Really? As discussed elsewhere, in the UK 1 person gets 1 vote. So, if 17.4 million people vote, it can be assumed that will equate to 17.4 million votes. Not difficult, is it?
Incidentally, 17.4 million of votes is incorrect. It should read '17.4 million votes'.

Bob, I think broadly Fly is correct. 'Take back control' was a powerful slogan. From my observations in a few countries we see grand local infrastructure projects with EU funding. The project is attributed to the EU and the blue flag flies high: projects like block paved streets, retro street lighting and perhaps the most notorious the motorways and harbour front in Madeira.

In UK we don't see such largesse, if we do we see it as the EU telling us how to spend our money. Any display board showing EU funding will be discrete and flags, well . . .

These are observations. My thought, as I said before, 'good' and the Government will claim credit, 'bad' and It is the EU fault.

Kelvin, I suspect Fly was alluding to early discussion where some people controlled more than one votes.

I was listening to the debate on voter ID on the radio yesterday. Earlier it was claimed 3.5 million do not have a photographic ID; MacDonald claimed 11 million. I can certainly picture the little West Indian grandma, living in London, shopping locally, never travello, never drove. It was then mentioned about the Windrush scandal and the truck of many people

With one breath Labour are saying there is no evidence of voter fraud and with the other that photographic ID would adversely affect them more than Tories. This is a problem and might deserve its own thread.

Interesting listening to the Sky reporter from Brussels.

It would seem the Ambassadors from the other nTions, being briefed by Barnier this afternoon, are as fed up with Brexit as everyone else. The suggestion is that no open ended extension will be given, even if Boris writes his letter*. Rather the deal presently being negotiated is the end of the road.

The rumour is that, if approved tomorrow in draft, it will be sent back to the UK Parliament in order to be approved as is, no changes, whilst the legal details are worked out for final signature by the nations by the 31st and current exit date. No messing about with a referendum or more months of debate - it will be accept the deal or be out.

*The letter will, apparently, be ignored by the 27 whilst the negotiations continue to the end of the month, with no acknowledgement of receipt or reply.

Thank you sir for helping this foreigner better master your language.
Hope my broken English won't prevent you from getting the message.
(Moon, finger pointing, etc.)

PN; not necessarily, the EU signs on the A465 "Heads of the Valleys" road are quite prominent:

http://i1.walesonline.co.uk/news/wal...S/s615b/e2.jpgIt's currently running £54 million over budget and quite why they are spending so much money on a road which doesn't have that much traffic is beyond me.....

Interesting report by Guido - which would be stymied by the EU sitting on the letter as indicated above anyway......

https://order-order.com/2019/10/16/r...ill-pass-deal/

Remainers May Try and Prevent Saturday Sitting of Parliament

HuffPo’s Paul Waugh is that Labour and their rebel alliance are planning to vote against Parliament sitting and having its say on Boris’s new deal if he brings one back this Saturday, as they fear Boris will use the House’s endorsement of a deal to bypass the Benn Act. Now all of a sudden Remainers want to deny Parliament having its say – they’ve never been subtle about showing their true motives…

What ?!?

https://news.sky.com/video/brexit-se...etter-11836871

If that is true, so much for all this "We're leaving on the 31st, period."
"We will leave on October 31st because otherwise BJ would lose all credibility"...

I'm a bit disappointed. I would have expected some kind of suspense up to the last moment...

Sadly, it appears you have a rather limited knowledge of said road.

For many years it was, and still is in places, a death trap. Even the RAF advised against using it unless you had to.

It's also a major trunk route.

Can we take it you've never enjoyed the panoramic views of the M4 through and around Cardiff and those enchanting tunnels near Newport ( incidentally, the Gov't rejected a recent by pass scheme to alleviate the problems they induce ) as you have plenty of time to "enjoy " them. If so, you will have missed the sight of HGV's heading for Fishguard and the ferry to Rosslare, plus traffic for Swansea and the surrounding areas of South Wales and then to Mid Wales coastal locations.

Once the road is fully upgraded, it will provide a much needed alternative trunk road access to South Wales....still, what's the damned EU ever done for the UK eh ?.....

Think of the above as K n C's alternative motoring guide and introduction to UK geography .....all in one !

I don't know why, but where the EU Regional Fund has funded, or partly funded project around the UK if there is a sign board the funding element is generally printed in very small font on an out of the way segment of the sign, as though the council or organisation that has commissioned the project is in some way ashamed of taking funding from the regional fund.

Look abroad at any project, infrastructure, environmental or whatever and you generally see the cost, and how much has been contributed by, for example national government, state government, local council, EU regional fund, or whatever else. It certainly provides some element of transparency for the citizen / voter but also gives people the chance to see what they get (got) our of the EU, not just constant whinging from the usual suspects in the media of how much the EU costs the UK, and all the alleged obstacles it creates for us.

Probably another contributory factor to the ignorance of "what the EU has ever done for us".

KnC; I had the unfortunate experience of using the A465 commuting to and from Abergavenny from the coastal end for longer than I care to remember and continue to use it regularly now.
It was colloquially referred to as the "butcher's shop", "slaughter house" etc and anybody who travelled that "lovely" 3 lane road could see the reason why in the number of sheep carcasses littering the verges. Grants to erect effective (double fences space 1m apart) sheep fences made a huge difference and painting double white lines to clarify the sensible overtaking areas made a huge difference to the human death toll as well. Still, the new widening scheme will reduce peak period travelling times by 9 mins between Dowlais Top and Hirwaun in 2037

I've spent even more time enjoying the delights of the M4 and completely agree with you that the twin flush toilet tubes known as the Brynglas Tunnels are utterly inadequate but you can blame Plaid Cymru for that not Westminster.

Think of the above as an introduction to the facts of the matter from somebody who has been using these roads for the last 45 years.

Sadly, as I was looking at this I discovered that 2 people died on the Heads of the Valleys last night.

Sky News shows he's already caved in.
According to ORAC above, they hold him by the throat and won't release him until he signs the proposed agreement.
He signs or they're out. Period.
As I understand it, any extension would be provided in order for the Parliament to approve a redacted version of this last deal.
They approve, they leave with a deal. They don't, they're out with no deal.
No more ifs, buts, no other deal or negociation.

It has plenty of traffic, and was in dire need of refurbishment above the Neath-Hirwaun stretch, the 3 lane bit. It was always (still is with the work) a dangerous road, prone to closures due to shunts and breakdowns. It carries about 16-24000 vehicles a day on average and is absolutely an 'arterial' road round here. Equally inportant to the 'why', is the ameliorating effect the completed road will have on the daily carnage around Newport, through filtering off M4 traffic wanting to go north to the M5 via the M50. Just sayin'.

CG

No sensible person on the remain side would ever suggest that we 'ignore the result of a democratic vote' - that's a straw man argument. If Brexit is to be stopped - and personally I'd like it to be - it must be via a democratic mandate that supercedes the 2016 referendum. That could come via a general election that returns a LibDem government (unlikely, I know) or a second referendum that allows voters to choose between two (or more) clearly defined and specific options. You know, like Rees-Mogg said in the House of Commons. ' We could have two referendums. As it happens, it might make more sense to have the second referendum after the renegotiation is completed'.

What would you ask people to choose between in a second referendum?

What reason do you have for running a second before enacting the last one?

What would you ask people to choose between in a second referendum?

1. Leave under some condition.
2. Leave under some other condition.
3. Stay.

That's how it will be done.

Is there time left for the political GE/referendum game ?
The EU summit begins tomorrow.
It is presented in the EU press as the "last chance" for the UK to avoid a no-deal exit.
Once you're out, this GE issue reduces to some unsignificant domestic affair.

If you do that then you might as well save the millions a referendum will cost and just cancel it. You are effectively splitting the leave vote while keeping 1 remain option. It is vote rigging plain and simple.

How about we have
1. Leave
2. Full adoption of the Euro, future EU army and any move towards United States of Europe.
3. Remain but keep the £ and veto any EU army proposals.

Option "2" of your list simply isn't on the cards, unless the UK leaves the EU, then decides it was one God awful mistake and decides to rejoin. Option "3" is the status quo. So we are left with just two realistic options; leave with whatever deal Johnson gets (or no deal if he fails to get a deal) or remain.

That appears to me to be a perfectly sensible and straightforward approach, but make it absolutely crystal clear that the decision taken in that referendum is final, and do that by ensuring legislation has passed into law before the referendum. The problem with the last one was simply that the way it was left the government couldn't be forced to carry out the referendum result. It was not clear, beyond all reasonable doubt the result was legally binding. A typical British fudge.