Current Affairs EU In or Out

In or Out

  • In

    Votes: 688 67.9%
  • Out

    Votes: 325 32.1%

  • Total voters
    1,013
Status
Not open for further replies.
Then you'll agree that a referendum can only ever be advisory and not binding?

A presumption on your part which has no foundation in fact or truth. I have not agreed to any such thing, for the simple reason I have never commented on the Referendum being so. Come on, Esk, you must really do better. Do not claim to speak for me...
 
It's interesting that many Brexit voters are saying we should respect the will of the people because a small majority voted to leave.

What about the fact that the majority of the population didn't vote to leave, only the majority of those who were allowed and chose to vote ? Many young voters who are forward thinking and wanted to remain were unable to be involved due to an arbitrary age limit. Should a small majority of a portion of the population be allowed to dictate their future ?

Personally I think those over a certain age shouldn't be allowed to vote, if we're going to prevent intelligent and involved teenagers from voting. Why should a 75 year old who likely doesn't have many years left to live be given the vote ?

That's one of the many reasons why a referendum is not and should never be legally binding or a final decision.

It's not legally binding, but it was put to the electorate by the government in the understanding that the govt would follow whatever the electorate told them.

On age, I think anyone 16 or over should have been able to vote, but they couldn't and that can't be changed retrospectively. Stopping 75+ year olds voting is a nice bit of popcorning but two wrongs don't make a right.

I was a teenager when the 1975 referendum took place and I remember Enoch Powell arguing that parliament should ignore the electorate back then and he was rightly condemned for that idea.

It's a funny old world whereby the opposite spectrum of what Powell wanted ( ie non-xenophobic Remain supporters ) are using pretty much the same argument that he was.
 
It's not legally binding, but it was put to the electorate by the government in the understanding that the govt would follow whatever the electorate told them

Well yeah, but the question was In or Out. The result was close, but most are, so fine.

But the question was not on what terms we leave on. 10 minutes after the result, many of the "pro leave" points were either denied, rewritten, or shown up to be down right lies.

So, on that premise, surely the terms we end up with should be at least voted on in at least the HOC?

Or, would Outers be happy that we negotiate an agreement to leave the nasty bits of the EU that they dont like, say, the EU Court, but retain a free trade agreement but with freedom of movement?
 
Then you'll agree that a referendum can only ever be advisory and not binding?

Actually, unless my memory is playing tricks on me, the referendum which took place in 2011 ( or thereabouts ) on changing the voting system was legally binding.

So a referendum can be legally binding, but the latest one wasn't.
 
Actually, unless my memory is playing tricks on me, the referendum which took place in 2011 ( or thereabouts ) on changing the voting system was legally binding.

So a referendum can be legally binding, but the latest one wasn't.

The AV one?

Only about 8 people voted.
 
Well yeah, but the question was In or Out. The result was close, but most are, so fine.

But the question was not on what terms we leave on. 10 minutes after the result, many of the "pro leave" points were either denied, rewritten, or shown up to be down right lies.

So, on that premise, surely the terms we end up with should be at least voted on in at least the HOC?

Or, would Outers be happy that we negotiate an agreement to leave the nasty bits of the EU that they dont like, say, the EU Court, but retain a free trade agreement but with freedom of movement?

Aa far as I'm concerned it's fine for parliament to debate, fine tune and vote on how we go about the process of Brexit.

But, if they try to use that process to effectively stop Brexit happening to pander to the chattering classes because they don't like the answer the electorate gave them then they're overstepping their remit, which is to represent their electorate.

Otherwise there is absolutely no point in holding a referendum.
 
The AV one?

Only about 8 people voted.

Haha !!!

So what. We've had three UK wide referendums and a third of them have been legally binding, so it's wrong to say they can't be.

Hey, I'm an analyst and a stickler for detail !
Hopefully I'm not talking bollocks ;)
 
But, if they try to use that process to effectively stop Brexit happening to pander to the chattering classes because they don't like the answer the electorate gave them then they're overstepping their remit, which is to represent their electorate.

Otherwise there is absolutely no point in holding a referendum.


200.gif
 
You didn't challenge anything you just trashed the stats provided waffling on about whether they'd asked every 18-24 year old in the land.


Wrong, totally wrong. I did not 'trash' the stats. You stated a %age for the 18-24 years age group, for example. You cannot make that kind of claim in a blanket fashion, and expect it to be accepted as gospel.

You quoted statistics purporting to show the voting of age groups, from a poll, I believe.

I simply pointed out that you didn't show the evidence of the poll sample. And logically, moved on to question whether the poll figures you quoted were statistically valid.

What part of the above do you not understand?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top