UK voters should make final Brexit decision if talks with EU collapse: poll

[Grouse]

4 hours ago, rixalex said:

No but read it anyway.

Glad you read it!

[nauseus]

56 minutes ago, adammike said:

The issue is not about TM as such it's about Brexit being such a cluster and you and others on here trying to blame remainers for the f=#k up it's turned out to be.All those who campaigned for and voted leave are entirely responsible for Brexit ,it's not JC or remainers.You own Brexit.

I could take partial responsibility for the vote but certainly not for the execution of Brexit, which seems to have been intentionally fouled up by a bunch of remainers. 

[Srikcir]

4 minutes ago, nauseus said:

I don't think that will be removed. Unless you are a naughty boy, of course.

The draft agreement on post-Brexit relations says:

"It must also ensure the sovereignty of the United Kingdom and the protection of its internal market, while respecting the result of the 2016 referendum including with regard to the development of its independent trade policy and the ending of free movement of people between the Union and the United Kingdom." https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-46300247

[billd766]

1 hour ago, adammike said:

The issue is not about TM as such it's about Brexit being such a cluster and you and others on here trying to blame remainers for the f=#k up it's turned out to be.All those who campaigned for and voted leave are entirely responsible for Brexit ,it's not JC or remainers.You own Brexit.

Actually it IS all about Brexit and Teresa May.

 

Whilst we Leavers voted to leave, the whole Brexit shambles has been led by Teresa May, a committed Remainer who is doing her best, or worst perhaps to give us a semblance of freedom whilst clinging to the EU apron strings. 

 

IF there was a committed Leaver at the helm from day 1 i assure you it would be a whole lot different.

[Grouse]

5 hours ago, rixalex said:

No but read it anyway.

Glad you read it!

[tebee]

4 minutes ago, vogie said:

Call it a Portuguese Turkey if you want, the government said they would implement it.

But before that they said it was only advisory; so the supermajority normally needed for constitutional changes was not needed.

 

So trying to make it non-advisory afterwards was bait and switch

 

 

[malagateddy]

You do know there was a US hedge fund billionaire, Robert Mercer, behind Cambridge Analytica, who were heavily involved in influencing the Leave vote?
 
 

Does Mr Mercer strut his stuff with your beloved eu commisioners?..I do not think so.
Only scum like soros..imo war criminal blair etc., who do not give a toss about the working man/woman on the street in the UK.
Soros and his ilk only care about money..cos greed is good!!!
Just remember 1991... how much damage did soros do to the UK and the UK working people..PLENTY


Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[billd766]

22 minutes ago, vogie said:

Call it a Portuguese Turkey if you want, the government said they would implement it.

 

It seems a bit odd to me that no matter how many times Leavers post this leaflet the Remainers deny what it means.

 

https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160813202542/https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/why-the-government-believes-that-voting-to-remain-in-the-european-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk/why-the-government-believes-that-voting-to-remain-in-the-european-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk

 

The referendum on Thursday, 23 June is your chance to decide if we should remain in or leave the European Union.

The government believes it is in the best interests of the UK to remain in the EU.

This is the way to protect jobs, provide security, and strengthen the UK’s economy for every family in this country – a clear path into the future, in contrast to the uncertainty of leaving.

 

This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide.

 

I have made it bold and underlined so it should me easy enough, even for teebee and AdamMike to understand.

 

The UK voted to leave the EU yet the government under Teresa May STILL wants to keep us in, thus ignoring the bold and underlined statement.

[vogie]

4 minutes ago, tebee said:

But before that they said it was only advisory; so the supermajority normally needed for constitutional changes was not needed.

 

So trying to make it non-advisory afterwards was bait and switch

 

 

Have you got a link stating that it was only advisory, it certainly does not say anything like that on the referendum leaflet?

[AGareth2]

3 minutes ago, vogie said:

Have you got a link stating that it was only advisory, it certainly does not say anything like that on the referendum leaflet?

were the words enacted into law?

No

[mogandave]

 
Like all those teenagers who protested about the Vietnam war? 
 

All they really cared about was getting drafted. Once the draft stopped, do did the protests.

[vogie]

9 minutes ago, AGareth2 said:

were the words enacted into law?

No

I'm still waiting for the link I asked you to provide from yesterday, I have shown you proof, all you have to do is show me proof, not too much to ask is it. All you are doing is kicking the can down the road.

[beautifulthailand99]

9 hours ago, vogie said:

Do you have a link that states this particular referundum is "advisory"

 

Which part of 'the government will act on what you decide' are you finding difficult to understand, this was the choice we were offered, and those were the rules at the time. Just because you don't like the outcome of the referendum is of very little concern to those who voted.

The referendum was not advisory.

It is now - thanks for the suggestion - we've had a look at it and naahh - I think we'll stay in after all.On one of my hit and runs to this thread 18 months ago I predicted that we would stay in - it was bleeding obvious then and it is bleeding obvious now.

[tebee]

7 hours ago, rixalex said:

They key aspect which you omit to mention is the part in which democratic decisions get implemented first and then overturned. What you desire is for a democratic decision to be overturned before it has been implemented. If this is happening all the time, as you allege, please cite some examples.

 

The Swiss voted democratically in a referendum to end FOM

 

The EU said fine, but pointed out that would also mean ending other agreements with considerable cost to the Swiss economy.

 

The Swiss government ignored the referendum result, prefering to keep the economy intact.

[adammike]

33 minutes ago, billd766 said:

Actually it IS all about Brexit and Teresa May.

 

Whilst we Leavers voted to leave, the whole Brexit shambles has been led by Teresa May, a committed Remainer who is doing her best, or worst perhaps to give us a semblance of freedom whilst clinging to the EU apron strings. 

 

IF there was a committed Leaver at the helm from day 1 i assure you it would be a whole lot different.

Dead cat strategy 1.0 

[tebee]

6 minutes ago, vogie said:

I'm still waiting for the link I asked you to provide from yesterday, I have shown you proof, all you have to do is show me proof, not too much to ask is it. All you are doing is kicking the can down the road.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Referendum_Act_2015#Limitation

 

This act required a referendum to be held on the question of the UK's continued membership of the European Union before the end of 2017. The bill did not contain any requirement for the UK Government to implement the results of the referendum, nor set a time limit by which a vote to leave the EU should be implemented. Instead, this is a type of referendum known as pre-legislative or consultative, which enables the electorate to voice an opinion which then influences the Government in its policy decisions.

[AGareth2]

6 minutes ago, vogie said:

I'm still waiting for the link I asked you to provide from yesterday, I have shown you proof, all you have to do is show me proof, not too much to ask is it. All you are doing is kicking the can down the road.

google English constitution 

Referendum

Binding or not

Who am I 

your mother?

[vogie]

4 minutes ago, tebee said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Referendum_Act_2015#Limitation

 

This act required a referendum to be held on the question of the UK's continued membership of the European Union before the end of 2017. The bill did not contain any requirement for the UK Government to implement the results of the referendum, nor set a time limit by which a vote to leave the EU should be implemented. Instead, this is a type of referendum known as pre-legislative or consultative, which enables the electorate to voice an opinion which then influences the Government in its policy decisions.

From your own link it clearly states.

 

In accordance with the Act and the public duty of the Electoral Commission, a guide was posted to every household in the UK and Gibraltar in the week beginning of 16 May 2016 by HM Government. The advisory leaflet was titled: "Why the Government believes that voting to remain in the European Union is the best decision for the UK". This leaflet clearly stated: "This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide".[12

[AlexRich]

1 hour ago, melvinmelvin said:

parliament does not need a 2nd referendum to stop Brexit, if they so wish

 

Yes they do, whatever the law says, it’s the only way open to them.

[AlexRich]

58 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Virtual raspberry!

Virtual common sense. I wonder in the future how willing they will be to vote for OAP benefits? I can see wealth taxes and higher death taxes on the horizon ... the dish that is best served cold.

[AGareth2]

Art 50 has been evoked

the question of the binding legality is water under the bridge

Parliament is sovereign

need to pass a law

[adammike]

26 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

It seems a bit odd to me that no matter how many times Leavers post this leaflet the Remainers deny what it means.

 

https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160813202542/https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/why-the-government-believes-that-voting-to-remain-in-the-european-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk/why-the-government-believes-that-voting-to-remain-in-the-european-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk

 

The referendum on Thursday, 23 June is your chance to decide if we should remain in or leave the European Union.

The government believes it is in the best interests of the UK to remain in the EU.

This is the way to protect jobs, provide security, and strengthen the UK’s economy for every family in this country – a clear path into the future, in contrast to the uncertainty of leaving.

 

This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide.

 

I have made it bold and underlined so it should me easy enough, even for teebee and AdamMike to understand.

 

The UK voted to leave the EU yet the government under Teresa May STILL wants to keep us in, thus ignoring the bold and underlined statement.

I have never questioned the result of the referendum or what was on the ballot,I have said from the beginning I would rather remain, failing that leave and do it fast as possible.If the UK leave without a deal I want it to be a total disaster so it destroys the Tory party for a couple of generations.I am not a fan of Jeremy Corbyn but I would be ok if he did become PM so he could bring the water,railways,electricity back into public ownership.You have blown Brexit as many said you would and now you want to pass the buck onto remainers who are not part of the process,Theresa May and Brexit are your bitches not mine,reap the whirlwind brexiteers.

[AlexRich]

6 minutes ago, vogie said:

From your own link it clearly states.

 

In accordance with the Act and the public duty of the Electoral Commission, a guide was posted to every household in the UK and Gibraltar in the week beginning of 16 May 2016 by HM Government. The advisory leaflet was titled: "Why the Government believes that voting to remain in the European Union is the best decision for the UK". This leaflet clearly stated: "This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide".[12

You keep quoting a leaflet? The point being made is that on a purely legal basis they do not have to. I think it would be undemocratic if they did ... if they cannot sort it they have to hand it back to the people. That is the only democratic solution.

[tebee]

8 minutes ago, vogie said:

From your own link it clearly states.

 

In accordance with the Act and the public duty of the Electoral Commission, a guide was posted to every household in the UK and Gibraltar in the week beginning of 16 May 2016 by HM Government. The advisory leaflet was titled: "Why the Government believes that voting to remain in the European Union is the best decision for the UK". This leaflet clearly stated: "This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide".[12

But once again I need to point out that sending out a leaflet is not a way of changing the law or constitution. 

 

Any commitment made there is purely a moral one - and we all know conservatives have no morals.....

[AGareth2]

Art 50 has been evoked

the question of the binding legality is water under the bridge

Parliament is sovereign

need to pass a law

[AlexRich]

28 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

All they really cared about was getting drafted. Once the draft stopped, do did the protests.
 

 

Simply not true. Many were women

Edited December 1, 2018 by AlexRich

[vogie]

1 minute ago, AlexRich said:

You keep quoting a leaflet? The point being made is that on a purely legal basis they do not have to. I think it would be undemocratic if they did ... if they cannot sort it they have to hand it back to the people. That is the only democratic solution.

It would appear you are not quite correct on that response. The reason the leaflet is being quoted is because it is proof of our argument, however I can totally understand why you would like it to be kept under the table.

[AlexRich]

2 minutes ago, vogie said:

It would appear you are not quite correct on that response. The reason the leaflet is being quoted is because it is proof of our argument, however I can totally understand why you would like it to be kept under the table.

You deny the legal fact, it was advisory. But near impossible for parliament to ignore the advice, unless of course they pass it back to the people, which looks increasingly likely.

[7by7]

On ‎11‎/‎25‎/‎2018 at 12:46 AM, rixalex said:

<snip>

A fully committed Brexit would have been one in which, in the matter of an exit deal, we maximized our position to get the best deal for our country. No, I don't mean going in banging fists on tables making demands, I mean simply calmly telling the EU from day one that we were preparing for a no deal Brexit and that is what would happen unless we were to get a better offer. Let the EU come up with something. Put the onus on them.

 As I, and others, have said before; there is no onus on the EU to offer us anything. If we had said "Give us what we want or it's no deal" they would have  said "OK, no deal it is, then!"

 

We chose to leave the EU, they don't have to offer us anything at all.

 

It seems to me that, like most Brexiteers, you believed that we could have maintained all the advantages of EU membership and simply ditched the bits we don't like. That simply was never going to happen, and those who believed it would fell for Leave's big lie.

[beautifulthailand99]

Leavers should just think themselves lucky we're not billing them for the cost and chaos they have caused. And for all the ifs and butters .....

 

 “if ifs and ands were pots and pans, there'd be no work for tinkers' hands”.