News

Over 70% of junior legal profession still wants to remain in the EU

By on
86

Legal Cheek’s survey of over 800 law students and lawyers delivers resounding result

The final countdown may have begun to the UK’s exit from the European Union on 29 March 2019 — but 71% of the junior end of the legal profession still want to remain part of the EU.

That is the eye-catching result of Legal Cheek’s exclusive Brexit survey of 839 law students and lawyers.

The next most popular version of Brexit among respondents was a Canada-style deal, which received the support of 12% surveyed. A hard Brexit on WTO rules got 9%, a Norway-style departure 6% and the Chequers deal just 2%.

The respondents to the survey were roughly half law students and half lawyers (including trainee solicitors and pupil barristers). There was very little variation in the overwhelmingly pro-Remain views of those studying law and those practising it; 70.9% of the former want to stay in the UK, and 70.7% of the latter. Preliminary results were presented to 200 students at Legal Cheek’s Friday event, ‘What does Brexit mean for future lawyers?’ at Linklaters.

The results show little change to a Legal Cheek survey that we conducted before the Brexit referendum which found 75% of the legal profession wanted to remain.

Brexit has been dominating the legal news of late, with lawyers involved in various legal challenges that broadly aim to prevent departure from the EU. The best chance of Remain supporters may be using these methods to bring about the necessary delays that would be needed to create time for a second referendum. Today a letter signed by 1,500 lawyers demands just this, arguing in favour of a ‘People’s Vote’.

Other pro-Remain lawyers take a more pragmatic view, expressing regret about the referendum result but respecting the democratic process that led to it, and concentrating their energies on making the best of what follows.

86 Comments

Ciaran Goggins

Sure they do! Anyone with a good job would agree, think is 3 million of me (never voted before) and 14 million others don’t have well paid jobs. So, see ya next April when the civil war breaks out;)

Anonymous

Well best wishes for April 2019 when you are magically offered a new high flying job along with the millions of others.

Anonymous

There’s 3 million of you? God help us.

Ciaran Goggins

There are 50 million behind them Tarquin.

Anonymous

‘People’s Vote’ a horribly Orwellian term, from the same crowd that brought us ‘New Labour’. Lawyers denying democracy is not a good look.

Anonymous

using the concept of “the people’s …” stinks of communism. Look at all the things that were justified under this notion…

Popper

The people got it wrong last time.

They should be given an opportunity to correct their mistake.

A concerned citizen

Unless you work at Dechert

Dechart Trainee

I’m off to Philly as soon as I qualify to join the ERISA litigation team. Yee-haw!

Anonymous

Don’t blame you mate, wouldn’t want to stay in the QV Street offices longer than I have to.

Anonymous

Good luck in Killadelphia. Recommend you buy a bulletproof vest.

Anonymous

Why all the hate for Dechert? Makes no sense. There are worse firms out there.

Anonymous

LMAOOOO hello HR

Ex Dechert Trainee now working in HR

HR people have feelings too you know :'(

Anonymous

Yeah mate maybe on the high street!

Anonymous

oooooooh, burn

Anonymous

Where do you work mate?

Anonymous

The EU admittedly generates a good deal of legal work and makes a good few lawyers quite rich.

But there are two things to say about that.

First, it is a very selfish attitude – the country is comprised not only of lawyers.

Second, not all economic activity is good – this is Bastiat’s famous “broken window fallacy” (I’m guessing Remainers won’t know it – educate yourselves and look it up). The reality is that much of the labour spent working through EU legal issues would be far better spent on something else – it would be better to decrease pointless legal work and encourage our youth to find cures for cancer, create great works of art, or travel to the stars.

Anonymous

I look forward to the day you have a ‘pointless’ legal dispute and can only find astronauts, artists and oncology experts…

Anonymous

With what money, dipshit

Also lol @ Brexiteers justifying their narrow-mindedness by recourse to this shit

Anonymous

Good argument. Well done.

Anonymous

Having a functioning brain is generally required for lawyers, so this isn’t surprising really.

Also really enjoyed Brexitard Anonymous @ 11.22 suggesting space travel, arts and healthcare are all so important given all three are going to be drastically hampered by Brexit.

Anonymous

Couldn’t care less if 150% of lawyers still want to remain, you still lost the vote

Anonymous

Eat my choad you little Englander

Anonymous

EU shill or just a random NPC? Sometimes it’s kind of hard to tell.

Anonymous

Wrong again cockstain.

Anonymous

*Correction*

70% of the junior legal profession want something that isn’t going to happen.

Anonymous

What did the trainees at Greenberg Glusker have to say? Top firm.

Greenberg Glusker NQ

They’re too busy doing DD to go on the internet.

Be patient please, we’ll run out of work for them soon enough, and then they’ll be in a position to get back to you.

Anonymous

Anybody know what’s the NQ rate at Greenberg Glusker these days? Top titan of a firm.

Anonymous

Recently bumped to £130k on NQ in the London office. Not sure about the US.

Anonymous

Anybody noticed that EU-supporters write with the same crudeness of language and uniformity of thought displayed by Antifa?

How sensitive they all are and how easily triggered? How intolerant of rational debate? How they send their little internet thugs to downvote dissenting comments – just as the Chinese communists do?

Wonder why that is?

We all need to wake up to who is behind all this and wake up fast.

Anonymous

Now I’m scared. Please… tell me who is behind it! Is it Chinese communists?

Anonymous

Lol go back and watch your telly

Anonymous

Brexitards are literally trying to trash the UK because they are so triggered by foreigners.

The overwhelming majority of well educated successful people are EU supporters so it’s quite hard to see why you think they can’t write or reason properly. I think we all know that the incoherent fat gammon down the pub is likely to be a Brexiteer while a highly educated surgeon or scientist is almost certainly a remainer.

Anonymous

Remainer here.

I think it’s more accurate to say that the defining feature of remainers is that they are often very conventional and tend to be quite invested in trying to achieve conventional social status and tend to believe the controlled media.

Brexiters on the other hand tend to be more skeptical of conventional education and the controlled media.

There’s probably an overlap between these tendencies and education, since education tends to inculcate conventional viewpoints and values.

Actually I’m a remainer and in fact if there was a second referendum I would change my vote to Brexit because I was misled last time to think there would be an economic crisis after the Brexit vote and that turned out to be a lie.

But I suppose other remainers may see things differently.

Anonymous

You clearly are not a remainer.

Brexiteers believe anyone who tells them what they want to hear – they cannot apply critical thought beyond ‘this is what I already think therefore it is right’. Immigrants are the reason for a poorly funded NHS? Makes sense. The EU is the reason we have loads of Muslims? Nigel ‘straight talking’ Farage told me so it must be true. Simple solutions to big problems. You see this in the thought-terminating Brexitard tropes of ‘you lost get over it’ and ‘I don’t care how we leave just get on and do it’. ‘Just get rid of all the immigrants’ being another.

Remainers tend to be able to understand that the world is very complex and there are no simple answers to anything in politics – hence being sceptical of snake oil salesmen like Rees Mogg, Alexander de Pfeffel Johnson and Nigel ‘wanted by the FBI’ Farage who offer nothing but sound bites and easy answers.

Education helps you realise that you don’t know everything and that everything is pretty damn complex, thus helping you to think more critically about areas in which you don’t know much. On the one hand, for example, you have Nigel telling you the NHS is collapsing because of migrants. On the other hand you have literally every single doctor and nurse in the NHS saying it is collapsing because there is no money and they can’t get enough people and that both these things have got worse since Brexit.

I don’t know why I’m bothering writing this so I’ll go back to work now.

Anonymous

“I don’t know why I’m bothering writing this so I’ll go back to work now.”

That’s probably for the best mate.

Start to think outside the box, though, and you might earn enough money to be your own boss.

Just sayin’.

Anonymous

“I don’t know why I’m bothering writing this so I’ll go back to work now.”

It’s the effect of propaganda and conditioning.

Normal free people don’t have this kind of irrational compulsion.

Anonymous

It’s actually quite funny how on message you all are today – in fantasy Brexit land Remainers are all sheep mindlessly following their rulers despite simultaneously being evil overlords controlling and oppressing the poor little Brexiteers. Hm. I think someone is triggered that people who actually get paid to think critically (ie lawyers) all understand Brexit is stupid.

Anonymous

Lol calm down mate just messin with yah

Anonymous

All your points focus entirely on arguments of immigration, which is highly unlikely to be the reason why any educated person would vote Brexit. I know many highly educated and successful people who voted out and not one argument they raise discusses immigration. Some of those were individuals were given access through IT systems to sensitive information about the future plans of the EU and also the EU army, which caused deep concern.

Its far to simplistic to drill all of it down to racism.

Anonymous

Hang on, is this a Brexiter complaining about a lack of rational debate?!

Please point out the rational, fact based, even vaguely sane Vote Leave arguments. I don’t remember a single one from the referendum campaign. All I remember is: £350m; evil foreigners; and the nasty ECJ.

If you’re a brexiter arguing in favour of rational debate you might as well be a vegan in leather shoes (or Farage complaining about career politicians!). Your clueless hypocrisy is as obvious as it is embarrassing.

Fat Gammon Brexiter

Brexit means Brexit you c*nt

Mr Barstow

THAT IS RACIST!!!!!

Anonymous

Yes, the readership of this website is almost entirely millennial metropolitans (and, to boot, mostly students). Almost all, if not all, will never have been alive to see a time when the UK was not an EUMS. If anything, I’m surprised the result in your survery wasn’t more heavily in favour of remain.

“Project fear” is pretty much entirely intended to influence the aforementioned demographic. If enough so-called voices of authority tell you that your job will disappear if we leave the EU, and especially if you’re a typically risk-averse lawyer type, you will naturally fear the change entailed in leaving.

But most people in this country simply do not see any benefit from membership of the EU, and the fact is that as a net contributor we do stand to be able to reallocate funds to causes we judge more worthy in the future through leaving. Most people in this country are not employed in the financial services sector, and so the concerns of a few well-heeled lawyers are a terrible basis on which to decide an issue like this.

There is a huge world out there of countries with which we currently have to trade on the basis of rules set by an inefficient conglomerate of countries with divided interests, dominated by German auto industry and French agriculture interests, hampered perennially by disproportionately powerful bit players (e.g. Wallonia). Any critical reasoning would conclude that tangible benefits are on offer, even if weighted towards the long term.

We have embarked on this project as the result of a democratic exercise in which there was more engagement than in any other vote we as a country have ever held. It is completely right that we see this through, and strive to achieve the very real benefits on offer as a result.

Anonymous

I recently moved out of the UK and I’m really genuinely looking forward to seeing smug pseuds like you try to explain why everything is great from April onwards.

Anonymous

Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Anonymous

That’s the ‘rational debate’ that Remainers can’t do is it?

Horatio 🇬🇧

Yes. Enjoy your kilometres and centimetres and getting beer served by the 0.5l.

Britain doesn’t need the likes of you who hate this country so much.

Dr Bob

Nurse! Horatio forgot his meds and is out of his cot again!

Anonymous

Again, crude and disrespectful.

This commentator expressed his or her opinion in a reasoned and civilised manner.

You respond with rudeness and ignorance.

Yet another reason why the pro-EU faction cannot win hearts and minds.

Anonymous

““Project fear” is pretty much entirely intended to influence the aforementioned demographic. If enough so-called voices of authority tell you that your job will disappear if we leave the EU, and especially if you’re a typically risk-averse lawyer type, you will naturally fear the change entailed in leaving.”

ie – “I am very clever and these silly millennials just believe what they are told by authority.” Classic patronising Brexiteer guff dressed up as ‘rational debate’. I thought Brexiteers love telling it how it is but you all seem to get triggered when someone does so without agreeing with you. Apparently that only applies to traffic jams being caused by immigrants and fake new on the side of busses.

Anonymous

That paragraph you’ve quoted is just stating that a natural response to being told x is y. Perhaps the statement is wrong, seems you think so, but I think the “rational debate” you suggest is spurious is actually made elsewhere in the original comment, and you’ve just cherry-picked an expositional piece.

Anonymous

– “Yes, the readership of this website is almost entirely millennial metropolitans (and, to boot, mostly students)…”

Ad hominem: it isn’t relevant what the demographic of this website is. But if we go down this route, am I allowed to point out that one of the strongest predictors of Brexit voting constituencies were the areas of the most uneducated?

Source: http://www.theweek.co.uk/89378/fact-check-did-uk-s-better-educated-vote-remain

– “If enough so-called voices of authority tell you that your job will disappear if we leave… you will naturally fear the change entailed in leaving.”

Sophisticated way of repeating Michael Gove’s mantra of “I think the country has had enough of experts.”

I’d rather trust the arguments of 1,500 of the Britain’s top lawyers, 60 of Britain’s business leaders, the British Medical Association, 29 Nobel Prize winning laureates etc. – all of whom in the past two or three months say this is a stupid decision. When the widest coalition of voices are united in opposition, this isn’t a conspiracy formed from vested interests. Perhaps the experts in their collective wisdom have a point. It takes utter arrogance to dismiss them.

Sources:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/05/uks-top-lawyers-urge-theresa-may-to-back-second-brexit-vote

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/04/uk/business-leaders-vote-brexit-deal-intl/index.html

https://www.bma.org.uk/collective-voice/influence/europe/brexit/bma-brexit-briefings/a-health-service-under-threat-the-dangers-of-a-no-deal-brexit

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/oct/23/hard-brexit-cripple-uk-science-nobel-scientists-may-juncker

– “But most people in this country simply do not see any benefit from membership of the EU… most people in this country are not employed in the financial services sector”

You’re right – most people don’t work in financial services. Some people work in car manufacturing: Mini will be shutting their Oxford plant for weeks to coincide with Brexit in March 2019 (Autotrader – Brexit concerns grow as decline in UK car manufacturing continues). Some people work in healthcare: Brexit makes the staffing crisis worse (Financial Times – Britain faces nursing shortfall as EU recruits stay away). 70% of UK GDP comes from people working in the services sector: the government has confirmed no-deal means UK law firms will immediately lose special status and the right to represent clients at all European courts and bodies (Legal Futures – No-deal Brexit “will strip EEA lawyers of special status”.)

Sources:
https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/brexit-concerns-grow-decline-uk-car-manufacturing-continues

https://www.ft.com/content/f0c23fdc-ce18-11e8-9fe5-24ad351828ab

https://www.legalfutures.co.uk/latest-news/no-deal-brexit-will-strip-eea-lawyers-of-special-status

– “…the fact is that as a net contributor we do stand to be able to reallocate funds to causes we judge more worthy in the future through leaving.”

Are we talking about the “Brexit dividend”, which simply doesn’t exist because, as the Institute of Fiscal Studies say, the lost economic growth alone means £55 billion of extra borrowing over the next 15 years?

Even if, being generous, there is £350 million a week in additional funding, not much trickles down to the public once the UK stumps up to replace every benefit and governmental agency lost. The European Medicines Agency (which is relocated from Canary Wharf to Amsterdam), the Gallileo satellites project, infrastructure funding, Regional Development Fund subsidies, the European Banking Authority, Erasmus, and more.

In five years time, we’ll look back to when Britain used to pay a reduced membership fee – with a substantial rebate – to access to wide benefits. Now we’ll be paying even more – but without the say or influence over how anything is run.

– “There is a huge world out there of countries with which we currently have to trade on the basis of rules set by an inefficient conglomerate of countries with divided interests…”

Great, let’s set fire to 759 (and counting) separate international treaties which we now need to renegotiate. It’s worth noting that since the vote, the EU has reached trade agreements with Japan and Mexico and more. At least we’ll get to enjoy these for a few months. (Financial Times – “After Brexit: the UK will need to renegotiate at least 759 treaties”)

How are the diplomatic efforts of the UK, in renegotiating agreements without the full force of the Single Market, going for us then?

Well the UK’s post-Brexit proposals to enter the World Trade Organisation – on substantially similar terms as the country enjoyed whilst in the EU – has been vetoed by 20 countries, including Russia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States. Why should these countries give Britain the same preferential deal, now that the country no longer has the full force of 27 Member States behind them? Now just wait until Britain starts negotiating bilateral trade agreements anew (Liam Fox said we should be done with these by now – the fact is, we haven’t started…). (New Europe – “Russia leads 20 nations blocking smooth WTO Brexit process”).

It isn’t just in trade where Britain will renegotiate vastly inferior agreements either. In aviation, the United States is demanding ownership and control rules as a condition to allow transatlantic flights. (The Financial Times – “US offers UK inferior open skies deal after Brexit”). This is just one of the 65 worldwide transport agreements which need to be redone – again, we haven’t started this yet. (Financial Times – “US offers UK inferior open skies deal after Brexit”).

Sources:

https://www.ft.com/content/f1435a8e-372b-11e7-bce4-9023f8c0fd2e

https://www.neweurope.eu/article/russia-leads-20-nations-blocking-smooth-wto-brexit-process/

https://www.ft.com/content/9461157c-1f97-11e8-9efc-0cd3483b8b80

– “We have embarked on this project as the result of a democratic exercise in which there was more engagement than in any other vote we as a country have ever held.”

Based on lies and misconceptions peddled by snake-oil salesmen who ran away and absolved themselves of responsibility a day after the vote. And where the Leave.EU campaign is now under investigation from our very own National Crime Agency.

– “… and strive to achieve the very real benefits on offer as a result.”

Can someone please tell me a genuine benefit which we’ve seen since the vote? A real concrete benefit – not “blue passports”, intangible fluff like “sovereignty”, or wild speculation into future after Britain voluntarily erects barriers from the largest trading bloc on the planet?

Anonymous

Firstly, thank you for taking the time to respond properly. This is an unfortunately rancorous debate, so I do appreciate the effort to debate somewhat reasonably and (!) to source your statements. Forgive me but I do not have the time to fully source my response – happy for someone else to provide links but for now I’m just going to provide my rebuttal free-form.

1. The demographic matters when one is pointing out that one demographic in particular was polled, and then suggesting that demographic is susceptible to a particular argument, then seeking to point out the flaws in that argument. Your response is just a slur on leave voters as uneducated, with no further substance, no reasoning as to why your comment on the demographic might be considered relevant. Reverse snobbery is nothing new in this debate, and most people intuitively see it as bad faith, so I’ll move on.

2. Sneer all you want, only the naïve would deny there are levers of public opinion which the establishment can from time to time lean on, and the most moving is the professed expert saying doom. Large swathes of economists, the Treasury and the BoE all said that a leave *vote result* would cause, variously, a recession, or the need for an emergency budget, etc. None of this was true, of course. Economists are notoriously bad at forecasting, and we’re subject to global boom and bust no matter what (or would you say that Labour caused the 2008 crash?) A sensible prognosis on the UK economy would be that we may face some turbulence, but the markets have effectively priced in disruption now and the worst we’re likely to see is the fall in the pound which has already happened, and has some positive effects anyway.

3. Telling that the first thing you mention is Mini’s announcement that they would slightly shift a factory closure which happens anyway every year – makes plenty of business sense to have that annual closure at a time when it may be that new border check processes are being instituted (no reason to suspect that will actually cause much disruption – it’s the kind of bureaucratic exercise which happens on a fairly routine basis).

Also, if you are a lawyer in a law firm, you’ll understand how meaningless your reference to “[losing] special status and the right to represent clients at all European courts and bodies” is. How many UK based lawyers do you know who regularly do this. Now, how many of those are for some reason unable to cross-qualify in Ireland, as many already have using a straightforward and hassle-free workaround. And you acknowledge this may only be relevant in the unlikely event of no-deal anyway!

I agree a deal should include a focus on services.

4. 350 million a week is a credible figure in terms of the increased funds available for *discretionary* UK government spending without any extra funding assuming even flat growth. Anyway, the maths is very hard to debate because, as you’ll know if you’ve ever dealt with accountants, everyone picks different accounting treatments and it becomes a bit meaningless.

5. Most of the large number of treaties you mention are very easily adopted between the UK and the relevant counterparty as, obviously, nothing has really changed to make e.g. air travel between the UK and, say, Singapore suddenly more risky. You’re highlighting an administrative burden and saying it’s a reason to stay – I suggest a good analogy is a kidnap victim pointing to the difficulty of undoing restraints as a very good reason to stay with his or her captor.

Of course, when it comes to more substantial trading relationships, these will be a more substantial negotiation exercise, but you seem to be missing the point that this is what Brexiteers *want* – we need to be free to trade on our own terms, and while we’re as yet legally unable to negotiate FTAs, the US have (I’m sure you’re aware) said this is something they’re very interested in doing.

6. It’s a tired argument that somehow suggests the referendum was illegitimate because some people may have said some exaggerated things, or this private individual may have done that administratively wrong thing. We’re seeing exactly the same across the Atlantic with the pathetic suggestion that the election of Trump was illegitimate because some naughty people exposed the blatant hypocrisy of some of the campaigners on one side.

We get it, you don’t like the outcome. Not everyone does. Doesn’t change what happened though, and you’re wasting your breath because I’m really sorry but Brexit is going to happen now.

7. As people on your side of the debate love to point out when it comes to the “Project Fear” non-consequences, we haven’t left yet. Tangible benefits will, as I say, likely be long-term (whereas the purported disastrous disadvantages are conspicuously centred on the difficulty of actually getting out, viz. above). Most people seem able to grasp this so I’ll leave it there.

Anonymous

Great comment.

It’s important to get through to young people, in particular, that there is a whole debate out there – beyond “Project Fear” – that powerful interests are not allowing them to hear. Also to let dissident students know that there are people in the profession who share their views. It’s not as monolithic as they think.

Hopefully they will be empowered to really think through these issues for themselves.

Anonymous

Any independent thought leads one to the conclusion that Brexit is stupid. 52% of the country voted for it but you’re pretending it’s some martyred minority.

Of course Brexiteers are a minority in the legal profession – it’s like professing belief that the earth is square and seriously calls into question someone’s cognitive ability when they buy into the nonsense. There is no cogent pro-Brexit argument out there short of entering into terrible one sided trade deals with America and maybe joining TPP.

Anonymous

You have failed to provide any argument here. Again, all you appear to be capable of is rudeness and ad hominems.

Don’t you understand that your faction lost, so that if you wish to change people’s minds you actually have to have some kind of reasoned and fact-based argument?

Anonymous

“It’s important to get through to young people, in particular, that there is a whole debate out there – beyond “Project Fear” – that powerful interests are not allowing them to hear. Also to let dissident students know that there are people in the profession who share their views. It’s not as monolithic as they think.“

There’s no argument here either is there.

At this point all we can do is take comfort in all the studies that show Brexit voting areas will mostly be much more heavily hit by Brexit than the remain areas.

Anonymous

Mate quit the propaganda we’re so tired of it. So boring. No one believes you anymore.

Anonymous

“Any independent thought”? I don’t think so.

It’s telling how little anyone cares to voice positive reasons to continue EU membership. All remainers these days care to do are speculate and fear-monger, but you never hear people saying that the EU legislative system is fantastic, or that the ECJ is wonderful, or that Junker is an incredible leader, or that EU rules are marvelous, or that the EU budget is really well spent.

At most, you might find one or two masochists trying to defend the premise of the single market. And it’s not an awful idea, in theory, it’s just that its most attractive elements are completely achievable without all the other rubbish. Financial services are a case in point – common regulatory standards (see MiFID, EMIR etc) are an ok idea, and of course improving access / limiting tariffs for those with equivalent regulatory standards, but we could achieve those things with quite limited treaties, and could seek to extend them to much “better” markets (New York, Singapore, Hong Kong, etc. etc.).

Basically, people arguing remain are just screaming about the supposed horrors of leaving a convoluted set of agreements (the scariest element is undoubtedly just untangling the mess), while people arguing to get on with Brexit usually have some positive end-point arguments – the status quo really isn’t some heady dreamland, and never will be while we have this debate hanging over us, so the only way is forwards and, as the Speccie quite rightly put it, out and into the world.

Anonymous

Most people who voted Leave have a rubbish life. Their current predicament before the referendum was unlikely to change. They’re too lazy to re-train or commit to years of hard graft to improve their prospects.

Instead, they ticked the Leave box and crossed their fingers in the hope their lives will improve. It’s easier to blame faceless Europe than look in the mirror and confront the poor life decisions that placed them in their position.

I’m not interested in stories of outliers that voted Leave. We know who the bulk of voters were.

Anonymous

“Most people who voted Leave have a rubbish life”

Clever argument. Well done.

Anonymous

Don’t you have a Tommy Robinson march to attend?

Anonymous

Ooh another clever argument. How can the EU produce so much cleverness all in one day!

Anonymous

Quotas.

Anonymous

I snorted at the quotas remark. Well played, Sir.

BREXITKRIEG

Fuck off and choke on choad little Tommy Englander

Ciaran Goggins

Wearing my poppy with pride.

Anonymous

And are therefore lesser beings who’s vote should count less than the educated self serving Eurocentric elite, non?

Anonymous

VOTE LEAVE

TAKE CONTROL

WINNING SO HARD

Anonymous

One sentence for you: will not be retained as an NQ.

Anonymous

I serious doubt the poster wants to be “an [sic] NQ” in your scuzzy little solicitor firm mate

Anonymous

PS What’s with the inability to use the indefinite article? I thought you little cubicle monkeys were supposed to have “an eye for detail”, as your HR departments would put it?

Anonymous

Don’t be harsh – may not necessarily be a native speaker

#generationdrynites

It’s generation Drynites again who want to remain wearing a nappy to bed because it’s the safest thing to do!

Or they could grow up, leave the Drynite behind and risk sleeping without it. Yes the sheets could get wet, or they might discover that they have grown up and can now sleep in any bed without fear!

Jenny (18)

It’s not a nappy.

It’s a pull up!

Big Boy

You keep telling that to your Barbie, hun.

Jenny (18)

Don’t patronise me!

#peoplesvoteremain

Big Boy

Says the girl who still wears the bed…

Jenny (18)

I do not! I never said that!

Anonymous

Speaking to the younger British men here. I’m going to keep it simple and not get distracted because this is important.

What you’ve got to remember is this. The EU isn’t your friend and doesn’t like you (this is true for British men generally and Englishmen specifically).

It’s also true that the British government isn’t your friend and doesn’t like you either.

(Sorry about that. I appreciate it’s not an ideal situation.)

The difference is this: once we bring democratic power back home through Brexit, we can hold the British government to account through the democratic process, and we can replace it if necessary.

This is the most basic and fundamental truth and is exactly why global interest groups and their lackeys are so agitated by Brexit.

Join the conversation

Related Stories