The answer to that is that Labour should be arguing against leaving the EU, whatever the referendum result was. The referendum result was for a reactionary policy that Labour has no business committing itself to implementing. Would Labour for example, feel it had to implement a referendum result to reintroduce capital punishment if it was voted through in a referendum, or to introduce discrimination against women, or homosexuals, or to ditch all of its environmental goals?

After all, surveys show that there is a very clear overlap on all those issues with those who voted Leave in the referendum, and Paul Nuttall had already raised the idea of a referendum on capital punishment. The fact is that had 16 and 17 year olds had the right to vote, had Labour’s actual message been aired by the media, the referendum result would have been different. By the time Britain comes to Leave in 2-4 years time, many of those old bigoted voters who voted for Leave will have died off, whilst millions of new young voters will have the right to vote, so that there would by then be no majority for leaving the EU.

Why on Earth would any sensible party commit itself to blindly respecting a vote that by that time meant really appeasing the dead, at the expense of the living?

Tax credits, housing benefits, free NHS, free schooling, social housing, pension, …

It’s not good for the people who have to pay thousands of pounds a year to make up the difference between tax generate and cost of services.

If you think selling state services below cost when you don’t have to [you do for Brits, not for economic migrants], then sell me your house for a quid. I’ll have paid you, but its below cost.

How can you object?