Page 8 of 157 FirstFirst 1234567891011121314151617183358108 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 3130

Thread: Brexit - Time to scrap it and start again?

  1. #141
    Dante Von Hespburg's Avatar Sloth's Inferno
    Civitate Magistrate

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,995

    Default Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?

    Quote Originally Posted by Copperknickers II View Post
    So the current situation is, everything's moving forward at pace because the EU and UK have once again agreed to kick the can down the road. Northern Ireland may yet prove to be the undoing of Theresa May's Brexit plans, as they have now decided that should negotiations hit a brick wall then the default position will be either de facto Norway-style EU 'rules without representation', or a hard border in between the island of Ireland and Great Britain, i.e. a quasi-united Ireland. In other words, once again Theresa May is between a rock and a hard place - if she agrees to a soft Brexit she will be ousted by her own party and be punished at the next election by Brexit voters for having changed pretty much nothing that they wanted changed; if she agrees to hard Brexit then the DUP will pull support and her government will collapse. Either way the Tories are screwed and we're looking at a Labour victory unless we can come up with an agreement for a Switzerland-style cherrypicking deal within the next few months.
    I think that's rather spot on, the issue of course to elaborate on your Swiss point, is that the EU hate the Swiss model and have for years been trying to whittle away Switzerland's special status with an aim to make them exactly the same as 'Norway' to streamline EU membership- so even if the UK had an equal power-balance with the EU, its unlikely this could be achieved.

    To add to the Tories mess ups also and something that has divided the Scottish Conservatives MSP's and MP's from their southern cousins is over the capitulation over fisheries. Its interesting that the Conservatives who are so reliant on their Scottish arm (Effectively the seats having saved them from being out of power) have almost effectively taken it for granted seemingly that the next election will see these seats lost as they are doing nothing to support them and placate the Scottish wing. But yeah, this has not been a great period for British brexit- apparently Moggs is going to actively join in a the protests on the side of the fishermen at an event on the Thames, directly against May- in quite a public way.

    EDIT: Moggs just publicly briefed against May and the current brexit agreement saying its 'destroying peoples lives and livelihoods'.He did not get on the boat itself as Farage did, but still both there, against the government - So indeed, we're back to public splits- the unity lasted all of what a few weeks during those 'brexit' speeches.

    What is causing concern today too is the omission from the current agreement of the rights of British citizens living in Europe- Clause 32 iirc....its literally missing- there's a 31 and a 33, but this one is gone. EU citizens are now protected and secure in the UK (Something that should not have taken this damn long), but Davis has now received urgent letters from MEP's from all parties about the fact that the part protecting British citizens is literally absent. Its probably a mistake on the part of both parties- but it does rather question the actual scrutiny from us in that we would 'miss' such a thing until now in negotiations.
    Last edited by Dante Von Hespburg; March 21, 2018 at 06:52 AM.
    House of Caesars: Under the Patronage of Char Aznable

    Proud Patron of the roguishly suave Gatsby


  2. #142

    Default Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dante Von Hespburg View Post
    I think that's rather spot on, the issue of course to elaborate on your Swiss point, is that the EU hate the Swiss model and have for years been trying to whittle away Switzerland's special status with an aim to make them exactly the same as 'Norway' to streamline EU membership- so even if the UK had an equal power-balance with the EU, its unlikely this could be achieved.

    To add to the Tories mess ups also and something that has divided the Scottish Conservatives MSP's and MP's from their southern cousins is over the capitulation over fisheries. Its interesting that the Conservatives who are so reliant on their Scottish arm (Effectively the seats having saved them from being out of power) have almost effectively taken it for granted seemingly that the next election will see these seats lost as they are doing nothing to support them and placate the Scottish wing. But yeah, this has not been a great period for British brexit- apparently Moggs is going to actively join in a the protests on the side of the fishermen at an event on the Thames, directly against May- in quite a public way.

    EDIT: Moggs just publicly briefed against May and the current brexit agreement saying its 'destroying peoples lives and livelihoods'.He did not get on the boat itself as Farage did, but still both there, against the government - So indeed, we're back to public splits- the unity lasted all of what a few weeks during those 'brexit' speeches.

    What is causing concern today too is the omission from the current agreement of the rights of British citizens living in Europe- Clause 32 iirc....its literally missing- there's a 31 and a 33, but this one is gone. EU citizens are now protected and secure in the UK (Something that should not have taken this damn long), but Davis has now received urgent letters from MEP's from all parties about the fact that the part protecting British citizens is literally absent. Its probably a mistake on the part of both parties- but it does rather question the actual scrutiny from us in that we would 'miss' such a thing until now in negotiations.
    Excellent posts both of you. Again a joy to discuss politics on this political forum, for a change.

    In a country where even those in work require food banks to survive, did anyone find the dumping of food into the Thames,by wealthy people, disgusting?

    I stumbled across a Guardian article which illustrates the extent to which we , the voters were misled about the UK's readiness for Brexit.


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics...uietly-dropped

    HM Govt has one year to get out of this mess. Scary.
    Absolutley Barking, Mudpit Mutt Former Patron: Garbarsardar

    "Out of the crooked tree of humanity,no straight thing can be made." Immanuel Kant
    "Oh Yeah? What about a cricket bat? That's pretty straight. Just off the top of my head..." Al Murray, Pub Landlord.

  3. #143

    Default Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?

    It would seem that it is not only the Government that has screwed up Brexit, it looks as if some on the leave campaign cheated the electorate.

    https://www.politico.eu/article/camb...vacy-facebook/
    Absolutley Barking, Mudpit Mutt Former Patron: Garbarsardar

    "Out of the crooked tree of humanity,no straight thing can be made." Immanuel Kant
    "Oh Yeah? What about a cricket bat? That's pretty straight. Just off the top of my head..." Al Murray, Pub Landlord.

  4. #144
    Cope's Avatar 777777777777777
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    4,687

    Default Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?

    Quote Originally Posted by mongrel View Post
    It would seem that it is not only the Government that has screwed up Brexit, it looks as if some on the leave campaign cheated the electorate.

    https://www.politico.eu/article/camb...vacy-facebook/

    The Cameron government already "cheated" by spending £9m of taxpayer money to send pro-remain leaflets to every house in the United Kingdom. Similarly the Liberal Democrats have already been fined for breaching regulations during the referendum campaign.

    But sure, lets just abandon the whole thing because a single "whistle blower" is claiming that Cambridge Analytica "may" have broken the law.

  5. #145
    Dante Von Hespburg's Avatar Sloth's Inferno
    Civitate Magistrate

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,995

    Default Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?

    Quote Originally Posted by ep1c_fail View Post
    The Cameron government already "cheated" by spending £9m of taxpayer money to send pro-remain leaflets to every house in the United Kingdom. Similarly the Liberal Democrats have already been fined for breaching regulations during the referendum campaign.

    But sure, lets just abandon the whole thing because a single "whistle blower" is claiming that Cambridge Analytica "may" have broken the law.
    In fairness, its far more than just one coming forward now- to my knowledge there are 3 whistle-blowers in total, and as the committee investigating it said, the evidence they have is staggering due to the fact they have copies of all the documents proving it. This isn't though about derailing brexit, i don't think it will go that far. But there does need to be an investigation and i think a tightening of powers, as well as those involved losing their place in the political process. This is about safeguarding democratic integrity i think- something very important given other recent issues with indeed other big parties overspending and flaunting the rules- here though the scale is apparently significantly different.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ial-scale.html

    Spending limits broke on an 'Industrial scale'.
    House of Caesars: Under the Patronage of Char Aznable

    Proud Patron of the roguishly suave Gatsby


  6. #146
    Cope's Avatar 777777777777777
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    4,687

    Default Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?

    £625,000 (allegedly). Compared to Cameron's £9m of taxpayer money.

    Of course, the establishment only started to care about the supposed misuse of personal information, manipulative advertising and "fake news" when they sensed that it may be having a negative effect on the political status quo. Prior to the referendum and and the 2016 US election they ignored it - as they continue to ignore it where it benefits them. It reminds me of the anti-Trump league declaring the impossibility of the US election being "hacked" only to immediately claim that the election had been hacked on Nov. 9th.

  7. #147
    Dante Von Hespburg's Avatar Sloth's Inferno
    Civitate Magistrate

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,995

    Default Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?

    Quote Originally Posted by ep1c_fail View Post
    £625,000 (allegedly). Compared to Cameron's £9m of taxpayer money.

    Of course, the establishment only started to care about the supposed misuse of personal information, manipulative advertising and "fake news" when they sensed that it may be having a negative effect on the political status quo. Prior to the referendum and and the 2016 US election they ignored it - as they continue to ignore it where it benefits them. It reminds me of the anti-Trump league declaring the impossibility of the US election being "hacked" only to immediately claim that the election had been hacked on Nov. 9th.
    Indeed, but i was under the assumption that the £9 million was not breaking the regulations around election spending? (I personally don't think tax payer money should be used as it was a public referendum- though in fairness i'd have to look to see if the public purse then was opened to Vote Leave, iirc it was to a far lesser extent with things like fee-free use of public buildings ala Boris- which again cost difference- but places them both on the same regulatory use, providing the £9 million is not deemed as breaking the rules).

    As a general comment i do rather partly agree with you that in the UK specifically the government has taken a seemingly close interest in electoral changes that while keeping the system intact, are i would say geared towards attacking certain elements and excluding groups who would create 'upheaval' in a property-stake representative democracy. Thinking here of the current trials of demanding ID from voters (The majority of which, if not all iirc are ones you have to pay for- thus acting as an exclusionary device for those who either have not got them, or cannot afford them, which has been argued is a fairly significant minority of those underemployed). This is from a stance in the UK where there has never been any real issues with electoral fraud in this manner- thus the ID seems pretty darn irrelevant.

    I'll withhold comment on Trump as i'm not really for or against him- I do see that he played a political blinder by appearing 'anti-establishment' when in fact even prior entering office he was essentially exactly the same- background, interests and links. It was a well played marketing move. Though i think many of those around him seem to be in hot water regarding the Muller investigation, so there's arguably something to be seen- Though i have my doubts as to the effective scale that Russia could influence anything, moves towards 'populists' or the extremes are more a reaction i think to economic structures being challenged and changed by Nye's 'Fourth Industrial Revolution' and the apparent failure of so-called 'neoliberal' economics (Which long term have proven downright awful for the majority in the west), anyway certainly i think Trump himself did not seek Russia's help as some have put forward.
    Last edited by Dante Von Hespburg; April 14, 2018 at 06:32 PM.
    House of Caesars: Under the Patronage of Char Aznable

    Proud Patron of the roguishly suave Gatsby


  8. #148

    Default Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?

    Quote Originally Posted by ep1c_fail View Post
    The Cameron government already "cheated" by spending £9m of taxpayer money to send pro-remain leaflets to every house in the United Kingdom. Similarly the Liberal Democrats have already been fined for breaching regulations during the referendum campaign.

    But sure, lets just abandon the whole thing because a single "whistle blower" is claiming that Cambridge Analytica "may" have broken the law.
    Thre money doesn't concern me as much as the lack of factual information offered to the public.
    Absolutley Barking, Mudpit Mutt Former Patron: Garbarsardar

    "Out of the crooked tree of humanity,no straight thing can be made." Immanuel Kant
    "Oh Yeah? What about a cricket bat? That's pretty straight. Just off the top of my head..." Al Murray, Pub Landlord.

  9. #149
    Cope's Avatar 777777777777777
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    4,687

    Default Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?

    Quote Originally Posted by mongrel View Post
    Thre money doesn't concern me as much as the lack of factual information offered to the public.
    What factual information do you believe was not offered to the public?

  10. #150

    Default Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?

    Quote Originally Posted by ep1c_fail View Post
    What factual information do you believe was not offered to the public?
    Have you not read this thread? Impact assessments, obviously. They were not prepared at all. What information that has been cobbled together (recently) is kept for Parliamentary eyes only.

    Qouting an earlier post of mine.

    If the government behaved the way it should have done, that is, make the impact assessments, which are supposed to be statutory, work out scenarios like costs , for example the need to hire thousands of Customs staff, new software, considered the impact on Parliamentary time, because Brexit will require at least 1000 statutory instruments, meaning no Department has a hope in hell in writing or amendment secondary legislation, and reveiws of all treaty obligations with the EU and any nation affected by Britain's withdrawal, then it would not have invoked Article 50 until this essential work was completed
    Last edited by mongrel; April 14, 2018 at 09:06 PM.
    Absolutley Barking, Mudpit Mutt Former Patron: Garbarsardar

    "Out of the crooked tree of humanity,no straight thing can be made." Immanuel Kant
    "Oh Yeah? What about a cricket bat? That's pretty straight. Just off the top of my head..." Al Murray, Pub Landlord.

  11. #151
    Cope's Avatar 777777777777777
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    4,687

    Default Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?

    Quote Originally Posted by mongrel View Post
    Have you not read this thread? Impact assessments, obviously. They were not prepared at all. What information that has been cobbled together (recently) is kept for Parliamentary eyes only.

    Qouting an earlier post of mine.

    If the government behaved the way it should have done, that is, make the impact assessments, which are supposed to be statutory, work out scenarios like costs , for example the need to hire thousands of Customs staff, new software, considered the impact on Parliamentary time, because Brexit will require at least 1000 statutory instruments, meaning no Department has a hope in hell in writing or amendment secondary legislation, and reveiws of all treaty obligations with the EU and any nation affected by Britain's withdrawal, then it would not have invoked Article 50 until this essential work was completed
    The complications that have arisen as a consequence of the United Kingdom choosing to leave the European Union can be explained almost entirely by Westminster's opposition to the outcome of the referendum. Despite having arranged for a plebiscite to occur, the overwhelming majority of MP's (including the Cameron government) have never wanted the United Kingdom to leave the European Union. Both the Conservatives and Labour have nominally pledged to honour the result of June 2016 out of an obligation to democracy alone, but it has been clear from the start that a significant minority of MPs wanted to sabotage the process. Many have been explicit in their aims to do so. With May having lost ground in the 2017 general election, this minority has grown to such an extent that getting Brexit legislation through Parliament has become extraordinarily precarious.

    It's true that a lack of preparation has exacerbated the process, although it was never realistically possible for any concrete plans to be made because during the referendum campaign, the reigns of government were held by the Cameron administration which openly opposed Britain leaving the European Union (and so had absolutely no interest in formulating contingency arrangements in the case that it lost the referendum). For her part, May's government was under severe pressure to trigger article 50 within a reasonable amount of time so as not to be seen as ignoring the result of the vote.

  12. #152

    Default Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?

    Quote Originally Posted by ep1c_fail View Post
    The complications that have arisen as a consequence of the United Kingdom choosing to leave the European Union can be explained almost entirely by Westminster's opposition to the outcome of the referendum. Despite having arranged for a plebiscite to occur, the overwhelming majority of MP's (including the Cameron government) have never wanted the United Kingdom to leave the European Union. Both the Conservatives and Labour have nominally pledged to honour the result of June 2016 out of an obligation to democracy alone, but it has been clear from the start that a significant minority of MPs wanted to sabotage the process. Many have been explicit in their aims to do so. With May having lost ground in the 2017 general election, this minority has grown to such an extent that getting Brexit legislation through Parliament has become extraordinarily precarious.

    It's true that a lack of preparation has exacerbated the process, although it was never realistically possible for any concrete plans to be made because during the referendum campaign, the reigns of government were held by the Cameron administration which openly opposed Britain leaving the European Union (and so had absolutely no interest in formulating contingency arrangements in the case that it lost the referendum). For her part, May's government was under severe pressure to trigger article 50 within a reasonable amount of time so as not to be seen as ignoring the result of the vote.


    Wrong. These issues are structural. Whatever ones views on Brexit is, the fact remains that:

    - No effort was made to make a formal impact assessement of the impact of Brexit on tne economy or individuals or indeed the Government'ds legislative programme. This meant that the vote was tainted by the public relying on guesswork, fear and outright lies, mixed with manipulation by foreign powers.

    -- If some basic things were explained, like the loss of the right to drive in the EU , threat to free health treatment under the E111 card system, the imposition of duty on items under £18, what happens to the pensions of British ex-pat state pensions, then Leave would have had issues.

    - If the practical issues where explained, the Goverment would perhaps have been less complacent about its position. Indeed Boris might have joined the other side.
    NI border, how the feck to we man our Customs posts (needs 5,000 officers) when HMRC is making staff redundant, due to budget cuts.Every piece of legislation since 1973 needs to be re-read and if, necessary statutory instruments need to be drafted and laid in Parliament, estimate, at least 1000. It takes 7 months to draft and lay just one. Brexit have completely reversed cuts in Whitehall, boring work but the best thing that has happened to Civil Servants in years.It goes without saying that there is little or no tiime for the Government to pass legislation on anything else, rendering it utterly paralysed.The Brexit legislation was always going to be precarious because May chose a partisan hard line , which invites further scrutiny of an already massive legislative programme.

    All of this work could and should have been done before the vote, and certainly before Article 50, despite the pressure, because the natiobnsl interest overrides those of Rupert Murdoch.
    Last edited by mongrel; April 16, 2018 at 12:23 AM.
    Absolutley Barking, Mudpit Mutt Former Patron: Garbarsardar

    "Out of the crooked tree of humanity,no straight thing can be made." Immanuel Kant
    "Oh Yeah? What about a cricket bat? That's pretty straight. Just off the top of my head..." Al Murray, Pub Landlord.

  13. #153
    Cope's Avatar 777777777777777
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    4,687

    Default Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?

    Quote Originally Posted by mongrel View Post
    No effort was made to make a formal impact assessement of the impact of Brexit on tne economy or individuals or indeed the Government'ds legislative programme.
    Blame Cameron. It was the Prime Minister and de facto head of the Remain campaign who failed to use the institutions of state to "make a formal impact assessment" of the ramifications of the United Kingdom leaving the European Union. He also singularly failed to prepare the organs of civil society for a vote to leave, primarily because it was in his interest to maintain the perception that leaving the European Union would be a leap into the unknown.

    This meant that the vote was tainted by the public relying on guesswork, fear and outright lies, mixed ewith manipulation by foreign powers.
    Are you suggesting that the referendum should be considered invalid because of the shortfalls of the losing side (ie. the Cameron government et al)? Imagine applying this same standard to a general election. We don't reverse election results because the defeated side failed to make good arguments and/or preparations.

    More importantly, every single democratic political campaign in history has forced the public to rely on "guesswork", "fear" and "outright lies". It's all just part of the game I'm afraid. You might as well argue that the United Kingdom's decision to sign the Lisbon Treaty was "tainted" because the Blair government promised the electorate that they'd be offered a referendum on the issue but never were.

    - If the practical issues where explained, the Goverment would perhaps have been less complacent about its position. Indeed Boris might have joined the other side.
    Johnson knew perfectly well what he was supporting.

    NI border, how the feck to we man our Customs posts (needs 5,000 officers) when HMRC is making staff redundant, due to budget cuts.Every piece of legislation since 1973 needs to be re-read and if, necessary statutory instruments need to be drafted and laid in Parliament, estimate, at least 1000. It takes 7 months to draft and lay just one. Brexit have completely reversed cuts in Whitehall, boring work but the best thing that has happened to Civil Servants in years.It goes without saying that there is little or no tiime for the Government to pass legislation on anything else, rendering it utterly paralysed.The Brexit legislation was always going to be precarious because May chose a partisan hard line , which invites further scrutiny of an already massive legislative programme.
    The Remain campaign persistently argued, on the basis of reports from reputable economic organizations, that leaving the European Union would be financially devastating. The electorate was informed that the vote to leave would cause a recession; it was warned there would be an emergency budget; it was informed of the bureaucratic and legal nightmares it would cause; it was informed of the difficulties that would arise for EU citizens living in the United Kingdom and of expats living in Europe; it was informed that there were concerns relating to Irish border; it was informed that the United Kingdom lacked the diplomatic expertise to negotiate with the EU effectively. A majority of those who voted still opted to leave.

    Secondly, May did not choose a partisan "hard line". What she chose to do was get behind the result of the referendum. It would be absolutely pointless for the United Kingdom to leave the European Union but not leave the Single Market or the Customs Union. Non of the major issues that compelled people to vote leave can be addressed so long as the United Kingdom remains attached to these institutions. On the issue of EU legislation, the government has deferred the need for immediate examination by claiming that it will automatically incorporate the overwhelming majority of EU legislation into British law, meaning that it shan't be necessary to "re-read every piece of legislation since 1973" within a set time frame (not that all legislation since '73 is derived from the EU anyway).

    All of this work could and should have been done before the vote, and certainly before Article 50, despite the pressure, because the natiobnsl interest overrides that of Sun readers.
    Again, blame Cameron. At the very least, blame Parliament. It was their job to prepare contingency plans in the event that leave won. They chose not to because, as I stated, the overwhelming majority of MP's, including the executive, didn't actually want the United Kingdom to exit the European Union.
    Last edited by Cope; April 16, 2018 at 12:28 AM.

  14. #154

    Default Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?

    Quote Originally Posted by ep1c_fail View Post
    Blame Cameron. It was the Prime Minister and de facto head of the Remain campaign who failed to use the institutions of state to "make a formal impact assessment" of the ramifications of the United Kingdom leaving the European Union. He also singularly failed to prepare the organs of civil society for a vote to leave, primarily because it was in his interest to maintain the perception that leaving the European Union would be a leap into the unknown.
    I do, I consider him the worst PM since Lord North.

    Quote Originally Posted by ep1c_fail View Post
    Are you suggesting that the referendum should be considered invalid because of the shortfalls of the losing side (ie. the Cameron government et al)? Imagine applying this same standard to a general election. We don't reverse election results because the defeated side failed to make good arguments and/or preparations.
    Referenda are supposed to be advisory. Parliamentary sovereignty remains unaffected by them.


    Quote Originally Posted by ep1c_fail View Post
    More importantly, every single democratic political campaign in history has forced the public to rely on "guesswork", "fear" and "outright lies". It's all just part of the game I'm afraid. You might as well argue that the United Kingdom's decision to sign the Lisbon Treaty was "tainted" because the Blair government promised the electorate that they'd be offered a referendum on the issue but never were. .
    We were not electing a government with vague promses of this or that, this was a consultation. Consultations require a factual basis upon which a decision can be made. It was entirely within the gift for Cameron to make and publish impact assessments before the vote and for May to do so (for advisory purposes) before enacting Article 50.

    Quote Originally Posted by ep1c_fail View Post
    Johnson knew perfectly well what he was supporting.
    If he did, he would be Prime Minister by now.

    Quote Originally Posted by ep1c_fail View Post
    The Remain campaign persistently argued, on the basis of reports from reputable economic organizations, that leaving the European Union would be financially devastating. The electorate was informed that the vote to leave would cause a recession; it was warned there would be an emergency budget; it was informed of the bureaucratic and legal nightmares it would cause; it was informed of the difficulties that would arise for EU citizens living in the United Kingdom and of expats living in Europe; it was informed that there were concerns relating to Irish border; it was informed that the United Kingdom lacked the diplomatic expertise to negotiate with the EU effectively. A majority of those who voted still opted to leave.
    The arguments were weak and did not relate to specifics having a direct impact on individuals.


    Quote Originally Posted by ep1c_fail View Post
    Secondly, May did not choose a partisan "hard line". What she chose to do was get behind the result of the referendum. It would be absolutely pointless for the United Kingdom to leave the European Union but not leave the Single Market or the Customs Union. Non of the major issues that compelled people to vote leave can be addressed so long as the United Kingdom remains attached to these institutions.
    Bollocks. Corbyn is pro-leave, he needs Brexit to allow his policies to get around State Aid rules. Rather than work with him, she has attempted every time to bypsass Parliament, and indeed tried and failed to engineer a Parliamentary majority through a disastrous election to avoid working with the opposition.

    Quote Originally Posted by ep1c_fail View Post
    SAgain, blame Cameron. At the very least, blame Parliament. It was their job to prepare contingency plans in the event that leave won. They chose not to because, as I stated, the overwhelming majority of MP's, including the executive, didn't actually want the United Kingdom to exit the European Union.
    They chose not to because to do so would have prevented other measures like tax cuts and austerity being implemented, as we are finding now.
    Last edited by mongrel; April 16, 2018 at 12:43 AM.
    Absolutley Barking, Mudpit Mutt Former Patron: Garbarsardar

    "Out of the crooked tree of humanity,no straight thing can be made." Immanuel Kant
    "Oh Yeah? What about a cricket bat? That's pretty straight. Just off the top of my head..." Al Murray, Pub Landlord.

  15. #155
    caratacus's Avatar Primicerius
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    U.K.
    Posts
    3,807

    Default Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?

    Quote Originally Posted by mongrel View Post
    Referenda are supposed to be advisory. Parliamentary sovereignty remains unaffected by them.

    We were not electing a government with vague promises of this or that, this was a consultation. Consultations require a factual basis upon which a decision can be made. It was entirely within the gift for Cameron to make and publish impact assessments before the vote and for May to do so (for advisory purposes) before enacting Article 50.
    I would argue that Parliament holds no sovereignty, it governs in the monarch's name on behalf of the Country, in this case Her Majesty’s Parliament. The Monarch therefore remains sovereign but powers of governance are conveyed to Parliament to govern on behalf of the people. When it no longer represents the people, those powers are no longer legitimate. To disregard a vote of the people, brings the legitimacy of that power into question.

    The notion of Parliamentary Sovereignty has served the Monarch and Parliament well for over 300 years, preventing the advancement of Republicanism. However the Monarch retains the Royal Prerogative. They have the power to prorogue or close a parliamentary session, to appoint whomsoever they please as prime minister and even refuse royal assent to a Bill (though the last time this happened was in 1704 under Queen Anne). It is only the 1,000-year-old web of convention and precedent and Her Majesty’s personal restraint – which means such a scenario does not occur.

    Attempts by those in Parliament to thwart the People's wishes however, may bring about a constitutional crisis that hasn't happened since the Restoration. Apart from Brexit this is especially relevant to actions taken by a Prime Minister that may lead directly to military conflict with another country without Parliamentary approval.
    Last edited by caratacus; April 16, 2018 at 05:49 AM.

  16. #156

    Default Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?

    Quote Originally Posted by caratacus View Post
    I would argue that Parliament holds no sovereignty, it governs in the monarch's name on behalf of the Country, in this case Her Majesty’s Parliament. The Monarch therefore remains sovereign but powers of governance are conveyed to Parliament to govern on behalf of the people. When it no longer represents the people, those powers are no longer legitimate. To disregard a vote of the people, brings the legitimacy of that power into question.

    The notion of Parliamentary Sovereignty has served the Monarch and Parliament well for over 300 years, preventing the advancement of Republicanism. However the Monarch retains the Royal Prerogative. They have the power to prorogue or close a parliamentary session, to appoint whomsoever they please as prime minister and even refuse royal assent to a Bill (though the last time this happened was in 1704 under Queen Anne). It is only the 1,000-year-old web of convention and precedent and Her Majesty’s personal restraint – which means such a scenario does not occur.

    Attempts by those in Parliament to thwart the People's wishes however, may bring about a constitutional crisis that hasn't happened since the Restoration. Apart from Brexit this is especially relevant to actions taken by a Prime Minister that may lead directly to military conflict with another country without Parliamentary approval.
    Yes, you can see that problem etched on the PM's face.
    Absolutley Barking, Mudpit Mutt Former Patron: Garbarsardar

    "Out of the crooked tree of humanity,no straight thing can be made." Immanuel Kant
    "Oh Yeah? What about a cricket bat? That's pretty straight. Just off the top of my head..." Al Murray, Pub Landlord.

  17. #157
    caratacus's Avatar Primicerius
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    U.K.
    Posts
    3,807

    Default Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?

    Quote Originally Posted by mongrel View Post
    Yes, you can see that problem etched on the PM's face.
    There seems to be a consistent disregard for Parliament and the wishes of the public and it isn't healthy for democracy. The present emergency debate being played out in Parliament tonight is something that shouldn't need to be done. Even the decision to run the debate in tomorrows session, is rushed for something that has extremely important implications. People who voted for Brexit wanted better democracy and representation, not less! It is a poor thing that I find myself agreeing with the SNP, who are speaking up in support of something they don't want to be a part of, namely the UK Parliament.
    The best weapon against authoritarian regimes is our democratic principles and the rule of law, not missiles. Whilst the best path from EU membership is improved representation not just trade deals.
    Last edited by caratacus; April 16, 2018 at 05:31 PM.

  18. #158

    Default Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?

    Quote Originally Posted by caratacus View Post
    There seems to be a consistent disregard for Parliament and the wishes of the public and it isn't healthy for democracy. The present emergency debate being played out in Parliament tonight is something that shouldn't need to be done. Even the decision to run the debate in tomorrows session, is rushed for something that has extremely important implications. People who voted for Brexit wanted better democracy and representation, not less! It is a poor thing that I find myself agreeing with the SNP, who are speaking up in support of something they don't want to be a part of, namely the UK Parliament.
    The best weapon against authoritarian regimes is our democratic principles and the rule of law, not missiles. Whilst the best path from EU membership is improved representation not just trade deals.
    I can't disagree with any of this. Something else is troubling me about Britain's governance. If have time, a new thread is in order.
    Absolutley Barking, Mudpit Mutt Former Patron: Garbarsardar

    "Out of the crooked tree of humanity,no straight thing can be made." Immanuel Kant
    "Oh Yeah? What about a cricket bat? That's pretty straight. Just off the top of my head..." Al Murray, Pub Landlord.

  19. #159

    Default Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?

    Quote Originally Posted by mongrel View Post
    I can't disagree with any of this. Something else is troubling me about Britain's governance. If have time, a new thread is in order.
    And apparently there are more reasons to suggest Article 50 was called prematurely.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics...ff-study-finds
    Absolutley Barking, Mudpit Mutt Former Patron: Garbarsardar

    "Out of the crooked tree of humanity,no straight thing can be made." Immanuel Kant
    "Oh Yeah? What about a cricket bat? That's pretty straight. Just off the top of my head..." Al Murray, Pub Landlord.

  20. #160
    Aexodus's Avatar Persuasion>Coercion
    Civitate

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    NI
    Posts
    7,255
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: Brexit-time to scrap it and start again?

    It's funny how a year and a half later, Brexit is still being questioned.

    Whats more important, democracy, or economy.

    The fundamental reason why a lot of people voted leave was to have control, freedom over our own choices as a country. To many this was more important to economic forecasts such as a 20% decrease in foreign investment. On the contrary, it is at 'record levels', as well as the savings made on the EU budget contribution, in which we were a net contributor, not a recipient.

    Our money was going to Eastern Europe (Romania, Poland etc) yet Eastern Europe's migrants were coming to us, on the broad trend.
    Patronised by Pontifex Maximus

    Quote Originally Posted by Himster View Post
    The trick is to never be honest. That's what this social phenomenon is engineering: publicly conform, or else.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •