DEBATE on Brexit took place in York again this weekend, as Rachael Maskell met with voters from both sides.

The York Central MP told about 120 visitors to a meeting at Clements Hall on Saturday morning that Brexit "started as a process about the Conservative party and still is a process about the Conservative party", but the concerns of voters on both sides of the argument must be respected.

York Press:

However, after another frantic week for all sides in the House Of Commons, Ms Maskell said "there aren't clear heads around at the moment, we need to slow and calm it down".

She said: "Be careful what you wish for. If you think Europe is broken, I can tell you Westminster is completely broken.

"I don't think anyone can carry what the Prime Minister is having to carry out at the moment. It's just too much when the stakes are so high and you're culpable for that."

Addressing concerns about a 'no deal' Brexit, Ms Maskell said she would be surprised if that happened, but it was still a concern.

She said: "I think, deep down, the Prime Minster won't let us fall off a cliff edge. I cannot believe she would be that reckless.

"We either have to extend [Article 50] and take place in the European elections, or revoke Article 50, which we can re-trigger later. I don't know how she can bring 'meaningful vote four' back to Parliament without attaching something to it. Putting it out to the country is the only way of breaking this deadlock."

York Press:

Concerns were raised by some at the meeting over EU workers living in the UK and whether a public vote would cause the public to lose faith in Parliament and democracy.

She said: "The reality is business can't have confidence in the UK, jobs will be lost and economic modelling suggests we will be much, much poorer as a result of Brexit.

"I do respect the vote we had but I think there's a reality there that if Parliament are allowed to vote four times on the Prime Minister's deal, people in our city and country should be allowed to vote for the first time on the Prime Minister's deal. Why should Parliament be given a second vote on the same thing when people in the county don't have even a first vote?"