Today's Brexit vote

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
Post Reply
JohnMcGreal
Posts: 2207
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:37 am
Been Liked: 1344 times
Has Liked: 438 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by JohnMcGreal » Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:20 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Come off it Dom, you know as well as i do that a low tariff, low welfare country means less money on public services.

And as we are going to have a Tory govt for the foreseeable future, that is where we are heading
Tax haven's have even less money to spend on public services. Still, it's all about taking back control, or something.
Last edited by JohnMcGreal on Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Quickenthetempo
Posts: 17930
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:35 am
Been Liked: 3845 times
Has Liked: 2066 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by Quickenthetempo » Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:23 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:If Quikenthetempo is going down that route.

Then BOOM!

The referendum is only advisory. Thats all it is.
Does it really look like a promise to you? Or a suggestion?

Has a promise ever started with the word 'Lets'?

Unfortunately I don't think any of my views will influence anything to do with the referendum.

Lancasterclaret
Posts: 23343
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
Been Liked: 8058 times
Has Liked: 4714 times
Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by Lancasterclaret » Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:26 pm

Your argument is like the Brexit one for trade.

Very, very weak

quoonbeatz
Posts: 4491
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:03 am
Been Liked: 2562 times
Has Liked: 757 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by quoonbeatz » Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:29 pm

Quickenthetempo wrote:Does it really look like a promise to you? Or a suggestion?

Has a promise ever started with the word 'Lets'?
as long as nobody thinks they can complain when that money isn't spent on the nhs, thats fine.

Darthlaw
Posts: 3060
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:08 pm
Been Liked: 1177 times
Has Liked: 414 times
Location: Death Star, Dark Side Row S Seat 666

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by Darthlaw » Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:30 pm

If you can't understand the difference between a manifesto (promise) issued by a party and a suggestion put forward by one side of a campaign then you are in bother.

Just how were 'leave' or 'Remain' going to implement any of their suggested changes, exactly? The public were voting on the act to leave or remain, not for governance.
This user liked this post: Quickenthetempo

Imploding Turtle
Posts: 19799
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
Been Liked: 5483 times
Has Liked: 2540 times
Location: Burnley, Lancs

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by Imploding Turtle » Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:40 pm

Darthlaw wrote:If you can't understand the difference between a manifesto (promise) issued by a party and a suggestion put forward by one side of a campaign then you are in bother.

Just how were 'leave' or 'Remain' going to implement any of their suggested changes, exactly? The public were voting on the act to leave or remain, not for governance.
So politicians can say anything they like as long as it's not in the manifesto, or explicitly uses "promise", and they don't have to follow through?

Imagine if your mate said to you "come over to mine and let's get drunk" and when you got there he told you he's going out while you babysit, you'd be pretty ****** off. But hey, he only suggested you get drunk.
This user liked this post: Rick_Muller

Quickenthetempo
Posts: 17930
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:35 am
Been Liked: 3845 times
Has Liked: 2066 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by Quickenthetempo » Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:42 pm

quoonbeatz wrote:as long as nobody thinks they can complain when that money isn't spent on the nhs, thats fine.
Whatever happens after we leave the EU it is down to our government and can be held accountable.

Darthlaw
Posts: 3060
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:08 pm
Been Liked: 1177 times
Has Liked: 414 times
Location: Death Star, Dark Side Row S Seat 666

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by Darthlaw » Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:47 pm

Leave - Spend £350 m on the NHS

Remain - World War 3 if we leave

Leave - We'll reduce immigration

Remain - Punishment budget will be required.

It would seem that yes, politicians can say anything they like. Imagine that, politicians lying...
This user liked this post: Sidney1st

quoonbeatz
Posts: 4491
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:03 am
Been Liked: 2562 times
Has Liked: 757 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by quoonbeatz » Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:48 pm

Darthlaw wrote:If you can't understand the difference between a manifesto (promise) issued by a party and a suggestion put forward by one side of a campaign then you are in bother.
.
agreed but i think there's a lot of people 'in bother', thats kind of why we are where we are.

there's no need to be misleading. to campaign on something saying 'we can do this' but then as soon as you've won be like 'psyche!' is a bit shitty really.

goes for both sides that.
Last edited by quoonbeatz on Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

WadingInDeeper
Posts: 534
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:37 pm
Been Liked: 155 times
Has Liked: 57 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by WadingInDeeper » Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:49 pm

Quickenthetempo wrote:So which politicians who were responsible for the bus advert have a say in were the money we save will be spent?
Is it a quiz? I'm going for the current Foreign Secretary.

Darthlaw
Posts: 3060
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:08 pm
Been Liked: 1177 times
Has Liked: 414 times
Location: Death Star, Dark Side Row S Seat 666

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by Darthlaw » Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:52 pm

quoonbeatz wrote:agreed but i think there's a lot of people 'in bother', thats kind of why we are where we are.

there's no need to be misleading. to campaign on something saying 'we can do this' but then as soon as you've won be like 'psyche!' is a bit shitty really.

goes for both sides that.
My point is both were as misleading as the other. Unfortunately for Remain, they got found out sooner with Dave's 'I'll get reform from the EU' and his subsequent Neville Chamberlain moment.

The fact Juncker, the day before the referendum, said there would be no more reform just showed how equally empty Remain's promises could be.
This user liked this post: quoonbeatz

minnieclaret
Posts: 6842
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:05 am
Been Liked: 2012 times
Has Liked: 2287 times
Location: lismore co. waterford

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by minnieclaret » Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:55 pm

Manifestoes tick me off. They cover a myriad of subjects, all diverse. You might vote on one of them but when they win they scream "We have a manifesto".
We need more referendums, like the Swiss.

RingoMcCartney
Posts: 10318
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
Been Liked: 2636 times
Has Liked: 2798 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by RingoMcCartney » Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:57 pm

Still lots of huffing n puffing from Remoaners.

Burnley lost to a dubious penalty on Sunday. I was gutted. But it's Tuesday now and looking forward to making progress in the Cup. And getting 3 more valuable survival points against Leicester on Tuesday. Whining and whinging about what happened in North London won't change a thing.

Remoaners. Democracy isn't something that's only rammed down other people's throats. Accept the referendum result like as Clarets, we have to take Sundays result on the chin.

Morinho whines and moans is decisions go against him.

Be more like Dyche. "We move on"

Lancasterclaret
Posts: 23343
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
Been Liked: 8058 times
Has Liked: 4714 times
Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by Lancasterclaret » Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:58 pm

Aye, years of utter ******** from politicians has finally come home to roost in Brexit and Trump.

Sidney1st
Posts: 15478
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:40 pm
Been Liked: 3547 times
Has Liked: 5594 times
Location: Oxfordshire

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by Sidney1st » Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:58 pm

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 42976.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

:lol:

Darthlaw
Posts: 3060
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:08 pm
Been Liked: 1177 times
Has Liked: 414 times
Location: Death Star, Dark Side Row S Seat 666

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by Darthlaw » Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:59 pm

Please stop referring to them as remoaners. It's actually quite good to have debate at last with some who voted remain without that pish being thrown around.

Darthlaw
Posts: 3060
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:08 pm
Been Liked: 1177 times
Has Liked: 414 times
Location: Death Star, Dark Side Row S Seat 666

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by Darthlaw » Tue Jan 24, 2017 1:00 pm

Wow.

We'l be having a referendum on which postage to send the final proposal on next. ;)

dsr
Posts: 15139
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by dsr » Tue Jan 24, 2017 1:01 pm

JohnMcGreal wrote:The right decision. The great dictator is going to have to learn that we live in a parliamentary democracy, and she can't just do as she pleases while bypassing our sovereign parliament.

dsr
Posts: 15139
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by dsr » Tue Jan 24, 2017 1:03 pm

I think the objections are not that the PM can't do what she wants because Parliament has the veto; it's that the public via referendum's view is also subject to Parliament's veto. There are arguments as to whether or not we have referendums at all, but if we are having them, they ought to be binding on parliament; It now appears they are not.

quoonbeatz
Posts: 4491
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:03 am
Been Liked: 2562 times
Has Liked: 757 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by quoonbeatz » Tue Jan 24, 2017 1:05 pm

Darthlaw wrote:My point is both were as misleading as the other. Unfortunately for Remain, they got found out sooner with Dave's 'I'll get reform from the EU' and his subsequent Neville Chamberlain moment.

The fact Juncker, the day before the referendum, said there would be no more reform just showed how equally empty Remain's promises could be.
i think thats the biggest problem with this referendum, both arguments were packed with bo11ocks.

for me there were good and bad reasons on both sides and it was a really hard decision to make but to actually find those parts of the argument you had to wade through all the wildly polar headlines - almost all of which were bullsh1t.
Last edited by quoonbeatz on Tue Jan 24, 2017 1:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
These 3 users liked this post: Sidney1st Darthlaw keith1879

quoonbeatz
Posts: 4491
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:03 am
Been Liked: 2562 times
Has Liked: 757 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by quoonbeatz » Tue Jan 24, 2017 1:07 pm

Darthlaw wrote:Please stop referring to them as remoaners. It's actually quite good to have debate at last with some who voted remain without that pish being thrown around.

Ringo still shakes his fist at passing planes so you're fighting a losing battle there.
These 5 users liked this post: Sidney1st Darthlaw Bacchus Cheerful SammyBoy

Rileybobs
Posts: 16689
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
Been Liked: 6903 times
Has Liked: 1471 times
Location: Leeds

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by Rileybobs » Tue Jan 24, 2017 1:35 pm

Remoaners is really witty because it's a cross between remainers and moaners.
This user liked this post: keith1879

Bacchus
Posts: 888
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 1:07 pm
Been Liked: 599 times
Has Liked: 171 times
Contact:

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by Bacchus » Tue Jan 24, 2017 1:37 pm

dsr wrote:I think the objections are not that the PM can't do what she wants because Parliament has the veto; it's that the public via referendum's view is also subject to Parliament's veto. There are arguments as to whether or not we have referendums at all, but if we are having them, they ought to be binding on parliament; It now appears they are not.
The referendum was never legally binding. Nothing has changed here. All that has happened is that the legal basis of the referendum result has been tested by experts and a judgement passed. It's been shown that David Cameron's government screwed up royally by not nailing the legal position down in advance.

Sovereignty of Parliament has been upheld. As I understand it, 'restoring' that sovereignty (as though it was ever lost) was a fundamental aim of the Leave campaign, so why are so many advocates of Brexit now up in arms? It's illogical and supports the argument that a good number of people didn't really understand the issues that they were voting on. If anything, complaining about this judgement undermines the referendum result more than advancing the argument that it should be legally binding.

Damo
Posts: 4505
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 12:04 pm
Been Liked: 1777 times
Has Liked: 2761 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by Damo » Tue Jan 24, 2017 2:10 pm

IMG_20170124_140446.jpg
IMG_20170124_140446.jpg (188.72 KiB) Viewed 2674 times
Some of you seemed like you were up to about stage 4 and close to getting over it.
I fear many have slipped all the way back to stage 2 after today though

Colburn_Claret
Posts: 8069
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:30 pm
Been Liked: 3060 times
Has Liked: 5023 times
Location: Catterick N.Yorks

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by Colburn_Claret » Tue Jan 24, 2017 2:25 pm

minnieclaret wrote:Manifestoes tick me off. They cover a myriad of subjects, all diverse. You might vote on one of them but when they win they scream "We have a manifesto".
We need more referendums, like the Swiss.
But you can't have a referendum and then complain about the result. The people had their say, many disagree, but that is democracy.
Personally I think too many referendum would cause more problems. Only because manifestos come as a package. Many of the components are dependent on the others. If you start cherry picking policy you would end up with chaos, and nothing would be achieved. That's why we vote for a party's manifesto, and not for the Labour plan for the NHS, and the Tories plan for the economy ....

minnieclaret
Posts: 6842
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:05 am
Been Liked: 2012 times
Has Liked: 2287 times
Location: lismore co. waterford

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by minnieclaret » Tue Jan 24, 2017 2:36 pm

Colburn_Claret wrote: That's why we vote for a party's manifesto, and not for the Labour plan for the NHS, and the Tories plan for the economy ....
This was my point. People don't vote for a full manifesto they vote for what matters to them. Whether it be immigration, the EU, NHS, taxes, housing, etc.,
a referendum is final. However wrong the result you honour it.
This user liked this post: Colburn_Claret

RocketLawnChair
Been Liked: 1 time
Has Liked: 826 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by RocketLawnChair » Tue Jan 24, 2017 2:59 pm

Why are so many obsessed with what the leave campaign put on the side of a bus. I didn't believe it because the NHS is in a state of disrepair and no amount of money will improve it, its gone wrong for too long. Its a model that's 7 decades old and nobody else as copied, that tells you all you need to know. I also think that people who believe a high percentage of leave voters voted for leave because of NHS claim are completely wrong.

To counter the bus campaign though I personally thought the majority of what was coming out of Camerons and Osborne mouths was hot air and ****. Just remember a punishment budget placed on all of us would have generated a figure in pounds and pence far in advance of what the leave campaign were claiming would be pumped back into the NHS, that was also a whopping great and proven to be unnecessary lie by Osborne. Cameron resigned despite claiming he would honour the result and lead us no matter what the outcome, look what happened within 24 hours.

Both sides were as bad as each other and anybody with any sense will have seen through it all and voted for what suited their own situation the best.

And all along Imploding Turtle thinks its wrong for politicians to make promises they cannot keep and that they wont tell us lies. You must have felt let down by an awful lot of politicians on all sides of the political spectrum over the years IT.

dsr
Posts: 15139
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by dsr » Tue Jan 24, 2017 3:04 pm

Bacchus wrote:Sovereignty of Parliament has been upheld. As I understand it, 'restoring' that sovereignty (as though it was ever lost) was a fundamental aim of the Leave campaign, so why are so many advocates of Brexit now up in arms? It's illogical and supports the argument that a good number of people didn't really understand the issues that they were voting on. If anything, complaining about this judgement undermines the referendum result more than advancing the argument that it should be legally binding.
Restoring the sovereignty of Parliament over foreign powers is a good thing. Restoring Parliament's sovereignty over the a public referendum is not. If it is decided to hopld a referendum, it should not be within Parliament's power to overturn that result on the grounds that Parliament is sovereign over the people as a whole. Parliament must be accountable to the electorate.
This user liked this post: Colburn_Claret

Lancasterclaret
Posts: 23343
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
Been Liked: 8058 times
Has Liked: 4714 times
Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by Lancasterclaret » Tue Jan 24, 2017 3:07 pm

Then the referendum needs to be planned properly.

Thank God the people who put it together are no longer in power....oh wait

CrosspoolClarets
Posts: 5231
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:00 pm
Been Liked: 1623 times
Has Liked: 397 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by CrosspoolClarets » Tue Jan 24, 2017 3:59 pm

JohnMcGreal wrote:Tax haven's have even less money to spend on public services. Still, it's all about taking back control, or something.
I've missed much of today's events because I have been doing some work advising the public services of a tax haven how best to spend their money.

I'm thus in a good position to say what complete and utter nonsense the above statement is.

If a tax haven had no money coming in to spend on its citizens, why on earth would it choose to be a tax haven (assuming it is a fully democratic one of course)?

Bacchus
Posts: 888
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 1:07 pm
Been Liked: 599 times
Has Liked: 171 times
Contact:

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by Bacchus » Tue Jan 24, 2017 4:07 pm

dsr wrote:Restoring the sovereignty of Parliament over foreign powers is a good thing. Restoring Parliament's sovereignty over the a public referendum is not. If it is decided to hopld a referendum, it should not be within Parliament's power to overturn that result on the grounds that Parliament is sovereign over the people as a whole. Parliament must be accountable to the electorate.
In which case the referendum should be clearly stated (and legally tested) as being binding on Parliament before it was held. This is one wasn't, as has just been proven. I completely understand that some people disagree with that state of affairs but any complaints should be directed at the government, not the judges or the people who brought this case to court (correctly as has been proven.)

In any case, it won't affect the outcome as Parliament will almost certainly pass any required legislation.

kentonclaret
Posts: 6437
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 4:06 pm
Been Liked: 969 times
Has Liked: 204 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by kentonclaret » Tue Jan 24, 2017 4:18 pm

Gina Miller obviously had a clearer understanding of the Constitution than Theresa Maybe and her advisors otherwise she would not have embarked on this frivolous appeal.

quoonbeatz
Posts: 4491
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:03 am
Been Liked: 2562 times
Has Liked: 757 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by quoonbeatz » Tue Jan 24, 2017 4:35 pm

CrosspoolClarets wrote:If a tax haven had no money coming in to spend on its citizens, why on earth would it choose to be a tax haven (assuming it is a fully democratic one of course)?
i think the point was less money rather than no money.

i'm not massively knowledgeable about such things but i'm not sure any other tax havens have populations of 64 million people.
This user liked this post: JohnMcGreal

nil_desperandum
Posts: 7301
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
Been Liked: 1823 times
Has Liked: 3952 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by nil_desperandum » Tue Jan 24, 2017 4:38 pm

I think that it should be made clear to a minority on this board, that this judicial ruling really has virtually nothing to do with Brexit.
It simply seeks to reaffirm that in any circumstance the authority of the PM and cabinet has to be subject to the scrutiny of Parliament and due process, and that you can't just have a PM using the "Royal prerogative" to push though any measure without full consultation.
For those who disagree. Why not look at it from the opposite angle:
Let's suppose that on June 24th Cameron had said: "This is a very narrow victory for leave. It'll be very bad for business, it'll cause enormous problems with the Irish border, the Scots voted against it, we haven't voted to leave the single market, 16 and 17 year olds who couldn't vote will be part of the electorate by the time we have negotiated an exit, ex-Pats didn't vote, the NHS won't get 350 million etc.etc., and for this reason I'm staying on as PM, and won't be triggering Article 50, but we will seek further negotiation with the EU".
In this circumstance there would have been justified outrage at his dictatorial behaviour, and if he had refused to put this to parliament, then there would have correctly been a legal challenge. You can see the headlines in the Mail, Sun, Express etc., and when judges correctly ruled that Cameron needed to go through due Parliamentary process, then they would have been hailed as "Defenders of Democracy and Friends of the People".
However when Theresa May opts to trigger Article 50 without due Parliamentary process, these same judges are vilified as "Enemies of the People".
So it's really nothing to do with "Remoaning" as some would have it, it's all about defending our hard earned democratic process.
These 3 users liked this post: RocketLawnChair keith1879 Bacchus

Lancasterclaret
Posts: 23343
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
Been Liked: 8058 times
Has Liked: 4714 times
Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by Lancasterclaret » Tue Jan 24, 2017 4:40 pm

To be fair, the only one who doesn't get that is Ringo.

And also to be fair, he doesn't care anyway.

As long as the trains run on time, he's happy.
These 2 users liked this post: nil_desperandum Bacchus

nil_desperandum
Posts: 7301
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
Been Liked: 1823 times
Has Liked: 3952 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by nil_desperandum » Tue Jan 24, 2017 4:43 pm

dsr wrote:Restoring the sovereignty of Parliament over foreign powers is a good thing. Restoring Parliament's sovereignty over the a public referendum is not. If it is decided to hopld a referendum, it should not be within Parliament's power to overturn that result on the grounds that Parliament is sovereign over the people as a whole. Parliament must be accountable to the electorate.
Except its is clearly established, and was recorded in Hansard prior to the referendum, that in our system of parliamentary democracy, any referendum can only be advisory, and is not binding on Parliament.
Basically Parliament can do whatever it wants, but there would be a clear expectation that it would follow the advice of the people.
The big issue is May's misunderstanding of this simple and clear point, and the money and time she has wasted in this legal challenge rather than just getting on with it.

Blackrod
Posts: 5114
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 12:41 pm
Been Liked: 1348 times
Has Liked: 608 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by Blackrod » Tue Jan 24, 2017 4:45 pm

Charlie Mullins is a Tim Sherwood

dsr
Posts: 15139
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by dsr » Tue Jan 24, 2017 4:50 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:Except its is clearly established, and was recorded in Hansard prior to the referendum, that in our system of parliamentary democracy, any referendum can only be advisory, and is not binding on Parliament.
Basically Parliament can do whatever it wants, but there would be a clear expectation that it would follow the advice of the people.
The big issue is May's misunderstanding of this simple and clear point, and the money and time she has wasted in this legal challenge rather than just getting on with it.
It's not just May's understanding that was faulty. Cameron spent the run-up to the vote saying he would invoke article 50 the day after the vote if Brexit won, and he wasn't to my knowledge called up on that. If Cameron hadn't changed his mind (or been lying all along) about stopping in power, this mess could be even worse.

What they presumably will do now is put a one-line bill through the Commons and the Lords to approve the invoking of Article 50. And if, as you claim, they had known all along that this bill would be needed, they would surely have done this on the day after the vote.

Can you link any site anywhere on the internet, published before the vote, that says the vote was advisory and not binding? This Hansard item, for example? It was certainly not widely publicised.

Lancasterclaret
Posts: 23343
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
Been Liked: 8058 times
Has Liked: 4714 times
Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by Lancasterclaret » Tue Jan 24, 2017 4:54 pm

You can't act all shocked when stuff isn't published widely dsr.

maybe the likes of the Sun and the Mail should have spent a bit more time on research on stuff like this, rather than making stuff up about migrants.

RocketLawnChair
Been Liked: 1 time
Has Liked: 826 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by RocketLawnChair » Tue Jan 24, 2017 4:55 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:I think that it should be made clear to a minority on this board, that this judicial ruling really has virtually nothing to do with Brexit.
It simply seeks to reaffirm that in any circumstance the authority of the PM and cabinet has to be subject to the scrutiny of Parliament and due process, and that you can't just have a PM using the "Royal prerogative" to push though any measure without full consultation.
For those who disagree. Why not look at it from the opposite angle:
Let's suppose that on June 24th Cameron had said: "This is a very narrow victory for leave. It'll be very bad for business, it'll cause enormous problems with the Irish border, the Scots voted against it, we haven't voted to leave the single market, 16 and 17 year olds who couldn't vote will be part of the electorate by the time we have negotiated an exit, ex-Pats didn't vote, the NHS won't get 350 million etc.etc., and for this reason I'm staying on as PM, and won't be triggering Article 50, but we will seek further negotiation with the EU".
In this circumstance there would have been justified outrage at his dictatorial behaviour, and if he had refused to put this to parliament, then there would have correctly been a legal challenge. You can see the headlines in the Mail, Sun, Express etc., and when judges correctly ruled that Cameron needed to go through due Parliamentary process, then they would have been hailed as "Defenders of Democracy and Friends of the People".
However when Theresa May opts to trigger Article 50 without due Parliamentary process, these same judges are vilified as "Enemies of the People".
So it's really nothing to do with "Remoaning" as some would have it, it's all about defending our hard earned democratic process.
You know my stance on this nil and I seem to think you disagreed with me to a point. I still firmly believe if Remain had won the referendum we wouldn't have ended up in the supreme court. It would have been a case of status quo lets get on with it. So the judicial ruling does partly have something to do with Brexit because this challenge would never have been brought but for the result of Brexit.

As for the judicial ruling itself I agree with it. The PM and the cabinet cannot just do what they want when they want and major issues should come under extreme scrutiny from our elected MPs. its just concerning that its taken something as monumental as Brexit to remind them of that.
This user liked this post: Lancasterclaret

Imploding Turtle
Posts: 19799
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
Been Liked: 5483 times
Has Liked: 2540 times
Location: Burnley, Lancs

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by Imploding Turtle » Tue Jan 24, 2017 5:14 pm

Darthlaw wrote:Please stop referring to them as remoaners. It's actually quite good to have debate at last with some who voted remain without that pish being thrown around.
Indeed. And if you could stop calling the emergency budget a "punishment budget" that would help the debate along too. You're absolutely right about the "remoaners" nonsense though. That just screams "I'm not to be taken seriously".

Imploding Turtle
Posts: 19799
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
Been Liked: 5483 times
Has Liked: 2540 times
Location: Burnley, Lancs

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by Imploding Turtle » Tue Jan 24, 2017 5:17 pm

RocketLawnChair wrote:You know my stance on this nil and I seem to think you disagreed with me to a point. I still firmly believe if Remain had won the referendum we wouldn't have ended up in the supreme court. It would have been a case of status quo lets get on with it.
Farage even said before the vote that if the result ended up being 52-48 then it wouldn't be the end of the issue.
This user liked this post: SammyBoy

Colburn_Claret
Posts: 8069
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:30 pm
Been Liked: 3060 times
Has Liked: 5023 times
Location: Catterick N.Yorks

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by Colburn_Claret » Tue Jan 24, 2017 5:19 pm

Bacchus wrote:In which case the referendum should be clearly stated (and legally tested) as being binding on Parliament before it was held. This is one wasn't, as has just been proven. I completely understand that some people disagree with that state of affairs but any complaints should be directed at the government, not the judges or the people who brought this case to court (correctly as has been proven.)

In any case, it won't affect the outcome as Parliament will almost certainly pass any required legislation.
But it was. 3 of the judges voted that it didn't need to go back before parliament, therefore at best it's a grey area. Parliament said let the people decide, and they did. Your right, it probably will get ratified anyway, but this whole scenario has been a massive waste of tax payers money, and completely undemocratic.

dsr
Posts: 15139
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by dsr » Tue Jan 24, 2017 5:22 pm

RocketLawnChair wrote:You know my stance on this nil and I seem to think you disagreed with me to a point. I still firmly believe if Remain had won the referendum we wouldn't have ended up in the supreme court. It would have been a case of status quo lets get on with it. So the judicial ruling does partly have something to do with Brexit because this challenge would never have been brought but for the result of Brexit.

As for the judicial ruling itself I agree with it. The PM and the cabinet cannot just do what they want when they want and major issues should come under extreme scrutiny from our elected MPs. its just concerning that its taken something as monumental as Brexit to remind them of that.
But this decision has already been made. Invoking Article 50 is the only way to leave the EU, and the democratic process has been followed logically:

1. The general election was won by the conservatives, who had promised an EU referendum if they won.
2. Parliament passed a bill confirming that the referendum would be held, clearly stating their intention that the referendum result would be a definitive, binding decision on whether we stay or whether we go.
3. The referendum was held and we decided to go.

There is no room for doubt anywhere in the chain of events. The whole process led up to the verdict that the UK population voted to leave the EU, in accordance with the system set out by Parliament, and for Parliament now to say in effect "we had our fingers crossed so it doesn't count" would be a nonsense. If the vote had been to Remain and Cameron had invoked Article 50 next day, that wouldn't have been a bigger nonsense than this lot is.

Put the one-line bill through Parliament, and see which of our legislators has the nerve to tell the public that they don't accept the result of the referendum.

Lancasterclaret
Posts: 23343
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
Been Liked: 8058 times
Has Liked: 4714 times
Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by Lancasterclaret » Tue Jan 24, 2017 5:25 pm

What do you do for a living DSR?

If you are not a retired supreme court judge, then you might be a bit out of your depth on this one!

claretandy
Posts: 4751
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 953 times
Has Liked: 238 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by claretandy » Tue Jan 24, 2017 5:30 pm

I'm a brexiteer, whoever wrote the referendum bill made a mistake in not making it explicit that the government had the power to trigger article 50. Anyway they're is a big majority for triggering it so they're is no problem.

nil_desperandum
Posts: 7301
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
Been Liked: 1823 times
Has Liked: 3952 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by nil_desperandum » Tue Jan 24, 2017 5:31 pm

dsr wrote:
Can you link any site anywhere on the internet, published before the vote, that says the vote was advisory and not binding? This Hansard item, for example? It was certainly not widely publicised.
There are many examples if you have a look, but this for starters:

October 2010, David Cameron’s Government's response to an inquiry by a House of Lords committee:

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.”
Further:
The European Union Referendum Act 2015 (c 36) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that made legal provision for a non-binding referendum to be held in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and Gibraltar, on whether they should remain a member of the European Union or leave it. The bill was introduced to the House of Commons by Philip Hammond, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs on 28 May 2015. The Act was subsequently passed by 544-53 votes on its second reading on 9 June 2015, a ratio of six to one in the Commons and was approved by the House of Lords on 14 December 2015, and given Royal Assent on 17 December 2015.

Lancasterclaret
Posts: 23343
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
Been Liked: 8058 times
Has Liked: 4714 times
Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by Lancasterclaret » Tue Jan 24, 2017 5:33 pm

Interesting, I wonder if the change at the top meant that no one actually knew how Cameron would have gone about it?

dsr
Posts: 15139
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by dsr » Tue Jan 24, 2017 5:33 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:What do you do for a living DSR?

If you are not a retired supreme court judge, then you might be a bit out of your depth on this one!
If this thread is to be restricted to retired high court judges, it might be a bit short of posts.

Anyway, I haven't said that the specific decision is wrong in law, only that it's wrong in principle. Parliament has already agreed (in advance) to accept the referendum vote, and if there are any unforeseen legal hoops to jump through, it should be a matter of days to do it.

keith1879
Posts: 865
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2016 1:28 pm
Been Liked: 262 times
Has Liked: 363 times

Re: Today's Brexit vote

Post by keith1879 » Tue Jan 24, 2017 5:33 pm

When the F*CK are those people in favour of "Brexit" (horrible word) going to stop screaming long enough to realise that reaffirming the right of parliament to scrutinise and amend legislation does not necessarily mean that they will actually refuse to pass Article 50. It would be political suicide for a major party to do so and you should all calm down, take your tablets and be reassured that this stupid (in my opinion) action WILL be taken this spring. What this ruling does mean however is that YOUR representatives, those people for whom YOU (in the majority) voted (or could have voted if you had bothered to do so) will get the chance on YOUR behalf to review the detail of one of the most momentous actions of the last 40 years. How can that possibly be a bad thing? Apologies for the bad-tempered capital letters chaps - but at least I haven't resorted to simple lying and stupidity.
These 3 users liked this post: nil_desperandum Imploding Turtle SammyBoy

Post Reply