Brexit: High Court judges to give legal verdict

[Grouse]

18 minutes ago, jpinx said:

This is sensible and pragmatic, and would certainly work if the personalities around the table can swallow their pride.   What happened to the old rules about an employer having to prove that there was no UK resident capable of doing the job he wanted to import labour for?  The free movement of labour within the EU was never going to work without some controls.  Now Germany might realise that the controls are possible, can be tailored to individual countries and can be enforced without undue discrimination. 

 

Unfortunately such sensible and pragmatic solutions have been voiced by many over the last 6 months, but there's precious little willingness by the bigwigs to grasp the nettle -- they all have too much ego in it.

 

I'm delighted you agree the concept. 

 

I have heard nothing except all or nothing

 

Cameron got agreement for a brake but after the referendum it was not implemented.

 

There has to be a sensible way through this ?

[elliss]

1 hour ago, CharlieK said:

 

 

And you think if the UK stays the EU will not forget. What's to stop them demanding the UK adopt the Euro as a condition of staying? Especially the value of the GBP being what it is now!  

 

Q: Is this really what this is all about? 

   Agree .

 if UK were  to beg forgiveness . adopting the Euro 

         would  certainly be a condition for staying .

        

Edited November 4, 2016 by elliss

[A1Str8]

Now this brexit bs got old, tell the people the truth instead. 

Your vote on the subject at hand never really mattered. It has been decided a long time ago whether the UK would exit the EU or not.  

Politics is a billion dollar business, they won't let the average Joe decide such things. 

 

[brewsterbudgen]

 
Rubbish

Why? The government has already stated it will appeal. There is no higher court after the Supreme Court, except Europe. We're still in the EU in case you didn't realise.

Sent from my SM-A500F using Thaivisa Connect mobile app

[mommysboy]

I think you have hit on the nub: Remainers will reluctantly accept soft Brexit. I'd guess the majority of Brexiters prefer a soft Brexit.  What we're really dealing with on these boards, is a small minority of people that want hard Brexit, and for some reason belive they are entitled to that. They interpret the result as Brexit any which way we want, but democracy doesn't work like, on the contrary, any true democracy has effective opposition, and debates minority interests.

 

Now that this is going to Parliament, a little bit of imagination tells us that the only way MP's can be seen to deliver, and not go against their principles is to force a soft Brexit, and that is likely what will happen.  It's the sensible, compromise solution.

 

 

[jimmybkk]

The EU is a self-serving old boys club that naturally every European leader wants to join because they know that there are 10,000 EU officials who earn more than the British Prime Minister, and it seems no-one contests it or complains about it. So naturally they all want a piece of that action when their term in office comes to an end... and who wouldn't? Of course, we're not supposed to know about those 10,000 earning more than the British PM because the EU, setting the bar for opaque governance, refuses to release figures on what their (mostly un-elected) officials are paid. We only know this because of leaked documents... Which makes it no less shocking. Ten thousand... !!! Are you frickin' kidding me? Imagine taking on a job as Country Head for some multinational corp with 27 overseas offices. You'd probably hope that at least you're the highest paid company exec in the country that you work in... And depending on which country that is, you'd probably also hope that you're not the lowest paid of those 27 country managers... And of course you'd expect that there would be a number of people at head office getting paid more than you - the Global Heads of this, that and the other... But seriously... there's 10,000 people in head office getting paid more than you...??? What the...??? I've seriously got to get me a job in head office when this gig is up...

 

Oh but wait... you can, and it's not that hard to do... All that's required to guarantee yourself a place in the old boys club is to use your best endeavours to make sure your country remains a part of the EU and doesn't question the contributions, financial and otherwise, that your nation is required to make. And if it looks like the public are getting wise to what's going on and start asking too many questions then you must lie and lie and lie... Create some demons... Fill the people with fear... This has proved to be a highly successful strategy in the past... No reason why it shouldn't work again... But if for some reason it doesn't work, if all else fails you simply "eject"...

 

Here's a classic case of George doing exactly what he was supposed to do, even though he makes himself look a complete idiot in the process. Keep in mind that before he ejected this guy was the Chancellor of the Exchequer... The head honcho of Britain's "Accounts Department", and the financial whizz-kid who would still be responsible for Britain's fiscal policies had the "Remainers" got their way. I'm gonna at least give him some credit by suggesting that he probably has more insight and understanding of Britain's financial situation than most posters on TVF, and yet here he is resorting to the use of an image of the empty purse of an old-age pensioner who will be so much worse off if the British people vote to leave the EU... And why will the pensioners be so much worse off? Well, according to George it's because of the likelihood that Brexit would cause a rise in inflation, meaning that the money in the pensioners' pockets would buy them less at the shops. Except for one thing George... as pointed out by the interviewer Andrew Neil: UK state pensions rise each year by at least the rate of inflation....

 

But wait... Wouldn't that mean that the chief finance guy in Britain, who is in favour of remaining in the EU, has had to resort to spreading disinformation and using scaremongering propaganda in an attempt to secure a "Remain" majority? Are the real financial benefits of remaining in the EU not strong enough on their own merits that he needs to resort to this kind of behaviour? Apparently they are not, at least that's what Britain's Chancellor of the Exchequer felt, although some folks on this forum seem to think they know more about all of this than George does... 

 

 

 

The whole interview is worth watching, but if you're pressed for time just skip to 8:00 and watch George do his best to secure his place in the old boys club...

[stevenl]

 
  Arrogance again. Maybe the electorate voted for what they considered the best for their country, and therefore the M.P's should hold to the democratic wishes of their 
constituency.When a general election is called,and the sooner the better. Then you will see how many of the prospective parliamentarians will vote to remain in this European dictatorship.
  

Yes, they can vote. That is their power, making laws is not.

Sent from my ROBBY using Thaivisa Connect mobile app

[nontabury]

i just wonder " why did we have a referendum"

 

let's see if this gets past the censor.

 

 

[ilostmypassword]

10 minutes ago, nontabury said:

i just wonder " why did we have a referendum"

 

let's see if this gets past the censor.

 

 

No evidence Mark Twain actually said or wrote that.

[mommysboy]

2 hours ago, stevenl said:

Yes, they can vote. That is their power, making laws is not.

Sent from my ROBBY using Thaivisa Connect mobile app
 

 

Yes. Electorate votes, the Government formulates laws, Parliament then scrutinizes and passes them (or otherwise).  As I remember from my school days anyway.  The elector has no further say other than lobbying the MP, who is the elected representative he/she chose.

[Mojomor]

I wish people would stop using the term referendum. It was a plebiscite, which is more of an advisory nature. Referendums are for changing the constitution, but Britain does not have a constitution.

[hawker9000]

12 hours ago, rockingrobin said:

MPs have not unapproved anything, the court ruled parliament is required to pass an act. The referendum is statuary advisory   

If you'd asked UK voters at the time of the referendum, I'll bet almost none would have shared your view that it was only "advisory".  But if you can support your statement that they all knew that it was, feel free to do so...

 

[stevenl]

If you'd asked UK voters at the time of the referendum, I'll bet almost none would have shared your view that it was only "advisory".  But if you can support your statement that they all knew that it was, feel free to do so...
 

If they didn't know, it says a lot about their knowledge. Maybe they should not have been allowed to vote.

Sent from my ROBBY using Thaivisa Connect mobile app

[rockingrobin]

14 hours ago, brewsterbudgen said:

 

Why? The government has already stated it will appeal. There is no higher court after the Supreme Court, except Europe. We're still in the EU in case you didn't realise.

Sent from my SM-A500F using Thaivisa Connect mobile app
 

 

The judiciary doesnt function that way.

There is no appeal  to the ECJ from national courts. If the Supreme Court requires clarification on a matter relating to EU law it suspends proceedings awaiting for the ECJ to give a preliminary ruling.On receiving this the court re- convenes and give its judgement in light of ECJ.

It is upto the Supreme Court and not litigating parties to determine if clarification from ECJ is required.Therefore both parties may agree that the Art 50 is irrevocable, but the court may determine that it requires clarification to make its decision and refer it to ECJ

Edited November 5, 2016 by rockingrobin

[soalbundy]

17 hours ago, jpinx said:

Given the declared willingness of just about every substantial country to do a good deal with an independent UK, and given also the serious inability of the EU to do decent deals quickly with those same countries, it's a bit of a no-brainer to see that a hard exit is actually pretty soft. 

so why didn't the UK have all these wonderful deals before they joined the EU, we even used to produce things then and had British owned car firms and an aerospace industry now we push bits of paper backwards and forwards and have lost our industrial know how.

[rockingrobin]

8 hours ago, hawker9000 said:

If you'd asked UK voters at the time of the referendum, I'll bet almost none would have shared your view that it was only "advisory".  But if you can support your statement that they all knew that it was, feel free to do so...

 

It was widely reported in all the media,

Lord Astor

Writing in the The Spectator, he said: "If the Brexiteers win, an exit from the EU is actually not deliverable. The EU referendum is merely advisory; it has no legal standing to force an exit. 

"Parliament is still sovereign. We will need an Act of Parliament to revoke the European Communities Act 1972, by which Britain joined the EEC or Common Market, or perhaps a paving bill enabling the Government to start the Leave negotiations.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/07/brexit-is-not-deliverable-says-david-camerons-father-in-law/

 

[hawker9000]

4 hours ago, stevenl said:

If they didn't know, it says a lot about their knowledge. Maybe they should not have been allowed to vote.

Sent from my ROBBY using Thaivisa Connect mobile app
 

Lol.  Says you...   'Somebody who wants to opine about who should & shouldn't be allowed to vote.   Hahahahaha

[SgtRock]

17 minutes ago, hawker9000 said:

Lol.  Says you...   'Somebody who wants to opine about who should & shouldn't be allowed to vote.   Hahahahaha

 

A tad harsh there hawker.

 

He might just be onto a cunning plan.

 

As we are apparently too thick, stupid and illiterate to be worthy of a vote.

 

I am quite happy to give up my vote in exchange for the Government to give up taxing me.

 

[nontabury]

13 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

No evidence Mark Twain actually said or wrote that.

 

  It's not important who wrote or said, it's the message that is important.

[brewsterbudgen]

1 minute ago, nontabury said:

 

  It's not important who wrote or said, it's the message that is important.

Maybe Twain should have added "and voting in a referendum is merely advisory".  It would have saved a lot of trouble.

[nontabury]

32 minutes ago, hawker9000 said:

Lol.  Says you...   'Somebody who wants to opine about who should & shouldn't be allowed to vote.   Hahahahaha

 

  And he, Steven, probably thinks he's a democrat. Arrogance at it's finest.

[jpinx]

1 hour ago, soalbundy said:

so why didn't the UK have all these wonderful deals before they joined the EU, we even used to produce things then and had British owned car firms and an aerospace industry now we push bits of paper backwards and forwards and have lost our industrial know how.

 

Pre-1972 we did have them

[stevenl]

47 minutes ago, nontabury said:

 

  And he, Steven, probably thinks he's a democrat. Arrogance at it's finest.

You may be very wrong with your presumptions. I believe democracy is leading to its own demise.

 

BTW, presuming things like this without having any idea about another person sounds like arrogance at its finest.

Edited November 5, 2016 by stevenl

[Grouse]

Responsibilities go hand in hand with rights.

 

I really do believe that the right to vote relies upon the responsibility of the voter to inform themselves of the facts before exercising that right

 

You may joke about it but universal suffrage may not be the best form of democracy

 

In the recent referendum it was demonstrated on many occasions that high numbers of voters did not have a clue about the issues and ramifications.

 

The dumbing down of the UK generally is a serious issue.

[soalbundy]

4 hours ago, jpinx said:

 

Pre-1972 we did have them

Then why join ? We must have been rich as a nation, or not? why did the UK have to get a loan from the IMF IN 1976, ah yes it was all the EU's fault no doubt. I can remember living in the UK pre 1972, it was lousy

[jpinx]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

Responsibilities go hand in hand with rights.

 

I really do believe that the right to vote relies upon the responsibility of the voter to inform themselves of the facts before exercising that right

 

You may joke about it but universal suffrage may not be the best form of democracy

 

In the recent referendum it was demonstrated on many occasions that high numbers of voters did not have a clue about the issues and ramifications.

 

The dumbing down of the UK generally is a serious issue.

Not just the UK -- it is scary just how dumb folks are in other first-world, supposedly highly educated countries, for example when you see a University Graduate writing that he has his degree and "could of gotten" a doctorate. 

[Laughing Gravy]

On ‎11‎/‎4‎/‎2016 at 10:16 PM, ilostmypassword said:

No evidence Mark Twain actually said or wrote that.

Nontabury could have said it. It doesn't matter. The quote is relevant and very true linking it to the referendum. Why do you always have to try and dismiss anyone linking something.

[Laughing Gravy]

13 hours ago, jpinx said:

Not just the UK -- it is scary just how dumb folks are in other first-world, supposedly highly educated countries, for example when you see a University Graduate writing that he has his degree and "could of gotten" a doctorate. 

Another important act and point is what is important to one voter is different to another. When we have a referendum or vote in elections we can never exactly know what will happen. We supposedly trust and put our faith in MP's who are meant to work on our behalf. I think we all know that last statement is tosh and they generally work on their own behalf.

 

Now I would be very interested to see if the MPs vote in favour of their constituents majourity in the referendum if it foes to parliament (still unsure on that). I know this won't happen as I am sure you will get the I am supporting the party line. Something all Labour MP's will do no doubt, even though many of the boroughs voted out in the referendum and have labour MP's in power.

[ilostmypassword]

3 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Nontabury could have said it. It doesn't matter. The quote is relevant and very true linking it to the referendum. Why do you always have to try and dismiss anyone linking something.

Because it isn't a fact. Get the difference between fact and falshehood? And why would anyone care about that particular sentence and what authority would it have had it not been attributed to Mark Twain?

[Laughing Gravy]

15 hours ago, Grouse said:

Responsibilities go hand in hand with rights.

 

I really do believe that the right to vote relies upon the responsibility of the voter to inform themselves of the facts before exercising that right

 

You may joke about it but universal suffrage may not be the best form of democracy

 

In the recent referendum it was demonstrated on many occasions that high numbers of voters did not have a clue about the issues and ramifications.

 

The dumbing down of the UK generally is a serious issue.

Where is the evidence that voters didn't have a clue about the ramifications about the Brexit. It is impossible to judge as it hasn't happened. yet.  One thing that is for certain is the reason we joined the European Common Market at the time, is not what it is now. In fact nothing like it is. That is certainly not what the voters expected. Also all the treaties that were pushed through to make the EU what it is today, people didn't expect that.