Fury of Brexit 'inferno' lays bare a divided United Kingdom

[Forethat]

12 minutes ago, DannyCarlton said:

No. It can only happen if it is supported by the majority in the house. The government doesn't have that majority, the opposition do. However, at the moment, I don't think the opposition have sufficient unity to get that bill through the house.

Three things:

1. A second referendum can only take place if it is supported by the government.

2. For a referendum to be held, primary legislation is required. This will require both houses to vote in favour, just as any normal legislation.

3. Leave this to those who know their stuff. 

Edited September 27, 2019 by Forethat

[StreetCowboy]

12 hours ago, HeyHeyHey said:

Wish you strength our might savior Johnson ????

Humour in adversity is what marks the British apart.

 

Sadly, many people may not understand your dark sarcasm.

 

Still, stiff upper lip, eh?

[phantomfiddler]

The population voted to leave. The officials elected in place by the population are refusing to carry forward the wishes of the people who voted them into office. Strange !

[DannyCarlton]

15 minutes ago, Forethat said:

Three things:

1. A second referendum can only take place if it is supported by the government.

2. For a referendum to be held, primary legislation is required. This will require both houses to vote in favour, just as any normal legislation.

3. Leave this to those who know their stuff. 

1. A second referendum can only take place if supported by a majority in the House. Opposition take control of the agenda as the did to introduce the Benn Bill.

2. The Benn Bill sailed through the HoL, proving that they are primarily remainers and likely to support any pro remain bill.

3. Agreed. Unfortunately that's clearly not you.

 

Fore!

 

 

Edited September 27, 2019 by DannyCarlton

[StreetCowboy]

13 minutes ago, phantomfiddler said:

The population voted to leave. The officials elected in place by the population are refusing to carry forward the wishes of the people who voted them into office. Strange !

We elect members of parliament because we are too busy to understand the complexities of government.  One of their jobs is to protect us from our own stupidity.

 

Boris is doing this by a slightly unusual method, lampooning and exaggerating our foolishness, but its working.

 

Good job, Boris!

 

SC

[Forethat]

35 minutes ago, DannyCarlton said:

1. A second referendum can only take place if supported by a majority in the House. Opposition take control of the agenda as the did to introduce the Benn Bill.

2. The Benn Bill sailed through the HoL, proving that they are primarily remainers and likely to support any pro remain bill.

3. Agreed. Unfortunately that's clearly not you.

The only option to motion is via a private members bill. Good luck with that. If they want to force the government there is a precedent from 1979.

 

You tend to think that the parliament can simply vote to hold a referendum. It's far more complex than that in case the government doesn't support the idea.

Edited September 27, 2019 by Forethat

[RichardColeman]

I think it more funny labour want to get a deal to offer to the public and then campaign against it in a new referendum

[BritManToo]

1 minute ago, RichardColeman said:

I think it more funny labour want to get a deal to offer to the public and then campaign against it in a new referendum

Not to mention Corbyn has always been a leaver.

We've got a party in power that doesn't really want to leave, and an opposition led by a guy that really wants to leave.

Edited September 27, 2019 by BritManToo

[yogi100]

The uproar in parliament the other evening was largely drink fueled. 

 

The subsidised bars in the HoC are open all day and cheaper than most nearby pubs.

 

You can even smoke in them and many of those who work there take full advantage of the fact including our MPs to whom we pay 80,000 quid a year to act in our interest. Many of us will remember George Brown who was paralytic most days by mid afternoon.

 

Drunken rowdyism has no place in parliamentary offices. The bars should be permanently closed. Little wonder some MPs are receiving death threats.

 

 

 

 

Edited September 27, 2019 by yogi100

[DannyCarlton]

1 minute ago, StreetCowboy said:

We elect members of parliament because we are too busy to understand the complexities of government.  One of their jobs is to protect us from our own stupidity.

 

Boris is doing this by a slightly unusual method, lampooning and exaggerating our foolishness, but its working.

 

Good job, Boris!

 

SC

For me the classic example of that was in the mid 60s. The government instituted a bill to remove capital punishment. There was a public outcry and it was clear that amajority in the country wanted to have capital punishment returned to the statute books.

 

The government declined a referendum, held a vote in parliament which supported the legislation to outlaw capital punishment.

 

This is how government business is done to protect us from our own stupidity.

 

Will of the people = anarchy. Thank goodness we have a parliamentasry democracy.

[soalbundy]

8 hours ago, JamesBlond said:

Of course there'll be violence if the will of the people is denied. That has always been obvious. Has Reuters only just realised? Have the remainers really been labouring under that same naivety, that same ignorance, all this time?

The will of which half? considering percentage wise there wasn't much difference between leave and remain and taking into account many didn't vote anyway it would be one half against the other, Cromwell is dead, we need a new model army and plenty of muskets, get out the popcorn and put beer in the fridge this is going to be better than Black Adder.

[bannork]

2 hours ago, sanemax said:

How many voted to Remain ?

34.7% and nearly 13 million, a whopping 29%, didn't vote at all.

And of that 37% who voted to leave, how many of those wanted a No Deal Brexit?

No one knows.

Time for another referendum to find out.

Edited September 27, 2019 by bannork

[DannyCarlton]

16 minutes ago, Forethat said:

The only option to motion is via a private members bill. Good luck with that. If they want to force the government there is a precedence from 1979.

 

You tend to think that the parliament can simply vote to hold a referendum. It's far more complex than that in case the government doesn't support the idea.

Not if the opposition take control of the agenda as they did with the Benn Bill. A much more recent precedent.

[Forethat]

Just now, bannork said:

34.7% and nearly 13 million, a whopping 29%, didn't vote at all.

And of that 37% who voted to leave, how many of those wanted a No Deal Brexit?

No one knows.

Time for another referendum to find our.

May I ask: what would you do if (I say IF) Leave won again?

[bannork]

36 minutes ago, phantomfiddler said:

The population voted to leave. The officials elected in place by the population are refusing to carry forward the wishes of the people who voted them into office. Strange !

Only 37% of the adult population voted to leave.

[bannork]

2 minutes ago, Forethat said:

May I ask: what would you do if (I say IF) Leave won again?

I would accept it, but the question on the referendum sheet would have to give clear cut choices, i.e leave with a deal passed by Parliament or remain.

If Parliament cannot agree then we remain.

[Forethat]

11 minutes ago, bannork said:

I would accept it, but the question on the referendum sheet would have to give clear cut choices, i.e leave with a deal passed by Parliament or remain.

If Parliament cannot agree then we remain.

Let's say two questions are asked:

 

1. Remain

2. Leave

In case you voted 2, do you want

A. May's deal

B. A new deal

C. No deal

 

The problem with this, if you ask me, is what happens if 52% vote for Leave, but only 16% on each of the Leave options. 

 

I for one think the referendum and the law should stand. I think the only working option is to hold a second referendum with the following question:

 

Do you want to:

1. Leave on No Deal

2. Leave on May's deal

Edited September 27, 2019 by Forethat

[yogi100]

15 minutes ago, bannork said:

I would accept it, but the question on the referendum sheet would have to give clear cut choices, i.e leave with a deal passed by Parliament or remain.

If Parliament cannot agree then we remain.

 

I do believe the LibDems have said that if we do vote to leave again they still won't accept it.

 

It's not not cheap to have a referendum. The one in 2016 cost the tax payer 130 million quid.

[StreetCowboy]

1 minute ago, yogi100 said:

 

I do believe the LibDems have said that if we do vote to leave again they still won't accept it.

 

It's not not cheap to have a referendum. The one in 2016 cost the tax payer 130 million quid.

It cost a lot more than that; we still don't know the full damage it will do.  Those who do not have our best interests at heart must be guffawing with delight.

 

How long can we continue to shoot ourselves in the foot before we run out of bullets?

[stephenterry]

7 minutes ago, Forethat said:

Let's say two questions are asked:

 

1. Remain

2. Leave

In case you voted 2, do you want

A. May's deal

B. A new deal

C. No deal

 

The problem with this, if you ask me, is what happens if 52% vote for Leave, but only 16% on each of the Leave options. 

 

I for one think the referendum and the law should stand. I think the only working option is to hold a second referendum with the following question:

 

Do you want to:

1. Leave on No Deal

2. Leave on May's deal

Far clearer to hold a GE, hopefully after 31 October, with all parties setting out their agenda - which for the LDs would be focused on revoking article 50, labour by offering a referendum (fence sitting again) and the tories promising the earth to all and sundry. 

 

The fact is, IMO, that the majority of the population couldn't give a toss about brexit because it doesn't materially affect them - yet. More important matters are those close to home.

 

However, it is likely with the UK's current voting system that the tories would win, but without a majority, in which case whatever has happened to brexit would be replaced by another few years of parliamentary chaos.

 

A situation to look forward to? 

 

[Sticky Wicket]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/09/26/sir-john-major-saysboris-johnsons-government-could-bypass-legislation/

Edited September 27, 2019 by Sticky Wicket

[tomacht8]

if the UK does not pay attention, the country degenerates into a new Yugoslavia in the final stage.

The division of the country is increasing more and more. The UK now needs a leadership that unites the population and does not divide them more.

[DannyCarlton]

2 minutes ago, Forethat said:

Let's say two questions are asked:

 

1. Remain

2. Leave

In case you voted 2, do you want

A. May's deal

B. A new deal

C. No deal

 

The problem with this, if you ask me, is what happens if 52% vote for Leave, but only 16% of them want to leave on No Deal terms.

It's not multi choice. parliament would have to agree which leave option is put on the ballot paper and that deal needs to have previously deemed acceptable by the EU.

 

Putting "no deal" on the ballot paper would be pointless as the majority in parliament and the majority of the public are dead set against it.

 

Only 2 options for leave. May's deal or some fantasy deal that Johnson comes up with. Yesterday Barnier stated that they hadn't yet recieved any sustantitive proposals from the UK yet, 2 weeks left to agree a deal and get the assent of the 27 other member states. Johnson has no clue as to an alternative to May's deal. Cummings' cunning plan is to return with May's deal with a couple of tiny and meaningless tweeks and claim it as a fantastic new deal (as May did). Then he has no need to ask for an extension. Parliament will either approve May's deal or crash out of the EU at the end of the month. Well that's the plan.

 

I think the EU and the opposition may have other ideas.

[DannyCarlton]

10 minutes ago, yogi100 said:

 

I do believe the LibDems have said that if we do vote to leave again they still won't accept it.

 

It's not not cheap to have a referendum. The one in 2016 cost the tax payer 130 million quid.

The Lib Dems have 18 out of 650 MPs. Not a lot they can do either way.

[stephenterry]

Read in the news today, that johnson would utilise EU law to override UK law to circumvent parliament's efforts to prevent a no-deal using Benn's bill.

 

Couldn't be more ironic, could it? 

 

However, if that transpires, he would certainly be finished, IMO. 

[StreetCowboy]

1 minute ago, DannyCarlton said:

It's not multi choice. parliament would have to agree which leave option is put on the ballot paper and that deal needs to have previously deemed acceptable by the EU.

 

Putting "no deal" on the ballot paper would be pointless as the majority in parliament and the majority of the public are dead set against it.

 

Only 2 options for leave. May's deal or some fantasy deal that Johnson comes up with. Yesterday Barnier stated that they hadn't yet recieved any sustantitive proposals from the UK yet, 2 weeks left to agree a deal and get the assent of the 27 other member states. Johnson has no clue as to an alternative to May's deal. Cummings' cunning plan is to return with May's deal with a couple of tiny and meaningless tweeks and claim it as a fantastic new deal (as May did). Then he has no need to ask for an extension. Parliament will either approve May's deal or crash out of the EU at the end of the month. Well that's the plan.

 

I think the EU and the opposition may have other ideas.

If the plan had been to weaken democracy and set man against man with the sole intention of weakening the power of the United Kingdom internationally, in what way would things have progressed differently?

[Henryford]

The problems at the moment are really nothing to do with Brexit, most people couldn't care less either way. The REAL issue is do we live in a democratic country or in a dictatorship which can ignote votes if it doesn't like the result.

[stephenterry]

3 minutes ago, DannyCarlton said:

The Lib Dems have 18 out of 650 MPs. Not a lot they can do either way.

They could be the king-makers to a hung parliament that would be the likely result in the next GE. They will contest all of the tory marginal seats, and other 'remain' parties would let them have a free ride. I can see them (at least) doubling their seats - 36 MPs is not for any minority government to ignore.

[StreetCowboy]

1 minute ago, Henryford said:

The problems at the moment are really nothing to do with Brexit, most people couldn't care less either way. The REAL issue is do we live in a democratic country or in a dictatorship which can ignote votes if it doesn't like the result.

Are we ruled by parliament, or by our glorious emperor and the baying mob?

 

Is the Crown part of our unwritten constitution, or a mere face for coins and stamps, who can be treated with contempt?

 

Is our illustrious emperor above the law, or subject to its limitations the same as the rest of us?

[DannyCarlton]

2 minutes ago, StreetCowboy said:

If the plan had been to weaken democracy and set man against man with the sole intention of weakening the power of the United Kingdom internationally, in what way would things have progressed differently?

Johnson Cummings isn't bright enough for that. They simply do and say everything to appeal to their base. His performance in the house a couple of nights ago was ample evidence of that. Shouting, blustering and hurling insults to curry favour with his fanboys sat watching it on TV. The opposition front bench weren't even listening and made no reply. He's just copying Trump'ds tactics.

 

The plan to weaken the power of the UK and the EU (divide and conquer) is down to Trump and Putin. A major ambition for both. Putin aided and abetted this by backing leave in the referendum by setting the full force of the St Petersberg Troll Farm on the gullable members of the public. Trump has done this by saying what a wonderfulk chap Boris is, claiming that there would be no trade deal with a soft exit and now promising Boris "the most wonderful deal ever, a marvellous deal etc.". Yea right . Wonderful for the US. Boris will be expecte to bend over and take it up the poop chute as a reward to Trump for all that he has done for his little pet Boris.