1 hour ago, stag4 said:

So if Sturgeon gets her wish for a second independence referendum and the Scottish people vote to leave the UK, you would be quite happy for the British parliament to take a vote and possibly overturn the will of the people?

you don't seem to understand how the respective referendums were set up - the EU leave / stay was purely advisory - the last Scottish was much more binding.

Read the preamble to the various referendums and you'll get an idea of their scope.

they are particularly difficult, rare  and unliked in UK as parliament is sovereign...not a one day vote with a 2% majority.

21 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

Then let's see how this develops. The pro-leave support was marginal at best; now, with the various possible ramifications of Brexit still so unclear and the cack-handed efforts of Brexit politicians and the government alike in trying to define what it actually means, the popular support is surely waning. I have seen no evidence of Remain voters changing their minds since, but the opposite seems to be a tangible thing. 

 

The popular movement has had it's day in the sun; I predict it will dissipate while most breathe a sigh of relief that common sense finally prevailed.. 

If it goes to a vote, it will be down to the MPs to choose referendum or constituents.

1 minute ago, SgtRock said:

 

Nice of you to acknowledge that the person responsible for the Referendum had not planned for the outcome should it have been an '' OUT '' vote.

 

I expect to see the resident remoaners now leaping all over your post telling you the opposite.

 

Or perhaps they have already changed their tune.

Can you explain - it looks like you are concurring but phrasing it as some kind of gainsay?

"“I was never binary remain or leave. I was very much of the sentiment, and still am, that it was about remain, reform and review,” Miller said. “The UK actually has a very powerful place in Europe ... and we have not just let ourselves down but I think the whole of Europe down by not taking up that challenge.”" - Gina Miller.

i wholeheartedly agree.

Now lets have an election and scrap Brexit.

29 minutes ago, jpinx said:

 

The proposals about Brexit were very clear.  It was proposed that the whole raft of legislation which empowers EU in UK would be replaced by native UK laws immediately on Art 50 being invoked and these UK laws  would then be debated and voted on over time and away from the heat of the current "furnace". 

whatever the "proposal, it wasn't legally binding on any parliament, now or later.

44 minutes ago, jpinx said:

That is a seriously smelly red-herring.  Quoting Atlee who wanted power and was not a lawmaker, but spoke thus to prevent his own rise to government from being stymied.

Why he did it doesn't alter the message.

Parliamentary Sovereignty is something that Brexiteers have conveniently forgotten.

Clement Attlee on a  post war referendum to extend the Churchill coalition.

"‘I could not consent to the introduction into our national life of a device so alien to all our traditions as the referendum which has only too often been the instrument of Nazism and Fascism"

"Legally, Parliament at any point in future could reverse legislation approved by referendum, because the concept of parliamentary sovereignty means no Parliament can prevent a future Parliament from amending or repealing legislation. However, reversing legislation approved by referendum would be unprecedented." - wiki

21 minutes ago, fabphil said:

Just get on with it, get rid of eu, stop the refugee invasion..

 

What a magnificent comment - firstly the "invasion" isn't happening and secondly refugees are nothing to do with our membership of the EU........it's a wonderful example of the "thinking" that some Brexiteers believe to an opinion.

17 minutes ago, sandyf said:

I doubt it.

Both TM and David Cameron were prepared to overstep their authority in the use of the prerogative power.

Many years ago Tony Benn campaigned to abolish the royal prerogative but was unsuccessful as it would have meant a bit more work for MPs. From the debate however it was clear that the prerogative should only be used if it was quite clear that was the intention of parliament, in this issue that was certainly not the case.

The appeal was an automatic response but the fact that TM is not going to make a statement in the house until Monday is a fairly good indication that some deep thinking is required.

There is every chance the Supreme Court will uphold the ruling and it will go no further. That being the case, you may well be right and that she sees an election as the only honourable way out.

Any appeal can result in going to the ECJ for legal opinions.....and may possibly to do so especially if other parties are involved (Scotland)

The government may have to go to the European Court of Justice to appeal for Brexit

also the chances of an early election are increased.

On 11/2/2016 at 2:54 PM, Ace of Pop said:

What about a Rolled Truck Test .Avoiding another Inverted Cart.I like Mooses.


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

There are plenty of roll-over tests for pickups - and other vehicles - most involve testing the roof strength - is is particularly weak in the basic design of chassis-based constructions.

it seems to have evaded most people that this isn't actually a test about mosses, it is to do with the vehicles manoeuvrability in relation to CoG. Pickups  - especially the "hi-rise" versions have a higher than normal GoG. They certainly don't want tires to loose adhesion too quickly as that opens a whole new Pandora's box. 

As the Swedish Vision Zero document points out - most incidents are down to minor human error and to think that "paying attention" is all you need is just ignoring the dsalient points of the problem

In countries like Thailand swerving is often the result of dogs, elephants buffaloes etc as well as man-instigated events, in Sweden again they have long stretches of uninhabited country, in the more populated areas the hazards are again like Thailand either made made or down to wildlife and agriculture.

in countries like US and Oz the single vehicle accident is a well-documented - long lonesome roads the driver looses  control or does off and leaves the road - on waking they make an instinctive grab at the wheel and the vehicle rolls...the drivers are sometimes found days/weeks later.

Anything that can be done to make sure the CoG is as low as practical ca save lives.

8 hours ago, Srikcir said:

Ruling likely by early January.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/03/news/brexit-ruling-parliament-what-next/

 

Ironically they will probably have to used the European Court of Justice at some point.

49 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

 

I do not think that parliament will, under any circumstances, consider the referendum sufficiently 'advisory' to exercise a vote to reject Brexit. It is not going to happen. Full stop. However, where parliamentary sovereignty can be exercised in practice is over the terms of Brexit.

the referendum was nonetheless advisory - I think it boils down to which the MPs fear most, the referendum or their constituents.

There could even be an election.

and was not merely advisory. ..get the facts straight

The referendum was merely advisory.....this is clearly set out in law...it was not the same as either the Scottish referendum or the original "in" referendum of the 1970s

Contrary to the apparent view of many Brexiteers, in the UK, parliament has soveriegnty

Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson has said the UK will make a "Titanic success" of Brexit. -Independent 

this guy is the master of the Freudian slip

12 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

Christ! And I thought my Blackpool story link was scraping the unintended humour barrel!

Id say that comment just underlines how little you understand about the future issues facing the UK after  Brexit

7 hours ago, MYKTHEMIN said:

In my opinion this is a worthless test, and may be applicable to 1% of the owners, if most people swerved this hard they would be in the ditch/hedge on the side they swerved towards, or hit the vehicle head on coming towards them, just stupid, if you are driving aware of your surroundings you should never have to swerve like this.

I'm impressed by your confidence in your own clairvoyancy ....sadly not a very scientific approach...

34 minutes ago, MJP said:

 

Brexit puts pork pies at threat, says Nick Clegg

Melton Mowbray pork pies are one of many UK foodstuffs with EU protected status which could be lost after Brexit

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-threat-to-pork-pies-a7392931.html

 

Protected EU status, eh? If people want pork pies they'll buy pork pies.

Such a philistine point of view!

"Protected Status" - is a big thing in the food and drink industry - Melton Pork Pies MUST be made in Melton, Stilton has to be made in a particular region, just the same as Champagne and Camembert....various foods arounds the UK have protected status and this preserves the quality and of  course the jobs of those who grow/make/sell it. it also contributes to tourism in the relevant areas.

It is a massively valuable collection of products (including Scottish Beef) if you have any doubt check out the wiki page.

List of foods with protected status

Although this is a positive step, the whole fiasco is yet another example showing the rest of the world what an illogical cumbersome and unfair justice system there is is Thailand.

1 hour ago, Laughing Gravy said:

If Nick Clegg says it then it must be true. Between, him, Blair and Mandelson they will say and try anything to keep the UK in the EU following their masters orders. I am expecting toilet paper to be in the news soon due to brexit, as there certainly seems a need for it with the amount required to clean up, with regards to the talk spoken by these three Muppets.

Rather than address the messenger,why not address the message......i have to say your lack of coherent argument and constant use of ad hominem somewhat invalidates your posts

2 hours ago, Laughing Gravy said:

 

Really. so where are your sources that prove this amazing fact of yours, that the UK will have to pay more than it is paying now (which is extortionate). Did you see it written on the  wall in some public toilet?

 

http://www.cityam.com/1414168815/eu-budget-map-how-much-has-uk-been-asked-pay-compared-other-countries

 

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/336667/Now-our-payments-to-the-EU-hit-53m-each-day

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8036097.stm

 

No..Reuters ..but I know how to research and analyse not just Google and regurgitate.

If you disagree with a point I've made and want to be taken seriously,why not construct and put forward an argument in favor of your stance? 

One of the Brexit mantras was that UK had to pay to stay in the Eu.....now it looks as if we will have to pay more to stay out.

4 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

Ah yes. The Nissan example. Remainers were shouting from the rooftops when Nissan mooted pulling out of the UK. The government talked with Nissan and, not only did they not pull out, they committed to building two new models. 'Bribery!!!' remainers chanted. 'The government is subsidising them, and every other business will want the same! It'll lead to ruin!' But it turned out the government hadn't bribed Nissan: it had just convinced them that it's brexit strategy would give them unhindered access to EU markets. 'Well.....it's, er, still a sort of bribery, isn't it?' No, it isn't. But if it makes remainers feel better, we could pretend that it is .

The fact is you are referring to a situation that would not have arisen at all in Brexit had not occurred - and now the UK is going to have to give subsidies to keep Nissan jobs. This was not needed before Brexit. Also the rest of UK manufacturing will also expect similar protection.

I think as this unfolds it will become fairly obvious that this was a vain attempt by the government to inject some good news into a gloomy landscape - and in the end it will be seen as an impractical or hugely expensive solution to a problem that is much larger than Brexiteers (at least the Brostrich element) appear to realise.

There is no such thing as a free lunch

Britain's Brexit subsidies for carmakers could top wage bills - Reuters

16 hours ago, Don Mega said:

 

And yet it is only toyota that struggles with the moose test.

Actually that's not quite right other vehicles have failed (you DO understand the principles behind the test?). Part of the problem is that for one reason or another the Toyota model STILL fails the test after 9 years. 

Furthermore if you think the moose testis the sole criterion for vehicle safety, I think you need to review your understanding of the issue as a whole

On 10/29/2016 at 11:01 AM, JaseTheBass said:

 

After a reread I see that you're saying all pickups are primitive with regard to safety even though they're not. Of all cars available here for normal money the Wildtrak is one of the safest vehicles you can buy.

Sent from my R2D2 using my C3P0 manservant
 

 

You are mis-informed - it is a chassis-based pickup with all the concomitant flaws that accompany that kind of vehicle - not only relatively dangerous to the occupants but also to other road users.  It has high CoG and poor shock absorption - both passive and active safety features are  impaired by this type of construction.

1 hour ago, SgtRock said:

 

It might well do.

 

Time will tell, Brexit has not happened yet.

In other words you admit that it is poo pie at present and think that somehow it will get better???

No matter what you add to a poo pie - even prime steak - it will still be poo pie.