Current Affairs EU In or Out

[JonS]

The shocking thing about going to Parliament before invoking Article 50 is that, in theory, they could decide not to invoke it. This is despite a referendum that was clearly presented to the public (including in the booklet that was sent around) as binding - that our wishes would be carried out. In my opinion, if it does go to Parliament any MP, of whatever political persuasion (and they are some in all parties: Fallon, Clarke, Lammy), that votes against invoking Article 50 is (by virtue of their wish to trample on our democratic process) a disgrace and unfit to be an MP.

 

[Joey66]

People don't want the truth. We've seen during the Trump thing that his lies were highlighted numerous times and it didn't make a blind bit of difference. Likewise, there has been warning after warning post-Brexit and they're similarly brushed off with that helpful catch all that we don't need experts any more. When your reasoning style is akin to sticking your fingers in your ears and going tra-la-la then it's always going to be hard.

The funny thing is, when (if) it really does go wrong, those same folks won't blame the choices they made, but rather the people who warned them it'd be rubbish. We've seen that already with SNova suggesting that the rise in the far-right in Europe is the fault of Merkel for being too kind. So is there likely to be some kind of damascene moment where the people of Thanet et al become open and tolerant? I doubt it somehow.

That you've got people on an Everton forum preaching about 'the people having spoken', despite not only most people in Liverpool voting otherwise, but also clearly most of their fellow GOT members, it says mountains for me.

71.5 million spoke OUT Bruce the Esk points the laws out in detail nowhere does it say what majority was needed so OUT won - like any sore losers mainly big businesses they do not like it it's the people's choice they do not want to be in a self governing Polictical EU union end of!

 

[Joey66]

Just make em vote again, just like the Irish.

Yes the bully boys of the EU backed by the blairs and Cleggs the kinnocks the mandelesons who will lose their EU pensions!

 

[Whistlin' Dixie]

The funny thing about this is that now that people actually know the truths after the vote, if a second referendum were done it would soundly get beaten and so many more people would vote.

Like the last time when remain were meant to have walked it?

Well, in case you missed it, here's the news...They didn't. Know why? Because people were increasingly sick of listening to those bleating morons in westminster, wanting their own way.

Here's a prediction. They wouldn't again. Know why? Because more people are becoming increasingly sick of listening to those bleating morons in westminster, crying about not getting their way.

People don't want the truth. We've seen during the Trump thing that his lies were highlighted numerous times and it didn't make a blind bit of difference. Likewise, there has been warning after warning post-Brexit and they're similarly brushed off with that helpful catch all that we don't need experts any more. When your reasoning style is akin to sticking your fingers in your ears and going tra-la-la then it's always going to be hard.

The funny thing is, when (if) it really does go wrong, those same folks won't blame the choices they made, but rather the people who warned them it'd be rubbish. We've seen that already with SNova suggesting that the rise in the far-right in Europe is the fault of Merkel for being too kind. So is there likely to be some kind of damascene moment where the people of Thanet et al become open and tolerant? I doubt it somehow.

That you've got people on an Everton forum preaching about 'the people having spoken', despite not only most people in Liverpool voting otherwise, but also clearly most of their fellow GOT members, it says mountains for me.

lol

 

[peteblue]

You have moved on Pete. Don't presume to speak for a great many people who haven't. I know it seems like their views are unimportant and all. There's a lot of talk at the moment about the elite being out of touch, but that fails to account for the 16 million of so people who voted to stay in the EU, or the however many million that voted to keep Trump out of the white house. Those people aren't 'an elite', and I'm afraid your views on being better off are absurd. Were Marconi better off whatever happened with the telecoms licenses?

It's not my fault if those who voted remain cannot move on. They voted, they didn't get a majority. When the Conservatives won the GE the nine million or so Labour voters accepted the result and moved on, just as the millions of Tory voters would do if it were the other way around, just as the Leave voters would have done had they lost. If you cannot see that trying to undermine a public vote with a clear winner is undemocratic, petulant and self serving then I am sorry, but it really is time for everyone to move on and make the best of our new direction.........

 

[The Esk]

If a Prime Minister, his cabinet and the opposition make it very clear, repeatedly, that the result will be binding then politically there is no going back.

If you can find a single quote from any minister to the contrary, the remain side might have a prayer of achieving something in parliament.

In October 2010, David Cameron’s Government responsed to an inquiry by a House of Lords committee, as follows:

"because of the sovereignty of Parliament, referendums cannot be legally binding in the UK, and are therefore advisory".

In response, then-constitutional reform minister Mark Harper stated: "The Government agrees with this recommendation.

"Under the UK’s constitutional arrangements, Parliament must be responsible for deciding whether or not to take action in response to a referendum result."

 

[Whistlin' Dixie]

In October 2010, David Cameron’s Government responsed to an inquiry by a House of Lords committee, as follows:

That inquiry concluded that "because of the sovereignty of Parliament, referendums cannot be legally binding in the UK, and are therefore advisory".

In response, then-constitutional reform minister Mark Harper stated: "The Government agrees with this recommendation.

"Under the UK’s constitutional arrangements, Parliament must be responsible for deciding whether or not to take action in response to a referendum result."

They'd do well to take the advice then, wouldn't they?

Mark Harper? Ha! Illegal immigrant employing hypocrite. 'Go Home' - unless you work as my cleaner

 

[1966efc]

From the government pamphlet, posted to every household ...

The referendum on Thursday, 23rd June is your chance to decide if we should remain in or leave the European Union.

And ...

This is your decision. The Government will implement what you decide.

In addition to the multiplicity of spoken assertions to the same effect. I don't recall any of this being challenged as to its legality.

 

[SNova]

People don't want the truth. We've seen during the Trump thing that his lies were highlighted numerous times and it didn't make a blind bit of difference. Likewise, there has been warning after warning post-Brexit and they're similarly brushed off with that helpful catch all that we don't need experts any more. When your reasoning style is akin to sticking your fingers in your ears and going tra-la-la then it's always going to be hard.

The funny thing is, when (if) it really does go wrong, those same folks won't blame the choices they made, but rather the people who warned them it'd be rubbish. We've seen that already with SNova suggesting that the rise in the far-right in Europe is the fault of Merkel for being too kind. So is there likely to be some kind of damascene moment where the people of Thanet et al become open and tolerant? I doubt it somehow.

That you've got people on an Everton forum preaching about 'the people having spoken', despite not only most people in Liverpool voting otherwise, but also clearly most of their fellow GOT members, it says mountains for me.

People want sensible border control. Merkel let's in millions and she is meant to be the Conservative in Germany. Where do you suppose the people will turn to? It's common sense. Can you not see that?

 

[peteblue]

In October 2010, David Cameron’s Government responsed to an inquiry by a House of Lords committee, as follows:

"because of the sovereignty of Parliament, referendums cannot be legally binding in the UK, and are therefore advisory".

In response, then-constitutional reform minister Mark Harper stated: "The Government agrees with this recommendation.

"Under the UK’s constitutional arrangements, Parliament must be responsible for deciding whether or not to take action in response to a referendum result."

I don't think that was his point though Esk. The Government have decided to implement what the public voted for, they have not chosen to reject the vote........In the same way that Governments decided to sign up for ever more Europe, this one will initiate less/no Europe.......

 

[1966efc]

In October 2010, David Cameron’s Government responsed to an inquiry by a House of Lords committee, as follows:

"because of the sovereignty of Parliament, referendums cannot be legally binding in the UK, and are therefore advisory".

In response, then-constitutional reform minister Mark Harper stated: "The Government agrees with this recommendation.

"Under the UK’s constitutional arrangements, Parliament must be responsible for deciding whether or not to take action in response to a referendum result."

Sorry ... posted something about this before reading your 'alert'.

It doesn't, however, reply to my point. What happens, eventually, is what parliament wants to happen. The politics of the business will determine the outcome.

 

[SNova]

It's this simple.

The first referendum question: 'Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?'

The answer comes back No.

All fine. Go through parliament, get approval for Article 50 to start the process to leave (which will pass through as parliament will accept the democratic principle of the referendum).

At that point, we're negotiating the terms of leaving. We have NOT been asked what terms we leave on - neither parliament or a referendum has had a chance to judge those terms.

Therefore, the second referendum makes perfect sense - not to ask again if we should leave, but the question should be.

"Do you support the process of leaving the European Union via the Brexit Act 2018 (or whatever it'll be called)?"

At that point, we should actually have referendum after referendum until the answer is Yes, because Article 50 can be cancelled at any point in those two years, so if we keep getting the answer No at that point, there's no reason not to re-run (it'd be ludicrous if it was an unimportant issue, but this is the biggest issue of a generation - it makes sense to do it thoroughly).

But during the process, if we keep getting No and it's looking likely the public have changed their mind for economic reasons or whatever, then we should ask the original question again.

People who have applauded the referendum have applauded democracy in action - therefore, why are you all so scared of democracy continuing to act? You trusted and applauded the public for its' decision in the first instance; why be so wary of asking them again about the terms? Or, if you really are afraid of another referendum, why not advocate parliament having a free vote on it according to their conscience, given they are elected to govern?

So you think we should go into a negotiation with the EU with them knowing that if they give us a bad deal we'll eventually vote to stay?

 

[peteblue]

People want sensible border control. Merkel let's in millions and she is meant to be the Conservative in Germany. Where do you suppose the people will turn to? It's common sense. Can you not see that?

Bruce will never see that. He, very commendably, believes in open Borders and allowing anyone to live wherever they want without restrictions. Obviously this is not a practical stance, but it appears to be the one he consistently observes....

 

[Whistlin' Dixie]

People want sensible border control. Merkel let's in millions and she is meant to be the Conservative in Germany. Where do you suppose the people will turn to? It's common sense. Can you not see that?

Take no notice mate. Let's follow Brucey's 'advice' and let in millions of refugees, asylum seekers and economic migrants, dump them in the poorer areas of the country, deprive the people there of funds and public services (But not kensington & chelsea or belgravia and the likes, oh, no siree) and see how people flock to the extremists when they're the only ones voicing concern - because every other party will tell you it's YOUR fault for complaining and you're racist because of it.

 

[blue76]

I'd be interested if even a single person has changed their opinion after reading this thread.