Do not hijack Brexit, minister warns Britain's parliament

[evadgib]

<deleted post>

Edited January 21, 2019 by evadgib

[evadgib]

45 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

If anyone is sounding like a sore loser, it’s the Brexiteers whining that “their win” should be respected. And as long as you keep telling us that people voted for anything and everything that you approve as a valid Brexit, others will keep bringing up that old chestnuts again proving the opposite. 

 

There was “the easiest deal in history”. 

 

No, that’s not what leave voters were being told their leaders. Quite the contrary. 

 

I have. So what?

 

So now you’re the one deciding what’s “looking good”? Funny how  Brexiteers demand having the authority about deciding what means leave and what not. 

- As I said, Splitting hares.

- It's called an opinion. You are entitled to mine ????

 

('Reverse Ferret' for anyone taking any of this too seriously)

Edited January 21, 2019 by evadgib

[sawadee1947]

8 hours ago, luckyluke said:

Hope it will not generate in a street clash between 48 and 52 % of the population. 

And "Good Friday" is coming soon or startet Already with that auto bomb? 

[Tchooptip]

1 hour ago, evadgib said:

Here's what might be coming & if it does it will dwarf the 2016 result:

 

They're all boozing, politicians like voters,
with that no wonder it does not move... and no need any comment from the boozers Pffffff

...on those goods words, I'm going to have a drink

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, natway09 said:

He has got it right.

The People in Parliament are all looking for an angle to better themselves rather than the country

It has become a bun fight

Who has?

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, vogie said:

Lets not dwell on what Parliament can do, but more what they did do.

 

 

Well Im interested in What Katy Did Next!

[tomacht8]

I am sure that some who voted in favor of Brexit have changed their mind when one of the leading advocates explains that it may take 50 years before positive effects can occur.

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DMy4UM_zCpk0&amp;ved=2ahUKEwj__pTNs_7fAhUHtY8KHZAzCDcQwqsBMAF6BAgKEAU&amp;usg=AOvVaw3oj8zUWMVYfROIagzaddZ5&amp;cshid=1548057557103

[Grouse]

48 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Which for those who's superior education doesn't understand, it equates to no deal, at the moment.

What?

[Grouse]

47 minutes ago, evadgib said:

Splitting hairs. I have yet to meet anyone on the same side who doesn't think leaving is a good idea or who wants to retain any form of connection under any of the prefixes dreamed up by the opposition.

Canada +++ on the other hand is looking good and may well come our way after we have formally left.

Then you should get out a little more

[Grouse]

39 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

You're creating a Strawman's argument since I have never claimed we have anything other than representative democracy and understand it perfectly well. Feel free to explain it again though if it makes you feel better.

 

What I said was that parliament should not try and over-ride the result of the referendum by sabotaging the process and I stand by that comment. We didn't vote 52% to allow our MP's to decide for us. We voted 52% to leave.

 

Now I will ask you again. Why will you not accept the result of a Democratic vote?

Because parliament is sovereign in the UK. NOT the people. Parliament can do as they damn well like.

[vogie]

6 minutes ago, tomacht8 said:

I am sure that some who voted in favor of Brexit have changed their mind when one of the leading advocates explains that it may take 50 years before positive effects can occur.

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DMy4UM_zCpk0&amp;ved=2ahUKEwj__pTNs_7fAhUHtY8KHZAzCDcQwqsBMAF6BAgKEAU&amp;usg=AOvVaw3oj8zUWMVYfROIagzaddZ5&amp;cshid=1548057557103

"The over whelming opportunity for brexit is over the next 50 years" is what Jacob Rees Mogg said and not what you are saying he said. Are you deliberately misquoting to help you make your point.

You can see the difference can't you?

[tomacht8]

1 minute ago, vogie said:

"The over whelming opportunity for brexit is over the next 50 years" is what Jacob Rees Mogg said and not what you are saying he said. Are you deliberately misquoting to help you make your point.

You can see the difference can't you?

No.

[vogie]

Just now, tomacht8 said:

No.

The way you quoted is that we will have to wait 50 years for the benefits to be known, what JRM is saying is that we will be feeling the benefits over the next 50 years. 

 

 

[Baerboxer]

9 hours ago, TopDeadSenter said:

If they keep trying to cancel our Brexit by these underhand means things will get messy. When I say messy, I mean the anger will spill over on the streets and it will make the Gilets jaune look like the teddy bears picnic. Enough of this BS.

 

Dream on! No one will take to the streets apart from a few nutters,

[evadgib]

22 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Then you should get out a little more

I'm still wading through Andrew Marr ????

Here's one for you:

 

[Nigel Garvie]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

 

 

parliament can revoke or replace any law

 

I agree that both major parties agreed to "respect the referendum" but they did not agree to proceed with any specific deal or a no deal. Clearly Norway is not in the EU.

 

I would prefer parliament to decide and have the decision ratified publically.

 

Running down the clock to force no deal or crap deal is cynical and unethical 

Yes running down the clock (As in a filibuster) is unethical, and the last resort of villains, rouges, scoundrels and knaves. 

 

The point is oh so simple as you say "Parliament can revoke or replace any law". Parliament can repeal the corn laws, dump the poll tax, call another referendum, vote for a hard brexit, or sell the NHS to the US (As many front bench Tories appear to want), or vote to remain. Parliament - whatever individual office holders may have promised - can change its mind. Indeed it does that all the time, much to the annoyance of most posters (Including me) on TV, on issues that concern them. If we don't like it we change who we vote for at the next GE.

 

I just get so tired of the "We ara peepul" refrain. Firstly Brexiteers are just some of the people - a minority of the UK population, and secondly just voting one way on one issue does not entitle you to take over the executive.

[LucysDad]

23 minutes ago, vogie said:

"The over whelming opportunity for brexit is over the next 50 years" is what Jacob Rees Mogg said and not what you are saying he said. Are you deliberately misquoting to help you make your point.

You can see the difference can't you?

 

 

If he says “No”, he is probably one of those remoaners paying £300 for a Brexit box !!  ????

[evadgib]

3 minutes ago, Nigel Garvie said:

I just get so tired of the "We ara peepul" refrain. Firstly Brexiteers are just some of the people - a minority of the UK population, and secondly just voting one way on one issue does not entitle you to take over the executive.

If you care to bring it on again the defeat will be much larger as some on your own side have openly admitted.

[vogie]

This is from the Guardian.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/global/commentisfree/2019/jan/16/second-brexit-referendum-mps-democracy-peoples-vote

 

"Arrogant remainers want a second vote. That would be a bad day for democracy

 

 

So, many hoping for another vote will have cheered as MPs dramatically voted down the prime minister’s deal last night. Yet making a second vote happen would require tearing up much of what we consider to be the elementary workings of British parliamentary democracy. Since the June 2016 referendum, MPs have repeatedly voted in support of the result, in the name of implementing a decision taken by a majority of the electorate. Many seem to forget that between the original Brexit vote and today, we had a general election. Conservative and Labour parties both committed themselves in their manifestos to implementing the referendum result. Only the Liberal Democrats could say that they opposed Brexit in an election that saw them pick up only a handful more seats than the catastrophic 2015 election. The same happened over the so-called “great repeal bill”, the legislation required to repeal the 1972 European Communities Act, when MPs rejected an amendment calling for a referendum on whether to support the deal or remain in the EU."

 

[JonnyF]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

Because parliament is sovereign in the UK. NOT the people. Parliament can do as they damn well like.

Why won't you accept the result of the democratic vote? The prime minister stated that the result would be respected. It was in the manifesto. You won't accept it because you lost.

 

Got to 1:10 below. The conditions were clear. MP's should not over-rule the result.

 

 

 

Edited January 21, 2019 by JonnyF

[PETERTHEEATER]

10 hours ago, Somtamnication said:

God, let's get going with this. Got a bottle of Champagne ready for March 29! No more EU shackles!

Sorry, effective March 29 Champagne will be black-listed????

[keemapoot]

17 minutes ago, PETERTHEEATER said:

Sorry, effective March 29 Champagne will be black-listed????

 

May not be black listed, but the new high import tax tariffs might mean the only ones who can afford to drink it are the remainers. ????

[damascase]

1 hour ago, PETERTHEEATER said:

Sorry, effective March 29 Champagne will be black-listed????

Indeed, and why celebrate ‘no more EU shackles’ with a very typical EU product, I wonder????????

[welovesundaysatspace]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

Why won't you accept the result of the democratic vote?

Everyone is accepting the result of the manipulated opinion poll of 2016. What people don’t accept is that parliamentary representative democracy is being overturned. 

 

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

The prime minister stated that the result would be respected.

A false promise, like so many in Brexit. He simply didn’t have the authority or mandate to give anyone such guarantee. Parliament is sovereign. 

 

 

[Grouse]

2 hours ago, evadgib said:

If you care to bring it on again the defeat will be much larger as some on your own side have openly admitted.

If, after all we have learnt over the past 3 years, the electorate still vote to leave I will support that and hand in my British passport. I could not stand the shame. Seriously.

[Grouse]

53 minutes ago, Grouse said:

If, after all we have learnt over the past 3 years, the electorate still vote to leave I will support that and hand in my British passport. I could not stand the shame. Seriously.

I kid you not. After years of putting up with British yobbish behaviour, Brexit would be the last straw for me. Skinheads, football hooligans, chavs, laddish behaviour, drunkenness, drinking and eating in the street, it's just too embarrassing. Not everywhere of course; their are still some decent places like Winchester, Harrogate, York, Cambridge but the country has gone to the dogs. I viewed EU membership as a positive social and cultural influence. I guess people just don't understand. I hope for the best but have already planned for the worst. My parachute is packed. Enjoy your celebrity culture, sports stars and grinding poverty. 

[Baerboxer]

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Why won't you accept the result of the democratic vote? The prime minister stated that the result would be respected. It was in the manifesto. You won't accept it because you lost.

 

Got to 1:10 below. The conditions were clear. MP's should not over-rule the result.

 

 

 

 

Cameron did not have any authority to impose what he said.

 

The advisory referendum, a gloried opinion poll, had no legal binding on parliament.

 

The executive cannot override parliament even though the scoundrel May tried to my manipulating the use of the Royal Prerogative.

 

The UK evolved the parliamentary democracy system to prevent exactly what those Brexit Tories and the easily led people who believe them are trying to do.

 

And, btw, the advisory referendum wasn't a one off, never to be repeated or changed event.

[vogie]

5 minutes ago, Grouse said:

I kid you not. After years of putting up with British yobbish behaviour, Brexit would be the last straw for me. Skinheads, football hooligans, chavs, laddish behaviour, drunkenness, drinking and eating in the street, it's just too embarrassing. Not everywhere of course; their are still some decent places like Winchester, Harrogate, York, Cambridge but the country has gone to the dogs. I viewed EU membership as a positive social and cultural influence. I guess people just don't understand. I hope for the best but have already planned for the worst. My parachute is packed. Enjoy your celebrity culture, sports stars and grinding poverty. 

If you think that about our country perhaps it best you did leave, but if you're going to use a parachute I wouldn't sever all your ties.

[Baerboxer]

3 hours ago, vogie said:

"The over whelming opportunity for brexit is over the next 50 years" is what Jacob Rees Mogg said and not what you are saying he said. Are you deliberately misquoting to help you make your point.

You can see the difference can't you?

 

Rees-Mogg hmm. Now why do you think he's qualified to make such a long term prediction?

[Baerboxer]

3 hours ago, evadgib said:

I'm still wading through Andrew Marr ????

Here's one for you:

 

 

Boris the barmy, Nigel "mines a pint of bitter", the upper crust Rees-Mogg, and the weasel Gove.

 

Yep, the Brexiters really know whose a trustworthy winner!