Think I'm watching on a slight delay, but have to say with considerable surprise that all four politicians in the #C4Brexit debate actually started with more facts than I expected
Barry Gardiner though... turned the unobtainium up to 11. Though good for him to recognise the need to deliver for both the 52 and 48 #C4Brexit
JRM failing the fact check though...
Lucas not easily able to rebut the view a second vote coming because she thinks the first delivered the wrong result. On this evidence a second vote wouldn't be easily won for remain
Probably unpopular view. Cleverly won by not getting dragged in as much as others, and making the deal the middle ground. But unconvincingly as nobody really made a positive and realistic case for what next #C4Brexit
Incidentally I have Caroline Lucas as the only panel member not to say anything obviously wrong or unobtainable. But also the one whose arguments didn't quite seem to resonate. These two things may be linked...
Some further reflections on the #C4Brexit debate - as ever with these things too many statements went unchallenged (e.g. JRM I am the only one supporting what the people voted for, Cleverly NHS dividend, though Gardiner's unicorns were challenged)
Gardiner's unicorns were the only suggestion of being able to improve the deal, so we weren't really talking practicalities. They also didn't talk of the coming years dominated by the relationship with the EU, or frankly much that was positive
Someone should also have called out the audience member saying treason, not doing so continues the debasement of political culture. As for the audience cheers for Lucas, it sounded like a few loud people rather than winning over the audience
Did the #C4Brexit really take us anywhere forward in terms of our understanding of Brexit or what happens next? Sadly probably not - since you'd have to go into detail. So a good try by C4, but on we go with nothing really changed... /end. more wine
