Jump to content
nealpina

Post Brexit Result

Recommended Posts

Brexiteer: I am annoyed that parliament is required to approve triggering article 50 which I want to restore the power of parliament.

 

Remainer: I was completely comfortable with the principle of the primacy of EU law to overrule our parliament but now the intervention of our parliament is essential as we cannot allow  any decisions to be made without our parliament.

 

Maybe if everyone stopped to think a bit, just a little bit, they would see that whatever side of the fence they are on, that we are all a bunch of hypocrites.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm no hypocrite. But I know somebody who is. A month before the referendum, she is telling a bunch of bankers that Brexit would be a disaster. (Since then she has admitted ' The working class can kiss my arse, I got the foreman's job at last')  She says 'Brexit is Brexit' but she isn't going to give a running commentary.  Which I take to be the English equivalent of a gallic shrug. Despite a court ruling, she is telling EU leaders she means to proceed with article 50 in March. On whose authority?

 

FFS. Let's vote in Carl as PM. Brexit is a disaster but at least he is passionate about it and would tell us what he is doing :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, amauvis said:

Brexiteer: I am annoyed that parliament is required to approve triggering article 50 which I want to restore the power of parliament.

 

Remainer: I was completely comfortable with the principle of the primacy of EU law to overrule our parliament but now the intervention of our parliament is essential as we cannot allow  any decisions to be made without our parliament.

 

Maybe if everyone stopped to think a bit, just a little bit, they would see that whatever side of the fence they are on, that we are all a bunch of hypocrites.

Well, to be fair, parliament has always had primacy because they can repeal any law, including the EU act - something that the remainers often pointed out when brexiteers would falsely claim that we had given up our sovereignty.

 

It's not as if we've actually left yet, giving parliament it's power back. And parliament hasn't suddenly been given this power by the courts - the judges have just confirmed that they always had it. Remainers are simply saying that the government must obey the constitution - which isn't contradictory to their position before the vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, would one of the more eloquent amongst us please write a letter to Mr. Blair and tell him to butt out as his views are not welcome. Then advice him to crawl back into his little hole and start preparing his defence argument for his trail in The Hague (please god).

Narcissistic little w4nk3r

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I think this ^^^ is eloquent enough actually, succinct, to the point and no spelling mistakes (unless you count trail rather than trial) but on the whole a good effort! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a bit tired of hearing that "the will of the people must be obeyed" in the context of the High court ruling. In the last and preceding  national elections more people voted not to have a Conservative government than voted for it but that is the parliamentary election system. You can't really pick and choose when you want to abide by a parliamentary system of government. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually, I think this ^^^ is eloquent enough actually, succinct, to the point and no spelling mistakes (unless you count trail rather than trial) but on the whole a good effort! 

Deliberate speilling mistake just glad you didn't pick up on advice which should have been advise

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 04/11/2016 at 0:08 AM, Karl said:

It seems pretty clear to me..

brex.jpg

I also voted out, but just because you saw a picture on the internet doesnt mean its true lol.

 

will happily be proven wrong if this text did exist :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ROB163 said:

I also voted out, but just because you saw a picture on the internet doesnt mean its true lol.

 

will happily be proven wrong if this text did exist :)

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/515068/why-the-government-believes-that-voting-to-remain-in-the-european-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk.pdf

I'd have scanned my own copy but it got posted back to Tory headquarters.....Page 14

Edited by Karl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, inkiboo said:

Another person who doesn't understand why we have a Parliament. Staggering.

Parliament is easy... Can you explain how the unelected House of Lords fits in with democracy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 03/11/2016 at 5:26 PM, Spandex said:

So the Brexiteers campaigned and voted to get our parliament's sovereignty back from those shifty Europeans, and now they're complaining because parliamentary sovereignty actually means that parliament gets to vote on major decisions?

 

You couldn't make it up...

But just to muddy the waters, did we actually join the Common Market at all?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Karl said:

But just to muddy the waters, did we actually join the Common Market at all?

 

Hopefully I'm not misunderstanding that comment, therefore if that means what I think it means. I completely agree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 03/11/2016 at 10:20 PM, inkiboo said:

I do find it hilarious that all those people who voted to leave because they wanted control of our laws suddenly get so annoyed when our judges uphold the law of the land!

That would be fine as long as the judges can be proven to be impartial... Are we all sure that they are?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, nealpina said:

 

Hopefully I'm not misunderstanding that comment, therefore if that means what I think it means. I completely agree

As long as you understand the comment that I made and not misunderstood what I meant then I agree too..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do believe most judges especially at their level do leave their personal thoughts at home. I however find it bizarre that in Northern Ireland the judges verdict was the opposite.  

 

If the appeal is successfully at the Supreme Court then it needs to be taken to the European court. May then can tigger Article 50 before it gets to the European court :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 04/11/2016 at 6:56 PM, whiskychaser said:

I'm no hypocrite. But I know somebody who is. A month before the referendum, she is telling a bunch of bankers that Brexit would be a disaster. (Since then she has admitted ' The working class can kiss my arse, I got the foreman's job at last')  She says 'Brexit is Brexit' but she isn't going to give a running commentary.  Which I take to be the English equivalent of a gallic shrug. Despite a court ruling, she is telling EU leaders she means to proceed with article 50 in March. On whose authority?

 

FFS. Let's vote in Carl as PM. Brexit is a disaster but at least he is passionate about it and would tell us what he is doing :)

Well thank you for that vote of confidence but with me in charge, every one would be unhappy... Part of me sides with Maggie May, I understand that it can be beneficial to play you cards close to your chest, I genuinely hope that she does have a plan... However she is supposed to work for us and so we should at least know what her plan is.. But that gives to opposition an advantage.. To me Brexit is a withdrawal from the EU, totally and completely... This is what we voted for. Then negotiations need to be conducted to determine how the UK and EU work with each other.... Cooperation over security, agreements over travel, requirements for foreign nationals living in the UK and for Brits living in the EU... The trick is to make these things all work simultaneously.. I know how I would do it and it is the most logical way but I'm sure that the Goernment will unnecessarily over complicate things for no apparently good reason..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, nealpina said:

I do believe most judges especially at their level do leave their personal thoughts at home. I however find it bizarre that in Northern Ireland the judges verdict was the opposite.  

My understanding is that the case in Northern Ireland considered a number of questions, but they chose not to answer the one about parliament because the same question was due to be decided in England. So, the verdict only covered the remaining questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, nealpina said:

I do believe most judges especially at their level do leave their personal thoughts at home. I however find it bizarre that in Northern Ireland the judges verdict was the opposite.  

 

If the appeal is successfully at the Supreme Court then it needs to be taken to the European court. May then can tigger Article 50 before it gets to the European court :rolleyes:

Or if the appeal fails and we do need to consult with Parliament, then why bother with article 50 which is an EU bowl of spaghetti and just go for a straight forward repeal of the European Communities act? I also suspect that hidden somewhere in the EC act is a little clause which allows us to exit immediately and without consultation in the event of a war or other such disaster...

 

Of course there are some who are of the opinion that dragging things out may be beneficial to the UK, or rather to the EU's detriment so it would be in their interest to get rid of us sooner rather than later, so they may make our leaving easier and argue less at the negotiating table..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Lennox said:

So Karl in your opinion where on this diagram do we want to be post Brexit??

287ca073c0473b914838b7b6ae17b3f0.jpg

I'd like to see the UK in the section with the US and Canada with a much better working relationship with the Commonwealth countries. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Karl said:

Well thank you for that vote of confidence but with me in charge, every one would be unhappy... Part of me sides with Maggie May, I understand that it can be beneficial to play you cards close to your chest, I genuinely hope that she does have a plan... However she is supposed to work for us and so we should at least know what her plan is.. But that gives to opposition an advantage.. To me Brexit is a withdrawal from the EU, totally and completely... This is what we voted for. Then negotiations need to be conducted to determine how the UK and EU work with each other.... Cooperation over security, agreements over travel, requirements for foreign nationals living in the UK and for Brits living in the EU... The trick is to make these things all work simultaneously.. I know how I would do it and it is the most logical way but I'm sure that the Goernment will unnecessarily over complicate things for no apparently good reason..

I think that is a fair statement. Out means out. Lock stock and barrel. On trading terms it puts us on a par with a Banana Republic. (With the greatest respect to Banana Republics). The EU has repeatedly made it clear that we cannot cherry pick - the stumbling block being free movement of labour. But if we disregard concerns about trade with Europe, it is most liberating. Unfortunately, a lot of our trading partners use the UK as a gateway to Europe. And financial services dwarf export of goods. So I suspect the government is dithering rather than bluffing  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I prefer to think that we would be on a par with the US, China or Japan...Canada has a deal with the EU and free movement of people didn't seem to be an issue so why should it be with us... Our trading partners could also use the UK as a handy gateway to countries where the EU cannot sell....The EU can repeatedly make whatever they like clear, does it really mean that they mean it or are they bluffing?.... After all, the UK is divorcing the pretty girl who grew into the outrageously demanding old hag who wants to keep the Bentley, family silver and the Van Gough

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×