casual_squash Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 The problem stems back to what Parliament agreed on for a Referendum and to what they then portrayed to the public. There is your constitutional crisis. To blame now the electorate because what Parliament promised now can't be delivered is disingenuous. The message was loud and clear, I'm getting a vote to decide whether we stay or leave the EU. At no point did they suggest that that decision then again needs to go back to Parliament to be second guessed.This is complete disingenuous. It voids really the referendum and I suggest now this act of treason won't go completely unpunished by the electorate, regardless of what happens here on in. Additionally I fail to see why the Royal prerogative to leave isn't is no longer good enough when it's been good enough to pass EU law. It's a complete stitch up by an establishment that was largely within the Remain camp that the electorate are supposed to trust to deliver what they voted on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion of VIs Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 3 minutes ago, South Lorne said: ....you are avoiding the issue ..you suggested it was in the link (good to read it first) ..why send the link and not quote from it.....the 'process' under discussion is who invokes article 50...Parliament voted 6:1 it should be the Government before the referendum took place ....to state "There is nothing that defines how the process moves forwards" is not very helpful , when it is not true ....the judges are challenging the power of Parliaments 6:1 majority ...that is a serious matter...... You have managed to twist yourself into a very strange interpretation of challenging the power of Parliament. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybong Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 (edited) 23 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said: I think in this instance the judges bats were straight. Not sure about anyone else's, or your qualifications as a legal eagle capable of dissecting 3 high court judges considered opinion. Anyway while it won't effect the Brexit outcome, it's throwing some light on the governments incompetent handling of the issue which surely would be welcomed by any objective person. I know enough to form and to express a reasonable opinion on the forum based on what's already been posted and if the reference to government in Wikipedia etc is correct. I wasn't necessarily referring to the judges bats - it was generally speaking. I also know that the entrance of some (admittedly slight) ad hominem rather than counter evidence also demonstrates someone starting to lose the argument. Edited November 4, 2016 by billybong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digsby Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 Let's March. Spread the word. The remainers have had their moment on the streets, let's show them we can stamp our feet too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nabby81 Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 Just thinking but does this ruling also mean that in event of an indy2 in Scotland getting a leave vote Parliment could then consider that advisory and vote against it in parliment ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheeple Splinter Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 12 minutes ago, Byron said: PUBLIC ENEMY NUMBER ONE Gina Miller No! Irresponsible statement unless it's banter. Symptoms and causes. She is the symptom, the cause is muptards (MP's) and their SPAD's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
South Lorne Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 2 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said: Why are you devoting all this effort and bile defending May's incompetent handling of Brexit. She knew that the referendum was advisory and would have to be confirmed by parliament (because it was advisory, the clue's in the word advisory) yet she tried to push it through without a vote relying on a centuries old view of Royal prerogative. She should just get on with it, state what a successful Brexit will look like and have the vote which will easily pass. The reason she doesn't want to do this is because it will give us, the people, a measure by which to assess whether she has succeeded or failed in the negotiations. your naivity is plain to see...the governments stance cannot be divulged until the cards from both sides are on the table ....as a remain trougher you are the one with bile and to state the referendum was advisory is a lie to the people of this country (to both remain and leave) ....cast aside your confusion and start respecting the people of this country.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion of VIs Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 Watching the Brexiteers on here, who previously have been complaining about Remoaning, take moaning to new and unsurpassed levels while tying themselves up in knots about the apparently very complex meaning of the word advisory is providing me with more amusement than Property118 on a good day. Keep up the good work, with a bit of luck the Supreme court will support the High court's decision at which point we will no doubt have Brexiteers demanding the issue is taken to the European court. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheeple Splinter Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 2 minutes ago, Nabby81 said: Just thinking but does this ruling also mean that in event of an indy2 in Scotland getting a leave vote Parliment could then consider that advisory and vote against it in parliment ? Here's the rub, no way the SNP would let that one get past them! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
South Lorne Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 2 minutes ago, Nabby81 said: Just thinking but does this ruling also mean that in event of an indy2 in Scotland getting a leave vote Parliment could then consider that advisory and vote against it in parliment ? ...ha ha...they would only try once....I am Scottish..and know they would not put up with such nonsense...(as I live outside Scotland I do not have a vote)..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion of VIs Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 2 minutes ago, South Lorne said: your naivity is plain to see...the governments stance cannot be divulged until the cards from both sides are on the table ....as a remain trougher you are the one with bile and to state the referendum was advisory is a lie to the people of this country (to both remain and leave) ....cast aside your confusion and start respecting the people of this country.... You believe that tosh and call me naïve BTW I have got over it and hope we now move along the exit path ASAP, uncertainty is now the enemy. Just think what a mess we would be in if this court challenge had happened in say 2019 just before exit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
South Lorne Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 2 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said: Watching the Brexiteers on here, who previously have been complaining about Remoaning, take moaning to new and unsurpassed levels while tying themselves up in knots about the apparently very complex meaning of the word advisory is providing me with more amusement than Property118 on a good day. Keep up the good work, with a bit of luck the Supreme court will support the High court's decision at which point we will no doubt have Brexiteers demanding the issue is taken to the European court. ...why take it to a court which does not represent a democracy..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion of VIs Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 8 minutes ago, Nabby81 said: Just thinking but does this ruling also mean that in event of an indy2 in Scotland getting a leave vote Parliment could then consider that advisory and vote against it in parliment ? Surely we would move on to best of 3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
South Lorne Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 1 minute ago, Confusion of VIs said: You believe that tosh and call me naïve BTW I have got over it and hope we now move along the exit path ASAP, uncertainty is now the enemy. Just think what a mess we would be in if this court challenge had happened in say 2019 just before exit. ...your obviously not from the real world if you think that is 'tosh' ...there will be challenges from the hiding VI's even after we leave..although this time next year there may be nothing to leave..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheeple Splinter Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 1 hour ago, DiggerUK said: I suggest that people use the time between now and the appeal to the Supreme Court, to swat up on anything they can find on UK constitutional history and law, and just shut up for now. You will find that laws can only be enabled or dissolved by the legislative body. Referendums count for nothing under the legislative process. The legislative assembly rules the roost not you. I can only repeat my argument that the referendum counted for nothing beyond a giant opinion poll..._ Fair comment to those on here. However, the vast majority on both sides believed what they were told and read. I think that you will find the referendum issue is going to count for a lot more than a poll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion of VIs Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 3 minutes ago, South Lorne said: ...why take it to a court which does not represent a democracy..... Glad to see you have come round and now agree the High court is representing our democracy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
South Lorne Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 2 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said: Surely we would move on to best of 3. ...you don't understand Scotland making a statement like that..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion of VIs Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 1 minute ago, South Lorne said: ...your obviously not from the real world if you think that is 'tosh' ...there will be challenges from the hiding VI's even after we leave..although this time next year there may be nothing to leave..... If you believe that we might as well wait for it to break up then, it would save an awful lot of effort not to mention our £30bn leaving payment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion of VIs Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 1 minute ago, South Lorne said: ...you don't understand Scotland making a statement like that..... That's probably true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
South Lorne Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 2 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said: Glad to see you have come round and now agree the High court is representing our democracy. 2 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said: Glad to see you have come round and now agree the High court is representing our democracy. 2 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said: Glad to see you have come round and now agree the High court is representing our democracy. ...the Government and the people fight for democracy and they will ensure through the ballot box our destiny ....not the judiciary.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
South Lorne Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 3 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said: If you believe that we might as well wait for it to break up then, it would save an awful lot of effort not to mention our £30bn leaving payment. ...it will cost us more to stay.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecrashingisles Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 1 minute ago, South Lorne said: ...the Government and the people fight for democracy and they will ensure through the ballot box our destiny ....not the judiciary.... Mob rule vs the rule of law? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XswampyX Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 (edited) 21 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said: If you believe that we might as well wait for it to break up then, it would save an awful lot of effort not to mention our £30bn leaving payment. How is It really going to break up... when nobody can leave! The incompetent judges have got this wrong. It's a binary answer invoke article 50 or don't (They already have their answer). So what are they going to debate, their wishes for the price of potatoes in 2040? Demand a beret tax to be placed on the French? No German sausages over 6" long? What? Edited November 4, 2016 by XswampyX Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warpig Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 Does anyone here understand why the high court ruled the way it did? I've read only Parliament has the authority, because activating Article 50 would cancel the rights granted under the EU treaties, however I haven't heard an explanation as to why the Royal Prerogative couldn't be used. I'd like to understand what logic lead them to this conclusion. Does anyone know? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheeple Splinter Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 Depraved idiots: Quote A prominent campaigner who helped bring about the successful legal challenge to the government over Brexit has received death threats online. Gina Miller, 51, led the action against the government’s plan to commence Article 50 negotiations to leave the EU without parliament’s consent. http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/article-50-fallout-sees-gina-millar-receive-death-threats-online_uk_581ba19fe4b020461a1bec57? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.