Gina Miller has launched Best for Britain, a new crowdfunded campaign to back politicians who will support a meaningful vote on the UK’s future relationship with Europe, and who are prepared to reject anything which leaves Britain worse off.
The London investment manager, who previously led a successful legal challenge over #brexit, has raised almost £300,000 in less than a week to fund the UK’s ‘biggest tactical voting drive ever.’ Over 10,000 people have donated so far.
Gina is encouraging the public to vote for MPs who want to see all #brexit options on the table:
“The idea that Parliament should simply rubber stamp a binary deal or no deal option put by a future government, and ignore any other alternatives, would reduce democracy to a mere footnote.”
“Only tactical voting in this election can ensure that Parliament plays its full role in the future of our country.”
Money raised is going towards new research to provide data and algorithm-backed tactical voting recommendations, so as to educate and empower people to make a tactical vote. It will be promoted both both online and on the ground with the help of volunteers. Funding will also go directly to Parliamentary candidates who have committed to keeping all #brexit options open.
Gina also encouraged young people to register to vote:
“This will be the most important election of a generation. It’s crucial that people feel inspired to register and vote. It is particularly essential for young people to vote, as they will be living with the consequences of the decisions taken in the next parliament for the rest of their lives.”
You can watch Best for Britain‘s launch event to hear the rest of Gina’s speech:
Gina previously brought a successful legal challenge against the UK government in the Supreme Court, forcing the Prime Minister to seek parliamentary approval for #brexit.
Best for Britain will be working with various other organisations and campaigns in the UK, and is also seeking advice from the tactical voting campaign team that got Justin Trudeau elected as Prime Minister in Canada.
Here’s what Best for Britain says it stands for:
1. The most important decision is yet to come
People across the UK must be able to rely on their MPs to reject any deal that does not measure up as best for Britain. No one should have to sign a blank sheet of paper.
A future deal will change this country
We want to work with people around the country to connect people with Parliament and their representatives to make sure everyone has the opportunity to participate in the process. We will help amplify your voice with your local MPs to ensure that your voice is heard.
Britain deserves the best outcome
Any Prime Minister of this country has a mandate to begin negotiations, but the terms of our future relationship with the EU have yet to be agreed, and these new terms will present a new set of options for the country. We want those options to be set out against each other at the end of the process, and for the Parliament to be free to decide what is the best for Britain.
To get involved, visit their website at BestforBritain.org.
Dear Gina,
Thank you so much for enshrining in law which is irreversible your enormous contribution to article 50 and the ensuing repeal bill…Every brexiteer has you to thank and every Re-maniac has you to blame,for your one woman crusade which frankly back fired…3 cheers for Gina, hip hip, hooray, hip hip, hooray, hip hip…..
There are many reasons why the UK should not leave the EU; the list grows daily. In contrast, it appears that there is only one frequently voiced reason for leaving – that we must honour the will of the people that was expressed, democratically, in the result of the referendum.
How many times must it be demonstrated that the referendum was anything but democratic? Ignore for a moment the lies and manipulation which contaminated the campaign and simply focus on the figures. From a total electorate of 46,500,000, 37.5% voted to leave, 34.7% voted to remain and 27.8% didn’t vote.
Why the non-voters didn’t vote is totally immaterial. There is only one glaring, material fact – that 37.5% of the electorate voted for Leave and 62.5% did not. So, as for just about every past election, we are seriously suggesting that our fate should be determined by a little over a third of the people. And, whereas in a parliamentary election we can look forward to voting again after a few years, the result of a referendum offers no such future opportunity.
Of course this situation has come about because of the high number of non-voters and the small majority of the winning vote. For something as important as a referendum it is essential to agree in advance thresholds for both turnout and winning majority. Perhaps if David Cameron had been less cocksure about the result he would have given some thought to the design of the referendum. As it is, a result of 52% – 48% on a turnout of 72% does not command respect as the ‘will of the people’, only, in this case, the will of just over a third of them. In fact it might even be considered as unconstitutional.