UK likely to have “clean break” with EU

[Bannoi]

If the leave side voted to get out of the EU in order to give full power back to Parliament without any outside interference from the EU surely that means they also wanted Parliament to be supreme and not usurped by a dictator.

[rockingrobin]

Just now, jpinx said:

Art50 is a foreigns affairs matter, concerning a treaty with a foreign entity.  The bill of rights does not apply to Art50, but might come into play later when the subsequent acts of parliament are being debated and voted on.

I repeat - the UK has no written constitution.

Art 50 inevitably leads to a loss of rights, what might happen or not happen in the future is not an answer. As I mentioned once parliament enacted the treaty into domestic law it fettered the RP in relation to that treaty.

[jpinx]

Just now, Bannoi said:

If the leave side voted to get out of the EU in order to give full power back to Parliament without any outside interference from the EU surely that means they also wanted Parliament to be supreme and not usurped by a dictator.

You are being mislead - there's not been a dictator since the man who established Parliament

[jpinx]

1 minute ago, rockingrobin said:

Art 50 inevitably leads to a loss of rights, what might happen or not happen in the future is not an answer. As I mentioned once parliament enacted the treaty into domestic law it fettered the RP in relation to that treaty.

You're just confused.  Art50 does nothing other than start the negotiations, it does NOT actually change anything in UK law -- *THAT* requires an act of parliament.

[rockingrobin]

15 minutes ago, jpinx said:

You're just confused.  Art50 does nothing other than start the negotiations, it does NOT actually change anything in UK law -- *THAT* requires an act of parliament.

On the contrary I am not confused

RP cannot be used to frustrate the will of Parliament, it was parliament who enacted 1972 ECA ,in doing so its will was to give citizens the rights which have flowed since. In invoking Art 50 it is not within parliaments gift to keep some of these rights, they will be lost.

[elgordo38]

17 hours ago, jpinx said:

qotd :-  "A bad deal would be worse than no deal"

It's a nice touch that she's standing in the same spot as was MrsT when she took us into that unholy alliance.

 

As the speech progressed the US$/£ went from about 120 to about 123. 

 

 

I am happy to see that you got an increase lets hope it holds. Usually these deals play hell with pensioners living abroad. Not that they would ever consult you. 

[jpinx]

35 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:

On the contrary I am not confused

RP cannot be used to frustrate the will of Parliament, it was parliament who enacted 1972 ECA ,in doing so its will was to give citizens the rights which have flowed since. In invoking Art 50 it is not within parliaments gift to keep some of these rights, they will be lost.

Art50 in itself does nothing.  It is a "Notice to Quit".  No rights will be gained or lost.  That comes later when the terms of brexit are laid before parliament.  All clear now? :)

[rockingrobin]

46 minutes ago, jpinx said:

Art50 in itself does nothing.  It is a "Notice to Quit".  No rights will be gained or lost.  That comes later when the terms of brexit are laid before parliament.  All clear now? :)

The effect of giving art 50 notice on relevant rights is direct , even though art 50 process will take time. At the end of the process the UK will not be an EU member or subject to the treaties.

 

The gov in negotiating a withdrawal  agreement will pick and  choose which EU rights to preserve or lose, the effect of art 50 on rights is direct.

 

Parliament will be constrained in the knowledge that the effect of not ratifying the final agreement , however inadequate parliament believe it to be ,will result in the loss of all rights

Edited January 18, 2017 by rockingrobin

[jpinx]

12 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:

The effect of giving art 50 notice on relevant rights is direct , even though art 50 process will take time. At the end of the process the UK will not be an EU member or subject to the treaties.

 

The gov in negotiating a withdrawal  agreement will pick and  choose which EU rights to preserve or lose, the effect of art 50 on rights is direct.

 

Parliament will be constrained in the knowledge that the effect of not ratifying the final agreement , however inadequate parliament believe it to be ,will result in the loss of all rights

"........... The gov in negotiating a withdrawal  agreement will pick and  choose which EU rights to preserve or lose......."   --  and vote on them.  There are no contraints on voting other than those that exist on any piece of complex legislation. 

[WhamBam]

Personally, I liked the tone of her speech and I don''t think the E.U. will.

 

Miss May / May not seems to have summed things up quite well and I am more inclined now to believe she will.

 

Let's get on with it and show them we are not rolling over to the many demands and statements made by so many E.U. dictators and leaders.

 

[dunroaming]

Good to have a bit of clarity.  Brave or foolhardy approach?  It's a high risk strategy but she has decided to open the batting by threatening the EU.  It's all uncharted territory and I am pleased that May has at last given an outline of what she wants.  Of course that is a long way from what we will end up with but you have to start somewhere.

[jpinx]

17 hours ago, dunroaming said:

Good to have a bit of clarity.  Brave or foolhardy approach?  It's a high risk strategy but she has decided to open the batting by threatening the EU.  It's all uncharted territory and I am pleased that May has at last given an outline of what she wants.  Of course that is a long way from what we will end up with but you have to start somewhere.

The threats were started by Junkers and the EU saying that UK must be made to pay heavily for their exit, spoken soon after the referendum result.  TM has played this well, keeping her powder dry till now and making it very clear that she will invoke the nuclear option if the EU continue to be obstructive.  Walking away with no deal would not be such a bad result compared to bowing down to Brussels.

Edited January 19, 2017 by jpinx

[maxtwo]

She could end up are best pm since Maggie if she stands up to them.

[uptheos]

On 1/17/2017 at 8:39 PM, Aforek said:

Very good, Britain, leave frankly and never come back : best thing for EU

 

Yup the EU will be ruled by the little fat German lady, it will have millions of migrants that they need to disperse and if they don't like it there's always the EU courts to help you out. Have a happy life with your migrants, we don't need them.

[WhamBam]

 

This song seems VERY apt, especially as it was a Eurovision song contest song.

 

Great for us oldies who remember freedom from the yolk of E.U. tyranny

 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, uptheos said:

 

Yup the EU will be ruled by the little fat German lady, it will have millions of migrants that they need to disperse and if they don't like it there's always the EU courts to help you out. Have a happy life with your migrants, we don't need them.

Little fat German lady who happens to have PhD in Physical Chemistry..

 

Not your average politician 

[jpinx]

33 minutes ago, oilinki said:

Little fat German lady who happens to have PhD in Physical Chemistry..

 

Not your average politician 

Wasn't Maggie Thatcher a PhD in Chenistry?  I think you'll find that most of the higher echelons of MP's have degrees   Try googling a few of the current crop of top-politicians and see how you get on

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, jpinx said:

Wasn't Maggie Thatcher a PhD in Chenistry?  I think you'll find that most of the higher echelons of MP's have degrees   Try googling a few of the current crop of top-politicians and see how you get on

According to wiki, she had BSc in Chemistry, not PhD. 

[Guest]

Theresa May last year. How things change so fast.

[dick dasterdly]

1 hour ago, oilinki said:

Little fat German lady who happens to have PhD in Physical Chemistry..

 

Not your average politician 

 

35 minutes ago, jpinx said:

Wasn't Maggie Thatcher a PhD in Chenistry?  I think you'll find that most of the higher echelons of MP's have degrees   Try googling a few of the current crop of top-politicians and see how you get on

 

19 minutes ago, oilinki said:

According to wiki, she had BSc in Chemistry, not PhD. 

Not sure how a doctorate or degree in chemistry is at all relevant when it comes to leading a country or group of countries?

 

Nye Bevan (as far as I know) had no academic qualifications, but was one of the few politicians worthy of respect IMO.

 

Back on topic - a few EU politicians threatened to "punish" the UK if they dared leave the EU, and May (eventually) responded in the correct manner - 'trying to punish us will only result in a bad deal for all involved' (or words to that effect).

[uptheos]

1 hour ago, oilinki said:

Little fat German lady who happens to have PhD in Physical Chemistry..

 

Not your average politician 

 

I guess you can be both clever and stupid.

No not your average politician, more a dictator who decides how many come in.

Well good luck to all those lovely little Bavarian villages when her friends move in.

Is it Leiderhosen all round to disguise them a little?