Your support helps us to tell the story
In my reporting on women's reproductive rights, I've witnessed the critical role that independent journalism plays in protecting freedoms and informing the public.
Your support allows us to keep these vital issues in the spotlight. Without your help, we wouldn't be able to fight for truth and justice.
Every contribution ensures that we can continue to report on the stories that impact lives
![Kelly Rissman](https://static.independent.co.uk/static-assets/support-us/kelly-rissman.png)
Kelly Rissman
US News Reporter
Prime Minister Johnson insists he will refuse to ask for any delay with Brexit. “I think the British public really want us to get out. They don’t want more dither and delay.”
May I respectfully remind him that 17.4 million people is not the same as “the British public”. It is just over a quarter of the population of 66 million. If he was bringing less belligerence to the debate he would add, “But I also understand that almost half the British public do not want us to get out. They want us to remain in the EU.”
Dominic Cummings (you’d think) would be the first to advise him that the most powerful thing he could do right now (and become a hero in the eyes of the majority) would be to let the people decide, as parliament has not been able to, after three years.
The government should bring in a bill for a second referendum with three clear options on the polling card: leave with no deal; leave with a deal; remain.
Alison Hackett
Co Dublin, Ireland
EU has a say in Article 50
Parliament talks as if an extension of the Brexit deadline flows automatically from the vote to stop Brexit without a deal. Of course, it doesn’t, because it is subject to EU agreement. Does anyone know what parliament’s position is, if an extension is refused? I have heard none stated.
But I would think it at least possible if not probable that the EU will refuse, for the obvious reason that extra time serves no purpose given the parties’ current positions. Parliament has rejected the draft deal on the table and the EU refuses to negotiate further. What is there left to talk about?
The only thing that’s changed since the last extension is the parliamentary vote not to leave without a deal. This will only harden the EU’s stance. If the EU has consistently refused further negotiation with the threat of no deal present, why would it start offering concessions with the threat removed? To facilitate the UK’s departure? THE EU DOESN’T WANT THE UK TO LEAVE!
Parliament has left itself only two options: remain or stand on its head and sign the withdrawal agreement as is. Both have been discussed ad nauseam and only require a vote, so either can be implemented on 31 October.
Name and address supplied
In Nice with his trotters up
In response to the article on placing a degree of blame on the chaos of Westminster on David Cameron, I fully concur.
John V Redmond
Bristol
Let’s move forward
History has taught the world that although fascism always fails, a country held in its grip by its right-wing leaders will stand still in time as the world goes forward. In accommodating an EU referendum in June 2016, a referendum which was full of lies and misinformation about eastern European migration, Boris Johnson’s far-right strategies and deceit have held the United Kingdom in limbo for over three years as the world moves on.
It is time to put English nationalism back into its cage and to rejoin the world. The problem is that the UK is populated by 67.6 million people, 53 million of whom are English. I fear that the remaining 14.6 million of Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish are not enough to hold the UK together.
Vance Broad
Port Talbot, Wales
Mugabe inspiration
I suspect Robert Mugabe has chosen to die now so that he can turn in his grave at the way Boris Johnson is giving self-aggrandising dictatorship a bad name.
Mike Shearing
Southall, west London
Trousers and skirts in equal measure
Priory School in Lewes, East Sussex is to be commended for seeking to promote gender equality with school uniform, but as so often happens in cases like this, has gone about it the wrong way.
It has decided that gender neutrality should be based on the boys’ uniform. True gender equality would have been achieved very simply and at no detriment to any of the students by allowing both boys and girls to choose whether to wear a skirt or a pair of trousers and vary their choice from time to time if they wish.
Ian Hurdley
Ferndown, Dorset
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments