UK PM May's government loses contempt vote over Brexit legal advice

[dick dasterdly]

1 hour ago, Baerboxer said:

 

The majority, by a very small margin, of those that voted, chose to vote for Brexit in what was legally established as an advisory referendum.

 

A crock of <deleted>, created by Cameron and his cronies. And rather than acknowledging and addressing that, the politicians will as usual make it a worse, bigger and fouler crock of <deleted>. After all, they will still be well off, with nice pensions,  no enforced retirement, and living the good life. And screw the people and country they're supposed to serve.

And you're still, somehow missing the point that the govt. sent out a leaflet to every house stating that they would enact the result of the referendum, even though they recommended remain in the leaflet!

 

You are right in that even though the govt. stated in writing to the entire electorate, that they would enact the referendum result - legally, it could be ignored by MPs - if they're willing to rely on legal 'loopholes'......

 

But MPs aren't entirely stupid - and they realise that a large percentage of the electorate would not react well to this.....

[vogie]

8 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

It's not me that can't accept democracy! It's you that doesn't want to understand, or deny, the way British representative democracy actually works.

 

But you can ignore all that and cling to the vague promise from Cameron that he, and he buggered off very quickly, would enact the result of his advisory referendum, although it was a meaningless statement as he actually couldn't just do that. And you can pretend that this was a one off, never to be repeated, never to be challenged or reversed decision, even though the referendum never mentioned this. 

 

This whole crock of crap was about Cameron trying to get control of anti EU Tories and spike the growth in UKIP. No more no less. He screwed it up and quit.

 

Where is the referendum legislation does it specifically state that the result would be decided, and enacted, based on 50% plus or minus 1? I'd be grateful if you could tell me which section that's in.

 

 

This is from the BBC, if you don't want to believe it, that is your choice. 

What is the 'winning post'?

To win the referendum one side must win 50% of valid votes cast, plus one vote or more.

 

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36044026

 

 

"And you can pretend that this was a one off, never to be repeated, never to be challenged or reversed decision, even though the referendum never mentioned this."

 

The governments own referendum leaflet called it a "A once in a generation decision"

 

 

 

[lamyai3]

11 minutes ago, freebyrd said:

And you think I'm not aware of that?! Even if it goes to £1 = $1, what can you or I do about it?

 

As I said to another critic, I didn't come to SE Asia to chase women and live the lazy life in Pattaya or other places, I work, have done for 25 years, I'm at my office now, and will continue to do so until I'm not capable anymore or croak. Worrying about things that you can't control will only serve to damage your health.

Your post I was replying to certainly suggests that you were unaware of it. Either that or you have an "I'm all right Jack" lack of empathy for those who do live on passive income and pensions here. 

[Chomper Higgot]

2 hours ago, vogie said:

It would seem the House of Commons disagrees with you. This is a paragraph from the petition that was signed againgst a second referendum, it came in my email today, if I can find a way to link it to TV I will. It does make interesting reading.

 

"Stop possible second referendum on E.U. membership. There is a growing band of people that want to reverse the result of the democratic vote of this country to leave the European Union and are calling for a second referendum. This is mainly by the people that lost the vote two years ago and cannot accept the democratic vote of the majority decision. Although not legally binding the referendum on whether we stay or leave the EU carried out on the 23rd June 2016 was the clearest indication of the will of the electorate. At that time our Prime Minister David Cameron assured us that the result of the referendum would be carried out. We must ensure the democracy rules”.

Oh dear, people in a democracy want to exercise their democratic right to voice opinions, disagree with the Government and campaign to reverse the direction the nation is heading.

 

Winning a vote does not end the democratic rights of those that lose the vote.

 

And it was you who suggested I go think about what democracy means.

 

Well Vogue, it is not ‘Tyranny by the ballot box’.

[Chomper Higgot]

8 minutes ago, vogie said:

This is from the BBC, if you don't want to believe it, that is your choice. 

What is the 'winning post'?

To win the referendum one side must win 50% of valid votes cast, plus one vote or more.

 

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36044026

 

 

"And you can pretend that this was a one off, never to be repeated, never to be challenged or reversed decision, even though the referendum never mentioned this."

 

The governments own referendum leaflet called it a "A once in a generation decision"

 

 

 

Where does it state that the winning vote ends the democratic process?

[dick dasterdly]

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

Oh dear, people in a democracy want to exercise their democratic right to voice opinions, disagree with the Government and campaign to reverse the direction the nation is heading.

 

Winning a vote does not end the democratic rights of those that lose the vote.

 

And it was you who suggested I go think about what democracy means.

 

Well Vogue, it is not ‘Tyranny by the ballot box’.

What are you waffling on about?  Nobody has denied the right of remainers to start their own party and  work hard to force a 'return' vote in the future.

 

Many of us do, however get annoyed at the idea that the referendum result should be ignored.....

[dick dasterdly]

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

Where does it state that the winning vote ends the democratic process?

Who said this???

 

Nobody has a problem with remainers forming a new party and campaigning to return.

 

We just have a problem with the referendum result being ignored.....

[vogie]

19 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Oh dear, people in a democracy want to exercise their democratic right to voice opinions, disagree with the Government and campaign to reverse the direction the nation is heading.

 

Winning a vote does not end the democratic rights of those that lose the vote.

 

And it was you who suggested I go think about what democracy means.

 

Well Vogue, it is not ‘Tyranny by the ballot box’.

Are you and BB a tag team?

 

 

[freebyrd]

14 minutes ago, lamyai3 said:

Your post I was replying to certainly suggests that you were unaware of it. Either that or you have an "I'm all right Jack" lack of empathy for those who do live on passive income and pensions here. 

You obviously misunderstood that post then. I also have a pension but I feel fortunate rather than entitled as you seem to. Look around you at Thai people of similar age, do you feel empathy for them struggling on a lot less than you? And why should I feel empathy for privileged people that I don't know?

 

You are of course free to live your life in TL but as with so many others, you want expect to have your cake and eat it.

[AGareth2]

1 hour ago, Baerboxer said:

Cameron, with no authority, said he'd act on it. Never disclosed how he intended to though as he thought he'd get the result he wanted.  Just because Cameron said so means zilch.

probably why he resigned

[Chomper Higgot]

16 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Who said this???

 

Nobody has a problem with remainers forming a new party and campaigning to return.

 

We just have a problem with the referendum result being ignored.....

Where did this ‘form a new party’ come from?

 

There’s a Parliament with elected representatives - that’s why is called a ‘representative democracy’.

 

Have all the problems you wish with the referendum being ignored, but in a democracy those who lost the referendum have a right to campaign for exactly that.

[AGareth2]

1 hour ago, Baerboxer said:

 

It's not me that can't accept democracy! It's you that doesn't want to understand, or deny, the way British representative democracy actually works.

 

But you can ignore all that and cling to the vague promise from Cameron that he, and he buggered off very quickly, would enact the result of his advisory referendum, although it was a meaningless statement as he actually couldn't just do that. And you can pretend that this was a one off, never to be repeated, never to be challenged or reversed decision, even though the referendum never mentioned this. 

 

This whole crock of crap was about Cameron trying to get control of anti EU Tories and spike the growth in UKIP. No more no less. He screwed it up and quit.

 

Where is the referendum legislation does it specifically state that the result would be decided, and enacted, based on 50% plus or minus 1? I'd be grateful if you could tell me which section that's in.

 

 

I believe there are some Cantons in CH that rule by plebiscite

[dick dasterdly]

12 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Where did this ‘form a new party’ come from?

 

There’s a Parliament with elected representatives - that’s why is called a ‘representative democracy’.

 

Have all the problems you wish with the referendum being ignored, but in a democracy those who lost the referendum have a right to campaign for exactly that.

And this is precisely why the 'argument' is becoming ridiculous....

 

Representative democracy?  Do you honestly believe that MPs are more intelligent, knowledgeable than many voters??  And that's without getting into whether politicians are more self-interested than many voters!

 

I've already said that those on the losing side have every right to form a new party (ala UKIP that forced a referendum eventually) and argue for another referendum in the future.  I only have a problem with those trying to force another referendum before the original referendum result has been enacted - as per the govt.'s promise!

[dick dasterdly]

I'm also getting v. tired of repeating this over and over again....

[mommysboy]

Both major parties suck regarding Brexit.  Clearly, Brexit was undefined and is not deliverable as envisaged, and we just need Parliament to say so, and stop this farce.

[dick dasterdly]

Just now, mommysboy said:

Both major parties suck regarding Brexit.  Clearly, Brexit was undefined and is not deliverable as envisaged, and we just need Parliament to say so, and stop this farce.

Brexit was easily deliverable - but the govt. made no attempt to prepare for 'no deal' (wonder why.....), and are looking for leave in name only that won't result in MPs losing their seats.

[sandyf]

1 hour ago, vogie said:

According to the rules of the referendum, it stated 50% ± 1.

Do you really think the future of the nation should be based on such a small margin. Criminals get a better deal.

[johng]

4 hours ago, evadgib said:

We need a Maggie, FAST!

We got a Maggie May ????

 

Quote

Oh Maggie I wish I'd never seen your face
You made a first-class fool out of me
But I'm as blind as a fool can be
You stole my heart but I love you anyway

 

 

 

[sandyf]

3 hours ago, Grouse said:

We have representative democracy. It is a pity that may, including MPs, do not understand that.

 

Cameron's leaflet was indeed a lie or at least an incorrect statement. he did not have the ability to bind parliament.

Seems to be a trait in modern day PMs, they think that sovereignty lies in Downing Street rather than parliament.

[sammieuk1]

I also have contempt for those turning my pound into 70p????

[vogie]

3 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Do you really think the future of the nation should be based on such a small margin. Criminals get a better deal.

These were the rules we were given, if remain had won I'm sure you would have been happy to accept the result. But I'm sure bias has a lot to do with how we think.

 

[dick dasterdly]

Just now, sandyf said:

Seems to be a trait in modern day PMs, they think that sovereignty lies in Downing Street rather than parliament.

Which brings us back to: - do you really think politicians are intelligent, knowledgeable etc.?  Do you really trust politicians to represent your best interests??

 

I suppose if you're very wealthy they may represent your interests, but certainly not those of ordinary people!

 

"Representative democracy" ????!

[evadgib]

It brings us back to;

- Votes for life, tied to NI number, regardless of geographic location.

- Voting to be compulsory, to include a NIL option (or 'Jedi' etc) to enable the non-conformists to 'Boaty Mcboatface' their votes.

- A 10 quid tax incentive to either be added to or subtracted from the P60s of those that do/don't vote (whichever is easier to pass).

- Proportional Representation is now necessary to complete this revolution now that 2-3 party politics have become obsolete and If Guy Fawkes left any DNA on the exhibits in the Tower lets hope advances in technology will soon enable us to bring him back for 'a peoples vote!' ????

[dick dasterdly]

Just now, evadgib said:

It brings us back to;

- Votes for life, tied to NI number, regardless of geographic location.

- Voting to be compulsory, to include a NIL option (or 'Jedi' etc) to enable the non-conformists to waste their votes.

- A 10 quid tax incentive to either be added to or subtracted from the P60s of those that do/don't vote (whichever is easier to pass).

- Proportional Representation is now necessary to complete this revolution now that 2-3 party politics have become obsolete.

 

& If Guy Fawkes left any DNA on the exhibits in the Tower lets hope advances in technology will soon enable us to bring him back for what we're now calling 'a peoples vote!' ????

Sweden is unfortunately proving that proportional representation doesn't work ☹️.  Unfortunate, as I too would far prefer this system.

 

You may be right about compulsory voting, as long as the jedi vote is allowed (much like the monster, raving, lunatic party) - but of course it won't be as nobody will be prepared to put up the money for a jedi party.....

 

Perhaps it should be compulsory, with the number of spoilt/rude comment votes reported?

 

As for Guy Fawkes, he was right IMO - politicians are not to be trusted and the 'peoples vote' that has now been turned into a leave in name only result proves the point.....

[dick dasterdly]

6 minutes ago, evadgib said:

It brings us back to;

- Votes for life, tied to NI number, regardless of geographic location.

- Voting to be compulsory, to include a NIL option (or 'Jedi' etc) to enable the non-conformists to waste their votes.

- A 10 quid tax incentive to either be added to or subtracted from the P60s of those that do/don't vote (whichever is easier to pass).

- Proportional Representation is now necessary to complete this revolution now that 2-3 party politics have become obsolete.

 

& If Guy Fawkes left any DNA on the exhibits in the Tower lets hope advances in technology will soon enable us to bring him back for what we're now calling 'a peoples vote!' ????

"& If Guy Fawkes left any DNA on the exhibits in the Tower lets hope advances in technology will soon enable us to bring him back for what we're now calling 'a peoples vote!' ????":

 

Not entirely sure what you mean by this?

 

Are you saying that the "peoples vote" was not a peoples' vote?

[beautifulthailand99]

Remain victory is within sight - get the champers on ice. Nontabury get your betrayal memes ready , your yellow jacket on and return to London to begin the fight back !

[evadgib]

Davis is probably our best bet as PM but TBH we (the Country) need a Maggie and I can't see one...anywhere!

[evadgib]

8 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Are you saying that the "peoples vote" was not a peoples' vote?

It was a tongue-in-cheek swipe at the prospect of a 2nd vote which I have edited/clarified. The first one was fine by me.

[dick dasterdly]

1 minute ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

Remain victory is within sight - get the champers on ice. Nontabury get your betrayal memes ready , your yellow jacket on and return to London to begin the fight back !

"Remain victory is within sight"

 

Sadly, I suspect you're right ☹️.

 

The only 'interesting' part is how they will arrange this - without alienating the electorate...

[evadgib]

32 minutes ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

Remain victory is within sight - get the champers on ice. Nontabury get your betrayal memes ready , your yellow jacket on and return to London to begin the fight back !

If I were in your camp I'd refrain from 'Cock-a-doodle-doo'ing until EU had undergone root-and-branch reformation including;

- Auditing of their books for 40 years

- Transparency and accountability at every level 

- Tusk, Barnier & the bloke with the barnet 40 years younger that his head being elected & thrown out by the EU electorate instead of being immune as they are today. Those buggers work for the electorate yet for years have ridden rough-shod over everyone.