Kingokings204
Well-Known Member
So no proof then.
The chap stated that he voted leave when interviewed by the BBC this morning after the high Court judgement. I have no reason to disbelieve him.
I hope the Foreign Secretary gets a good opportunity to defend his position...And if the MP's can actually have a civilised debate with the best interests of the country at the forefront (I have my doubts, but we shall see).
So no proof then.
There won't be a problem. Most labour MP's outside of London will vote to leave if they value their careers.
Fucking hell, so you want monners to break into the ballot boxes, rescue them from the shredder, and then match the handwriting of an X with the party concerned?
Ha yes - that reminds me, must change my avatarI hope the Foreign Secretary gets a good opportunity to defend his position...
So no proof then.
I do for obvious reasons.
The reality is the European Parliament is about as democratic as a government headed up by Stalin. It's autocratic and dicatorial.
The government should force it through or threaten an immediate election - labour MP's will just keel over.
It's telling the only one jumping up and down is the silly grinning man from the Liberals - the most un-principaled party in Britain who'd jump into bed with anyone and anything of it improved their ratings.
It was clear that Britain is a parliamentary democracy. If the government- Tory government- promised you that they would implement it, then what is your problem? They have the parliamentary majority- they just vote for article 50 and that is it. If they don't, take it up with them.
The high court is right in confirming that parliament is sovereign - regardless of whether they vote for or against triggering article 50.
I don't see your problem.
I see that May has a problem though.
Force it through...... like a government headed by Stalin you mean? Sounds really autocratic and dictatorial. I think we should stick to the democracy we know. Let the sovereign parliament decide.
Leavers are so sure that everyone thinks as they do, that I cannot see their fear of parliament. The MPs risk losing their seats if they make a decision against the people's wish.
What is the leaver's problem? Never heard so much talk about voting for democracy and transparency, but when it comes to a democratic vote in parliament then panic breaks out. What, our democratically elected representatives should have a say in the running of the country they were elected to run? No, the people ( at least a majority of just 4% of the voters that voted ) has decided, based on misinformation and for many different reasons nothing to do with the actual issue, on a yes/no question put to them about the most complicated and important decision of my life time. No-one can know the eventual outcome, least of all the ill informed or deliberately misinformed voters.
Parliament will at least debate the issue.
You couldn't make this up....
What? How can he prove it? If someone says something that goes against what you think, it means they are lying? What an odd perspective to have. NW is right- paranoia hs set in.So no proof then.
What? How can he prove it? If someone says something that goes against what you think, it means they are lying? What an odd perspective to have. NW is right- paranoia hs set in.
No worries - I am on the case. I may be gone some time though!Fucking hell, so you want monners to break into the ballot boxes, rescue them from the shredder, and then match the handwriting of an X with the party concerned?
Absolutely barking this, isn't it.What? How can he prove it? If someone says something that goes against what you think, it means they are lying? What an odd perspective to have. NW is right- paranoia hs set in.
Absolutely barking this, isn't it.
You know you're in trouble when Grendel pops up and is the voice of reason!
Yeah couldn't agree more. Leave won 52%. I feel very happy. Let them trigger article 50. Fine by me.
So you agree with the high court' decision then?
I've just agreed he voted leave. What's barking now? im sure there will be something that's wrong
After being shown up to be a particularly paranoid loon, yep!
Remain would have meant things staying as they are. There would be nothing to implement and therefore no vote in parliament needed.Wonder if it would of gone to high court and Supreme Court if remain had won?
Remain would have meant things staying as they are. There would be nothing to implement and therefore no vote in parliament needed.
Exactly. Life would have gone on. There was no real reason to ask the question yes or no. If there was to have been an advisory referendum, it should have several questions to see how much of the EU we want to accept. Yes or no has left us in a predicament. Brexit means different things to different people. Some people voted to get rid of Muslims, others to punish the government- but no-one was asked at what terms they wanted Brexit ( e.g. Hard brexit or soft brexit ).
The EU needs reforming. It is still - in it's present 28 member form - very new. There are loads of problems to sort out. If there was a need to pull together, it was as Europeans getting our part of the planet working smoothly and fairly.
Just ejecting ourselves into the unknown may have felt good - or even still feels good for some - but we are still in Europe - geographically and culturally- and no-one should want to go back to the old Europe of trying to solve social and economic problems at an international level by war as nation states looking after purely their own interests.
I don't agree with your first paragraph. Take Ireland for instance. I know the place well through family and friends - I don't ever feel there is a great deal of difference. On a global scale, Europeans (northern Europe perhaps more) has similariries between nations. All a bit subjective in some ways though.Culturally there is zero commonality between the uk and Europe. Across much of Europe there is little commonality.
The country decided to leave. There was no discussion regarding terms - just leave.
So all MP's who believe in democracy will just say yes and let the government decide. The Marxist rabble rouser from Scotland will of course have different views as will the silly grinning man whose anything but liberal.
The government should cease an opportunity here and also introduce a bill to have English votes determined only by England. They should also call the Marxists bluff and grant a referendum for their independence and set a timescale on it.
I don't agree with your first paragraph. Take Ireland for instance. I know the place well through family and friends - I don't ever feel there is a great deal of difference. On a global scale, Europeans (northern Europe perhaps more) has similariries between nations. All a bit subjective in some ways though.
I was referring the first paragraph re differing culture. Nevermind - i'll leave there as you have gone into angry modeIreland - oh yes a country that voted to get out of Europe and had to do it again until they gave the correct answer.
Ireland - oh yes a country that voted to get out of Europe and had to do it again until they gave the correct answer.
Laughable and you think in all this the French and Germans aren't looking after THEIR interests ? The nationalistic bias in awarding contracts and the state aid applied by these countries has made a mockery of it all. The EU is a parliament set up by these chief powers to serve these chief powers. The UK was throwing Billions at it every year to line the pockets of the French and German industrialists. It must be killing some of the Remainers how resilient the UK economy has been through all of this, even the BOE are admitting how wrong they got it. Prices for imported products will rise, so what ! Buy British !Exactly. Life would have gone on. There was no real reason to ask the question yes or no. If there was to have been an advisory referendum, it should have several questions to see how much of the EU we want to accept. Yes or no has left us in a predicament. Brexit means different things to different people. Some people voted to get rid of Muslims, others to punish the government- but no-one was asked at what terms they wanted Brexit ( e.g. Hard brexit or soft brexit ).
The EU needs reforming. It is still - in it's present 28 member form - very new. There are loads of problems to sort out. If there was a need to pull together, it was as Europeans getting our part of the planet working smoothly and fairly.
Just ejecting ourselves into the unknown may have felt good - or even still feels good for some - but we are still in Europe - geographically and culturally- and no-one should want to go back to the old Europe of trying to solve social and economic problems at an international level by war as nation states looking after purely their own interests.
I agree with your sentiment but the immediate rise in the Pound suggests that some of the Bremainers hold high hopes they will wriggle out of it all. It wouldn't surprise me either but if they do God help this country and it's future democracy. Personally I wouldn't bother voting for anything again, it would show that it is pointless and that those with the most vested interest will always get their way eventually. Fuck London and its yaa hoo wet blanket selfish shits and fuck Tony Blair and his witch who made a fortune out of all the human rights bollocks that came with the EU !
I bet he plumps for Protocol 13 article 1HAHA! Can you tell me what tenants of the human rights act you disagree with{
- Article 2 Right to life
- Article 3 Freedom from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment
- Article 4 Freedom from slavery and forced labour
- Article 5 Right to liberty and security
- Article 6 Right to a fair trial
- Article 7 No punishment without law
- Article 8 Respect for your private and family life, home and correspondence
- Article 9 Freedom of thought, belief and religion
- Article 10 Freedom of expression
- Article 11 Freedom of assembly and association
- Article 12 Right to marry and start a family
- Article 14 Protection from discrimination in respect of these rights and freedoms
- Protocol 1, Article 1 Right to peaceful enjoyment of your property
- Protocol 1, Article 2 Right to education
- Protocol 1, Article 3 Right to participate in free elections
- Protocol 13, Article 1 Abolition of the death penalty
In my experience people who slate the human rights act actually want all it's tenets afforded to them, they just don't want them extended to others, mainly people poorer than them and immigrants!I bet he plumps for Protocol 13 article 1
Hypothetical question. With the delays we might have a general election before brexit. What happens if a UK opposition party campaigns the general election as part of a coalition with the Scots and Irish and use remain as a main platform and that coalition wins the election?
What would be democratically fair then, following the result of the referendum or the general election?
It wouldn't make a difference. 25% of the country voted for an anti eU party and have one member of parliament.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?