BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

pblakeney

bompington wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

COLDEST WINTER IN 100 YEARS!!!

It must be about the time of year for the Express to print the same article they do every winter, mustn't it.

That was so last month.

kingstongraham

Surrey Commuter wrote:

The suggestion is that the parliamentary vote can be used to insist on Soft Brexit. Another suggestion is that we could try and force EU into prelim negotiations to agree a position which is then voted on before A50 is invoked

I know that i am biased but Parliamnent deciding what form Brexit should take seems reasonable

Hey, maybe if there were some preliminary negotiations, there might be a compromise to be done that's worth taking back to the public...

rick_chasey

Ha ha.

High court won, Brexiters lost.


Wish they'd stop moaning about it.

Bloody bremoners.

chris_bass

bompington wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

COLDEST WINTER IN 100 YEARS!!!

It must be about the time of year for the Express to print the same article they do every winter, mustn't it.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/weather/7 ... e-forecast

bendertherobot

Going to be very cold for Cyclocross in Wales this week mind. Don't tell Pinno I said.

bendertherobot

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/peopl ... 95466.html

Whether you like him or not, agree with him or not, he does do a quality rant.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/peopl ... 95466.html

surrey_commuter

KingstonGraham wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

The suggestion is that the parliamentary vote can be used to insist on Soft Brexit. Another suggestion is that we could try and force EU into prelim negotiations to agree a position which is then voted on before A50 is invoked

I know that i am biased but Parliamnent deciding what form Brexit should take seems reasonable

Hey, maybe if there were some preliminary negotiations, there might be a compromise to be done that's worth taking back to the public...

The public has spoken - no need for them to speak again

kingstongraham

Surrey Commuter wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

The suggestion is that the parliamentary vote can be used to insist on Soft Brexit. Another suggestion is that we could try and force EU into prelim negotiations to agree a position which is then voted on before A50 is invoked

I know that i am biased but Parliamnent deciding what form Brexit should take seems reasonable

Hey, maybe if there were some preliminary negotiations, there might be a compromise to be done that's worth taking back to the public...

The public has spoken - no need for them to speak again

And I'm sure that's what Nigel Farage would be saying if it had gone the other way.

bendertherobot

Did you forget to log out there?

Anyway, on a similar note: Andrew RT Davies.

A clear majority of the British people voted to leave the European Union in June, and Parliament's job is to enact that decision - not to subvert it.

Sigh, they.....just......don't......get.........it. These are the people you elect and they don't get it.

Lookyhere

bendertherobot wrote:

Did you forget to log out there?

Anyway, on a similar note: Andrew RT Davies.

A clear majority of the British people voted to leave the European Union in June, and Parliament's job is to enact that decision - not to subvert it.

Sigh, they.....just......don't......get.........it. These are the people you elect and they don't get it.

i dont get that, if that was Parliaments wish to give the people a true say in what they wanted over the EU, the vote would have been binding, it was only advisory and the fact that both sides lied and therefore people based their decision on these lies, surely means that both sides should rip up the result and give us all a referendum that is binding and is done to electoral commission GE rules.
the courts decision is purely on the power of the executive, just a re run of the Royalists v the Parliamentarians, hopefully with not such a bl00dy outcome.

bendertherobot

Lookyhere wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

Did you forget to log out there?

Anyway, on a similar note: Andrew RT Davies.

A clear majority of the British people voted to leave the European Union in June, and Parliament's job is to enact that decision - not to subvert it.

Sigh, they.....just......don't......get.........it. These are the people you elect and they don't get it.

i dont get that, if that was Parliaments wish to give the people a true say in what they wanted over the EU, the vote would have been binding, it was only advisory and the fact that both sides lied and therefore people based their decision on these lies, surely means that both sides should rip up the result and give us all a referendum that is binding and is done to electoral commission GE rules.
the courts decision is purely on the power of the executive, just a re run of the Royalists v the Parliamentarians, hopefully with not such a bl00dy outcome.

Quite. However you spin it the law is the law. It's abundantly clear. Parliament is the only one who can enact. Either it has before (it did not, as the Court says) or it must now. So he can't bleat about what the Court says because the Court is saying exactly that, Parliament must enact it. It's not Parliament subverting anything at all. Or the judges. The only subversive element in all of this happened earlier.

surrey_commuter

Apparently with the Xmas hols and then the length of parliamentary procedure they are unlikely to hit the March deadline to trigger A50

bendertherobot

It's a self imposed deadline, no need to worry about broken promises, it's hardly one of the worst.

wallace_and_gromit

bendertherobot wrote:

It's a self imposed deadline, no need to worry about broken promises, it's hardly one of the worst.

Except it will p*ss of the EU folk who want the UK to either stay or get on with leaving ASAP.

surrey_commuter

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

It's a self imposed deadline, no need to worry about broken promises, it's hardly one of the worst.

Except it will p*ss of the EU folk who want the UK to either stay or get on with leaving ASAP.

Oh cheer up... May is starting to look like a genius. If we assume she wants to not do Brexit, or delay it as long as possible with as soft an option as possible then she is doing a good job. Whilst using unqualified fools is working well it must, as a plan,have a shelf-life.

rick_chasey

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

It's a self imposed deadline, no need to worry about broken promises, it's hardly one of the worst.

Except it will p*ss of the EU folk who want the UK to either stay or get on with leaving ASAP.

In fairness, when Uk decides to enact it is one of the few decent leverage points UK has.

surrey_commuter

Rick Chasey wrote:

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

It's a self imposed deadline, no need to worry about broken promises, it's hardly one of the worst.

Except it will p*ss of the EU folk who want the UK to either stay or get on with leaving ASAP.

In fairness, when Uk decides to enact it is one of the few decent leverage points UK has.

Agreed - if we had any sense we would use this as an excuse to demand n outline agreement before we trigger

rick_chasey

Shows how much of a sham the campaigning was though.

Campaign about sovereign and British rule, and then get upset when that same British sovereignty means it gets discussed in parliament first. The ruling is literally what they wanted - all rules to be decided by commons & lords.

No-one is surprised but I'd like to see someone who Brexiters have to answer call them out on it.

Ben6899

We need Coopster's input. To keep this balanced.

Come on mate, get involved. You daft get.

mamba80

Ben6899 wrote:

We need Coopster's input. To keep this balanced.

Come on mate, get involved. You daft get.

He is out campaigning for the abolition of the judiciary......

the most scary statement i heard was from that nutter ukip potential leader, suzzane evans, who said it is about time Parliament had the power to remove judges.....

bobmcstuff

Reading the actual judgement, it strikes me that the government has tied itself in knots with this one by saying that A50 cannot be revoked once initiated (according to the person who wrote it there's nothing in it to say that it's irrevocable). Therefore invoking A50 by necessity means removing some rights that were conferred by the 1972 EC act. If the government had taken a softer line on this they could have maybe argued that invoking A50 wasn't synonymous with removing these rights and they may have had a stronger case.

https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/judgments/ ... ean-union/ - I'd recommend reading the summary at least, it is much, much clearer than anything that has come out of the government on the subject!!

briantrumpet

That is a rather delightfully succinct and simple summary. I can't see that leaving much hope for May and co., should they try to appeal.

rick_chasey

briantrumpet wrote:

That is a rather delightfully succinct and simple summary. I can't see that leaving much hope for May and co., should they try to appeal.

Hasn't stopped the mail.

Compare & contrast.

Beobachter (the Nazi newspaper) in '33


The mail today

surrey_commuter

Rick Chasey wrote:

briantrumpet wrote:

That is a rather delightfully succinct and simple summary. I can't see that leaving much hope for May and co., should they try to appeal.

Hasn't stopped the mail.

Compare & contrast.

Beobachter (the Nazi newspaper) in '33


The mail today

I am tempted to buy it to see what annotations they put on their GIANT map of Britain

rick_chasey

What is this?

What on earth has Brexit unleashed?

2nd biggest paper front paging judges for upholding UK democratic process as "enemies of the people".

I mean what.the.fuck.

Kind of stuff mugabe or Putin gets excited about.

There's way too much stuff since the referendum started that is just like Nazi propaganda in the early 30s.

It's horrendous, and it's not acceptable. I couldn't give a sh!t if you are a brexiters or not you MUST be vocal in opposing this beastly line of thinking.

This isn't coming just from me either. A family friend lectures specifically in Nazi history and he's genuinely worried.

rick_chasey

"We want UK judges deciding on UK legal matters!"

- UK judges decide on UK legal matters.

"ENEMIES OF THE PEOPLE!"

People who follow this line of reasoning have not voted for sovereignty. They have voted for bigoted racist reasons.

rick_chasey

This line of thinking is the enemy of the people.

The judiciary process is fundamental to Uk democracy.

This line of thinking is a more credible threat to UK democracy than any sharia law is.

wallace_and_gromit

Rick Chasey wrote:

The ruling is literally what they wanted - all rules to be decided by commons & lords.

Not quite true - what the Brexiters wanted is for all rules to be decided by the UK, not the EU. They weren't addressing the distinction covered yesterday of whether the government can make a particular decision without the approval of the HoC and the HoL.

This isn't to say that the Judges got it wrong, rather it's to highlight that the Brexiters' issue was "UK vs EU" with a characteristic lack of detail as to what "UK" actually means in respect of various types of decision.

I think their current ire is understandable given the unabashed writings of the likes of Blair and Toynbee about how Brexit can still be reversed or watered down to something indistinguishable from being in the EU. They see - rightly or wrongly - that yesterday's ruling facilitates such a reversal/watering down.

My view is that whilst it gives the impression of the UK not knowing its a*se from its elbow, once all elements of the UK establishment (MPs, government, judges and the serious press) get involved and take the matter seriously then the end result is "the right answer". It's when things are rushed or not taken seriously (e.g. Iraq and passing the Referendum Bill in the first place) that problems arise.

verylonglegs

I was thinking that after reading the tweet from the MP about 'power to the people' we seem to have slid slowly into the era of the 'angry idiot' whos levers are easily operated by such slogans. An MP should be well above spouting vacant nonsense like that but I don't know if he's stupid and actually believes what he says or if he's saying that because cynically he knows people will latch on to it. I honestly don't believe it's about the EU any more for some, we could leave next week and they'd still be walking around in a rage about something or looking for their next cause to fuel it in to.

wallace_and_gromit

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

It's a self imposed deadline, no need to worry about broken promises, it's hardly one of the worst.

Except it will p*ss of the EU folk who want the UK to either stay or get on with leaving ASAP.

Oh cheer up... May is starting to look like a genius. If we assume she wants to not do Brexit, or delay it as long as possible with as soft an option as possible then she is doing a good job. Whilst using unqualified fools is working well it must, as a plan, have a shelf-life.

You could be onto something here. At this rate, so much time will have passed between the referendum and triggering Article 50 that even if no-one has changed their voting intentions there will be a majority to remain given the relative propensity to vote one way or the other at either end of the age scale. As such a "confirmatory referendum" might well be a goer!

With hindsight, the remain campaign missed a trick. Rather than basing Project Fear on economics they should have simply said "Vote remain and avoid years of dull sh*t in the media about trade deals, customs unions, tariffs, vetos, qualified majority voting, plans, red lines, access to single market vs being in the single market, points systems vs work permits, tedious posts in the Guardian from people about 'Where's the extra £350m for the NHS?' or 'We've not left the EU yet' and best of all, minimise the risk of a return to mainline politics of Tony Blair." If they'd said that, they'd have walked it!