Paul Robson Bray

Daisy Cooper, "Nigel Farage basically decided that he couldn't be arsed to sit in the chamber and listen to the Chancellor's speech" "And instead chose to go and do a press conference so he could get onto the airways" "During the state opening of parliament, my understanding is that he physically shoved one of our female MPs out of the way" "One of our male MPs challenged him on that" "It's Nigel Farage wants to make stuff up, that's up to him" My view: Farage skipped a major parliamentary speech to hold a press conference and get on air—a show of contempt for the chamber and the people elected to do its work. Then, according to Daisy Cooper, he misrepresented what happened when MPs challenged his conduct at the State Opening. That is Cooper’s point: Farage can invent his own version of events, but those who were there can tell the public what they say actually happened. Parliament deserves more respect than to be treated as an inconvenience when it is doing its job and a stage when the cameras are on.

When Daisy Cooper explains the Freedom of Movement with the EU rule that "If people come to this country and do not get a job in 3 months, they can be kicked out" Zia Yusuf interrupts mocking the idea that the British government would kick anyone out - that doesn't mean the rule doesn't exist, it was Zia Yusuf former party, the Conservatives, who chose not to apply the rule Daisy Cooper, "Since Brexit there was the Boris wave of people coming here and settling here, which is very different to Freedom of Movement where people went in and out of countries depending where jobs and work are" "And because of the botched Brexit deal, we scrapped the mechanism of returning asylum seekers to the first EU country they arrived in" "The EU has just agreed a migration pact for asylum seekers, at the moment, we're not part of it" "The small boats crisis only started in 2016" Fiona Bruce then jumps in to dismiss the comment, "Not everybody will agree with you on that Daisy" My view: The 2016 referendum was not a perfect, settled expression of the country’s will for all time. It was a campaign marked by claims that have since been challenged, and a decision made before the public could see the practical costs of leaving. Now we have years of evidence: new barriers for businesses, weaker economic performance and a more uncertain security landscape. People are entitled to weigh what they were told against what has actually happened. There is nothing undemocratic about continuing to make the case for change. Those who opposed closer European integration did not abandon their arguments after earlier votes; they kept campaigning because they believed the decision was wrong. The same right belongs to people who now believe Brexit has damaged the country. That does not mean pretending the 2016 vote never happened. It means recognising that democracy is an ongoing conversation, and that voters can reconsider their choices when circumstances and evidence have changed. And Fiona Bruce’s questioning keeps revealing a clear instinct: whenever the case for closer ties with Europe is made, she seems quick to cast doubt on it—as though Brexit is beyond challenge and any attempt to repair its damage must be treated with suspicion. She may frame that as neutral scrutiny, but she rarely applies the same scepticism to the promises made by Brexit supporters. It comes across less as impartial examination than as a defence of the Brexit status quo. Burnham opening up this debate is a welcome step. Britain should be able to discuss closer ties with Europe on their merits: whether they can help rebuild growth, strengthen our security and give the country more influence in a world that has become far less predictable.

Alastair Campbell, "I will say to Zia Yusuf and his friend Nigel Farage" "Brexit has taken 6-8% out of economy" "If we had not left, the Chancellor today would have had £90 billion more to spend" "He could have doubled the defence budget" Fiona Bruce, "That is a projection Alastair, no one can be sure about that" Alastair Campbell, "And added 50% to the health budget as well" "The people who gave us Brexit now want to give you another set of false promises" "Do not fall for them because they are a bunch of conmen. They're being found out. And its one reason why Nigel Farage will never be Prime Minister of this country" My view: Fiona Bruce was quick to dismiss Campbell’s figures as “a projection”. But that shouldn’t be a way to shut down the argument. Campbell was making a point about what Brexit has cost the country: on his figures, a 6–8% hit to the economy means around £90 billion less for the Chancellor to spend—enough, he said, to double the defence budget or increase health spending by 50%. And remember what Nigel Farage was saying in 2016: that even without a trade deal, Britain would be better off than it was then. The evidence points the other way. The OBR estimates that Brexit will leave UK productivity around 4% lower than it would have been inside the EU; other studies put the economic hit higher. That means we’re poorer than we would have been had we stayed. So yes, these are estimates—but the claims made by Brexit’s champions were projections too. Bruce’s caveat shouldn’t obscure the central question Campbell raised: how much has Brexit cost us, and what could that money have done for the country?

Daisy Cooper, "The world has changed, the Defence Secretary said last week that we could be just 1,000 days away from war, that is a stark and sobering warning" "We need to get serious about growing our economy and defending our country" "And when you've got an unreliable partner in the White House, and you've got Putin that has plans for Europe, we have to chose our mates" "We need strength in numbers" "If we can work with our European allies we can grow our economy, defend our country and we have got to get serious about our future" My view: Security and economic strength are increasingly bound together. Europe cannot afford to wait until a crisis forces it to coordinate: working more closely with our neighbours means pooling capabilities, strengthening defence industries and making our economies more resilient. The UK should be helping lead that effort. In an unstable world, choosing our allies and building dependable partnerships is a matter of national security.