This month ICM have done parallel telephone and online polls. For voting intention the figures are almost exactly the same – topline figures are

ICM Phone: CON 38%, LAB 33%, LDEM 7%, UKIP 13%, GRN 3%
ICM Online: CON 36%, LAB 31%, LDEM 7%, UKIP 16%, GRN 4%

ICM have exactly the same Conservative lead on both modes, though the level of UKIP support is higher in the online poll (a long standing contrast between different polling modes). The Conservative lead in the phone poll is back up to five points after a neck-and-neck poll last month, not reflecting the trend of a falling Tory lead we’ve seen in other polling.

In EU referendum polling ICM found the usual, familiar gap between telephone and online samples – it’s down from the fifteen to twenty point gulf at the tail end of last year, but there’s still a steady contrast of seven or eight points.

ICM Phone: REMAIN 48%, LEAVE 41%, DK 11%
ICM Online: REMAIN 43%, LEAVE 44%, DK 13%

Tables should up tomorrow, once Martin Boon has wrestled with ICM’s new website.


240 Responses to “Parallel online and phone polls from ICM”

1 2 3 4 5
  1. @OldNat

    I’d overlooked somewhat the fact that the SNP – as the Scottish Government – were able to call on substantial civil service resources.

    However, ‘Leave’ have big financial backers – surely someone could have been paid to pull together something more weighty than that currently on offer?

    The fact that the SNP were so dominant in the Yes campaign must also have made it easier to deliver consistency and leadership whereas the diversity (politically) of Leave makes this difficult. The social and economic views of some in this camp will be repellent to others.

    The politics of ‘grievance’ are a danger for leave, and perhaps this is why they are so far tacking shy of what might have been regarded as their core issues of immigration and ‘British jobs / homes / schools / NHS for British people’.

    I suspect they have calculated that these messages alone will not take them across the winning line – played too heavily they could well put off swing voters who do not want to ‘associate’ with Nigel Farrage and ‘his sort’ – something supported by his ‘Marmite’ polling figures.

    That leaves them with this difficult quandary – offering something ‘a single market with no strings attached’ that simply isn’t on offer.

    The other difficulty on the economic argument resides in the research carried out for the Brexit side by Open Europe and others. This too relies on assumptions to deliver the ‘long term economic gains’ that the Leave side predict.

    These assumptions… ‘politically acceptable deregulatory measures’.

    That phrase perhaps provides a clue to why the leave campaign isn’t honing in on its own predictions.

  2. I think everyone here is completely missing the point about what will make up people’s minds on which way to vote. It won’t be some esoteric argument about the ECJ or about EFTA or any other initials.

    It was summed up perfectly by the 61 year old woman in Clacton, interviewed on Sky News today, who said she was voting for Brexit, “because of all the food we throw away that`s the wrong shape”.

    Now that’s the real nub of the issue.

  3. Norbold

    You are quite right that some people will vote on Brexit because they are ignorant.

    While that will apply to both sides, some nubs are more real than others. :-)

  4. @Norbold

    The funny thing is as YouGov found earlier this month, the public are somewhat better at sorting Euromyth from Eurofact

    https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/04/10/euromyths/

    Bananas are a contested issue – but what draws my eye is that some popular measures such as the minimum wage and smoking ban are now thought to be European in origin.

    Blaming Brussels for everything can occasionally backfire – meaning the ‘bureaucrats’ take the credit for some things that gain support when actually implemented.

  5. JOHNB160

    @”The Guardian described Dominic Grieve’s response to Gove as “a formidable take down”. Wrong on the ECJ and wrong on not being able to exclude EU citizens.”

    “We know that it is entirely up to the European Court itself how to interpret the terms of our recent new deal – there is no appeal and nothing we can do about its decisions, just as there was nothing we could when it sank our supposed opt-out from the Charter.
    Don’t just take it from me. The former Attorney General – and In campaigner – Dominic Grieve said only last year: “the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg has predatory qualities to it that could be very inimical to some of our national practices”.(22) ”

    From text of speech :-
    THE FACTS OF LIFE SAY LEAVE: WHY BRITAIN AND EUROPE WILL BE BETTER OFF AFTER WE VOTE LEAVE
    Michael Gove MP
    19 April 2016

    :-)

  6. I think that the overwhelming majority of those who actually vote already have a view one way or the other on the EU. Because of this, we’ve not seen any significant movement in the polls for many months. There was a hint of movement to Leave a couple of weeks ago, but the most recent polls suggest that this has petered out.

    I’ve been keeping a running tally of the EUref polling averages since the turn of the year, and, for what they’re worth, here they are:

    Jan Av 4.1% Remain lead
    Feb Av 2.8% Remain Lead
    Mar Av 3.2% Remain lead
    Apr Av 2.4% Remain lead (to date)

    We’ve been through the re-negotiation, the terrorist attacks in Brussels, the Budget shambles, and a big fall in the government popularity, but through all this EUref polls have pretty much flat-lined.

  7. Are the referendum polls adjusted for likelihood to actually vote, not just whether someone says they will vote? As I understand it General Election they are.

    Turnout for AV was 42.2%, will EU vote have a higher turnout? Was the result of the AV referendum accurately predicted by the polls?

  8. I’m guessing the more Gove is visible as the spirit of LEAVE the happier REMAIN will be.

    As Assid notes above, our EU partners see the 4 freedoms (goods, services, capital and people) as inseparable. That’s the single market right there as piloted through by Lord Carrington among others with Maggies support.

    Going back to “free trade” in say goods without free movement of people will not be available.

  9. @Colin

    Here we go again.

    Selective quoting by Michael Gove. The first part of the quote from Dominic Grieve in full:

    “On this issue between the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights, it is quite clear to me that the European Court of Human Rights is a very benign institution, whereas I happen to think that the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg has predatory qualities to it that could be very inimical to some of our national practices…” (he goes on to talk about a specific case and a conflation of the role of ECJ and ECHR in public perception).

    Essentially, Gove has intentionally misconstrued Grieve’s evidence to the committee. The case Grieve puts forward is that by either ignoring the judgements of the European Court of Human Rights or withdrawing from it partially or completely, the UK (within the EU) opens a door to the ECJ to intervene in human rights matters as

    “the more the United Kingdom is repeatedly non-compliant with a convention right, the higher the risk that the Court of Justice in Luxembourg might decide that this is an interesting area in which to expand its jurisprudence. As there is a lot in the treaties that says that EU countries should be compliant with human rights norms, including specific reference to the charter, it seems to me to provide at least a toehold for the European Court of Justice to insist on observance of human rights norms if it were to choose to do so, although it could be argued that that is taking it outside the treaties.”

    Gove implies that Grieve is being critical of European human rights apparatus, when in fact he is pointing out the unintended consequences of not being compliant with the European Convention on Human Rights and playing politics with the notion of withdrawing from it.

    As people have commented upstream, the quality of the EU debate so far is really very poor.

    Dominic Grieve’s full and balanced evidence to the Lords Select Committee on the European Union (from where the quote is taken) is at http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/eu-justice-subcommittee/potential-impact-of-repealing-the-human-rights-act-on-eu-law/oral/23810.html

  10. “Are the referendum polls adjusted for likelihood to actually vote, not just whether someone says they will vote?”

    I think the most common approach is to ask interviewees how likely they are to vote (what else might the pollster do?), and only include those who say they are very likely, or certain to vote. I’ve also seen some who ask people to rate themselves on a scale of 1-10, and only include those who are above 7.

    Turnout is certain to be higher than the AV referendum, with a widespread expectation of around 60%. Any, yes, the polls did referendum broadly right, but that was hardly difficult in the end. In contrast to what we’ve seen on the EU, the polls moved a good deal. As of two months out, the polls had the yes and no sides roughly level, before ‘No’ stormed into a lead to win 68:32. I certainly wouldn’t expect that to happen again this time.

  11. Anyone commenting on this site is politically aware and made up their minds on Europe long ago. Much of the increasing bitterness is frustration because the obvious advantages of leave/remain cannot be seen by others, who are plainly wedded to untruths.

    The result of the referendum, as always, will be decided by people who know very little, are entirely ignorant of the advantages or disadvantages, and will vote on completely spurious grounds. Naturally the campaigns concentrate on providing an attractive array of spurious grounds (or not, as neither campaign is very effective so far).

    The interesting thing for this site, is whether the polls can capture the views of the disengaged and ignorant who will actually determine our future. Personally I’m sceptical, but let’s wait and see. It’s a big challenge for the polling companies, as there are no previous votes to give a weighting.

  12. I’m not sure voters will quite tune in to the subtleties of ECJ and ECHR jurisprudence.

    Btw I see LEAVE are using the argument that our trade deficit is simply the UK “giving away money” and so we are bound to get a great deal post LEAVe . It’s not. Exporters have to go to the bother of making the stuff we like and shipping it to us. So let’s say the profit margins on the 60bn deficit is 10%. So the “loss” to our EU partners of freezing us out after a LEAVE vote is just 6bn per year.

    I doubt they would lose much sleep over that.

  13. JAMES E

    Thanks for the response.

    “I think the most common approach is to ask interviewees how likely they are to vote (what else might the pollster do?), and only include those who say they are very likely, or certain to vote. I’ve also seen some who ask people to rate themselves on a scale of 1-10, and only include those who are above 7.”

    I thought I read somewhere that they asked about previous voting history?

  14. @ Assiduosity

    “…what draws my eye is that some popular measures such as the minimum wage and smoking ban are now thought to be European in origin”

    Both these measures are thought to be European in origin, but in both cases this is largely due to ‘Leavers’ believing so. It’s therefore likely that both these measures were considered to be from the EU because of that perception among people who were personally opposed.

  15. Oh PS. They’ll get the 6bn back pretty quick as that’s about the size of the budget feedback. That’s the first thing which will go if we are outside the EU and we don’t have a budget veto any more.

  16. *rebate*

  17. @John Chanin

    “The result of the referendum, as always, will be decided by people who know very little, are entirely ignorant of the advantages or disadvantages, and will vote on completely spurious grounds. ”

    I think that’s a little unfair to say the least.

    People will vote on their perceptions, which will be formed in complex ways – media, politicians, friends, colleagues, employers etc.

    The ‘disengaged and ignorant’ will almost certainly not vote – indeed, the disengaged are increasingly not even registered to vote.

    I think it’s sad that we’ve come to a position where rational debate can be misinterpreted as ‘bitterness’ and jovial teasing as ‘puerile insults’.

    The point that I keep returning is a polling and campaigning one.

    The polls say the economy is the most important issue and that the EU remains 2 to 1 regarded as the economically least risky option.

    Given this measurable public opinion what can Leave do to change to change the tone of the debate.

    So far, answer there comes none. Arguments about the ECJ, ‘freedom’, ‘renewed patriotism’ etc are likely sideshows – or at least can’t have their moment in the sun until ‘the economy stupid’ is conquered.

  18. @ EOTW

    They would need to ask about how people voted in 2015 to ensure that the sample is politically balanced. I don’t think that this is used in any way to gauge likelihood to vote.

    But in any case, different pollsters ask different questions and deal with likelihood to vote in different ways.

  19. @ James E

    “Both these measures are thought to be European in origin, but in both cases this is largely due to ‘Leavers’ believing so. It’s therefore likely that both these measures were considered to be from the EU because of that perception among people who were personally opposed.”

    A fair point re the smoking ban.

    But on the minimum wage there’s actually quite a lot of evidence to suggest that UKIPpers and other core Brexit supporters at large (as opposed to the party and campaign elite) are quite socially conservative but economically redistributive.

    I’m not so sure given this that they would form a natural constituency against the minimum wage – which is such an overwhelmingly popular measure (66% support its increase more than 75% its retention) that there must be at least a fair few outers who support the measure who still thought it came from Europe.

    Always good to be wary of stereotyping a particular group’s views and underestimating the public’s capacity for cognitive dissonance – remember there are UKIP voters who will vote to remain.

  20. At last the EU referendum debate has taken off in UKPR!

    It’s becoming very interesting and quite impressive, thanks not least to Assiduosity’s academic rigour. Very refreshing.

    As to the lack of a leave ‘road map’ (to use that rapidly dated vernacular), it does puzzle me that no manifestoes have been published. You might expect some of the heavyweights on that side to have outlined their personal visions of where a post-Brexit Britain could and should travel. I don’t mean the generalities and sound-bites we get, but a comprehensive outline of what should happen between 24 June and 2020.

    Or have I missed something?

  21. John Chanin,

    I am pretty much with you on this. It’s the disengaged and uninterest who, if they can be got out to vote, may well decide it.

    That’s kind of what I was doing in the last thread, which for my trouble got me accused of calling someone a racist. Looking at messages that might appeal to people who aren’t engaged with the detail either financial or legal!

    So invoking an idyllic England or the spirit of 66, is a way to engage either Middle England, or the less educated Labour to UKIP voter who the polls show are more inclined to vote Leave.

    This won’t be won here or by appealing to anyone who posts here!

    Peter.

  22. @ Assiduosity (re EU Smoking ban & minimum wage)

    Yes, you’re right again.

    On closer inspection of YouGov’s figures, there is a clear lead among leavers for those who thought the smoking ban was an EU measure, but this is not so regarding the minimum wage.

  23. @Dieselhead

    “I’m not sure voters will quite tune in to the subtleties of ECJ and ECHR jurisprudence.”

    You’re not kidding.

  24. Perhaps voting to leave is to create a blank piece of paper. I find that appealing, and not something to put me off.

    The appeal of independence is that it’s the government we elect that will shape the future. It’s up to the voters.

    Quite frankly forecasts 15 yrs long don’t interest me one bit. In any case, economic forecasts so long in the future are pointless and bound to be wrong. Crikey, we can’t even forecast the economy 1 yr hence.

  25. @ CMJ

    “Perhaps voting to leave is to create a blank piece of paper. I find that appealing, and not something to put me off.”

    Undoubtedly that’s an appeal. Certainly to the more radically minded. But is it a mass appeal?

    Agreed too, long term forecasts in themselves are fairly meaningless – but they serve to reinforce a pre-existing impression of safety within the EU risk without.

    Are people prepared to face risk for a ‘blank sheet of paper’?

    At the moment, the underlying data says no, but the top line polling says even stevens. It’s interesting.

  26. Blank piece of paper:

    I think it’ll put most people off though. It’s a bit “year zero”. What happens in the meantime while we make up the new rules.

    I’m not sure 15 year forecasts are so meaningless in that context since if people believe business will be disrupted for that long (not unreasonable) they will believe REMAINs projections.

  27. CMJ

    @”The appeal of independence is that it’s the government we elect that will shape the future. It’s up to the voters.”

    Actually for many on the Left , that seems to have no appeal at all, because “the government” might be a Tory Government.

    Paul Mason on DP this morning said that his instinct was to leave-he cited Democratic Deficit & Free Movement. But he did not want a Leave majority which “put Gove & Johnson in charge.”

    Clearly Mason failed to see the irony of voting to tolerate a failure of Democracy in EU in order to subvert the Democratic process in UK,

  28. I’m glad to see (as it supports my views) that the Green Party recommended (in a crafty way) to its members that in the London mayor elections the second preference should go to Goldsmith.

    I doubt though it would have any impact.

  29. How different it might have been if Churchill had won the GE in 1945. A defeated German nation and a humiliated French one after WW2, would have seen the UK firmly in charge of the project and the EU would have been set up quite differently. Certainly we would not have had to destroy our fishing industry, and with the inclusion of the Commonwealth countries, the free trade area could have been massive.

    Oh well back to reality and off to bed.

    Nick Robbo was good. I had forgotten the lies about the Lisbon Treaty just being a tidying up exercise, when it was in fact the rejected constitution with a new binding.

  30. In that context I’m not sure the “fallen empires” argument is that great either. What happens after these supposedly unwieldy empires crash under their own contradictions etc. ? They are called the “dark ages” for a reason…

  31. CMJ

    You might get your “blank piece of paper” were England to vote for independence from both its unions, and embark on a wholesale re-examination of its structures.

    Monarchy? Sovereignty of Parliament or people? 2nd chamber? Role of Whitehall? Security Council? Arms exporter? etc etc etc

    Or do you just mean that the last bit of the page describing trading links with other countries should be blank, and that the existing UK Government should complete it, in agreement with those other countries?

    Hardly an exciting prospect. :-)

  32. @ Colin

    It’s always a pleasure to agree with you – the Eurocommunist, lefty social democrats do have a blind spot (they actually have three) about this referendum.

    Still, they may save the Remain.

  33. @Norbold –

    “It was summed up perfectly by the 61 year old woman in Clacton, interviewed on Sky News today, who said she was voting for Brexit, “because of all the food we throw away that`s the wrong shape”.

    Now that’s the real nub of the issue.”

    No, no, no!

    The nub of the issue is which bin she must use under the recycling directives!

  34. ROBERT

    It was an excellent program. So many memories.

    What a sorry tale of deception & cock-ups it has all been.

    The story of Thatcher’s Damascene conversion in Dublin was great.

  35. @ Colin

    “Clearly Mason failed to see the irony of voting to tolerate a failure of Democracy in EU in order to subvert the Democratic process in UK,”

    Of course, Paul Mason might view FPTP and the election of majority governments on less than 40% of the vote ‘a failure of democracy’.

    As such he might be balancing the lesser of evils. A position which seems to characterise many people’s approach to the EU referendum.

  36. LASZLO

    :-)

    They almost seem to treat the EU as the guardian of their Socialist objectives-because the UK voter cannot be trusted.

    They may indeed-and I think an analysis of voting on the political Left will be more interesting than for the right. I hope we will be provided with it.

  37. “That concerns over English identity are frequently expressed in terms which are very close to “blood and soil” are somewhat reminiscent of Scotland in the 1960s/70s, but not the 21st century.”

    Rather love the way the Scots Nats get very sniffy about their nationalism being decent, dignified and based on reason etc etc, while the UKIP version of nationalism is just that vaguely distasteful B&S stuff.

    Very humorous to those of us who followed the indyref in some detail.

  38. @Oldnat

    The former definitely :)

  39. Clearly Mason failed to see the irony of voting to tolerate a failure of Democracy in EU in order to subvert the Democratic process in UK,
    Colin April 19th, 2016 at 10:29 pm

    This is a joke, right?

    Did you not read any of the previous thread, especially the bits about democracy? I thought this was supposed to be an adult, informative site.

    You clearly have no interest in understanding much about the EU. That’s ok, but it would be nicer not to hear uneducated twaddle, unless, of course you can support your assertions. In that case your views would be very eagerly listened to, at least by me.

    But let’s think about the UK for a moment. When we come out of the EU please do tell me what your views are on how to remove the democratic deficit of the House of Lords. Do you not share my view that it is corrupt in so many ways to be able to gift someone a seat in that chamber?

    Why can’t I have a seat in there?

  40. Blank piece of paper….Top dog Germany, good place to start,

    Germany : Exports: 2015 ( Billions ) Imports 2015 ( Billions )

    1: USA….€ 113,853,485. China….€ 91,566,097.
    2: Fr……..€ 103,044,314. NL …….€ 88,040,912
    3: UK……€ 89,299,644. Fr……….€.67,009,336
    4: Ned…. € 79,597,811. US……..€ 59,295,506
    5: China. €. 71,292,623. It………..€ 49,082,378
    Pol…….€ 44,473,293
    Switz….€ 42,684,925
    CZ……..€ 39,271,283
    UK……..€ 38,277,559

    Trade surpluses 1: USA…….+ € 54,557,979
    ( Billions ) 2: UK………+ € 51,022,085
    3: Fr………..+ € 36,034,978
    ( China…….+ € 20,273,474 )

    Source: Fed Stat Office March 18th 2015

    Trade surplus of € 51,022,085 ( Billions ) with UK makes us 2nd biggest net contributor after US, can’t see Germany playing hardball if we leave.
    Similar stories with other senior EU economies.
    In my view, our weakness will be our negotiators, history tells us we’ll get shafted, even when we hold the strongest hand.

  41. “Scots Nats get very sniffy about their nationalism being decent, dignified and based on reason etc etc, while the UKIP version of nationalism is just that vaguely distasteful B&S stuff.”

    There are different sorts of nationalism. I’ve never met a Scottish nationalist who goes on about Muslims and foreigners being deported. Seems all too common amongst Ukip types though.

    Yes, I’m an SNP member. I’m also precisely 0% Scottish (I’ve lived here for 2 years). My Scottish “nationalism” appears to be just like all the other people in my branch and who I’ve met on campaigns, conferences etc.

    People who I’ve met who are into Ukip tend to frighten me. Scottish nationalists frightened me so little I ended up joining them.

    Perhaps my experience is unique. I suspect not, but I’ll leave it an open question.

  42. Blimey folks, what a shambles, if you want a reference it’s the Fed Stat Office trade figures 2015. Sorry, I no longer have minions. :-)

  43. Alec

    You followed – but 40 years behind the times. :-(

    If you had bothered to read what I actually said, instead of exercising your habitual knee jerk response, you would have noted that your caricature lacks a basis in anything other than your own prejudice.

    Have you really never bothered to look at the long debate (the Scottish Constitutional Convention played a major role – as did the expulsion of a number of “B&S fundamentalists” from the SNP) that took place in Scotland in the 35 years since the 1979 referendum?

    The whole point of my post was that Scots are no better, or worse, than the English or any other nation. All contain nutters and good guys, on both sides of the constitutional debates.

    It’s simply that the process of examining “identity” and its implications for constitutional change perforce took place in Scotland over many years, while England is facing this referendum without having had that long debate about “who they are”, and what that means for their place in the world.

    I didn’t suggest that the UKIP version of nationalism is “B&S” (although that version can appear rather too often). Nor would I suggest that all those Brit Nats who would prefer to leave the EU describe areas of high immigration as “not British” or “not English”.

    I wouldn’t even suggest that those who describe such areas as “not British” or “not English” are racists – just that they live in a political climate that hasn’t had a thorough debate about whether such language is appropriate, and actually describes what “British” or “English” mean in the 21st century.

  44. Anyway… They sell us € 89,299,644 ( Billion ) we sell them € 38,277,559 ( Billion ) thus we give ’em € 52,022,085 ( Billion ) .
    As a pal of mine would say, ” a billion here, a billion there, soon we’ll be talking serious money ” :-)

  45. Good evening all from a clear crisp Hampshire.

    Cycled 38 miles after work today and almost ended up in Southampton. Hampshire must be one of the best counties for cycling and even though I was born in neighbouring Berkshire which I know like the back of my hand, I’m discovering a whole new Hampshire.

    Anyway I did my usual 15 minute scroll down my twitter account and found something quite eye catching from the SNP.

    “If re-elected we’ll use new powers to ensure a Scottish public sector body can bid to run Scotland’s railways”

    I like that!! and even though I’m not a big fan of public ownership tentacles getting into everything I do however agree with the SNP’s proposals and it’s quite radical.

    It would be great if the rest of the UK would follow suit because quite frankly I don’t think we are getting value for money on our trains although admittedly I do receive quite a generous travelling allowance from my employers but even that is taxed.

    Credit where credit is due well done SNP.

    On public ownership of the BBC…The licence fee should be replaced with a subscription fee so those of us who think the BBC is a complete and utter waste of tax payers money don’t have to pay.

  46. ‘Clearly Mason failed to see the irony of voting to tolerate a failure of Democracy in EU in order to subvert the Democratic process in UK,’

    On the other hand Gove & Johnson were not presented to the British people in May 2015 as our prospective leaders!

  47. ALEC

    “Rather love the way the Scots Nats get very sniffy about their nationalism being decent, dignified and based on reason etc etc, while the UKIP version of nationalism is just that vaguely distasteful B&S stuff”
    ______

    Thankfully that’s just your opinion and even though I disagree with the SNP on the EU, emigration and other stuff, to compare the SNP’s Civic nationalism to that of UKIP ain’t that highbrow.

  48. Allan Christie

    Glasgow came very low on the approval rate for large cities. Given it’s built on a series of drumlins, that’s hardly surprising!

    I wouldn’t fancy cycling up Gardner Street.

    As to the rail franchise, the current contract won’t expire until 2022 at the earliest – so SNP and Labour promises to allow publicly (home) owned contractors to tender will only materialise in the arrangements for the next contract.

    Good politics (but pretty meaningless).

  49. KEN

    You’re churning out some incredibly big numbers there, any chance you can convert them into pound sterling? As a Brexiter I don’t work in Euros that well. ;-)

  50. @Al Urqa

    To defend our old pal Colin, who may have retired for the eve, his post doesn’t have to be challenging the democracy of the EU. His point is that Mason himself sees issues with democracy in the EU, yet might vote to outweigh the vote in UK elections. Therein lies the irony, or dilemma or whatever you wanna call it…

    Assiduous points out that Mason is simply choosing the lesser of two evils, which may be the case on Mason’s terms. This may be the case, it may even be rational, but doesn’t diminish the irony Colin refers to…

    (Of course, Colin may have his own issues with EU democracy, in which case as you were, have at it etc….)

1 2 3 4 5