In London, Cambridge, Birmingham and Edinburgh, tens of thousands of people gathered to march in favour of Britain’s place in the European Union.
Here are some of the best tweets and social media posts.
The London March was massive:
EU We 💛💙 you.@marchforeurope pic.twitter.com/WxCFqhRwOG
— March For Europe (@marchforeurope) September 3, 2016
An early photo as the Lib Dem contingent gathered at Marble Arch.
Today we #marchforeurope for an Open, Tolerant and United Britain in a strong European Union pic.twitter.com/UD4XAHUdID
— Liberal Democrats (@LibDems) September 3, 2016
Catherine Bearder gave one of the keynote speeches:
Fantastic rousing speech by @LibDems MEP @catherinemep at #marchforeurooe #MarchForEU pic.twitter.com/hHidkbNbto
— Sarah Ludford (@SarahLudford) September 3, 2016
At least nobody stole her flag, unlike poor Eddie Izzard who had to set off in hot pursuit, in heels, of someone who nicked his pink beret.
Sorry, Daisy Cooper, but this is crying out for a caption competition.
About to set off, suns shining, flags waving. @LibDems have a HUGE showing. Thanks to all of you! @marchforeurope pic.twitter.com/4MjxS6xoh9
— Catherine Bearder (@catherinemep) September 3, 2016
Julian Huppert addressed a big rally in Cambridge in the rain:
@julianhuppert delivers the final speech to the 500 people at the Cambridge #MarchforEurope pic.twitter.com/b3NzqPcEUr
— Cambridge Stays (@cambridge_stays) September 3, 2016
Here are my friends and I in Edinburgh which was a much smaller event. I think in Scotland, there’s a feeling that something different will happen, that there will be a different arrangement of some sort for Scotland so there isn’t necessarily the same sense of urgency as there clearly is south of the border:
A few of the @scotlibdems at the #marchforeurope Edinburgh. pic.twitter.com/HxH4bd5qTc
— Caron Lindsay (@caronmlindsay) September 3, 2016
Aberdeenshire East candidate from the recent Holyrood elections Christine Jardine spoke for the Liberal Democrats. The quality of the video is terrible, but the audio is better than I thought it would be.
* Caron Lindsay is Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and blogs at Caron's Musings. You can find her on Bluesky at caronmlindsay.bsky.social
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
No Carry Ons: Kenneth Williams's other films
Could Hitler have won?
Say hello to the Act that successfully set rules 1,050 years into the future - Calendar (New Style) Act 1750
Indecision costing the taxpayers millions
Steve J Smith
David Warren
John Barrett
Nonconformistradical
Chloe
39 Comments
Some of the EU’s key leaders are telling us to hurry up and go to end the uncertainty. As I’ve said, it gets to the stage where the pro-EU thing to do is leave for the sake of Europe.
With respect, why do people keep calling the EU “Europe”?
1. All countries in Europe are not currently in the EU and the UK is scheduled to leave the EU in any case.
2. “Europe” the geographical continent existed before the EU, the political superstate in the making and can exist after it.
3. The UK democratically voted to leave the EU political superstate in the making, not Europe the geographical continent.
All the best and peace.
Tony Benn: “What power have you got? Where did you get it from? In whose interests do you exercise it? To whom are you accountable? And how can we get rid of you?” If you cannot get rid of the people who govern you, you do not live in a democratic system.”
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/15/10-of-the-best-tony-benn-quotes-as-picked-by-our-readers
With respect, I am somewhat baffled how a political organisation presumably specifically (?) representing the UK population with the word “Democrats” as part of their title want to be governed from Brussels – how about changing your name to “EU Liberal Democrats”, if that is what you really believe? All the best and peace.
“hundreds of thousands of people gathered”
Really?
Two months after tens of thousands of people marched in London that would show real momentum for the anti-Brexit campaign.
Unfortunately, I think you mean “hundreds and thousands”, and possibly fewer people marched today than did then despite it being a national campaign with more time to organise.
@Peter Wilson: “More than 100 protesters gathered at the Scottish Parliament in Edinburgh” – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-uk-leaves-the-eu-37265840 and from this article: “@julianhuppert delivers the final speech to the 500 people at the Cambridge #MarchforEurope”.
The only figure I’ve seen for London is 2000 reported in the Daily Star (no, not that one!): https://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/World/2016/Sep-03/370372-2000-protestors-join-march-for-europe-in-london.ashx
And the BBC reports that “75 people attend a pro-Europe gathering in Cardiff” (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-37266879)
If these figures are accurate, around 200 people in the Welsh and Scottish capitals combined and 2000 in London (plus more in the regions), then it looks like pretty disheartening stuff for the anti-Brexit campaign. Is it running out of steam? Are British people more inclined to wait and see what actually happens?
Even if, as seems to have been disproved, hundreds of thousands of people marched today… 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU.
I voted remain (holding my nose while I did so), but the result was clear and should stand. Any attempt to over-turn it could lead to real social disorder. Not a few thousand activists having a nice afternoon walk, but the unpleasant kind that gets violent.
‘In London, Cambridge, Birmingham and Edinburgh, hundreds of thousands of people gathered to march in favour of Britain’s place in the European Union.’
Were the marches much bigger outside London where Police estimates were of 4,000 ?
john
“Were the marches much bigger outside London where Police estimates were of 4,000”
That would be “4,000” in the sense of “30,000” presumably:
“…the Metropolitan Police estimated closer to 30,000 people…”
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-eu-referendum-protest-march-30000-anti-saturday-2-july-anger-banners-leave-vote-central-a7115646.html
So Paul – 30,000 rather than 4,000 still doesn’t explain where LDV can get the “in London, Cambridge, Birmingham and Edinburgh, hundreds of thousands of people gathered to march …” in its very first sentence.
I fear LDV are in the same denial mode you were in throughout the coalition catastrophe, where we were fed a continual stream of over optimistic articles saying things were going fine, while the party collapsed around us. Now it seems LDV is doing the same over the EU issue. When will you realise that, whether we are right or wrong to focus on the EU issue or not, we have become totally ineffectual in terms of influencing British public opinion, and one of the contributory reasons for this was the total loss of trust most people have in the Lib Dems.
We may believe, but the vast majority voters don’t believe us.
Until you come to terms with that fact and change your behaviours, you will simply continue to serve up a message of naive hope to the troops while the party continues on its path of decline towards oblivion.
Hi leavetheeu, nobody is ruled from Brussels except the Belgians, you can stop making stuff up now the referendum is over
@Paul Walter “That would be “4,000” in the sense of “30,000” presumably:”
The link you provide points to an article about the march 2 months ago on 2 July (when interestingly, March for Europe claim 50,000 people marched rather than 30,000).
The turnout yesterday, across the UK, looks very very low.
thanks Peter. Apologies for my mistake.
David Evans: There is really no need to be so negative all the time. We have a long way to go before geting to where we once were, and we both know who is to blame for that, but the biggest issue now is not that people don’t “trust” us, but that they’ve forgotten we still exist.
@Alex Macfie “the biggest issue now is not that people don’t “trust” us, but that they’ve forgotten we still exist.”
I am not convinced that is entirely true, but if it is then there is an opportunity to construct a new reputation for the party. Reminding voters of the Clegg years ()https://www.libdemvoice.org/clegg-in-the-guardian-why-on-earth-would-you-not-want-to-try-and-do-st-51733.html) might be unhelpful in that regard. The apparent indifference indicated by turnout at yesterday’s Marches for Europe suggests that presenting the party as an anti-Brexit single-issue pressure group might not be a successful tactic at the moment. Perhaps the party should park that for now and keep its powder dry until the Brexit situation is better understood, and instead concentrate on communicating a clear and consistent set of policies in other vital areas.
Downing Street’s news management had to deal with timing issues, the return of Parliament and political commentators and the fact that the PM would be in China for the G20 meeting. An interview by Andrew Marr was recorded in the PM’s constituency on Friday and broadcast today, Sunday 4/9/2016. He prefers interviews which are live and up-to-date. He was therefore and thereby unable to ask her about events occurring between Friday and Sunday.
She was definite that she is not going to call an early general election, which is consistent with what she has previously said, but, as former PM Harold MacMillan said to a colleague “Events, dear boy, events”. Therefore her intentions and her power to deliver may be different. We should study carefully what she did not say. We should not assume that she will trigger Article 50 on 1/1/2017 or 2/1/2017. John Redwood’s idea of amending or repealing the 1972 Act was not even discussed (that would take us immediately into unilateral global free trade and fail to deal with UK citizens elsewhere in the EU and non-British EU citizens in the UK).
Ed Balls was franker. Her would accept an opportunity to return to parliament. He will vote for Owen Smith. If Jeremy Corbyn wins Labour MPs should serve in Labour’s shadow cabinet in the interests of effective opposition and with the objective of trying to win a general election in 2020, admittedly difficult. He expects to lose weight during Strictly Come Dancing, which might make him better known. He was not asked whether he currently aspires to be Labour leader. He was not asked whether Angela Eagle made a mistake by withdrawing her nomination in a deal with Owen Smith. Under STV second preference votes are relevant although JC was elected last time on first preference votes.
I think this kind of thing is a big mistake. It allows Theresa May to say to TV viewers (on Andrew Marr this morning) that the Tories are the only party who respect the result of the referendum.
We need to hold our nerve on this one. We must stick to our position consistently and relentlessly.
Brexit will not happen. Theresa May cannot take Britain out of the EU without the permission of the United States, and such permission will not be forthcoming. Theresa May knows that, because John Kerry and Barack Obama have told her that. Besides, the damage to Britain would be too great for any serious politician to contemplate.
Theresa May is going through the motions. The negotiations, if they ever start in the first place, will fail. They are meant to. The Tories know that, which is why the pro-European Tories are keeping quiet (for the time being).
No wonder Theresa May refuses to call a snap election. If she did, she would be forced to tell us what her real position is. At the moment, she is playing along the Brexiteers in order to keep the threat from the Tory right and UKIP at bay. She can only do that for so long.
The end result is going to be one almighty row in the Tory Party. They will be exposed as a bunch of incompetent opportunists. Labour is looking in on itself. The Liberal Democrats have to be in a position to emerge as the one party that has maintained a consistent principled position that has put Britain’s interest, rather than party interest, first.
So ignore the meteor shower of siren voices on this site that never seems to end.
It is exactly right that we should be continuing to press the case for staying in the EU. The national interest coincides with our principles – and once people realise the true implications of Brexit, they will likely change their mind.
The referendum was a vote in favour of the principle of leaving the EU. The least we can expect is some sort of new mandate for the actual details of that. It would only be polite to ask the voters if they are happy with what is being negotiated in their name. Why are people on the Leave side so scared of that? Could it be that they suspect it’s a vote they couldn’t win?
Stuart says :
“It allows Theresa May to say to TV viewers (on Andrew Marr this morning) that the Tories are the only party who respect the result of the referendum.”
But it’s true. [ although for accuracy,.. Tories, Ukip and Labour under Corbyn, respect the referendum result. ]
But Farron’s utterly confusing ‘We respect the referendum but we want another one’,.. is not just barmy,… it’s akin to a foot stamping tantrum. But the confusion doesn’t end there. ‘Open Britain’, with Clegg, Vince and Lamb don’t expect a second referendum,.. but Farron does want a second referendum..!?!
Curiously, Farron has also made Clegg your Brexit spokesperson, but Clegg disagrees with Farron over a second referendum. If you yourselves can’t get your act together over your EU position, how on earth do you think confused voters must feel.?
I think your first big party problem to solve isn’t even EU related. You need to work out just who is in charge, because it’s clearly not Tim Farron
@Caron
A second referendum was my big hope too, in the days after the referendum, but it soon became clear there were major practical obstacles to this idea. The EU is adamant that no substantive negotiations can take place before the invoking of Article 50; and once Article 50 sets the exit process in motion, the UK does not have the power to stop it, so a second referendum at that point would be pointless unless there was some sort of prior unanimous agreement among other EU governments to recognise it. Such a sequence of events seems very unlikely.
Of course, once we’re out, things may change. The best hope of a future UK return to the EU would be if our leaving set off a shock effect around the rest of the EU and led to real reforms.
ppb – you are denying EU law supercedes UK law – yes or no? Or should you be referring to yourself in fact?
@Peter Watson I had noted someone from UKIP maybe tweeting that it was 4,000 marchers in London according to the police – perhaps that was where you got your number from? Maybe one could say about 25,000 marchers maximum nationally as an approximate number (or less?)? All the best and peace.
@ Sesenco – “Brexit will not happen. Theresa May cannot take Britain out of the EU without the permission of the United States, and such permission will not be forthcoming.”
Would you like to present some supporting evidence for that claim? Or, if that is not available, at least your reasons for believing there to be a compelling rationale for why this should be so?
@Leave the EU
It is just because the EU isn’t all of Europe, and that we want to eradicate 2000 years of intra-European warfare and bloodshed (the Dutch just commemorated a massive raid by the Royal Navy on our East India Fleet , burning down the adjacent Island, in 1666; next year you’ll be mourning us kidnapping the Royal Charles flasgship from Chatham , “Raid on the Medway”, in 16667) that we federalists keep talking about Europe, and see the EU as an institutional framework to realise the Cobden & Bright ideals of Free Trade, Free movemnent, and Arbitration to pacify Europe…
And we don’t want to become a super state; we Dutch enjoy it when our king and queen sit in Bermuda shorts an orange T-shirts on unreserved seats, spurring Dutch Olympians on, just like the British love the pomp (?) and circumstance (OK, plenty of that in a certain way) of Last Night of the Proms…
Replied here: https://www.libdemvoice.org/lib-dems-march-for-europe-51739.html#comment-414629.
Caron
‘The referendum was a vote in favour of the principle of leaving the EU’
Nope, we were clearly told by Cameron that if we voted to Leave he would activate Article 50 no if’s, no buts, no second referendums & no blocking by parliament.It couldn’t have been clearer.
It’s now time to respect the democratic voice of the people and stop trying to finds ways to ignore it.
It’s three months since Leicester won the Football League. They had a huge parade through Leicester straight afterwards. Just supposing they felt the need to re-run the parade now, for some reason, do you think they’d get just as big a crowd as last time?
Of course not. Unlike Leicester FC, we do have a reason to keep attention on our issue. The surprise is not that the turnout was smaller. The “surprise” is that it was as big as it was. Heartening proof that this one won’t go away, and as Sesenco indicates, it’s odds-on that Brexit won’t ever happen!
@Caron,
You ask:
Why are people on the Leave side so scared of that? Could it be that they suspect it’s a vote they couldn’t win?
I’m not sure which way another vote would go. However, the very people who were against having even one referendum on the question of the EU now want to have two referendums. And if that doesn’t go the way they’d like no doubt they’ll want another and then another until they do get what they want.
Then we’ll no doubt hear the argument that the “people have spoken” and we’ll hear no more talk about referendums from the Lib Dems and others who support the EU in its current form.
Don’t you see it is precisely this kind of anti-democratic viewpoint which causes us to reject the EU? The clincher , for me, was last year in Greece when the population voted for change both at an election and a referendum. They were then told in no uncertain terms that the kind of democracy the Greeks thought they had in the EU had expired.
Well I don’t believe it has expired in the UK ! So let’s all respect the result and get on with life outside the EU. When, and if, the EU mends its ways and does become genuinely democratic in its nature, we can always re-apply for membership.
Alex Macfie: There really is a need to face up to facts. You and I know we have a long way to go before getting to where we once were, but I’m afraid most of the party still don’t get it. Most still pretend all we have to do is not worry, but simply get out there and campaign like good liberals. Indeed that was the panacea under Nick and look where that got us!
Many even think you can simply parachute a member of an under represented group into a target parliamentary seat and have a chance of winning. You and I know that is pure fantasy.
We are back to at least 10 years and possibly 20 years of hard campaigning for a candidate to build enough of a name locally to have a chance. Just look at the long records of Gordon Birtwhistle, Ronnie Fearn or Patsy Carlton for the facts. Or Claire Brookes and Beth Graham in Skipton for a close failure.
It took 50 years for us to build up from 6 MPs to over 60 and that was with the boost we got from the establishment and eventual merger with the SDP. Most of our party still want to believe that so long as they work hard it will just happen once again. It doesn’t work like that. By ignoring this, and that is what you are really proposing, all we are doing is setting ourselves up to fail again in 2020, and if we fail then, many of our newer members will simply become totally disillusioned, then there will be very little left.
Surely it’s better to plan based on facts, not fantasy.
@Peter Watson – “Are British people more inclined to wait and see what actually happens?”
I would agree that at the present time people are waiting to see what proposition the government is going to come up with, which as the PM has said isn’t going to happen until 2017, although if we’re lucky there should be some progress statements this autumn…
So I suggest that now is the time to gather one’s forces and build a resistance, because once the government presents it’s proposals – most likely well before May 2017’s local elections, events will move very quickly.
I suggest now is the time to be doing a Nigel Farage/UKIP and be pressing for a referendum on whatever plans the government propose; correctly presented it should attract supporters from all sides – yes the leave supporters (including Nigel Farage who campaigned for the people to be given the choice and not have the decision made by the self-serving Westminster crowd…) can’t complain as it would be hypocritical of them!
David Evans 5th Sep ’16 – 9:19am
“Surely it’s better to plan based on facts, not fantasy.”
The facts are that May intends to leave the EU without a further referendum, without a vote within the HofC and without freedom of movement – hasn’t anyone running the Party machine considered what opportunities there are for the L/Ds outside of the EU? Whilst it clings to the belief that we will not leave – voters will not take the Party seriously.
If we did remain, TTIP would rear its ugly head again [abandoned by the US since Brexit] – given the pressure that May has come under from Obama and the Japanese, at the G20, on behalf of their Global Corporations – isn’t it clear how awesome the power of these rampant unelected and undemocratic organisations has become? Just a reminder of some of the provisions from the leaked, corporate sponsored, TTIP draft back in July:
“A leak obtained by the Guardian shows that the EU will propose a rollback of mandatory energy savings measures, and major obstacles to any future pricing schemes designed to encourage the uptake of renewable energies.
Environmental protections against fossil fuel extraction, logging and mining in the developing world would also come under pressure from articles in the proposed energy chapter.
Paul de Clerck, a spokesman for Friends of the Earth Europe, said the leaked document: “is in complete contradiction with Europe’s commitments to tackle climate change. It will flood the EU market with inefficient appliances, and consumers and the climate will foot the bill. The proposal will also discourage measures to promote renewable electricity production from wind and solar.”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/11/leaked-ttip-energy-proposal-could-sabotage-eu-climate-policy
Why on earth would any Party, not funded by these corporations, wish to remain in such a corrupt organisation?
@John Roffey – re: TTIP – I think your comment is more an illustration of the problems in the way TTIP is being formulated behind closed doors with minimal oversight rather than with the EU per se; although I would agree it is troubling that the EU is potentially proposing a ‘fudge’ that, given the nature of TTIP and it’s protections, so obviously allows for major backtracking on EU policy that will be difficult to remedy.
WRT to Japan, there is this rather interesting piece: “Japan-United Kingdom Relations:
Government Task-force regarding the Withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union” http://www.mofa.go.jp/ecm/ie/page1e_000097.html
I suspect there will be other nations who will be preparing similar position papers adding to the information available on the implications of Brexit.
WRT “Why on earth would any Party, not funded by these corporations, wish to remain in such a corrupt organisation?”
I think here you are alluding to a situation that the Brexit fanatics are refusing to face up to, namely if the EU is as power hungry and corrupt as the Brexit fanatics would have us believe then post-Brexit the UK will be a minnow with a wolf as a neighbour – you only need to look at the China sea dispute to see where that might end up… So the question is how will Brexit prevent the creation of the monster on our doorstep that Brexit fanatics believe is happening?
Roland 5th Sep ’16 – 11:08am
@Roland
“So the question is how will Brexit prevent the creation of the monster on our doorstep that Brexit fanatics believe is happening?”
Firstly, I must say that that I do not understand why those choosing Brexit are fanatics – which seems to assume that those who wish to stay are not.
In truth my concern is not really trade or ‘the monster on our doorstep’ which is going to fall apart without the UK – but global warming. Although Obama and China have agreed to ratify the Paris Accord – the data used by the IPCC – which will be used by them to calculate the restrictions on emissions of the participating nations – is flawed and the restrictions will not have their desired effect in limiting global temperatures to 1,5C or even 2C above pre-industrial levels – as this short video explains:
http://millenniumthree.blogspot.co.uk/2016/08/warning-use-of-fossil-fuels-must.html
Essentially we have about a decade to dramatically reduce the use of fossil fuels to prevent the chain reaction of temperature rises from pushing Earth’s climate beyond the endurance of we humans and many other species – leaving the planet to cockroaches and other insects and perhaps some of the smaller mammals.
I particularly wanted Brexit because I want the UK to have the powers to legislate for the necessary measures to prepare for these climate changes. Unlike the large land masses of Europe and elsewhere where drought and high temperatures will cause desertification and significantly reduced crop yields – we in the UK will suffer flooding and high winds with lower temperatures [although higher than now] because we are a group of islands.
Since we only produce 50-60% of our food requirements and those nations that presently supply the rest will no longer have surpluses – we will need to develop schemes to produce the most that we can in difficult circumstances. Restricting immigration will help, but the chances of being able to feed everyone presently looks far less than certain.
Virtually all climate change scientists [apart from those funded by the fossil fuel industries] agree that irreversible climate change is taking place – the majority believe this will happen within the lifetime of those alive today – many sooner or much sooner.
Quite why the Lib/Dems are engaging in fantasy politics and ignoring climate change – is beyond me.
@John Roffey
Re: Brexit fanatics – To me there are two broad groups, those that support Brexit and those (the fanatics) who want to shove it down our throats. I hope this gives a better context to the point I was making.
Re: climate change and building a truly sustainable society – I agree, hence why I’ve maintained come 2050 the UK’s population will either be circa 35m (because we managed the change) or circa 5m (because we carried on regardless). As for the the pro’s and con’s of being in or out of the EU, I suspect it will make little real difference – so it does look like will be returning to population levels not seen since the start of the industrial revolution…
Roland 5th Sep ’16 – 2:28pm
Roland – although it is good to know that someone else on LDV is concerned about climate change – I must question your predicted UK population figures – unless you are envisaging a leader coming to power who is related to Mao Zedong, Stalin or Hitler.
@John Roffey – Yes the population projections don’t make comfortable reading.
I base the 35m figure on our ability to feed ourselves without being dependent upon food imports, given we can feed a little over half our current population. The 5m is an ‘optimistic’ disaster scenario based on us doing nothing and so as an advanced technology-based society getting caught out by the perfect storm of climate change, resource shortages etc.
In the early 1990’s when the UK had a relatively stable population at circa 57m and signs of decline, the 35m (by 2050) figure didn’t seem such a stretch target. 20 years later I agree with your assessment of the type of leader that would be necessary. However, I suspect even these leaders would be hard pushed to achieve the target and hence why I believe many politicians are in denial, which makes the 5m projection all the more likely…
@Roland 5th Sep ’16 – 9:13pm
From my research – it seems as though the UK will be more fortunate than those nations on large land masses – where high temperatures and drought will cause crop failure and desertification. The UK, because it is a group of islands, are likely to suffer higher temperatures, but the main challenges will be high winds and flooding as a result of deluge – both features can be used to an advantage to some degree – provided the necessary forward planning has taken place.
I do agree that Lib/Dems do seem to be in denial on climate change – based on the issues that seem to be considered important – judging from the articles included on LDV.
I wonder if TF’ will pay more attention to the issue when he reads about this initiative from his own ‘patch’.
“I’m sorry if rewilding hurts farmers, but we need it”
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/03/rewilding-countryside-national-trust
“tens of thousands of people gathered”
I notice that the figure has been changed (but did not spot an acknowledgement of the edit) but what is the basis of this revised figure?
Other reports (and subsequent articles on LDV) limit themselves to “thousands of people”, and I’ve not seen anything to make me believe the attendance across the UK was more than a single ten of thousand. Given the number of new members we are told have rushed to join the Lib Dems since the referendum because of their passion and determination to remain in the EU, this must be very disappointing.
I think the pro-EU movement should consider why support was so low for this national demonstration (logistics? publicity? support?) and address that rather than attempt to portray it as part of a popular mass movement.