We’ve got a Brexit Party. So why not a Remain Party?

Why is everyone dancing around the issue and using ever more elaborate parliamentary arithmetic when the answer has already been provided and met met with success? To counter the Brexit Party we need a Remain Party.

Such a party would be likely to be, broadly speaking, centre, left, social democrat, pro-EU, Green and youth-orientated – which is a very attractive prospect for many who are weary of the old divisions and the old guard. A thoroughly modern party for a thoroughly modern Britain.

Furthermore, if Brexit does happen it can always be undone by subsequent administrations. Nothing is forever. It can be anticipated that re-entry after a few months or years would be predicated upon full-scale Europeanisation – no rebate, adopt the euro, metrication, ever closer union etc etc.

Steve Ford
Haydon Bridge

We need the sensible centre

Just what does Julie Partridge want for our country? History and the present show that extremism of right- or left-wing politics always produces extreme reaction, so surely the middle ground is the most balanced and reasonable ambition for the majority of the population.

As for Brexit, the all-consuming nonsense of the past few years, the referendum was a badly thought-out exercise oversimplified for an electorate who had no real conception of its consequences either way, and it has become equally true that neither did our politicians or business leaders. They are finding out now.

Far too many voters responded to the lies, prejudices, bigotry and ignorance of the Leave campaign leaders, and the Remainers failed pathetically to react with the vigour needed to counterbalance the donkey-led campaign.

So now we will all have to live with the appalling mess about to be dumped upon us. Just look at the wonderful trade deals we’re bragging about to offset our trade with Europe, and the best our government can visualise is a sometime-never deal with that brilliant Trump-led USA that will never, ever behave as our equal partner. How both countries became saddled with our respective leaders defies understanding.

The prospects for the next decade are depressing.

Vic Gaunt

The disaster of rail privatisation

Why do we, rail users, put up with such a second-rate service?

The overblown price of a ticket to travel in such cramped, dirty conditions, often standing with hundreds of other passengers, is outrageous. Travelling from my village to London by either of the routes available in rush hour is horrendous in terms of cost and crowding on the train.

Additionally, parking at the station is far too expensive and often non-existent, which adds to the stress of travelling by train.

I, like many others, gave up a worthwhile job in London simply because of the stress and cost of travelling by rail.

Privatisation has given the passenger only more cramped conditions with an ever increasing cost of travel. Where is the benefit for the passenger? Nothing has been achieved in terms of an improved travel experience since Margaret Thatcher’s privatisation.

There have been promises of improvements to track and rolling stock which simply have not materialised or not had any positive effect. Yet, still the rail executives receive huge salaries and bonuses. For what? Turning up for work on time!

Does anybody really care about the passenger anymore. I don’t believe so.

Keith Poole

Vote them out

So the Conservative Party is now prepared to play Russian roulette with our economy, our union and the future of our young people, while (entirely predictably) seeking to put the blame for their own actions onto someone else. Please remember this at the next election when they will undoubtedly claim to be the party most competent to govern!

Arthur Streatfield


Johnson and May are not too different

On his determined road to No 10 Boris Johnson was canny enough to switch just before the referendum and then to step aside from becoming prime minister in 2016, leaving it to the hapless Theresa May to try and achieve the unachievable task that he and others had promised – ie leaving the EU with a better deal than we had by remaining in, or, as others have put it, “having ones cake and eating it” or “walking on water”.

He was clever enough then to dodge the column but he has failed to learn from his predecessors’ obvious errors – namely, don’t state red lines in advance and, more importantly, don’t exclude parliament from your negotiations because at some stage you will need it.

It should be obvious to Johnson, who claims to be some sort of historian, that he is about to repeat history by excluding parliament. Or has he yet to bring himself up to speed on recent history and the damage he and his fellows inflicted on the hapless May when it was excluded?

All that has happened over the past few months is that we have exchanged one dog-in-the-manger PM for another, both who believe that slogans can replace skill and ability and both who refuse to heed or understand positions other than their own.

John Simpson

What planet does Neil Coppendale inhabit? He implies that Boris Johnson represents the majority of the people. In reality both Johnson and his predecessor Theresa May were parachuted into the premiership by a tiny cabal of Tory party members.

When May attempted to gain a popular mandate she lost the slim majority she inherited from David Cameron and had to cosy up to the DUP, at a cost to the taxpayer, to maintain a working majority in parliament. To suggest that Johnson represents the views of the majority of the electorate is a travesty.

Patrick Cleary

---Watch the latest videos from Yahoo UK---