ChatterBank3 mins ago
Theresa May: We Risk Ending Up With No Brexit At All
//The prime minister has issued a stark warning to MPs that failure to back her plan for Brexit would risk the UK not leaving the EU at all.//
https:/
A stark warning? One could be forgiven for thinking she’s worried about flouting the democratic will of the people. Nigel Farage, speaking on ‘The Wright Stuff’ a couple of days ago, said that delaying tactics could be employed until the eleventh hour when Article 50 would be suspended. Is the real end plan coming to fruition? I think so.
https:/
A stark warning? One could be forgiven for thinking she’s worried about flouting the democratic will of the people. Nigel Farage, speaking on ‘The Wright Stuff’ a couple of days ago, said that delaying tactics could be employed until the eleventh hour when Article 50 would be suspended. Is the real end plan coming to fruition? I think so.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Now, after asking "the people", one way or the other, the Conservatives are going to take us out of the psychedelic pyramid scheme that we never voted to join in the first place. Job Done! I don't care whether the Tory party implodes. When it does something much less palatable to the luvvies and Marxists will fill the vacuum. You will not be able to post shi-ite as freely then believe me.
While we're at it, the "Remainers are an enemy of democracy" rhetoric is equally overblown, for two reasons: firstly, referendums are not a part of traditional UK democracy -- and, until that changes, holding them is meant to *kill* an issue, rather than resolve it. In that sense, having the referendum in the first place was arguably anti-democratic, as it was held for dubious and dishonest reasons.
Secondly, Parliament is the seat of democracy in this country, and MPs are meant to represent their constituents, about half of which will, on average, have voted to Remain. They too have a voice, that cannot and should not be ignored.
Thirdly (yeah, I know I said two), it's worth pointing out that all Brexit-related legislation has passed the house with almost no amendments. The Article 50 Act went through unamended; the recent Great Repeal Bill did have several attempts at amendments, all but one of which was defeated, and so on and so forth. Even if one or two more of those would have passed then the basic principle of Brexit would still have gone through. None of this exercise is anti-democratic.
In fact, May's various threats that her legislation must be passed free of amendment (and therefore effectively without any meaningful scrutiny) really *are* undemocratic, as they are cynical attempts to cut Parliament out of the picture entirely.
It's alarmist nonsense to speak of attempts to shape Brexit, to shape the future of this country, as undemocratic, or anti-democratic, or the like, just because you are a Remainer. People who are moaning about the death of democracy evidently don't seem to understand how it works in this country.
Secondly, Parliament is the seat of democracy in this country, and MPs are meant to represent their constituents, about half of which will, on average, have voted to Remain. They too have a voice, that cannot and should not be ignored.
Thirdly (yeah, I know I said two), it's worth pointing out that all Brexit-related legislation has passed the house with almost no amendments. The Article 50 Act went through unamended; the recent Great Repeal Bill did have several attempts at amendments, all but one of which was defeated, and so on and so forth. Even if one or two more of those would have passed then the basic principle of Brexit would still have gone through. None of this exercise is anti-democratic.
In fact, May's various threats that her legislation must be passed free of amendment (and therefore effectively without any meaningful scrutiny) really *are* undemocratic, as they are cynical attempts to cut Parliament out of the picture entirely.
It's alarmist nonsense to speak of attempts to shape Brexit, to shape the future of this country, as undemocratic, or anti-democratic, or the like, just because you are a Remainer. People who are moaning about the death of democracy evidently don't seem to understand how it works in this country.
Togo,
The Conservatives never asked you about joining in 1973, but Labour gave you a referendum in 1975 and the majority voted in favour of staying in the EEC.
And ever since, all our great leaders, Thatcher, Major, Cameron, happily signed us up to every new incarnation of the European Super State, without our participation
The Conservatives never asked you about joining in 1973, but Labour gave you a referendum in 1975 and the majority voted in favour of staying in the EEC.
And ever since, all our great leaders, Thatcher, Major, Cameron, happily signed us up to every new incarnation of the European Super State, without our participation
all our great leaders
all our great *Tory* leaders. Odd how the EU has been a Conservative project from beginning to end: their voters consistently express outrage at the wickedness of the EU while consistently voting for the party that's kept Britain in it. Meanwhile they berated Brown despite the fact that he single-handed kept the country out of the euro.
There's a lack of joined-up thinking going on here.
all our great *Tory* leaders. Odd how the EU has been a Conservative project from beginning to end: their voters consistently express outrage at the wickedness of the EU while consistently voting for the party that's kept Britain in it. Meanwhile they berated Brown despite the fact that he single-handed kept the country out of the euro.
There's a lack of joined-up thinking going on here.
//referendums are not a part of traditional UK democracy -- and, until that changes, holding them is meant to *kill* an issue, rather than resolve it. In that sense, having the referendum in the first place was arguably anti-democratic, as it was held for dubious and dishonest reasons.//
Yes to the first clause. The rest of the post is a Jim contrivance to avoid the moral point implicit in the exceptional grant by Parliament of a referendum. (We had one under Wilson in which I voted. Can't remember any "only advisory" or "might decide to ignore" clauses in that).
Sovereign Parliament says (by massive majority) "We your representatives favour staying in the EU, but we know you, the electors have strong passions and are more evenly split on the issue than your MPs. Whoever 'wins' will sipp half the country off, but despite that we will accept and enact the majority decision."
Was the vote for the referendum and the subsequent Government declaration on its meaning and effect offer in good faith? Or was it not?
The last truly binary decision four hundred years ago couldn't be resolved peacefully, only by war.
The referendum on EU membership had the possibility of a peaceful, even if contentious resolution.
Never expected the oligarchs ro negotiate in good faith in both Europe's and the UK's best interests. Would have been nice to see the remainers accept the result, however grudgingly and fearfully, and work with their fellow countrymen who voted Out rather than collude with the enemy.
the attempt to exit the EU on good terms work.
Yes to the first clause. The rest of the post is a Jim contrivance to avoid the moral point implicit in the exceptional grant by Parliament of a referendum. (We had one under Wilson in which I voted. Can't remember any "only advisory" or "might decide to ignore" clauses in that).
Sovereign Parliament says (by massive majority) "We your representatives favour staying in the EU, but we know you, the electors have strong passions and are more evenly split on the issue than your MPs. Whoever 'wins' will sipp half the country off, but despite that we will accept and enact the majority decision."
Was the vote for the referendum and the subsequent Government declaration on its meaning and effect offer in good faith? Or was it not?
The last truly binary decision four hundred years ago couldn't be resolved peacefully, only by war.
The referendum on EU membership had the possibility of a peaceful, even if contentious resolution.
Never expected the oligarchs ro negotiate in good faith in both Europe's and the UK's best interests. Would have been nice to see the remainers accept the result, however grudgingly and fearfully, and work with their fellow countrymen who voted Out rather than collude with the enemy.
the attempt to exit the EU on good terms work.
I'm happy to accept that there was a moral duty of Parliament to accept the result of the referendum, but that has already been achieved, with the passage of the EU (Notification of Withdrawal) Act and the subsequent Article 50 Notice.
The rest is detail, and therein lies my chief point: why is any attempt to shape that detail disgracefully branded as being "traitor[ous] to democracy"?
The rest is detail, and therein lies my chief point: why is any attempt to shape that detail disgracefully branded as being "traitor[ous] to democracy"?
Getting out is accepting the result of the referendum, not simply starting the process by passing othe EU (Notification of Withdrawal) Act and the subsequent Article 50 Notice. Thwarting real exit and approving of that action, is not right. And adds confidence to the EU that they don't have to compromise on any of their unreasonable demands, in direct opposition to this nation's aims.
//it was Enoch Powell who pointed out that the Wilson referendum could only be advisory in a parliamentary democracy//
Don't know whether to say "So what?" or "Yes, that's the point I was trying to make above".
The country "advises" Leave with a majority 52% to 48% and Parliament rejects the advise 75% to 25%. "Ho, ho - up yours!".
That's seriously taking the sipp, isn't it?
Don't know whether to say "So what?" or "Yes, that's the point I was trying to make above".
The country "advises" Leave with a majority 52% to 48% and Parliament rejects the advise 75% to 25%. "Ho, ho - up yours!".
That's seriously taking the sipp, isn't it?
-- answer removed --
Latest Posts
ChatterBank9 mins ago
Editor's Blog11 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles18 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles65 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles68 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.