captain_blackadder

No, I merely pointed out a lack of transparency. I would have flat out said something along the lines of "he's a shill for the EU" if I felt that way, and the actual grant money itself is minimal. Besides, EU money rarely, if ever seems to affect the opinions of those who recieve it - there are those who work with the EU (such as MEP's) who voted themselves out of a job. Dougan himself wouldn't suddenly become irrelevant in the event of a leave vote, either.

It's like you're a broken record consttantly repeating the same "£350m!!!" "populist nationalism!!!" "people killing poles!!!" "I care about people killing remainers but not those killed by the IRA!!!" bollocks over and over again. I will provide evidence of the budget 'getting airtime', and it's influence in the polls. Do the rest of the research yourself, because it's clear that whatever I say means nothing to you, and therefore it's a waste of my time to continue.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0DVZ8UF6xA

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/21/has-george-osbornes-punishment-budget-terrified-britain-into-rem/

Oh, and as for the 'wave of hate crime', I think Mr O'Neill provides a valuable insight into said issue: http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/08/the-real-hate-crime-scandal/

Obviously someone who has a PhD in European Law and a lifetime of experience in said field is going to be an expert in it. I never denied this. But acting as if a. everyone else is a drooling moron in comparison and b. this is the only issue that you should have based your vote on is laughable.

Let's put this straight - both campaigns in this referendum produced misleading information. Now, if this is an issue for those wishing to overturn the result of the referendum, then surely the previous one should be examined as well? If you believe that the result is invalid due to dishonesty and therefore that this dishonesty matters, then it is a double-standard to accept the result of the 1975 referendum, but not this one. That, is hypocrisy.

E.g. Are you suggesting that, because you feel someone was dishonest 50 years ago, it can absolve others of responsibility for being dishonest now?

No, both official campaigns produced misleading material (£350m, Turkey joining the EU, Osborne's treasury figures + punishment budget that would never have passed through the commons, the Calais border to name a few). I just find it a little hypocritical given that we were taken in on false pretences (and I must admit I'm surprised that the media hasn't made more of this issue) and in some cases, outright lies from people like Heath (which I believe the anti-markeeters did attempt to point out) that it is wrong for us to leave due to misleading information being provided by the official Leave campaign. Of course this doesn't absolve anyone from lying, I just think that it is wrong to act as if Vote Leave are the only group who have been dishonest. I believe Dr North has actually pointed this out to you.

I guess, that in a way, some would see this as correcting a historical mistake, as would Dr North. Now I am aware that you may not be on the best of terms, but as both Professor Dougan and Dr North have been advising Parliamentary committees, I would suggest taking a look at his exit plan, as it seems to me that there are not many individuals that have some idea of what this country's post-Brexit plan is going to be, or what potential negotiations will occur.

Feel free to disregard my suggestion though, after all I had no part in the creation of Flexcit, and am simply someone who has read through it.