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

  1. #2501
    Carmen Sylva's Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Palace of Neuwied
    Posts
    2,178

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

    One good thing has Johnson's proroguing of the Parliament in my opinion, its obvious now, that the UK needs desperately a written constitution, which regulates explicit the relationships between crown, government, parliament, state and citizens.

    Its an anachronism, that the UK relies so heavily on oral tradition and single laws.
    Christ was crucified, Socrates was poisoned, Phidias was accused of theft - it is almost an honor to be abused by contemporaries.

    Carmen Sylva (1843 - 1916), actually Princess Elisabeth Pauline Ottilie Luise zu Wied VA (Royal Order of Victoria and Albert), German writer and lyricist, by marriage Queen Elizabeth of Romania

    Proud Non-Citizen / End of Time / Unschuldsengel / My Mods

  2. #2502
    JP226's Avatar Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    16,960

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ep1c_fail View Post
    It's actually worse than you think. What he's not telling you is that voters in France and the Netherlands voted down the "Treaty for Establishing a Constitution for Europe" in 2005, so the Union simply rebranded it as the "Lisbon Treaty" and forced it through the European Parliament anyway (with the consent of the respective members of the European Council). In the United Kingdom, the then Labour government had pledged to hold a referendum to determine whether the the UK would agree to the new constitutional settlement but then called it off when it looked like the answer would be no. When the settlement was rehashed as the Lisbon Treaty, the British government also signed up to it without asking the electorate on the basis that it was technically different.
    One of the things that sort of cracks me up, and this is semi related to what you are saying, is that for all the Trump gets, his approval rating far and away dwarfs the majority of the European leaders. Merkel has less than a 3rd of the public supporting her. Yet she' pushed like some sort of mandate. It's all about the elites and doing what they want. The US has a horrible case of it but my God, the Europeans have some issues. And these folks are the ones pushing "do overs."

  3. #2503

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JP226 View Post
    So you'd rather have a rogue parliament setup to defeat a democratic referendum, that had 72% turnout, to keep sovereignty from the British people? Love European's idea of "democracy." It's my fave.
    Parliament is sovereign. I thought that was what Brexit is all about.
    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. #2504

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JP226 View Post
    So you'd rather have a rogue parliament setup to defeat a democratic referendum, that had 72% turnout, to keep sovereignty from the British people? Love European's idea of "democracy." It's my fave.
    Do you somehow consider the alternative more democratic? A referendum result is not a blank clearance to do anything they want. The parliament is there to regulate it. Your take doesn't represent how democracy works.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    Cities: Skylines
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...ities-Skylines

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  5. #2505
    JP226's Avatar Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    16,960

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

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    Do you somehow consider the alternative more democratic? A referendum result is not a blank clearance to do anything they want. The parliament is there to regulate it. Your take doesn't represent how democracy works.
    Do I consider upholding the results of an election more democratic? Yes.

  6. #2506

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

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    Do you somehow consider the alternative more democratic? A referendum result is not a blank clearance to do anything they want. The parliament is there to regulate it. Your take doesn't represent how democracy works.
    Parliament has regulated the referendum in every conceivable aspect.

    - Parliament voted to hold the referendum in the first place. Only a small minority (mainly from the SNP) of parliamentarians opposed the European Union Referendum Act 2015.
    - Via the EURA parliament set the terms of the referendum - including the question, the time (broadly) and voting entitlements.
    - After "Leave" had won the referendum the major parties (Conservative and Labour) agreed to honour the result; in the beginning even the Liberal Democrats said they would accept the result.
    - Almost 500 MP's (that is almost 5/6ths) voted to trigger A50. MP's knew that this opened up the possibility for so-called "no deal".
    - In the 2017 general election both of the major parties (Conservative and Labour) once again reaffirmed their commitment to the United Kingdom's departure from the European Union.
    - Parliament then repeatedly rejected the May deal knowing full well that it would dramatically increase the odds that the United Kingdom would leave the European Union without an agreement.
    - Since the dismissal of the May deal parliament has not been prevented from passing any legislation it wants - including legislation which would block a so-called no deal.

    It is therefore obvious that the outcome of the referendum in 2016 isn't the only legitimacy that the Leave position has; it has acquired clear legislative and manifesto support over the past three years. So you now claiming that "a referendum result is not a blank 'clearance' to do anything they want" falsely implies that parliament hasn't been closely involved with this process from the beginning. The fact that a contingent of desperate MPs are now opposing their own legislation and manifestos in an attempt to overturn everything that has happened over the past five years justifies the allegation that JP226 is making.
    Last edited by ep1c_fail; August 29, 2019 at 02:43 AM.

  7. #2507

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JP226 View Post
    Do I consider upholding the results of an election more democratic? Yes.
    You're not really doing that. You're denying people's representative the right to execute that result. Destination was set by the people, albeit under dubious circumstances, but you wanna force the path instead of letting people decide. through their representatives. Hence, you're unable to give a direct answer to what I actually asked.


    Quote Originally Posted by ep1c_fail View Post
    Parliament has regulated the referendum in every conceivable aspect.

    - Parliament voted to hold the referendum in the first place. Only a small minority (mainly from the SNP) of parliamentarians opposed the European Union Referendum Act 2015.
    - Via the EURA parliament set the terms of the referendum - including the question, the time (broadly) and voting entitlements.
    - After "Leave" had won the referendum the major parties (Conservative and Labour) agreed to honour the result; in the beginning even the Liberal Democrats said they would accept the result.
    - Almost 500 MP's (that is almost 5/6ths) voted to trigger A50. MP's knew that this opened up the possibility for so-called "no deal".
    - In the 2017 general election both of the major parties (Conservative and Labour) once again reaffirmed their commitment to the United Kingdom's departure from the European Union.
    - Parliament then repeatedly rejected the May deal knowing full well that it would dramatically increase the odds that the United Kingdom would leave the European Union without an agreement.
    - Since the dismissal of the May deal parliament has not been prevented from passing any legislation it wants - including legislation which would block a so-called no deal.

    It is therefore obvious that the outcome of the referendum in 2016 isn't the only legitimacy that the Leave position has; it has acquired clear legislative and manifesto support over the past three years. So you now claiming that "a referendum result is not a blank 'clearance' to do anything they want" falsely implies that parliament hasn't been closely involved with this process from the beginning. The fact that a contingent of desperate MPs are now opposing their own legislation and manifestos in an attempt to overturn everything that has happened over the past five years justifies the allegation that JP226 is making.
    Nope. It doesn't, and at no point did I imply that the parliament have no been closely involved with the process. They simply haven't came up with a path that they all agreed on. That might be bad but that's how it works. If they can't, and they don't seem to, come up with a proper path there is a price for that as with any democratic process. In this case, that is the no deal exit. Why may parliament members might be opposing policies that they themselves supported is likely because the referendum process have been done under quite a lot of false information. The public realized that and even a lot of the portion that voted to leave are opposing it. The people that organized and supported the leave campaign basically polluted the process and created this mess.
    Last edited by PointOfViewGun; August 29, 2019 at 03:18 AM.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    Cities: Skylines
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...ities-Skylines

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  8. #2508

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

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    Nope. It doesn't, and at no point did I imply that the parliament have no been closely involved with the process. They simply haven't came up with a path that they all agreed on. That might be bad but that's how it works. If they can't, and they don't seem to, come up with a proper path there is a price for that as with any democratic process. In this case, that is the no deal exit. Why may parliament members might be opposing policies that they themselves supported is likely because the referendum process have been done under quite a lot of false information. The public realized that and even a lot of the portion that voted to leave are opposing it. The people that organized and supported the leave campaign basically polluted the process and created this mess.
    Parliament - not the leave campaign - voted, via binding legislation, to trigger A50. This is the "path" that Parliament all agreed on. It was clearly known that this process could result in the United Kingdom leaving the European Union without an agreement. This action alone overcame any alleged improprieties during the referendum and it was confounded by the manifesto pledges of both the Labour and Conservative parties. At no point was Westminster under any legal obligation to do anything; the referendum was advisory and parliament opted to take the advise it was given. Making generic, unsubstantiated claims that "the leave campaign basically polluted the process" is meaningless drivel. By the standards of conventional democratic rationale, the United Kingdom's continued membership has no democratic mandate and JP226's point is justified.

  9. #2509

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ep1c_fail View Post
    Parliament - not the leave campaign - voted, via binding legislation, to trigger A50. This is the "path" that Parliament all agreed on. It was clearly known that this process could result in the United Kingdom leaving the European Union without an agreement. This action alone overcame any alleged improprieties during the referendum and it was confounded by the manifesto pledges of both the Labour and Conservative parties. At no point was Westminster under any legal obligation to do anything; the referendum was advisory and parliament opted to take the advise it was given. Making generic, unsubstantiated claims that "the leave campaign basically polluted the process" is meaningless drivel. By the standards of conventional democratic rationale, the United Kingdom's continued membership has no democratic mandate and JP226's point is justified.
    You are undermining your own position. On one hand you're defending the position of the sacredness of the referendum while undermining that by pointing out that it merely had an advisory nature. So, we jump to the parliament triggering A50. Again, the parliament simply haven't came up with the path they could agree on. Not a single word you said changes the fact on the ground. People's say through their representatives have been silenced. It's also quite well-established at this point how the leave campaign basically fooled the country. Denial won't make a difference.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    Cities: Skylines
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...ities-Skylines

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  10. #2510

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

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    You are undermining your own position. On one hand you're defending the position of the sacredness of the referendum while undermining that by pointing out that it merely had an advisory nature.
    Stating that parliament had no legal obligation to act upon the result of the referendum doesn't contradict the notion that it had a moral/ethical duty to do so. Even if parliament had legislated that the outcome of the referendum would be legally binding it could simply have passed further legislation reversing that obligation at a subsequent point.

    So, we jump to the parliament triggering A50. Again, the parliament simply haven't came up with the path they could agree on.Not a single word you said changes the fact on the ground.
    The exit process as outlined by A50 is the "path" which the Commons overwhelmingly agreed on. The MPs who are now desperately regretting assenting to the withdrawal act should have paid attention to what they were agreeing to. It's no good throwing a tantrum now that the inevitable outcome of their legislative action is coming to fruition.

    People's say through their representatives have been silenced.
    What rubbish. No MP has been "silenced" and Westminster is still in a position to do whatever it wants. Johnson proroguing parliament at an inconvenient time - whilst an unnecessary action in my view - doesn't prevent it from passing legislation either to reverse A50 or block a so-called "no deal". Nor does it prevent it from removing the government via a vote of no confidence. Moreover, since the position of the Labour Party has now switched to one of support for a 2nd referendum, they are not representing their own voters since no such position was articulated in their 2017 manifesto.

    It's also quite well-established at this point how the leave campaign basically fooled the country. Denial won't make a difference.
    This is just a tepid attempt to renounce the legitimacy of the referendum and subsequent legislation because you didn't like the answer of the vote. How very Erdoganesque. Your subjective - and hitherto unsubstantiated - claim that "the leave campaign basically fooled the country" doesn't provide grounds for dismissing the biggest democratic exercise in British history, much less parliament's subsequent support for the triggering of A50. More importantly, it's also irrelevant. If parliament felt that the result of its own referendum campaign had been sullied by manipulation then it shouldn't have provided its assent to the withdrawal act in the first place. Nor should the major parties have continued to support the UK's exit via their manifesto pledges (which provide the most up to date mandates). Coming back over three years later and crying about how the leave campaign (which has never had any legislative authority) allegedly "polluted" the referendum is nothing short of an insulting effort to find some sort of justification for reversing the entire process.

  11. #2511
    Katsumoto's Avatar Quae est infernum es
    Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    11,771

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ep1c_fail View Post
    Nor should the major parties have continued to support the UK's exit via their manifesto pledges (which provide the most up to date mandates).
    Labour opposed a No Deal Brexit in their 2017 manifeso. In any case, it's a bit of a weird stance to be like "well, they said and did this thing two years ago, they should suck it up and be quiet, the change in circumstances be damned". Obviously most people, including MPs when they triggered Article 50 (as if they had a choice, really), thought there would be some sort of deal and it's a bit daft to criticise them for changing their mind. Fact is, there is no mandate for a No Deal Brexit, yet that is what we are heading toward. The simple solution would obviously be a second referendum with two options, Leave with No Deal or Remain, but the same people that declare the sanctity of the first referendum for some reason don't want a follow up one to clarify the people's position.
    "I pray Heaven to bestow the best of blessings on this house and all that shall hereafter inhabit it. May none but honest and wise men ever rule under this roof."
    - John Adams, on the White House, in a letter to Abigail Adams (2 November 1800)

  12. #2512

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

    It's a case of people sticking to a terrible decision for no apparent reason. Along the way they hurt their own country immensely.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    Cities: Skylines
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...ities-Skylines

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  13. #2513
    caratacus's Avatar Primicerius
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    U.K.
    Posts
    3,771

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

    "Parliament suspension sparks furious backlash" BBC quote
    ! Yep, folks are taking to the streets yelling blue murder up and down the Country.

    More like politicians who wanted to manipulate the constitition to thwart a democratic mandate, accusing others of doing the same, by not giving them the opportunity for them to do so. A case of the pot calling the kettle black.

    Whatever your views over the prorogation of parliament for a longer period, there ain't much trust about Westminister by anyone who isn't sitting within the bubble.

  14. #2514

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Katsumoto View Post
    Labour opposed a No Deal Brexit in their 2017 manifeso. In any case, it's a bit of a weird stance to be like "well, they said and did this thing two years ago, they should suck it up and be quiet, the change in circumstances be damned". Obviously most people, including MPs when they triggered Article 50 (as if they had a choice, really), thought there would be some sort of deal and it's a bit daft to criticise them for changing their mind. Fact is, there is no mandate for a No Deal Brexit, yet that is what we are heading toward. The simple solution would obviously be a second referendum with two options, Leave with No Deal or Remain, but the same people that declare the sanctity of the first referendum for some reason don't want a follow up one to clarify the people's position.
    There is no "change in circumstances". The Commons overwhelmingly agreed to trigger A50 and then persistently voted against May's agreement. This made the very "no deal" exit which they had made possible via the Withdrawal Act (but which they claimed to oppose) existentially more probable. The reality is that the remain activists on the Labour side were more interested in derailing May's agreement so as to encourage a governmental collapse than they were/are in avoiding the United Kingdom leaving the European Union on WTO terms. What we're seeing right now is that strategy reaching its crescendo. So don't waste my time with this "no mandate" garbage when the only reason that the UK is in this position is because of the parliamentary decisions of people who are now hypocritically wailing about a no deal outcome which, if it comes to pass, they will have facilitated from day one.
    Last edited by ep1c_fail; August 29, 2019 at 08:02 AM.

  15. #2515
    The Wandering Storyteller's Avatar Content Staff
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    I wash my hands of this weirdness!
    Posts
    4,456

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

    Brexit has suddenly become a lot more interesting.





















































  16. #2516
    Katsumoto's Avatar Quae est infernum es
    Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    11,771

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ep1c_fail View Post
    There is no "change in circumstances".
    I'd say failing to adequately arrange a deal or prepare for no deal is a change in circumstances.

    The Commons overwhelmingly agreed to trigger A50 and then persistently voted against May's agreement. This made the very "no deal" exit which they had made possible via the Withdrawal Act (but which they claimed to oppose) existentially more probable. The reality is that the remain activists on the Labour side were more interested in derailing May's agreement so as to encourage a governmental collapse than they were/are in avoiding the United Kingdom leaving the European Union on WTO terms. What we're seeing right now is that strategy reaching its crescendo. So don't waste my time with this "no mandate" garbage when the only reason that the UK is in this position is because of the parliamentary decisions of people who are now hypocritically wailing about a no deal outcome which, if it comes to pass, they will have facilitated from day one.
    Obviously the deal May came up with didn't please anyone, not just Labour remain activists. It didn't help that she repeatedly dragged her feet and tried to force it through rather than involve Parliament and find an acceptable alternative. Meaning that MPs didn't agree or facilitate the -show that followed the triggering of Article 50 and that there is indeed no mandate for a No Deal Brexit.
    "I pray Heaven to bestow the best of blessings on this house and all that shall hereafter inhabit it. May none but honest and wise men ever rule under this roof."
    - John Adams, on the White House, in a letter to Abigail Adams (2 November 1800)

  17. #2517
    Aexodus's Avatar Persuasion>Coercion
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    NI
    Posts
    6,433
    Blog Entries
    2

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

    There’s no doubt in my mind that the parliamentary process has failed to find a solution. Now the question is, do we revert to the legal A50 default, the referendum, or ‘scrap it and start again’.
    Patronised by Pontifex Maximus

    Quote Originally Posted by Akar View Post
    Well if you survive a beheading I feel like that's fair enough you get to go home

  18. #2518

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

    The only real option now is a general election with each party CLEARLY stating their Brexit position and then we see what the people choose.

  19. #2519

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Katsumoto View Post
    I'd say failing to adequately arrange a deal or prepare for no deal is a change in circumstances.
    No it isn't. The circumstances are the same as they were the day after A50 was invoked. The only notable difference is that Conservative Party had 330 MP's in 2015 where it has only 311 today.

    Obviously the deal May came up with didn't please anyone, not just Labour remain activists. It didn't help that she repeatedly dragged her feet and tried to force it through rather than involve Parliament and find an acceptable alternative. Meaning that MPs didn't agree or facilitate the -show that followed the triggering of Article 50 and that there is indeed no mandate for a No Deal Brexit.
    Unlike the remain activists on the Labour benches, the libertarians and arch conservatives who voted down May's agreement from the Tory side aren't the ones now wailing and thrashing about the prospect of a no deal exit; the default outcome of the Repeal Bill simply suited/suits the ERG better than the withdrawal agreement. As I said - and as should be apparent to anyone whose been paying attention - the Opposition's primary objective is to bring down the government; they were always going to try and vote down whatever deal May put in front of them in order to facilitate that objective. Pretending that they aren't active participants in this game of brinkmanship is delusional. As to the point about whether there exists a mandate for a clean exit, I would say it is debatable but irrelevant. The unequivocal mandate for leaving supersedes the specifics (or lack thereof) of the arrangements.

  20. #2520
    Miles
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Wales... New South Wales.
    Posts
    357

    Default Motion to call Borris Johnson Bo Jangles.

    Quote Originally Posted by ep1c_fail View Post
    These people spend most of their lives scheming with teams of professionals on how to acquire power. Johnson had plotted his ascension to Downing Street for years; I think it's pretty obvious that he's thought through the risks - even if they do end up back firing on him.



    I doubt it. If he takes back the usual Conservative Party voters who have defected to the Brexit Party he will almost certainly win the election on account of Corbyn's woeful popularity and the remain split between the Liberals and Labour. The Kantar poll of a week or so ago found that the Conservative Party had a 14 pt. lead when the Brexit Party wasn't prompted in the questioning. There's a good 10+% of the voting electorate that Johnson can win from the Brexit Party, and I think it very unlikely that he won't win a majority if he's polling 12-14 pts above Labour in the general election.



    Scotland is a lost cause as far as pro-exit Parliamentary seats are concerned irrespective of Ruth Davidson. Johnson really cannot pacify the Scottish nationalists and leave voters at the same time.
    I know he's your prime minister and all, but it still feels weird to me that a guy can just be referred to as "Johnson". Like, Borris Johnson is a famous enough Borris to be called Borris but not a famous enough Johnson to be called Johnson.

    In the spirit of ScoMo can we just call him "BoJo" or if that's too short "Bo Jangles"?

Posting Permissions

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