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.
Tubey said:
We'll see, but in my eyes parliament won't have the guts to overrule, fearing civil unrest, despite how obvious the decision is economically.
Click to expand...

Sadly I agree with this.

Interestingly it should be remembered that the Conservatives were elected on a manifesto promoting the remain case.

I'll be reminding my Tory MP that he should vote in line with his election manifesto.
 
I see that remainers now believe that they will have a say on what sort of Brexit we will have before initiating article 50. The point of course is that absolutely no negotiations can even begin until it is initiated, therefore we don't know what type of Brexit we will have until negotiations conclude. The ruling today just means that parliament needs to give it's assent to initiate article 50, unless I'm missing something........
 
Tubey said:
We'll see, but in my eyes parliament won't have the guts to overrule, fearing civil unrest, despite how obvious the decision is economically.

I think all this does is take away the sovereign ability of one person in May to make this decision like she's the Queen in 1723 or something and put it in the hands of the elected body for the entire process, which is obviously the right thing to do.
Click to expand...
The Commons won't ultimately overrule the actioning of article 50 - but it WILL have a huge influence on the mandate they will provide May and the 3 Stooges in terms of what Brexit actually means i.e. what the intended priorities are.

The Lords could volley this about for 2 years don't forget.

May's original decision to try and bypass the democratic process was something I always thought was doomed to fail, she was trying to placate the far right and show her metal to the electorate. The question is did she always know this was going to be the outcome, her choice of counsel was interesting if you check out his background and relative lack of experience compared to his adversary.
 
Gwladysstreetlad said:
Why do you and the other remainers keep quoting that clown Fararge? I know it would be convenient in your own mind for it to be so but the vast bulk of leave voters didn't base their vote on or even care what he said. Just as the bulk of the remain didn't base their vote on the juvenile threats of Obama and Gideon.
Click to expand...
You suggested it was the remain "side" that did not respect votes. Farage was on the Leave "side" and it's quite clear from that interview he wasn't willing to respect the outcome that happened had it been reversed. Why then should the remain "side". Further to this, I don't care that its Farage who said it. Just that the leave "side" did.
 
peteblue said:
I see that remainers now believe that they will have a say on what sort of Brexit we will have before initiating article 50. The point of course is that absolutely no negotiations can even begin until it is initiated, therefore we don't know what type of Brexit we will have until negotiations conclude. The ruling today just means that parliament needs to give it's assent to initiate article 50, unless I'm missing something........
Click to expand...

Whilst correct, it also probably means that parliament will need full detail of what we're actually doing when we trigger Article 50 - as in what is the aim in terms of immigration, the single market and so on, instead of just going "oh, well we'll trigger it and wing that later."

So now the government is forced to actually explain itself and not just act on pure ideology and the executive prerogative.
 
Foot Long Hot Dog said:
The Commons won't ultimately overrule the actioning of article 50 - but it WILL have a huge influence on the mandate they will provide May and the 3 Stooges in terms of what Brexit actually means i.e. what the intended priorities are.

The Lords could volley this about for 2 years don't forget.

May's original decision to try and bypass the democratic process was something I always thought was doomed to fail, she was trying to placate the far right and show her metal to the electorate. The question is did she always know this was going to be the outcome, her choice of counsel was interesting if you check out his background and relative lack of experience compared to his adversary.
Click to expand...

Oh agreed. I just mean that if Theresa May is smart, she will still advocate hard Brexit and challenge MPs to shoot it down, because my view is they won't have the bottle.

Also, bare in mind that if she does detail concessions, they mean jack squat because the EU will set the rules of leaving, so parliament don't even know what terms they are voting for.

It's a massive mess, and all a result of both sides placing too much emphasis on the referendum, when they should have taken it for what it was - an official opinion poll to bare in mind, and ignore if it was obviously insane, because you're an elected body of politicians whose job it is to act in the best interests of the electorate ffs.
 
Brexit means Brexit.
Well maybe not...not just yet anyway...and there might be a vote...sooner (good say some, get it done), but maybe later, which might mean amendments tacked on, then that might lead to appeals.

and at the moment the highest court in the land...well not exactly in the land, is - ta-daaa.
The European Court of Appeal.
 
Re my earlier comments on it should only ever be Parliament that decides changes to the rights of British citizens, and that is what the High Court has essentially considered, is confirmed here:

 
Macca99 said:
You suggested it was the remain "side" that did not respect votes. Farage was on the Leave "side" and it's quite clear from that interview he wasn't willing to respect the outcome that happened had it been reversed. Why then should the remain "side". Further to this, I don't care that its Farage who said it. Just that the leave "side" did.
Click to expand...
Fararge is one man and doesn't represent anyone. The remainers have been given far more credence then leave would of been given if the vote had gone the other way. If it had ended 52% to remain the media (and everyone else for that matter) would of dismissed Fararge out of hand. I personally think the idea of ignoring any election/referendum result is disgusting regardless of which way the vote goes.
 
The Esk said:
Just one example but there are many of course mate, the right to freedom of movement across the EU.
Click to expand...
Ok Esk, but it doesn't mean that we won't be able to travel across or visit EU countries. We have our passports and I'm sure that visiting rights between UK and EU will be quite favourable. If we wanted to live or work there, then there will be a visa process. It would be financial suicide for EU not to have favourable bilateral terms for UK citizens. The overwhelming majority of people who just holiday in Europe will not notice any change I'm sure.

The same applies to free trade changes. It makes absolute sense for favourable agreement on tariffs between UK and EU as so much business is conducted between the two.

As regards all the European laws currently in force over here, do you not agree that these will all be adopted as UK law by an act of parliament as part of the Brexit procedure.? There's absolutely no other way of doing this, especially within the two year time frame once article 50 invoked. The Govt will then look at which laws they would be looking to change, which would all nee to go through parliament like any other law change. It's unlikely but possible this will include some changes to citizens rights but I imagine any attempt to do so would be massively opposed in Parliament.

Just think that the wide ranging statement that Brexit will bring about the removal of citizens rights, is the sort of statement the attention seeking gutter press might make. Sorry mate;)
 
Tubey said:
Whilst correct, it also probably means that parliament will need full detail of what we're actually doing when we trigger Article 50 - as in what is the aim in terms of immigration, the single market and so on, instead of just going "oh, well we'll trigger it and wing that later."

So now the government is forced to actually explain itself and not just act on pure ideology and the executive prerogative.
Click to expand...

I like the fact that every time we made changes to the EU treaties, handing more powers to the EU, they were done using this prerogative and any resultant court challenge failed. Now it was wanted to be used to take away powers from the EU the court has taken a completely opposite view. There is now also the possibility that this will end up at the ECJ regarding the irreversibility of article 50. I think every election or decision that is taken in this country will now end up in court.......
 
Last edited:
gonetomorrow said:
Well obviously we have to make the best of it but it feels like we're in the hands of a confused bunch of children trying to appear statesmanlike but floundering underneath it all.
Click to expand...

Only because all the remain children started throwing toys out of prams. I'm pretty confident that TM and her government together with the Civil Service can sort it all out. It would have just helped a bit if they were not having to deal with all the remainers who are stabbing them in the back........
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

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

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

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