30 years, being the period of the time the 1973 referendum result was generally accepted."
45 years
Both men makes great point but..
But,even Hitchens agreed coming out without a deal would be disastrous.
The EU are deliberately dragging this out, they know exactly what they're doing.
@CastAirLead , sorry,no cherry picking.
@@AjitB07 ,yes they do,and they will.
Lord "Adonis" is the most misnamed person in history."
Adonis should never have been an MP because he doesn't want to accept a democratic vote
We won’t be having another referendum no matter how many remainders protest. The people’s vote was in 2016 when it was made crystal clear we will leave the eu and the single market. Brexit 🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧
I'm a staunch remainer and supporter of the people's vote - But fair play to Peter Hitchin, this is the first proper, rational and well reasoned debate I've heard or watched on the topic
what would the question be?
May's Chequers proposal or Remain in the EU, as Lord Adonis proposed. That's the monstrosity we'll get. A referendum that no Leaver wants.
We have in fact already had three votes, as a nation, on the EU membership, since the 1975 referendum on staying in. These were:
1) 2015 General Election called by David Cameron with the manifesto promise to hold an "In/Out Referendum on membership of the EU". We voted for that.
2) The Referendum itself on June 23rd 2016.
3) The June 8th General Election called by Theresa May in which she promised to make Brexit happen. In fact the Labour Party's manifesto also promised to make Brexit happen, so all those who voted for the main two parties voted FOR Brexit.
Why do you go against the people's opinion on membership of the EU? It is extremely anti the people, anti democracy and anti the nation. The history of this nation is one of independence. Why would the people want to change that?
The 'history' of this country isn't one of independence, its more one of multilateralism (after conquering!) !
Putting aside for one moment the potential fact the leave campaign was potentially illegal, overspending, making promises which have turned out to be false (£350m for the NHS, on a red bus, 'quickest trade deal in history', no mention of a divorce bill) any of that ring any bells?
However, how on earth is it anti-democratic to have a vote (point one) especially one on facts which are apparent now which were not available at the time of the 2nd referendum. I totally recognise that some people want to leave come what may, at whatever cost. However, there are also people who don't. Those people who have changed their minds now the costs are known. Also if everyone knew what they voted for, why are earth are Brexiteers of the tory party at adds with what was promised at the election. This demonstrate that there is therefore no single 'leave' option or consequence. There is also the chance of cost that people will still vote to leave.As they would be voting on what is actually known, there is little for remainers to complain about if a vote of the terms of leaving the EU is lost.
Arguably the GE to which you refer indicates that people are in fact changing their mind otherwise that manifesto would have been comprehensively endorsed by the public, and the Tory's (despite thinking it would be a resounding win) lost their majority and ability to decisively get legislation through (which is the only thing that really counts in this debate - what PARLIAMENT decides. The referendums were advisory (as would be a future vote).
However, to get back to the comment I made. Peter Hitchin in this debate put across the most convincing arguments in a rational, non-accusatory way (rather than for example "why do you go against the people opinion). But that gets to the nub of the issue, because we are a democracy and everyone is entitled to their opinion and to protest in a peaceful way. People change their minds, they change their opinions, thats why we have regular elections and that is why people should be able to vote on whatever deal is negotiated.
There is no requirement for any debates on whether or not we remain in the EU. We voted to leave. We're leaving.
Dec 28th 2019 Adonis had a bad xmas. 😄
Isn’t it annoying having all of these elected bureaucrats doing their jobs to serve their constituents and their jobs by not endorsing brexit. Remind me why the unelected bureaucrats in Brussels were worse?
Hitchen 1 Adonis 0
Hitchens 0.25 Adonis 1.75
Only 1?
😀 🍻 #IndyRef2 then 👍
Do you think Scotland would 100% leave the UK if given another choice on their independence today ?
@@JOE_co_uk Just my opinion you understand but I think It really depends on the BrExit outcome tbh.
1) A differential agreement for Scotland, (that the SNP advocate), with NO power grab then probably not.
2) If the whole of the UK stays in the EU SM & CU then maybe not.
3) If the whole of the UK stays in the EU SM OR the CU then maybe yes.
4) A differential agreement for NI, (whilst understandable), would:
a) put Scotland at a significant disadvantage
b) make it obvious to the Scottish electorate that differential agreements are possible
then probably yes
5) If the UK leaves the EU SM & CU then yes.
post hard brexit, 100%
Adonis is logically inconsistent. He says the people's vote caused a mess but then says he supports a new vote to fix up this mess. He thinks that on democratic grounds there is no reason to wait a lifetime for a new vote. However, presumably he would not support a third vote if he got his preferred outcome in vote 2.
The problem is in the Title "Lord" Adonis. A person who is full of his own importance. He is a product of our political system of Patronage i.e. jobs for the boys. They do not represent anyone but their own group. They told us that the vote to leave meant leaving the customs union, the single market. They stressed how important this vote was as it would be a final decision on the subject of membership of the EU Federal State. We were misinformed in the referendum in the 1970's. We were told it was only a Common Market. It turns out to be a deliberate plan to create a European Federal State with a Central Government in Brussells. That is why the EU has a Presiident, A Parliament, A Flag, An Anthem, A Central Bank, A Currency and Criminal Justice System i.e The European Court of Justice. They are also planning for a European Army. The UK has 75 Members of The European Parliament out of a total of 750. We are in a permanent minority without any real control over what decisions are made by people we did not vote for. Our Country is being sold down the river. All we hear from the ruling classes in this country is about the economics. I would suggest that if we transfer politic control of our country to the EU we will eventually also lose control of our own economy.
Have to give it to Adonis on this one, we don't have the luxury of time so it's down to what path is likely to get us out of the quagmire. We need some pragmatism when we try to balance the immediate requirements of clairty on trade with other nations etc with the differing opinions on democratic legitimacy. I personally have no problems with referenda, but not the way we are conducting them. In my view there is a way to conduct them that doesn't simply poll people who don't have the time or resources available to make informed decisions, but also doesn't depend on professional politicians being representative of the publics wishes. We don't have time to come to a consenus on what is democratically optimal though, we just need the most democratic path currenlty available at short notice. We can settle constitutional debates later, but for now we just need some way to make an informed collective decision. A people's vote seems to satisy that.
I am actually standing up applauding. Better justification I've read/heard recently. Thank you!
How long do you think Freedom lasts?
@@iknewit.2471 What do you mean? It depends on what you mean by freedom and in what context. Freedom is an abstract idea, means different things to different people.
@@RichardsVideosWoohoo - Well Dick the fact you asked the question maybe abstract to you but is objective to me and tells me you are not free as you have no concept of it's meaning!
@@iknewit.2471 "I Knewit" the fact that you didn't understand what I said makes your youtube name very ironic. I understand that freedom has different meanings to different people. I have my own notions about what it means and my own conclusions about it. The fact that you don't understand that other people might define freedom in different ways, suggests you have never really thought about it. I suspect that you have a very rudimentary understanding of freedom as being equivalent to control. Maybe you have the idea of freedom as being able to do what you want when you want it. You need to understand some people use a more nuanced and/or realistic notion of freedom. When two people marry, they are in one sense, giving up some of their freedom, but you can't say that a married person is not free, because they married voluntarily and can divorce at any time. How free that couple is, depends on the question. Are they free to see other people? Yes and no are both valid answers to that question.
Maybe you think freedom is the freedom to choose, but what if the options you have to choose from have been decided by somebody else? So there are grades of freedom and the meaning of the word changes with context. A prisoner in jail, might consider himself to be free, because he retains his own freedom of thought, despite being physically restricted, he is free in one way and not free in another. You might consider yourself free, because you can come on youtube and spout utter shite at people any time of the day, but what if every thought you ever had has been given to you by other people, and you just regurgitate other people's thoughts without ever really understanding what any of it means. Are you a "free" thinker then? The nature of freedom and free will is something philosophers and scientists have been investigating for literally thousans of years, yet somehow it has all been figured out by a random youtube user called "I knewit"... Cheers
A vote by a narrow majority is still a majority, hence it is a democratic outcome, and those on the losing end should accept that the process worked. I also cannot see how anyone can think that being part of the EU makes Britain a better or freer country. Britain once ruled a vast portion of the entire globe; it stands to reason that it can at least function as an independent country, and that it's people should naturally want this, instead of making obeisance to an elite not even present on British soil.
Using, Adonis' logic, if another ref voted to leave, he would require another ref, and so on.
Peter Hitchen’s brother would be turning in his grave.... Norway is NOT leaving! 😡😤
The polital elite played a game with the british people and lost. But they think by tilting the rules of the game in their favour they will win.... So foolish
lets end the house of lords !!
Where THE F**K do you get a name like LORD ADONIS ?
Does he have bloody winged feet or something ?
Has he got gold plated underpants ?
Does he have a giant Venus ?
I THOUGHT OF A NAME!!! The irony is that Adonis was supremely handsome...
@@1jimmy534
Yes , but actually, just to add to that .....Adonis means "Lord" (Adonai , and Don etc ) , so hes , LORD LORD.
Hes "Lord Lord Mac Laird."...lol
Even in the last war , it was said by the top generals we fought the wrong war and that we all should of been fighting the Russians . ..
Adonis appears to advocate a second referendum where the options offered will be Mrs May's 'bad deal' which Parliament seem certain to reject - so not an option at all - and secondly, an option to reverse Brexit.
No mention of the question "Do you want to leave the EU" (now that all the consequences have been explained yet again)?" Why can't that question be put again? Could it be because 'the people' might again vote to leave the EU and the insulting "They didn't understand what they were voting for" argument could not be wheeled out for a third go at getting the answer Adonis and his mates want?
Both were wrong about a Noway style deal, David Davis explained why this would not work in Parliament. He advocated a deal called Canada +++ based on precedents of EU negotiated deals already in place, the +++ parts being lifted from trading templates operating between, among others, the EU and Australia, which the EU would be in no position to legitimately oppose because they negotiated these various trade treaties in the first place.
Good point, and well made!
Excellent debate on both sides. Pity about the comment stream below though...
What Mr. Adonis does not understand is that there is now a clear moral imperitive to implement the referendum result. Anything less would bring a justified moral outrage far more damaging than a disorderly no deal brexit
Adonis was dressing it up quite well but it was basically vote again and this time get it right, from his point of view.
Futile now, it's not happening.
Mrs May is PM because she lost/won a round of ‘Pass the Parcel’ when the result of the referendum became known. Cameron avoided his responsibility of starting the Article 50 quit notice.
Mrs May has made the classic error of negotiation by laying her cards face up on the table before the pot gets filled. Our position is ‘we quit’. Their position is still unknown. It would have been better to keep Stumm and let them come to us with an offer and negotiate based on that. Let ‘all agreed when everything’s agreed’. We were in a much stronger position then.
Hitchens made the point that holding a referendum on the same issue a couple of years later almost waters down the legitamcy of referendums on the whole over the society structure. What use is a vote and decision if it can be overturned so easily and so soon?What have you got left if you overturn the peoples vote every couple of years. Its not the same as electing which politcal party steers the ship,its more like dissassembling the permanent fixtures of a ship,reassembling it with temporary fixtures and expecting it to still function as efficiently as it did before. Its attractive although possibly very costly to prevent the politicans punt the hot potato back to the man on the street but instead to let them earn their wages while they burn their hands in the process as the promised the impossible to everyone, tis a classic politicians basic move
Me: Actually I have a principled opposition to referendums.
Also me: Let me tell you why we should support a second referendum:
We had a Lord who supported the people.
A referendum's shelf life, as it were, must at least have as a start date the point at which it is actually carried out. If and when the people have experienced the benefits or repercussions of their decisions then and only then should there be any consideration for a return to previous norms.
Adonis .... it shouldn’t have been put to the people, ( the referendum) well why’s that ? Because we don’t have the right to an opinion or because you knew we’d despite the full weight of propaganda vote to leave
Adonis now of course wants the people involved it’s all ok now as tbe people will get him what he wants especially if there’s 3 options on the ballot paper which will be done in order to split and guarantee the vote of remain
These people think that it is they that only have the right and we just do as we are told, they will use their mainstream media propaganda machine to persuade manipulate brainwash us all and as good Little sheep we will all conform, no wonder they are all pro EU the establishment it’s all about control and Lord Adonis isn’t interested in the people he’s only saying so now to over turn it all, trust has gone for us all, it’s a realisation that actually it’s a game that we play no part in
“We have our own dream and our own task. We are with Europe, but not of it. We are linked but not combined. We are interested and associated but not absorbed.” - Winston Churchill
Why is it that the people who don't recognise the result of the first referendum, are now screaming for a second?
I keep hearing that the Conservative Party are making a mess of Brexit. They proposed the referendum to the Commons and MP's agreed this was needed after Cameron was sent packing. The 650 MP's were voted into their positions by the same people who voted in the referendum and 17.4 m voted to leave despite all the scare stories from a wide array of people including eminent MP's and Peers. The main stream media were anti Brexit and did their best to ensure the result was to remain. MP's should represent their members whatever way they voted and take note of their views. The MP's in the Labour Party have never supported the decision to leave they are only interested in bringing down the Government. They vote as instructed by the Party that is based on advice from Momentum. Peter Hitchens is right to argue that another 'people's vote' solves nothing. MP's should be sent back to their constituencies instead to listen to the electorate and find their opinions and then stop undermining the Government and supporting the EU. Then debate properly and responsibly or resign if threatened or put under pressure. We all had our reasons for voting yes or no and may have been influenced by the debates and the media. Considering all the negative arguments the vote still went in favour of leave. People in the UK aren't stupid for voting for Brexit but intelligent when voting for MP's. That point was being made by Peter Hitchens but not understood by Adonis. Do the job you're paid handsomely to do.
There's been a people's vote and the result was out! The government has had 2 years to prepare.. the politicians arrogance towards democracy is very dangerous..
Wow. The question was "Do we want to start..."
I must have mis-read the ballot slip then as I thought it said "remain or leave"
Peter missed a very important point when Adonis was saying how long do we have to wait before having another referendum. Peter should have said you have to honour the decision of the first vote before getting a second vote on it.
Lost faith in politicians and leaders massively!
Always enjoy Peter’s opinions and thoughts.
You cannot just disregard the result of the 2016 referendum just because it didn't go the way that the minority wanted it to. It shows a complete lack of respect for our 'democratic' voting system and it's a potentially dangerous situation. As Hitchens rightly pointed out, we've already had a people's vote - The majority of voters voted to leave the EU.
What would be next if , say, there WAS to be another referendum, and let's imagine that it was the opposite of the first? What then? The best of 3? Best of 5? It would be never ending.
At the end of the day, and as far as I'm concerned, there can be no 2nd referendum and Brexit should be accepted and respected, and be honoured by the government. The majority voted leave, and leave we should - No deal, and no half in, half out, hokey cokey Brexit in name only. Leave means exactly that.
The 1938 thing Adonis brings up is no comparison. Hitler broke the Munich agreement.
He called Brexit a mess. This man does not understand that the people of the U.K. are watching and listening to what he is saying millions of him are Brexiters.