O/T Democracy

[mikemiller]

Watched the live coverage from parliament this morning. Boris wasn't even there. Ok, he might still be on his way back from New York, but where were the rest of the Cabinet? Couldn't even see that nutter who looks like Walter from the Denis the Menace cartoon strip in the Beano. In the well-known words of the poet... "Get back to work ya idle sods!"

[Shark27]

I'm gobsmacked that it was a unanimous decision. That is unusual in itself and demonstrates just how much the court disapproved of BoJo's action.

Kerr I have a genuine question for you regarding the law which prevents no deal.

If the EU do not grant an extension and parliament reject a deal it means that we would leave without a deal and therefore the law cannot be enforced. In your experience are there many other laws in this country that have the potential to be unenforceable? Also should a law that has the potential to be unenforceable be brought in?

Isn't it like a couple getting a divorce and a judge says that one of you can walk away without agreeing a settlement but the other one can't?

It puzzles me that such a law would be brought in!

[BigLadonOS]

Politicians all said lots of different and contradictory things. Your problem, like so many, is you cherry pick everything thing that reinforces your position and ignore everything that doesn't.

The facts are the referendum was stated as advisory and was legally advisory.

The facts are we live in a parliamentary democracy where parliament decides the laws through centuries of established procedure. You really really wanting something doesn't magically change that.

I do not cherry pick at all mate and you are entirely wrong that it was stated as advisory only because it was not stated either way but again please do not let facts spoil your argument eh! .

As you will no doubt know that referendum results in the past have been implemented even when it has not stated that it is a lawful mandate including the one in 1975. Does that mean we are not legally a member of the EU?

By implementing article 50 we validated the result anyway so lawful or not the result was implemented and therefore parliament should abide by it.

You seem to think that by changing the law to suit your point of view is acceptable but if it goes against your point of view it is not. I would look at yourself when talking about cherry picking mate.

[WanChaiMiller]

Reading the notes of this court case it says the referendum was advisory but all parties had agreed to implement the result.

[rolymiller]

Watched the live coverage from parliament this morning. Boris wasn't even there. Ok, he might still be on his way back from New York, but where were the rest of the Cabinet? Couldn't even see that nutter who looks like Walter from the Denis the Menace cartoon strip in the Beano. In the well-known words of the poet... "Get back to work ya idle sods!"

I think you might mean this guy mikemiller

[flourbasher]

Some people appear to be making things up on this thread. Surprise surprise.
There was a vote in 2016 with two questions. Do you want to stay in the EU or leave the EU.
None of the questions mentioned including a deal and the definition of what a deal means is widely misunderstood.
So we leave and this should not be complicated by something that people call a deal.
Whether people have a different opinion on this outcome is totally irrelevant because when the polling stations closed at 10pm on the date of the referendum debating the issue should no longer be factored into our destiny.
If people think the situation has changed for them then that's because there has been a three year delay. That shouldn't be a reason to change the decision.

[rolymiller]

Some people appear to be making things up on this thread. Surprise surprise.
There was a vote in 2016 with two questions. Do you want to stay in the EU or leave the EU.
None of the questions mentioned including a deal and the definition of what a deal means is widely misunderstood.
So we leave and this should not be complicated by something that people call a deal.
Whether people have a different opinion on this outcome is totally irrelevant because when the polling stations closed at 10pm on the date of the referendum debating the issue should no longer be factored into our destiny.
If people think the situation has changed for them then that's because there has been a three year delay. That shouldn't be a reason to change the decision.

But here lies the problem. we should have been told that a deal was also one of the options. The question was poorly thought out and didn't give the electorate all the options. The ballot paper should have read something like therefore

1, Do you want to leave the EU with no deal?

2. Do you want to leave the EU with a deal?

3. Do you want to stay in the EU?

Obviously I dont know what the outcome would have been then but I would make a good guess more would have voted to leave the EU with a deal than no deal. You could even add other options on as well. You could factor in what sort of deal for a start. It goes on and on. It should never been a 2 choice question because the issue was more complicated than that.



The problem for me ,and I thought this at the time, this is a knee jerk referendum based on the terrorist activities (and a fear of foreigners) that were going on at the time. It is one of the reasons why I didn't vote at all because I didn't really want to feed jingoistic nationalists and some quite nasty right wing views at that time.

If we were to have the same poll now the leavers would not win because time has moved on and terrorism and fear of foreigners is not such a big issue.

I blame Cameron for bowing down to the right wing of the party for turning it into a knee jerk referendum

The likes of Biglad can harp on all he likes about the voters wanting to leave without a deal but I think that is just not a true position now.

[Silly-miller]

But here lies the problem. we should have been told that a deal was also one of the options. The question was poorly thought out and didn't give the electorate all the options. The ballot paper should have read something like therefore

1, Do you want to leave the EU with no deal?

2. Do you want to leave the EU with a deal?

3. Do you want to stay in the EU?

Obviously I dont know what the outcome would have been then but I would make a good guess more would have voted to leave the EU with a deal than no deal. You could even add other options on as well.

The problem for me ,and I thought this at the time, this is a knee jerk referendum based on the terrorist activities (and a fear of foreigners) that were going on at the time. It is one of the reasons why I didn't vote at all because I didn't really want to feed jingoistic nationalists at that time.

If we were to have the same poll now the leavers would not win because time has moved on and terrorism and fear of foreigners is not such a big issue.

I blame Cameron for bowing down to the right wing of the party for turning it into a knee jerk referendum

Problem with that is it would split the leave vote, have you noticed no remainer wants a referendum that has deal or no deal but plenty want a rigged vote that lets them win.

[WanChaiMiller]

Some people appear to be making things up on this thread. Surprise surprise.
There was a vote in 2016 with two questions. Do you want to stay in the EU or leave the EU.
None of the questions mentioned including a deal and the definition of what a deal means is widely misunderstood.
So we leave and this should not be complicated by something that people call a deal.
Whether people have a different opinion on this outcome is totally irrelevant because when the polling stations closed at 10pm on the date of the referendum debating the issue should no longer be factored into our destiny.
If people think the situation has changed for them then that's because there has been a three year delay. That shouldn't be a reason to change the decision.

To add to Roly - the Leave Group campaigned on the promise that we would exit the EU with a better deal than existed as a full member state.

[WanChaiMiller]

Problem with that is it would split the leave vote, have you noticed no remainer wants a referendum that has deal or no deal but plenty want a rigged vote that lets them win.

Im a remainer who does not want a second referendum but the deal that was promised.