Brexit has created chaos in Britain – nobody voted for this

[sandyf]

23 hours ago, The Renegade said:

The Referendum was a simple Remain or Leave option for Joe Public.

 

The devolved Nations have all been involved in the debate. Having said that, the tail does not wag the dog.

 

Exactly, a simple Yes or No to leave the EU, nothing more, nothing less.

 

You obviously agree that TM speaks with forked tongue

[The Renegade]

Quote

The Referendum was a simple Remain or Leave option for Joe Public.

 

The devolved Nations have all been involved in the debate. Having said that, the tail does not wag the dog.

 

3 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Exactly, a simple Yes or No to leave the EU, nothing more, nothing less.

 

You obviously agree that TM speaks with forked tongue

 

Well to answer that, you will have to give me a clue.

 

I do not see TM mentioned above. So I have no idea what you are talking about.

[nauseus]

29 minutes ago, tebee said:

Government can promise whatever it wants - does not change the constitutional duties of the MPs. Has the concept that politicians might lie never occured to you ?  

I don't think that the constitutional duties of the MPs are supposed to include lying. 

 

Everyone knows that they do but is not a defined duty. ?

[aright]

1 hour ago, tebee said:

It doesn't matter., they are not there to mindlessly reflect the voting intentions of their constituents, they have to make their own minds up. This is what representative democracy means!   

Oh no it doesn't .

The UK public elects Members of Parliament (MPs) to represent their interests and concerns in the House of Commons.

 

https://www.parliament.uk/about/mps-and-lords/members/mps/

 

There has never been a bigger divide between people and politicians in the UK than there is now. If Brexit has one good by product, it is in illustrating just how big and dangerous the gap now is between the people  and the political classes along with their lackeys. If you look outside Brexit the same is true of the EU. On the basis of recent elections Europeans are just starting to realise that, although they have less to complain about; up to now they have always accepted what's best for them is the will of an unelected unaccountable Commission. 

In the main politicians go to the same universities, first jobs as researchers in think tanks, safe seats miles from where they live and fast tracked to ministerial positions. They have been conditioned to think their job is to manage the expectations of the electorate not represent their views. Much to his credit Nigel Farrage  was partially successful in changing that way of thinking.

[tebee]

2 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

Is it possible that you could stop talking garbage ?

 

https://www.parliament.uk/about/mps-and-lords/members/mps/

You seem to misunderstand what the term represent means in this context - they are there to represent the constituents interests, not their views. 

 

They are assumed to have a better understanding of things than the man on the street - lets face it, it's their job to understand how government works. Because of this they are given the choice and responsibility to vote as they see fit  to secure the best interests of those constituents. 

 

This is the principal of representative democracy - they are not there merely to parrot the views of those constituents.- if they where how was hanging ever abolished, when there is a majority of the country in favor of it? 

[The Renegade]

5 minutes ago, tebee said:

You seem to misunderstand what the term represent means in this context

If anyone misunderstands it is you.

 

You are correct and everyone is wrong ? A condition that appears to have inflicted Grouse also.

 

It is medical, it is called delusion.

 

https://www.parliament.uk/about/mps-and-lords/members/mps/

 

Even the Governments own website is wrong ??

Edited June 16, 2018 by The Renegade

[aright]

7 minutes ago, tebee said:

You seem to misunderstand what the term represent means in this context - they are there to represent the constituents interests, not their views. 

 

They are assumed to have a better understanding of things than the man on the street - lets face it, it's their job to understand how government works. Because of this they are given the choice and responsibility to vote as they see fit  to secure the best interests of those constituents. 

 

This is the principal of representative democracy - they are not there merely to parrot the views of those constituents.- if they where how was hanging ever abolished, when there is a majority of the country in favor of it? 

Hanging was likely a free vote not governed by a manifesto. It would be interesting to see the stats on it though.

 If the will of the people can be overridden by conscience and personal views you might just as well have the computer randomly pick 650 names and send them to Parliament 

[nauseus]

37 minutes ago, tebee said:

You seem to misunderstand what the term represent means in this context - they are there to represent the constituents interests, not their views. 

 

They are assumed to have a better understanding of things than the man on the street - lets face it, it's their job to understand how government works. Because of this they are given the choice and responsibility to vote as they see fit  to secure the best interests of those constituents. 

 

This is the principal of representative democracy - they are not there merely to parrot the views of those constituents.- if they where how was hanging ever abolished, when there is a majority of the country in favor of it? 

"In this context". Oh Lordy.

[vogie]

8 minutes ago, nauseus said:

You seem to misunderstand what the term represent means in this context - they are there to represent the constituents interests, not their views. 

Yet in a previous post he said.

 

"they are not there to mindlessly reflect the voting intentions of their constituents"

 

Is he contradicting himself?

 

[The Renegade]

2 minutes ago, vogie said:

Yet in a previous post he said.

 

"they are not there to mindlessly reflect the voting intentions of their constituents"

 

Is he contradicting himself?

 

One word answer beginning with '' Y '' ?

 

Though I am not sure how you can mindlessly reflect voting intentions !!

Edited June 16, 2018 by The Renegade

[nauseus]

2 minutes ago, vogie said:

Yet in a previous post he said.

 

"they are not there to mindlessly reflect the voting intentions of their constituents"

 

Is he contradicting himself?

 

That is not my quote but part of Teebee's. Yes he has contradicted himself on the same point several times already.

[vogie]

1 minute ago, nauseus said:

That is not my quote but part of Teebee's. Yes he has contradicted himself on the same point several times already.

Yes, sorry about that, I not sure what happened there.

[nauseus]

Just now, vogie said:

Yes, sorry about that, I not sure what happened there.

Aw. OK. I forgive you. 

[7by7]

8 hours ago, The Renegade said:

 

In 1973 most definitely.

 

There was no vote in 1973 ??

 

7 hours ago, soalbundy said:

which is why they are gullible, they thought there was.

 

Apologies for the error; the referendum was, of course, held in 1975.

 

It is very interesting, though not at all surprising, that neither of you have been able to address the points I made in my post and so have had to resort to highlighting a simple typo to try and dismiss it completely.

[soalbundy]

4 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 

 

Apologies for the error; the referendum was, of course, held in 1975.

 

It is very interesting, though not at all surprising, that neither of you have been able to address the points I made in my post and so have had to resort to highlighting a simple typo to try and dismiss it completely.

I only joking you hansum man

[7by7]

14 hours ago, nauseus said:

In 1973 the yes lies were more convincing than the very valid no concerns.

 

 

As pointed out, the referendum was in 1975, not 1973; apologies again for my typo.

 

As for your comment; as I said

15 hours ago, 7by7 said:

Unfortunately, evidence at the time and since shows that in 2016 a significant number based their vote to leave on false information put about by certain fringe elements of the Leave campaign (such as publicising yet again false EU directives like the one supposedly insisting upon straight cucumbers!).

 

What is worse, a significant minority based their leave vote on matters which had nothing to do with the EU at all. The most common being non EEA immigration into the UK. Something which, as earlier posts in this topic prove, some Brexiteers still think is down to the EU!

 

[Kieran00001]

53 minutes ago, aright said:

Hanging was likely a free vote not governed by a manifesto. It would be interesting to see the stats on it though.

 If the will of the people can be overridden by conscience and personal views you might just as well have the computer randomly pick 650 names and send them to Parliament 

 

Quote

At no time did the polls sway the Members of Parliament. Members were cognizant of the published results but did not allow the overwhelming sentiment of the public in favour of retention to cloud what was seen as a clear-cut issue. Polls conducted by both the British Gallup and Harris polls showed that the people wanted to retain the death penalty. The Marplan Poll conducted in October 1969 reached the same conclusion.

Quote

Prior to the passage of the Homicide Act in 1957 the people were questioned concerning their views on the issue of capital punishment... Gallup Poll conducted the survey which showed only twenty-five percent of those questioned favoured retention in all cases, thirteen percent called for total abolition and fifty-seven percent of the sample wanted hanging kept for certain types of murder. When the percentage favouring retention of capital punishment in all instances was combined with the figure wanting the death penalty retained for certain types of murder only, eighty-two percent of the people supported capital punishment to some degree.

Quote

the results closely coincided with a Gallup Poll conducted in March 1960. The poll was undertaken by Social Surveys (Gallup Poll) Ltd., and it showed that, of those questioned, seventy-eight percent wanted to retain the death penalty.

Quote

The only opinion poll which focused on a selected segment of public opinion was undertaken by National Opinion Polls in late 1964. This survey singled out that portion of society with some form of higher education. It was found that forty-seven percent favoured the abolition of capital punishment

https://scholarship.richmond.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1890&context=masters-theses

[sandyf]

6 hours ago, The Renegade said:

It is simply staggering that people do not understand the Democratic process that has went on throughout this whole Brexit process.

 

1. A promise to hold a Referendum entered into Party Election Manifesto

 

2. The EU Referendum Act 2015.

 

3. The actual Referendum in 2016.

 

4. MP's vote overwhelmingly to trigger Article 50 in January 2017.

Amended.

1. A promise to hold a Referendum entered into Party Election Manifesto

 

2. The EU Referendum Act 2015.

   The referendum

(1)A referendum is to be held on whether the United Kingdom should remain a member of the European Union.

(2)The Secretary of State must, by regulations, appoint the day on which the referendum is to be held.

(3)The day appointed under subsection (2)—

(a)must be no later than 31 December 2017,

(b)must not be 5 May 2016, and

(c)must not be 4 May 2017.

(4)The question that is to appear on the ballot papers is—

“Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?”

(5)The alternative answers to that question that are to appear on the ballot papers are—

“Remain a member of the European Union

Leave the European Union”.

(6)In Wales, there must also appear on the ballot papers—

(a)the following Welsh version of the question—

“A ddylai’r Deyrnas Unedig aros yn aelod o’r Undeb Ewropeaidd neu adael yr Undeb Ewropeaidd?”, and

(b)the following Welsh versions of the alternative answers—

“Aros yn aelod o’r Undeb Ewropeaidd

Gadael yr Undeb Ewropeaidd”.

 

3. The actual Referendum in 2016.

 

4. Court case to ensure that TM adhered to the democratic process.

 

5. It is up to parliament to implement the democratic process.

 

6. MP's vote overwhelmingly to trigger Article 50 in January 2017.

Full text of Article 50

1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.

2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218 (3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.

3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.

4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it. A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

5. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49.

 

It should be noted that under this so called democratic process that there is no requirement for the UK to leave the single market or customs union, that is an interpretation made by TM and part of her government.

It should also be noted by leavers that under item 2 of Art 50 ,withdrawal is based on the functioning of the EU and not the functioning of the UK.

[soalbundy]

4 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

Because there was a referendum on the issue - and the govt. assured the electorate that they would act according to the referendum result.

went well didn't it

[aright]

[The Renegade]

3 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

Apologies for the error; the referendum was, of course, held in 1975.

No need for apologies.

 

Quote

In 1973 most definitely.

 

There was no vote in 1973 

It was a joke. So I will do you the courtesy of answering your points.

 

15 hours ago, 7by7 said:

I want to believe that most people in both referenda, whichever way they voted, based their decision on the facts; weighing them up and forming an opinion as to what was best for the country.

Most likely true.

 

16 hours ago, 7by7 said:

Unfortunately, evidence at the time and since shows that in 2016 a significant number based their vote to leave on false information put about by certain fringe elements of the Leave campaign

This might be true for a minority, but I am  not having a significant number. To balance that out. How many voted remain due to Project Fear ? How about actual figures ?

 

16 hours ago, 7by7 said:

What is worse, a significant minority based their leave vote on matters which had nothing to do with the EU at all. The most common being non EEA immigration into the UK. Something which, as earlier posts in this topic prove, some Brexiteers still think is down to the EU!

Again. How about actual figures ? Significant minority means nothing. There are idiots everywhere, even on the remain side. Just look at the many postings on here ??

 

16 hours ago, 7by7 said:

I still firmly believe that, for all it's faults, remaining in the EU was the better option.  But Leave won the referendum, so leave we must.

 

We have made our bed and must now lie in it; whether it be a bed of nails or a bed of feathers.

Correct ??

[The Renegade]

5 minutes ago, sandyf said:

It should be noted that under this so called democratic process that there is no requirement for the UK to leave the single market or customs union, that is an interpretation made by TM and part of her government.

No.

 

Actually that was part of Barniers negotiating strategy

 

'' It is not possible to leave the EU and remain part of the Single Market ''

 

I have already posted a link to this, so I will not be doing it again. Have a hunt for it, it is within the last 100 pages.

[tebee]

About representative democracies in general, but applies to ours too, this is why we don't have direct democracy (usualy)

 

 

First, the very idea of representative democracy is based on the fact that the preferences of the individual constituents do not make for good decisions in complex questions. The Federalist Papers still provide one of the most readable general arguments on the matter, but modern research confirms that only 'elites' fulfill the information requirements of rational choice. In other words: In representative democracies, decisions are likely to differ from the preferences of constituents, because they supposed to be based on more information than most constituents bother to process. Differences do not indicate a systematic problem

[aright]

8 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

https://scholarship.richmond.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1890&context=masters-theses

Thanks for that .

 

[tebee]

2 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

No.

 

Actually that was part of Barniers negotiating strategy

 

'' It is not possible to leave the EU and remain part of the Single Market ''

 

I have already posted a link to this, so I will not be doing it again. Have a hunt for it, it is within the last 100 pages.

Norway, for one is in the single market, but not the EU

[nauseus]

9 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

As pointed out, the referendum was in 1975, not 1973; apologies again for my typo.

 

As for your comment; as I said

 

I can't quote the whole of your post (9289) but I am aware that first referendum was in 1975. But the leave/remain debate was in full swing in 1973. As for the rest of your post the evidence that you refer to seems to be missing and the points that you make I don't really see as being significant anyway.

[7by7]

7 hours ago, The Renegade said:

There is a vast difference between opposing a policy ( Brexit is no longer policy ) and trying to overturn a Democratic decision that has been voted into Law.

 

Something that certain remainers are either, oblivious to, incapable of understanding, or are so far up their own backsides that they do not care.

 

The decision to join what was then the EEC was taken by Parliament and voted into law under Heath's Conservative government in 1973.

 

Wilson's Labour government put a renegotiated agreement to a referendum in 1975. The result of that referendum was voted into law by Parliament.

 

In 1986 the Single European Act was agreed by the democratically elected governments of the member states; including the UK.

 

In 1992 Thatcher signed the Maastricht Treaty, which created the EU. Her decision to do so was, of course, agreed by Parliament and voted into law.

 

I could go on: the list of democratically taken decisions regarding the UK's continued membership of the  EEC, EC and now EU by the UK Parliament is long.  

 

All the above democratic decisions were overturned by the result of the 2016 referendum.

 

Using what passes for your logic, they should not have been and Brexit should not be happening!

 

Using what passes for your logic, no law passed by a previous Parliament should ever be repealed! 

[tebee]

1 hour ago, tebee said:

You seem to misunderstand what the term represent means in this context - they are there to represent the constituents interests, not their views. 

 

They are assumed to have a better understanding of things than the man on the street - lets face it, it's their job to understand how government works. Because of this they are given the choice and responsibility to vote as they see fit  to secure the best interests of those constituents. 

 

This is the principal of representative democracy - they are not there merely to parrot the views of those constituents.....

 

3 hours ago, tebee said:

It doesn't matter., they are not there to mindlessly reflect the voting intentions of their constituents, they have to make their own minds up. This is what representative democracy means!   

Reread these two statements, they are not contradictory, they are saying the same thing 

[nauseus]

1 minute ago, tebee said:

Norway, for one is in the single market, but not the EU

But in the EEA, having to agree to free movement of goods, capital, services and people. Having to pay. Having to accept part of EU law. Not really what Brexit is about at all.

[The Renegade]

3 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 

The decision to join what was then the EEC was taken by Parliament and voted into law under Heath's Conservative government in 1973.

 

Wilson's Labour government put a renegotiated agreement to a referendum in 1975. The result of that referendum was voted into law by Parliament.

 

In 1986 the Single European Act was agreed by the democratically elected governments of the member states; including the UK.

 

In 1992 Thatcher signed the Maastricht Treaty, which created the EU. Her decision to do so was, of course, agreed by Parliament and voted into law.

 

I could go on: the list of democratically taken decisions regarding the UK's continued membership of the  EEC, EC and now EU by the UK Parliament is long.  

 

All the above democratic decisions were overturned by the result of the 2016 referendum.

 

Using what passes for your logic, they should not have been and Brexit should not be happening!

 

Using what passes for your logic, no law passed by a previous Parliament should ever be repealed! 

How many of the above were agreed by the actual electorate in a National Referendum / Vote ?

 

If the EEC had not been changed by stealth into today's EU Brexit might not have happening either