Quotes of All Topics . Occasions . Authors
A Final Say referendum on the Brexit that actually lies in front of us will give everyone a tangible and decisive vote. I and most people, Brexiteers and Remainers alike, want the same thing - the best for the UK.
I think that the European Union negotiators have gotten a shock. They were shocked when they realised the Brexit trade negotiations were not just going to be a continuation of those that happened under Theresa May.
Freedom of movement in Europe has been all but abandoned as a cause in British politics. Brexit was far more about freedom of movement than our exact trading relationship with the EU, and the electorate rejected it.
If you're racist and you come out and say it's because of Brexit, then great. Then I know definitely not to talk to you, rather than you give me a sideways glance in a shop. Now I know, I've seen your Facebook post.
People talk often of Brexit as the biggest challenge since the Second World War. It is certainly proving to be a lot more difficult and complicated than was promised by those who won the referendum campaign in 2016.
The day after Brexit I had a moment when someone said, 'Don't you want to go back to your own country?' I wasn't 100 per cent sure if he was thinking he was being kind? I was like, 'Um... this is my home, thank you.'
I chose as the campaign logo a blue rose, which means 'make possible the impossible.' I think the British with Brexit, then the Americans with the election of Donald Trump, did that: They made possible the impossible.
In the absence of honesty from the Conservative party leadership, it is Labour's duty to spell out the very real consequences of a no-deal Brexit. It is also our duty to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent it.
No amount of extra civil servants recruited to deliver Brexit will make up for a lack of rational debate or for political judgments distorted by a desire to sound tough in order to appeal to narrow sectional interests.
Our interests lie in attracting added value and talent to France as a result of Brexit, but also in having a balanced relationship with Great Britain. We must not sacrifice the short term for our bilateral relationship.
Once we can Brexit delivered, we can then start talking about those other issues which are much better at bringing people together. We will talk about local health provision, education, farming policing and the economy.
On 'Question Time,' I've noticed great anger from the audience. When we discuss Brexit, emotions range from white-hot fury to cold, grey apathy. As soon as we move off Brexit, debate is much more nuanced and considered.
Just when we need a strong government, what do we see? Division. Chaos. And failure. No credible plan for Brexit, no solution to prevent a hard border in Ireland and no majority in Parliament for the Chequers proposals.
For me, the most ironic aspect of the Brexit debate has been right-wing Brexiteers speaking loftily about parliamentary sovereignty, when they have never backed MPs having a fuller involvement in how our country is run.
We were right to say from the outset that E.U. citizens should not be treated as bargaining chips but should have their rights guaranteed immediately. We were right to call on the government to publish a plan for Brexit.
After Brexit, the E.U. will no longer legislate for us. All laws will be passed by the U.K. parliament and the devolved legislatures. Parliament will be truly sovereign, with the freedom to accept or reject any new rules.
Systematic social and environmental deregulation, and the economics of austerity while enriching the rich, will be the markers of Farage/Tory politics after Brexit. Singapore-on-Sea for the rich; degradation for the rest.
Brexit makes me uncomfortable. It feels like we're in no-man's-land, and it doesn't feel safe. People who voted to leave did so because of the scaremongering. It was all about immigration, but immigration is a great thing.
Once the country voted for Brexit, I wanted the prime minister to make a success of it, but I knew that unpicking 45 years of entwinement with the E.U. would be impossible without our elected lawmakers being fully involved.
The group For Our Future's Sake will tour key marginal constituencies to ensure first that young people register to vote then, second, that they use that vote tactically to keep their hope of a final Brexit referendum alive.
The only way Brexit might have worked without an economic collapse is the Norway model of close integration with the structure of the European customs union and single market without being part of the formal E.U. institutions.
It looks like caring for the most vulnerable in our society could be yet another casualty of Brexit, with over-stretched and potentially unsafe care services and a reduction in female employment another unforeseen consequence.
Ultimately, Boris Johnson and the political and financial support behind his Brexit project are probably the biggest threat to both British democracy and the post-war welfare state settlement we've faced in the post-war period.
The Brexit decision is a decision we see very negatively. But, of course, it has been taken by the British people, so now we have to find a way to deal with it, and from our point of view, it is important to avoid a hard Brexit.
Brexiteers often hark back to the blitz. Maybe they think the 'Britain standing alone' motif adds much-needed heroic purpose to a Brexit future in which Britain stands without trading partners or allies to tackle climate change.
I challenge the Government to come clean on the cost of Brexit. The reason they can't look us in the eye, it's because they know this will leave us worse off and with less control. It's a gross abuse of civil service impartiality.
With Brexit, and I think the extraordinary strain it's put on our constitution and our representative democracy, I do sometimes feel like I'm in the middle of the 17th Century, when you are standing up for the rights of Parliament.
The day after Britain voted to leave the European Union, I woke up determined to make a success of Brexit. I was surprised by how quickly I went to acceptance of the result, without passing through any of the prior stages of grief.
If anything, one would think we learn from Brexit is we need a strong, stable banking system, not one to repeal the consumer bureau and repeal Dodd-Frank and give Wall Street what it wants. That would be the worst kind of response.
Including myself, it is now clear that there is a significant group of Conservative MPs who think that a People's Vote - a vote on the final form Brexit will take, is absolutely indispensable for the future wellbeing of our country.
In the wake of the United Kingdom's vote to 'Brexit' the E.U., we Europeans will indeed have to rethink how our Union works; but we know very well what we need to work for. We know what our principles, interests, and priorities are.
Notice of leaving the E.U. under Article 50, for which most of us voted, provides a mechanism for extending the negotiating period by agreement if this is necessary. It is not to undermine Brexit to insist it is carried out correctly.
If Parliament is voting overwhelmingly against leaving the European Union without a deal but is voting in favour of a softer Brexit, then I don't think it's sustainable to ignore Parliament's position and therefore leave without a deal.
For all the farcical invoking of Blitz spirit, Brexit isn't merely an absurdist experiment in English nationalist nostalgia - it is the most audacious example yet of a futuristic Russian nationalism that seeks to divide and rule Europe.
The most important funder of the British Brexit campaign had odd Russian contacts. So did some cabinet ministers in Poland's supposedly anti-Russian, hard-right government, elected after a campaign marked by online disinformation in 2015.
Given the right to - given the opportunity to vote, I voted for Brexit because I've never approved really of the European Union, I never approved of it because of its attempts to confiscate national sovereignty in all the issues that matter.
The Brexit referendum showed us to be divided, and those of us who campaigned for remain have to accept that we lost. But that does not mean that we have to agree to the deal the prime minister has brought back - a deal that satisfies no one.
My position was that if the country could unite around a soft Brexit that would be the least worst way through. But it is now very clear that the country is not going to unite around a soft Brexit. There is nobody really advocating a soft Brexit.
I am worried about the Tory party because give or take the odd spasm we have always been seen as pragmatic, sensible, good at our job, sane, reasonable and having the interests of the whole country. Now it is beginning to look like a Brexit sect.
Brexit has changed everything in British politics - it has blown open a cosy, zombie-like closed world of Westminster parliamentary politics. It has broken open the traditional line between left and right, which was already an exhausted tradition.
The impact of Brexit is likely to be slow and incremental, hardly the sudden transformation that some Leave voters wanted. Immigrants will not disappear, and manufacturing will not immediately return to northern-English cities - quite the contrary.
What a travesty it is that the high priests of Leave in 2016, who insisted to all of us that Brexit would mean a return to parliamentary sovereignty, are undermining and circumventing parliamentary sovereignty in order to deliver their hard Brexit.
Boris Johnson tried to prorogue parliament to get his disaster of a Brexit through, bringing hundreds of thousands out onto the streets for the 'Stop The Coup' protests, and seeing his cynical strategy overturned by the Supreme Court in the process.
Already, even before we have left the EU, Brexit is damaging our country, our economy, our society and our standing in the world - damage that will be worsened by the kind of ruinous no deal being pledged by some who aspire to become prime minister.
Quite simply, without UKIP, there would not have been a referendum. I am convinced that the 'we want our country back, we want our borders back' message that we took across the country on an open-top double decker energised non-voters to back Brexit.
Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt have not been responsible. Instead they have vied in an arms race towards a more and more extreme form of Brexit. Deeper red lines, even more ludicrous promises, but absolutely no coherent or workable plan for the country.
As I've said many times, Vote Leave could only win because the Establishment's OODA loops are broken - as the Brexit negotiations painfully demonstrate daily - and they are systematically bad at decisions, and this created just enough space for us to win.
There are tradeoffs between independence and co-operation, between regulatory autonomy and market access. This means that compromises are necessary to deliver a pragmatic Brexit that protects jobs and living standards while respecting the referendum result.
At least from a national security standpoint, none of the problems the U.S. and U.K. face will become easier to solve if the U.K. is out of the E.U.; on the contrary, I fear that a 'Brexit' would only make our world even more dangerous and difficult to manage.
If parliament and government work together in their respective constitutional roles, and respect due processes, we will maximise our chances of making the right decisions as we encounter the many challenges, risks and opportunities Brexit poses for our country.