Brexit hits speed bump as court rules lawmakers must get say

[Grouse]

44 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Ah, so that's how the fix will be done to circumvent the will of the people.

 

Maybe it's the German beer I'm drinking but I don't understand that. I'm a Yorkshireman, we don't really do subtlety ?

 

(Irlbacher since you ask)

[7by7]

20 hours ago, sandyf said:

So you (7by7) are saying the government did not tell the people of Scotland that if they voted no to independence they would be party to reforms in Europe. 

The rise in hate crime is anything but false.

 

As there was no plan to hold a referendum at the time of the Scottish independence referendum, then the government could not tell them anything about it!

 

If there had been a plan to hold a referendum on the UK's membership of the EU at the time, do you seriously believe that it would have effected the outcome of the Scottish independence vote?

 

It seems that even Nicola Sturgeon has given up on the idea of a second independence referendum for the time being, partly because she wants to continue receiving English taxpayers money to bail her government out! Sturgeon shelves plan for quick second Scottish independence referendum

Quote

Nicola Sturgeon has shelved plans for a quick second referendum on Scottish independence after dire spending figures and a fall in public support for leaving the UK.........

 

That morning, a YouGov poll for the Times had found only 40% of voters still backed independence, including don’t knows, while only 37% backed holding a second vote before the UK left the EU. Excluding don’t knows, it found that opposition to independence was at 54% and support at 46% – the same figure as in the 2014 referendum.

 

So it seems that the majority of Scots still believe that Scotland should remain part of the UK; even after Brexit.

 

I said much of the rhetoric was and is false; not all of it. I also expressed outrage at the rhetoric. What do you fail to understand about that?

[7by7]

11 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

 

I am no constitutional expert, but I assume it will happen through a formal dissolution of the Act of the Union.

 

Is your constituency a signatory member of a greater union? Does it operate with its own legal system and its own institutions? Is it a recognised country in its own right?

 

I admit when referring to individual constituencies I was using reductio ad absurdum.

 

But the question still stands; how would you break the Union up. I don't mean the constitutional means, I mean into what parts.

 

England and Wales both voted to leave; so they remain in one union, while Scotland and Northern Ireland, who both voted to remain, form a separate union?

 

Maybe you think all four should separate; perhaps forcing the people of Northern Ireland to become part of the Republic?

 

I suspect, though, that you're only interest lies in Scotland; in which case see my previous. The majority of Scots still want to remain part of the UK, even after Brexit.

 

[Mosha]

 
I admit when referring to individual constituencies I was using reductio ad absurdum.
 
But the question still stands; how would you break the Union up. I don't mean the constitutional means, I mean into what parts.
 
England and Wales both voted to leave; so they remain in one union, while Scotland and Northern Ireland, who both voted to remain, form a separate union?
 
Maybe you think all four should separate; perhaps forcing the people of Northern Ireland to become part of the Republic?
 
I suspect, though, that you're only interest lies in Scotland; in which case see my previous. The majority of Scots still want to remain part of the UK, even after Brexit.
 

Imagine Scotland forking out to run NI lol. I don't believe there is a strong political will to unite in the Republic of Ireland. It's said to be expensive to run.

Sent from my SMART_4G_Speedy_5inch using Tapatalk

[sandyf]

14 hours ago, Grouse said:

 

Maybe I'm being a bit pedantic, I think there is a difference between getting a forecast wrong and lying. Everybody thought Brexit would triggered immediately. If it had been, there could well have been an emergency budget. You know the Brexiteer real lies in so many area that I won't list them here

Looks like we may find out if they made “assertions of fact that were knowingly misleading”. 

 

Crown prosecutors are considering a complaint that the Leave campaign misled voters during the EU referendum campaign. 

The complaint against Vote Leave and Leave.EU campaigns was submitted by academic experts in electoral law, who suggested “corrupt campaigning practices” were used by campaigners.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-referendum-campaigns-crown-prosecutors-cps-complaint-a7403161.html

[RuamRudy]

12 hours ago, 7by7 said:

It seems that even Nicola Sturgeon has given up on the idea of a second independence referendum for the time being, partly because she wants to continue receiving English taxpayers money to bail her government out!

So very much is that is simply incorrect about this statement. After a summer of liberal sentiments from you, a febrile undercurrent of Little Englander arrogance is clearly still there. 

 

English taxpayers' money, like Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish taxpayers' money goes to the UK exchequer, which then allocates the money according to government mandated rules. Whilst you clearly consider England and the UK as being synonymous, you are wrong - it is UK money that finds the regions. 

 

Unless you live in the South East of England, it is actually the Scots who are subsidising you. As has been proven countless times, Scotland contributes more the the UK exchequer than any other region of the UK with the exception of London and the South East - so rather than trying to paint us as scroungers, accept the fact that we subsidise you and show some gratitude for once. 

[jpinx]

18 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Looks like we may find out if they made “assertions of fact that were knowingly misleading”. 

 

Crown prosecutors are considering a complaint that the Leave campaign misled voters during the EU referendum campaign. 

The complaint against Vote Leave and Leave.EU campaigns was submitted by academic experts in electoral law, who suggested “corrupt campaigning practices” were used by campaigners.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-referendum-campaigns-crown-prosecutors-cps-complaint-a7403161.html

That's a bit rich - given the Remainers lies and misleading forecasts bandied around, sponsored by the government.  I smacks of serious sour grapes and hopefully will not muddy the waters any further.

[RuamRudy]

14 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 

I admit when referring to individual constituencies I was using reductio ad absurdum.

 

But the question still stands; how would you break the Union up. I don't mean the constitutional means, I mean into what parts.

 

England and Wales both voted to leave; so they remain in one union, while Scotland and Northern Ireland, who both voted to remain, form a separate union?

 

Maybe you think all four should separate; perhaps forcing the people of Northern Ireland to become part of the Republic?

 

I suspect, though, that you're only interest lies in Scotland; in which case see my previous. The majority of Scots still want to remain part of the UK, even after Brexit.

 

 

Adding a touch of Latin doesn't make your point any less irrelevant - you are trying to compare apples and oranges. 

 

And here, again, your Little Englander arrogance shines through - why should I have any say over the future shape or alignment of the remaining parts of a UK without Scotland? I want that each part is prosperous and that the people are satisfied with the resolution as it affects them directly, but I would not suggest for one moment how they should organise themselves. 

[RuamRudy]

1 hour ago, jpinx said:

That's a bit rich - given the Remainers lies and misleading forecasts bandied around, sponsored by the government.  I smacks of serious sour grapes and hopefully will not muddy the waters any further.

 

[Grouse]

57 minutes ago, jpinx said:

That's a bit rich - given the Remainers lies and misleading forecasts bandied around, sponsored by the government.  I smacks of serious sour grapes and hopefully will not muddy the waters any further.

 

What lies were these? I you saying that forecasts were over egged? Are they lies? I think there is a difference.

[jpinx]

1 minute ago, Grouse said:

 

What lies were these? I you saying that forecasts were over egged? Are they lies? I think there is a difference.

Same as all pre-voting propoganda is.  I don't defend any of them - they were positively "souffled" -- but not so tasty !  ; )

[Khun Han]

Anyone who takes the trouble to go back and read the news articles on Osborne's emergency budget threat at the time that it was made can see that it was widely considered not to be a credible threat, and to be a last-ditch piece of propaganda ('dead cat on the table', as it's known) to shore up a flagging remain campaign.

 

And then there was Osborne's little pantomime of a secret request to Wolfgang Scheauble to ham up post-brexit difficulties, and then Osborne quoting him in a major speech.....

[ilostmypassword]

There are a few other bumps as well. Australia, for one, said it couldn't start negotiating with the UK until it is out of the EU.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-australia-uk-trade-deal-negotiations-article-50-eu-withdrawal-a7380696.html

 

The other great hope that has been cited is India. Looks like that one is foundering over immigration.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/08/world/europe/uk-britain-india-theresa-may-narendra-modi.html

[RuamRudy]

3 hours ago, Khun Han said:

Anyone who takes the trouble to go back and read the news articles on Osborne's emergency budget threat at the time that it was made can see that it was widely considered not to be a credible threat, and to be a last-ditch piece of propaganda ('dead cat on the table', as it's known) to shore up a flagging remain campaign.

 

Whereas the Brexit lie of the GBP350 million a week being given to the NHS was widely believed to be credible because all the Brexit charlatans were parading it, despite their being well aware that they were fooling the public - shameful and disgusting behaviour by self serving crooks. 

[jpinx]

7 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

There are a few other bumps as well. Australia, for one, said it couldn't start negotiating with the UK until it is out of the EU.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-australia-uk-trade-deal-negotiations-article-50-eu-withdrawal-a7380696.html

 

The other great hope that has been cited is India. Looks like that one is foundering over immigration.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/08/world/europe/uk-britain-india-theresa-may-narendra-modi.html

Frankly I don't believe that Oz has a law stating that negotiations can not start.  There might be a clause in the current Oz / EU trade agreement to not negotiate with EU countries individually, but that does not constitute "illegal" - it would be the breach of a contract.  Anyway - -I know plenty of people are already negotiating deals between UK and many businesses in many countries in- and outside the EU, so they will have paved the way for quick negotitations on the "formal" deal.

 

Agreed that India is hinging on immigration, but hopefully UK will open the floodgates to Indian workers and get them into employment and paying taxes, so that we get better pensions !!   ; )

[jpinx]

7 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

Whereas the Brexit lie of the GBP350 million a week being given to the NHS was widely believed to be credible because all the Brexit charlatans were parading it, despite their well aware that they were fooling the public - shameful and disgusting behaviour by self serving crooks. 

No more crooked than the many politicians who make promises during campaigns and then do not deliver.  ; )

[RuamRudy]

7 minutes ago, jpinx said:

No more crooked than the many politicians who make promises during campaigns and then do not deliver.  ; )

 

Of course I would disagree, but the NHS has a special place in most Brits' hearts so to use it so cynically to try to con the public shows just how desperate these scum were - and I don't use that word lightly. They are genuinely beneath contempt.  

[jpinx]

3 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

Of course I would disagree, but the NHS has a special place in most Brits' hearts so to use it so cynically to try to con the public shows just how desperate these scum were - and I don't use that word lightly. They are genuinely beneath contempt.  

My father was deeply engaged in establishing the NHS many many years ago, and two of my uncles served in the UK health service over decades.  All said (before they died) that the NHS had grown into something it was never intended to be because the politicians keep on adding peripherals to try to win votes.  I have a healthy scepticism of the NHS -- not of the people working in it at the patient interface, but the layers of grey suits weighing it all down.   It is vastly more costly to run than it needs to be. 

[Laughing Gravy]

Once again myself and my fiends didn't even consider the 350 million as a reason for leaving the EU. It has been said again and again, politicians say many things. This 350 million a week was not a vote changer and if anyone has any evidence to the contrary, please enlighten me.. People have had enough of the EU, laws, rules and immigration. That's why they voted to leave. Not because of some bus and slogan.  I can't understand why people can't accept that. Again people I know had made their minds up, way before the remain and leave campaign happened.

[jpinx]

3 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Once again myself and my fiends didn't even consider the 350 million as a reason for leaving the EU. It has been said again and again, politicians say many things. This 350 million a week was not a vote changer and if anyone has any evidence to the contrary, please enlighten me.. People have had enough of the EU, laws, rules and immigration. That's why they voted to leave. Not because of some bus and slogan.  I can't understand why people can't accept that. Again people I know had made their minds up, way before the remain and leave campaign happened.

It'd be interesting to see opinion polls on membership over the ten years prior to the referendum...    ; )

[RuamRudy]

8 minutes ago, jpinx said:

My father was deeply engaged in establishing the NHS many many years ago, and two of my uncles served in the UK health service over decades.  All said (before they died) that the NHS had grown into something it was never intended to be because the politicians keep on adding peripherals to try to win votes.  I have a healthy scepticism of the NHS -- not of the people working in it at the patient interface, but the layers of grey suits weighing it all down.   It is vastly more costly to run than it needs to be. 

 

Agreed - stories like this make it clear how much the NHS has been derailed by the need to try to implement market forces. From Thatcherism to Blairism, the NHS has not been served well by any recent government. 

[jpinx]

4 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

Agreed - stories like this make it clear how much the NHS has been derailed by the need to try to implement market forces. From Thatcherism to Blairism, the NHS has not been served well by any recent government. 

The EU has played it's part in the cost escalations.  Medicines that were bought according to UK standards suddenly didn't meet EU stnadards and we were forced to buy 3 times more costly EU approved medicines.  The same went for Hospital equipment, etc.  Don't get me started !!  haha!!  ; )

[Grouse]

3 hours ago, Khun Han said:

Anyone who takes the trouble to go back and read the news articles on Osborne's emergency budget threat at the time that it was made can see that it was widely considered not to be a credible threat, and to be a last-ditch piece of propaganda ('dead cat on the table', as it's known) to shore up a flagging remain campaign.

 

And then there was Osborne's little pantomime of a secret request to Wolfgang Scheauble to ham up post-brexit difficulties, and then Osborne quoting him in a major speech.....

 

But where were the actual lies?

[RuamRudy]

11 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Once again myself and my fiends didn't even consider the 350 million as a reason for leaving the EU. It has been said again and again, politicians say many things. This 350 million a week was not a vote changer and if anyone has any evidence to the contrary, please enlighten me.. People have had enough of the EU, laws, rules and immigration. That's why they voted to leave. Not because of some bus and slogan.  I can't understand why people can't accept that. Again people I know had made their minds up, way before the remain and leave campaign happened.

 

If you were to offer more than anecdotes of you and your friends, or a solid explanation of why you consider yourself to the the trusted face of UK public opinion, I might believe you. However the BBC disagrees with you, and I think they are better informed than you:

 

"Remain campaigner Angela Eagle may have told her opponents to "get that lie off your bus" but polling suggests it gained traction and was the single most remembered figure from the campaign, with many people believing that money handed over to the EU to be a member should be spent in the UK instead.

In that sense, it served as a powerful illustration of how the UK could be better off outside the EU."

[Grouse]

25 minutes ago, jpinx said:

No more crooked than the many politicians who make promises during campaigns and then do not deliver.  ; )

 

We are discussing the referendum specifically.

[jpinx]

5 minutes ago, Grouse said:

 

But where were the actual lies?

 

It's not just a "positive" lie -- deceit by innuendo is a lie...

 

Word forms: lies, lying or lied

1. (intransitive) to speak untruthfully with intent to mislead or deceive

2. (intransitive) to convey a false impression or practise deception

 

... ..couldn't resist this -- no offence intended : D

grouse1 (ɡraʊs )  Definitions

verb

1. (intransitive) to grumble; complain

noun

2. a persistent complaint

[jpinx]

6 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

If you were to offer more than anecdotes of you and your friends, or a solid explanation of why you consider yourself to the the trusted face of UK public opinion, I might believe you. However the BBC disagrees with you, and I think they are better informed than you:

 

"Remain campaigner Angela Eagle may have told her opponents to "get that lie off your bus" but polling suggests it gained traction and was the single most remembered figure from the campaign, with many people believing that money handed over to the EU to be a member should be spent in the UK instead.

In that sense, it served as a powerful illustration of how the UK could be better off outside the EU."

Osbornes threatening forecast budget was a "positive lie" to dissuade Brexiteers  ; )

I'd say the score is about even.  Apart from the silly threatened legal action it's not helpful to rake over the still glowing coals.  better to use this platform to construct something positive.  How would Grouse and others like to propose modifying the EU to make it more "user-friendly" so that Art50 does not have to be invoked?

[Khun Han]

The big problem with the NHS is with it's admin, which has mutated into an obscenely bloated and corrupt, self-serving behemoth. I'm not sure that giving it an extra £350 million a week would be anything other than a hugely lavish and wastful job creation scheme for said admin. In that respect, it's kind-of like a mini-me of the EU organisation. The particular suggestion by leave certainly didn't bribe me. The NHS is just not held in the 'sacred' regard it once was, despite all the best efforts of it's leading-edge staff.

[Orac]

Osbornes threatening forecast budget was a "positive lie" to dissuade Brexiteers  ; )
I'd say the score is about even.  Apart from the silly threatened legal action it's not helpful to rake over the still glowing coals.  better to use this platform to construct something positive.  How would Grouse and others like to propose modifying the EU to make it more "user-friendly" so that Art50 does not have to be invoked?

You mean like electing some decent MEPs to represent us and put a positive view of the EU forward that people can buy into maybe?

[Khun Han]

11 minutes ago, jpinx said:

Osbornes threatening forecast budget was a "positive lie" to dissuade Brexiteers  ; )

I'd say the score is about even.  Apart from the silly threatened legal action it's not helpful to rake over the still glowing coals.  better to use this platform to construct something positive.  How would Grouse and others like to propose modifying the EU to make it more "user-friendly" so that Art50 does not have to be invoked?

 

They can't, other than make references that we should stay in and have influence to do so. It's become obvious that he EU will only change when it faces a big enough crisis to force it to do so.