The Official Brexit - Remain Thread - All New Threads Will Be Merged Into This One

[spunko2010]

Has roy from Fulham been banned? As annoying and delusional as he is, I hope there is a better reason than this.

[ccc]

Roy ? Fulham ? A little bit dim ?

Now I know why he's so angry !! It's just a game after all Roy ffs !!!

[Noallegiance]

Grow up - you may have the mind of a child, but try to be adult in your posts.

Says the Mean Girls reject.

[frederico]

I will not be putting him on my ignore list, just like I would not put readers of the Daily Express or the Sun on ignore, knowing how these people work and group think is vital. I find Roy and education, sadly for him not how we would like it though. I do not believe for one minute he is that bothered about "racism" or standing side by side with his fellow comrades", but there is an element of truth when he talks about the economy, he has something to lose leaving the EU, that's for sure, and us serfs have wrecked it for him.

In some ways I love Dave Cameron, the status quo could of gone on for years or even decades, no matter who was in power the same general policies would have continued and those who have would kept having and ignoring the disillusioned, then he made the huge mistake, because Ed Miiiband would not have, of giving the disillusioned a stick to batter them with.

While I agree with the sentiment towards Cameron, I cannot help but think something was going to give eventually. The technocrats want to sort things out their way, but it will take far too long and hurt too many people. Some cultures are content to take a bit of down treading, the UK and probably France can only be pushed so far and it won't take decades to find the limit.

[grasshopper]

Has roy from Fulham been banned? As annoying and delusional as he is, I hope there is a better reason than this.

It helps someone to be on his side of the debate so it can tease out the key points from both - although the standard of his posting was always highly emotional, and light on facts.

Well the magnitude of the decision taken is such that the consequences could be dramatic i.e. break up of the union, violence returns to Northern Ireland, UK sinks into recession or depression, high unemployment, civil unrest, riots, EU breaks apart, sectarianism and nationalism take hold - then war in Europe.

Now, any of these may or may not happen but if you are off a pessimistic nature like myself they become a very real possibility in an active mind. So I guess we shouldn't be surprised when people react strongly.

I presume the outers would have been equally dismayed if the result had gone the other way.

[grasshopper]

Has roy from Fulham been banned? As annoying and delusional as he is, I hope there is a better reason than this.

It helps someone to be on his side of the debate so it can tease out the key points from both - although the standard of his posting was always highly emotional, and light on facts.

I wonder what the Brexiters make of the legal representations currently being made to clarify the legal position with respect to ensuring parliament has a vote on enacting article 50.

I remain of the opinion that parliament must be sovereign but clearly Members of Parliament would have to balance there voting intentions by giving due consideration to the wishes of the majority as expressed in the referendum.

[long time lurking]

Well the magnitude of the decision taken is such that the consequences could be dramatic i.e. break up of the union, violence returns to Northern Ireland, UK sinks into recession or depression, high unemployment, civil unrest, riots, EU breaks apart, sectarianism and nationalism take hold - then war in Europe.

Now, any of these may or may not happen but if you are off a pessimistic nature like myself they become a very real possibility in an active mind. So I guess we shouldn't be surprised when people react strongly.

I presume the outers would have been equally dismayed if the result had gone the other way.

I doubt it very much as most would know they would be just as screwed that day as they have been for the last decade...... they had nothing to lose and have nothing to lose now

Edited July 9, 2016 by long time lurking

[long time lurking]

I wonder what the Brexiters make of the legal representations currently being made to clarify the legal position with respect to ensuring parliament has a vote on enacting article 50.

I remain of the opinion that parliament must be sovereign but clearly Members of Parliament would have to balance there voting intentions by giving due consideration to the wishes of the majority as expressed in the referendum.

It`s an interesting one ,but i guess it will be seen as too much of a risk to vote against the peoples wishes ....but who knows..i suspect if it goes down that road we will see the strength of the parties "whips"

[billybong]

It would be a strange thing if Parliament having included it in the Queen's Speech and then having agreed the idea of the eu referendum by a massive majority and with Royal Assent then decided to reject the result - but there again it's Parliament.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_European_Union_membership_referendum,_2016

Legislation
To enable the referendum to take place across the United Kingdom and Gibraltar, two pieces of legislation were enacted. The first of these, the European Union Referendum Act 2015, was passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom and received the Royal Assent on 17 December 2015. The second, the European Union (Referendum) Act 2016, was passed by the Gibraltar Parliament to allow the referendum to take place in Gibraltar and received the Royal Assent on 28 January 2016.[citation needed]

The planned referendum was included in the Queen's Speech on 27 May 2015.[62] It was suggested at the time that Cameron was planning to hold the referendum in October 2016,[63] but the European Union Referendum Act 2015, which authorised it, went before the House of Commons the following day, just three weeks after the election.[64] On the bill's second reading on 9 June, members of the House of Commons voted by 544 to 53 in favour of it, endorsing the principle of holding a referendum, with only the Scottish National Party voting against.[65] In contrast to the Labour Party's position prior to the 2015 general election under Miliband, acting Labour leader Harriet Harman committed her party to supporting plans for an EU referendum by 2017.

Edited July 9, 2016 by billybong

[council dweller]

The ` not fair............can we have the vote again? .......I wasn't ready` petician has failed. (Reuters)

[long time lurking]

It risks the nationalists taking power at the next election. Consigning large parts of the Labour and Tory parties to the dustbin.

Yep that`s the risk for sure and it`s a direct risk to them as in team red and blue ,i think they are fully aware of that and the remainers in each camp will dress up their change of tact as it`s "democracy" but the real reason will be self preservation

[knock out johnny]

I wonder what the Brexiters make of the legal representations currently being made to clarify the legal position with respect to ensuring parliament has a vote on enacting article 50.

I remain of the opinion that parliament must be sovereign but clearly Members of Parliament would have to balance there voting intentions by giving due consideration to the wishes of the majority as expressed in the referendum.

There'll be anger and incredulity and sensationalist headling in the tabloids along the lines of:

"Unelected judges stop YOUR democracy" and other such bs

very much like when the courts decide to stop deportation of undesirables

I hope that there'll be some explanation in the tabloids that it's these very same courts that stop politicians taking the p!ss, but there won't be

you notice whenever a government leader wants to become a dictator abolishing or controlling the courts is the very first thing they do (just ask Robert Mugabe et al)

[spunko2010]

If TPTB try anything to purposely avoid invoking Article 50 via backdoor legal methods then there will, quite literally, be social unrest.

[knock out johnny]

If TPTB try anything to purposely avoid invoking Article 50 via backdoor legal methods then there will, quite literally, be social unrest.

There's nothing backdoor about it

[long time lurking]

There's nothing backdoor about it

If they are forced to vote on the decision in parliament my guess is they will vote to go with the result of the referendum to vote against it would be akin to a turkey voting for Christmas for the whole farm not just that particular turkey.....the nationalists will be running the country come the next GE, they team red and blue know this

But would agree with you on the MSM point in the earlier post the spin will be strong

[Bloo Loo]

P

There'll be anger and incredulity and sensationalist headling in the tabloids along the lines of:

"Unelected judges stop YOUR democracy" and other such bs

very much like when the courts decide to stop deportation of undesirables

I hope that there'll be some explanation in the tabloids that it's these very same courts that stop politicians taking the p!ss, but there won't be

you notice whenever a government leader wants to become a dictator abolishing or controlling the courts is the very first thing they do (just ask Robert Mugabe et al)

Parliament makes the law. If challenged, they can overturn it

[knock out johnny]

P

Parliament makes the law. If challenged, they can overturn it

I'm glad you realise this

The PM doesn't - and the judges are there to stop him

As I say dictatorships start with the courts either being controlled or abolished

[long time lurking]

I'm glad you realise this

The PM doesn't - and the judges are there to stop him

As I say dictatorships start with the courts either being controlled or abolished

Who trumps our High court ? would not be some court in the EU would it

[knock out johnny]

Who trumps our High court ? would not be some court in the EU would it

Parliament

edit to add

There is a hierachy of courts and in some matters rulings by domestic courts can be overruled by European courts - for example the Human Rights Act incorporated (by parliamentary majority) the European Convention on Human Rights into English Law and the ultimate court of appeal in certain cases is the European Court of Human Rights

If we don't like it we can vote in mps who'll get rid of it - I think Dave did a bit of sabre-rattling about replacing the Human Rights Act with a UK bill of rights, but it's ultimately our MPs in parliament by majority

Edited July 9, 2016 by knock out johnny

[long time lurking]

Parliament

I always thought that Parliament were the proposers and the lords were the ones that made it law

The EU High court can over rule our high court regardless to who made the law

"And the report concedes that EU law overrides UK law, and the European Court trumps the British Supreme Court.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/14/uk-obliged-judgments-of-european-courts-official-document-from-m/

[knock out johnny]

I always thought that Parliament were the proposers and the lords were the ones that made it law

The EU High court can over rule our high court regardless to who made the law

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/14/uk-obliged-judgments-of-european-courts-official-document-from-m/

Yes - I just added that to my original post

The lords can oppose it or ask for amendments, or rubber stamp it (it's a check and balance), but ultimately the mps in the commons and the government can combine to use the Parliament act to force it through the Lords - this takes time, but it shows that the Government of the day with the backing of majority of mps in the commons (and that's who we ultimately vote in - FPTP is for another debate)

[The Knimbies who say No]

I wonder what the Brexiters make of the legal representations currently being made to clarify the legal position with respect to ensuring parliament has a vote on enacting article 50.

I remain of the opinion that parliament must be sovereign but clearly Members of Parliament would have to balance there voting intentions by giving due consideration to the wishes of the majority as expressed in the referendum.

Kinda wondered why the voting areas for the referendum were not aligned exactly with the constituency boundaries, it would make identifying rebellious MPs from either side a bit easier.

[grasshopper]

I'm glad you realise this

The PM doesn't - and the judges are there to stop him

As I say dictatorships start with the courts either being controlled or abolished

Agreed.

One of my concerns is that we all to often belittle our politicians and parliament - which helps drive a wedge between the governed and those elected to govern.

That is not to dismiss the very real concerns of many people who feel totally alienated and badly let down by our political representatives - but that is political failure not institutional.

[long time lurking]

Kinda wondered why the voting areas for the referendum were not aligned exactly with the constituency boundaries, it would make identifying rebellious MPs from either side a bit easier.

i really don`t think the concern is about rebellious MP`s it`s about Labour /Tories continuing to be part of the balance of power come the next GE ,the rise of the SNP will not have gone unnoticed ..and that was off the back of a vote for independence

[grasshopper]

Kinda wondered why the voting areas for the referendum were not aligned exactly with the constituency boundaries, it would make identifying rebellious MPs from either side a bit easier.

Not thought about that one - but I don't go in for conspiracy theory’s in general.

I am very much in the ****-up theory of history rather than malintent i.e. Hanlon's razor "Never assume malice when stupidity will surffice".