Blow for PM Johnson as Scottish court rules suspension of parliament is unlawful

[evadgib]

7 hours ago, Loiner said:

Another enemy of the state do you think? We should all be enemies of the state these day. The ‘state’ is not on our side.
Remainers would be the collaborators.

Free Tommy!

They will, tomorrow ????

[DannyCarlton]

2 hours ago, englishoak said:

 

You miss the point I think, I said honesty and respect for doing so with the Queen was expected and unthinkable to lie, balance has nothing to do with the privy council or on advice given, it is there to advise not debate with the queen nor argue in her presence and the party in power is the one who is represented not the opposition, its got zero to do with balance or to make things confusing, thats what parliament is for. EG It was remainers under May and as another example warmongers under Blair, etc etc... The Privy council isnt there to argue but give advice to the Queen, that advice would be represented by the government of the time and its policies and mandate would be mirrored in the privy council of that time. In this instance it would be to deliver Brexit as the vast majority of the UK ( bigger majority than any election in history btw ) answered when asked in the referendum vote. 

 

Its amazing how people assume all of a sudden these things are a revelation when this is the way its always been done same as prorogation happens every year usually and this time its the longest without a new session since the English Civil war but Boris Prorogs parliament for 5 more days than usual and the remain stream media and co melt down... over a few days lol its laughable but hey ho, false outrage n all that sells.

I fail to see how you postulate that 3 right wing Brexiteers gave unbiased advice to the Queen. They lied, pure and simple, that's a fact that has been proven beyond doubt.

 

"In this instance it would be to deliver Brexit as the vast majority of the UK". You've just blown your whole post (and any subseqent posts) away with this one sentence.

 

The "vast majority"? 52%-48% a vast majority? Also, that was 3 1/2 years ago, when "Brexit" had very different connotations to what it has today. Back then it was sold as the promised land by Dominic Cummings and AIQ with their theory of, "If you tell a lie often enough, people will believe it".  And what lies they told to paint the pink unicorn for the gullible Brits. As I'm sure you are well aware.

 

So what does Brexit mean today? Leave with BRINO, May's deal, or leave with no deal which will cause untold damage to the British economy. A long way from the promised land. Today, the majority have seen through the lies and don't want Brexit in it's current form.

 

The majority of the British people don't want Brexit, the majority of MPs don't want Brexit (we do live in a parliamentary democracy, something that Johnson/Cummings is trying to destroy) and, for the sake of Britain, hopefully, it won't happen.

 

 

[Rookiescot]

Some of the absolute nonsense on this thread is so bad I believe it must be intentional.

 

First of all there is no waiting list or queue to join the EU. Every nation that applies does so on its own merit. Do you honestly think an independent Scotland would have to wait in line till Turkey joined before it got its turn? Absolute garbage.

 

 Second of all the UK pound is a fiat currency. Anyone can use it. No-one needs "Englands" permission. An independent Scotland could use it and there is nothing "England" could do about it. The advantage of using the pound would be continuity. Thats about it really. Nothing else.

Scotland could also opt to use the Euro or indeed start its own currency. I cant think of a single country which gained independence from the UK which did not start its own currency. The advantage of this would be full fiscal control of our own money. The disadvantage of this would be that the value of the pound would drop at least 10% overnight. Which would not be Scotlands problem.

 

Scotland has no deficit. The so called deficit is one which is run up by Westminster and attributed to Scotland. Now the figure used is in fact complete bovine manure. It has been debunked hundreds of times. It includes huge costs which Scotland neither benefits from nor controls. Major construction works deemed to be of national importance for example. Things like crossrail in London. Nuclear power stations in England. HS2. The list goes on. It also includes costs for Westminster foreign policy. Wars in Afghanistan for example. An independent Scotland would not be paying for any of that stuff.

 

Orkney and Shetland are not a country. 

 

So given that Scotland voted to remain in the EU and according to you English nationalists is a subsidies junkie I suggest that England leaves the UK.

This would give you independence from Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland plus you would be ejected from the EU. Hey presto! The Englandshire utopia you guys desire awaits. All you have to do is grow a pair and demand it. 

[Somtamnication]

............the Scottish what? Hadrian's Wall must be fixed like, right now!

[DannyCarlton]

16 minutes ago, Somtamnication said:

............the Scottish what? Hadrian's Wall must be fixed like, right now!

Apparently, Boris has commisioned a team of Polish builders (better, cheaper) to renovate it. And he has promised, "The Jocks are going to pay for it!"

 

I really don't know where he gets his ideas from.

[englishoak]

56 minutes ago, DannyCarlton said:

 

 

The majority of the British people don't want Brexit, the majority of MPs don't want Brexit (we do live in a parliamentary democracy, something that Johnson/Cummings is trying to destroy) and, for the sake of Britain, hopefully, it won't happen.

 

 

 

Im not here to argue with you, its a simple fact that only people who vote matter, the rest of the population dont, no political party by your argument standards EVER have had a majority of the population. . So yup the VAST MAJORITY of those who matter ( voters ) 1.4 million more is actually huge.  Labour got just under 13m ( about 40% of the voting population ) in a country of 75 million.. thats about 15 % of the population and the Tories got about 20% in the last election... But for some reason they still get to govern without endless whining and attempts to ignore the democratic process, thats how our system is. 

 

You know exactly how the political game and voting works so dont bother with the strawman drama please, the winners were those who voted leave, end of. If it had gone the other way there wouldnt have been all this meltdown and things would have moved on in a month  just like the Scotish ref but because its about big money the globalist agenda and EU the people are being talked down to like its the end of the world... BS it isnt, its no different than any election in reality, its about change in the rule makers, financial control and power thats what all the fuss is really about, you might feel otherwise with all the project fear stuff but thats how propaganda works, 

 

Just remind yourself your in Thailand and not Blighty. The world wont end and nothing will be much different for the average joe shmo..so jai yen yen and all that.  

 

 

[DannyCarlton]

15 minutes ago, englishoak said:

Just remind yourself your in Thailand and not Blighty. The world wont end and nothing will be much different for the average joe shmo..so jai yen yen and all that.  

I'm more concerned for the future of my children than myself, I could say, "I'm alright Jack" but I've got more humanity than that.

 

16 minutes ago, englishoak said:

its about big money the globalist agenda and EU the people are being talked down to like its the end of the world.

Soros? 555

[JonnyF]

The original ruling by the London court was clearly correct, this is not a matter for the courts.

 

The subsequent decision by the Scottish court was obviously politically motivated and the choice of Scottish courts by the legal activists was a shrewd but extremely cynical ploy to get this decision. I'd expect nothing less from the anti democratic Remainiac Gina Miller.

 

The London supreme court will overturn the Scottish court next week, and rightly so. 

 

Remainers have already made Parliament a laughing stock and now they are making the judiciary a laughing stock. They've made getting a good deal almost impossible, and slowed down the economy with the uncertainty caused by forcing extension after extension. I wonder what they'll destroy next in their attempts to overturn the democratic will of the British people? 

[Rookiescot]

16 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

The original ruling by the London court was clearly correct, this is not a matter for the courts.

 

The subsequent decision by the Scottish court was obviously politically motivated and the choice of Scottish courts by the legal activists was a shrewd but extremely cynical ploy to get this decision. I'd expect nothing less from the anti democratic Remainiac Gina Miller.

 

The London supreme court will overturn the Scottish court next week, and rightly so. 

 

Remainers have already made Parliament a laughing stock and now they are making the judiciary a laughing stock. They've made getting a good deal almost impossible, and slowed down the economy with the uncertainty caused by forcing extension after extension. I wonder what they'll destroy next in their attempts to overturn the democratic will of the British people? 

There are many differences between Scottish and English law.

The case in Edinburgh was heard under Scottish law and it was deemed to be illegal.

When the case goes to the Supreme Court in London it will also be heard under Scottish law because it is a case brought forward from Scotland.

Still with me?

Now regardless of how that case goes it is almost certain this case will be heading for the European court. Both sides are virtually guaranteed to appeal no matter which side wins or not. 

The irony of Johnson having to appeal to the EU to facilitate his suspension of parliament is going to be delicious.

I suggest we all get some popcorn in for this. 

[Laughing Gravy]

20 hours ago, david555 said:

You even have a clue how wrong you are ..... never mind it is more fun so 

 

As you speak for whole U.K. (in thoughts at least..) I feel very free to welcome anyone I like to welcome  , and I know for sure the Norway option is available , (as it was also for U.K. amongst other options …)

You seem to be trying to bait me. I still don't understand what you have written, as it isn't in clear English but you carry on using emojis to try and feel better.

[david555]

17 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

You seem to be trying to bait me. I still don't understand what you have written, as it isn't in clear English but you carry on using emojis to try and feel better.

no baiting , just answering your comment  ,nothing more …..

So now also emojis are disturbing you …? And I am not interesting in a bickering conversation .

[englishoak]

1 hour ago, DannyCarlton said:

I'm more concerned for the future of my children than myself, I could say, "I'm alright Jack" but I've got more humanity than that.

 

Soros? 555

 

I hear you, To ensure our Children got a proper education we left Thailand a decade ago. It was the humane thing to do ????

37 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

There are many differences between Scottish and English law.

The case in Edinburgh was heard under Scottish law and it was deemed to be illegal.

When the case goes to the Supreme Court in London it will also be heard under Scottish law because it is a case brought forward from Scotland.

 

Now regardless of how that case goes it is almost certain this case will be heading for the European court. Both sides are virtually guaranteed to appeal no matter which side wins or not. 

The irony of Johnson having to appeal to the EU to facilitate his suspension of parliament is going to be delicious.

I suggest we all get some popcorn in for this. 

No it wont, it wasnt illegal it was a civil case and declared unlawful... big difference. It will most likely end in the Supreme court of the UK like the other cases. If it were to go to the EU then it would vindicate everything vote leave has been saying about being under the boot of the EU courts and rules, for the UK gov to appeal to the EU in order to leave would be very bad optics for the remain camp AND the EU,  in turn that would just increase the leavers numbers and quite possibly rattle cages in other currently pacified EU countries. 

 

The ECB just announced a rate cut of 10 basis points to MINUS 0.5% AND will recommence QE from November, the EU is not in a healthy state and the UK leaving would make things a lot worse not to mention a no deal exit. Theres definitely a lot more going on and the EU has other problems more than just the UK,

 

In the event of being shackled and forced to remain the backlash would be huge AND likely a very uncooperative UK gov made up of bitter Brexiteers and Anti EU Tories as an alliance would surely happen then and there WILL be an election at some point soon To keep us in with the biggest voice in the EU parliament being Brexit party  would be a nightmare for the EU and you have to ask from the EUs perspective.. is it worth the ongoing battle from within ? the UK population wouldnt let it go, certainly not when the vote was legal and conclusive, article 50,  years prep etc etc.....nope I dont think that will or can happen... best result for the EU is Mays false deal and that is what the EU is aiming for imo, it knows we cant stay even if our silly remainers dont yet.

 

Its a ballet with boots on though thats for sure ????

[RuamRudy]

Amidst the chaos and incompetence being displayed by our self serving UK government, at least there are opportunities for those less erudite of us to learn a bit more about the arcane workings of our countries. This morning I expanded my limited knowledge of Scots law by reading about Nobile Officium: the equitable discretion of the Court of Sessions to afford relief in cases where none is possible at law

 

Anti-Brexiters file new legal challenge to force article 50 extension

"The campaigners have applied directly to the inner house of the court of session, the court’s senior tier, as it has a power unique amongst British courts to provide a legal remedy if one is not available elsewhere, a power known as nobile officium.

 

"They hope the nobile officium power could mean the court will send the article 50 extension letter on Johnson’s behalf, if he refused to do so."

 

What a wonderful moment that would be if Scotland stepped in and took control of the disaster that is unfolding in London, if only to see the outrage that would explode from those who tend to be more exercised about English supremacy.  

[englishoak]

2 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Amidst the chaos and incompetence being displayed by our self serving UK government,

 

What country would you expect the UK government to serve other than the UK ? Scotland has its own parliament but its people decided overwhelmingly to stay under the wing of the UK thus its Judiciary defers to the supreme court in England which represents the highest court of the lands. That means nobile officium does not and cannot apply to the Supreme court, sorry dream on. This is the price Scotland pays for all those handouts.

 

If England had a say about Scotland leaving youd have been shown the door out by a massive majority. Scotland's independence vote lost because it just wanted to change masters and suck off the EU instead rather than be truly independent. Enough Scots realised that being truly independent is economically impossible so chose better the devil they knew..probably right to do so too. Should have let the English have a say and help you out instead of playing braveheart ???? 

[Rookiescot]

4 minutes ago, englishoak said:

 

No it wont, it wasnt illegal it was a civil case and declared unlawful... big difference. It will most likely end in the Supreme court of the UK like the other cases. If it were to go to the EU then it would vindicate everything vote leave has been saying about being under the boot of the EU courts and rules, for the UK gov to appeal to the EU in order to leave would be very bad optics for the remain camp AND the EU,  in turn that would just increase the leavers numbers and quite possibly rattle cages in other currently pacified EU countries. 

 

Right fair enough I should have used the word unlawful rather than illegal.

How do you think the optics of a court in London overruling the Supreme Court in Scotland looks from a Scottish perspective? A Scotland which voted remain by a huge margin.

For my mind there are 3 possible outcomes the Supreme court in London can come to.

 

1. The Scottish court is right. Now this is unlikely in my opinion. It would give the message that Scottish law transcends English law. The right wing media would have a field day with this. It would plunge the UK into a constitutional crisis as English nationalist claim that the "tail is wagging the dog". Its also unlike based on the fact it is being heard by English Judges in an English court who have spent their entire professional career practicing English law. This is not a racist or xenophobic comment its just human nature that no-one wants to say their job is less worthy than someone else in the same role.

 

2. That English law supersedes Scots law. Again a constitution crisis is unleashed. It will destroy the last vestiges of a "united" Kingdom of equal partners. It gives the impression Scotland is a colony of England.

 

3. That its Westmisters job as the parliament of both countries to pass laws which satisfy the laws of both countries. This throws the ball back into number 10's court. It stops any constitutional crisis and ultimately means prorogation is null and void. Both parties would probably have to accept a ruling like this.

 

[englishoak]

7 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

Right fair enough I should have used the word unlawful rather than illegal.

How do you think the optics of a court in London overruling the Supreme Court in Scotland looks from a Scottish perspective? A Scotland which voted remain by a huge margin.

For my mind there are 3 possible outcomes the Supreme court in London can come to.

 

1. The Scottish court is right. Now this is unlikely in my opinion. It would give the message that Scottish law transcends English law. The right wing media would have a field day with this. It would plunge the UK into a constitutional crisis as English nationalist claim that the "tail is wagging the dog". Its also unlike based on the fact it is being heard by English Judges in an English court who have spent their entire professional career practicing English law. This is not a racist or xenophobic comment its just human nature that no-one wants to say their job is less worthy than someone else in the same role.

 

2. That English law supersedes Scots law. Again a constitution crisis is unleashed. It will destroy the last vestiges of a "united" Kingdom of equal partners. It gives the impression Scotland is a colony of England.

 

3. That its Westmisters job as the parliament of both countries to pass laws which satisfy the laws of both countries. This throws the ball back into number 10's court. It stops any constitutional crisis and ultimately means prorogation is null and void. Both parties would probably have to accept a ruling like this.

 

 

I. I agree under Scottish Law it has the right to determine cases brought before it. However , you are making the same argument about ceding supremacy to the English supreme court as leave were about ceding to the EU courts. The only difference but a crucial one is we as the UK collective which Scotland had previously voted to remain with when asked....  voted to leave.

 

2. Agreed, without prejudice to you and being brutally honest, Scotland IS and remains by their own choice and large margin a vassal state to England. As does Wales and N Ireland.

 

3 Disagree, a collective nation cannot have two masters and Scotland is not independent and chose that state freely to remain and under the rule of etc etc. 

 

Personally I would like to see Ireland as one unified nation, Scotland ruling itself, truly independent with no handouts and Wales too if they wish it but most of all I would wish for my own country England to be responsible for only ourselves instead of what I see as carrying the rest of the UK.

 

The best way for that to happen I believe is for Brexit to go through, preferably with another referendum at some point, which I think would be even more of a leave margin now and more the longer its delayed, then Scotland should have another vote, with the rest of the UK having a say, Bye bye Scotland, then N & S Ireland be given a vote on unification.. Bye bye N Ireland... Ask Wales next as thats only fair and stay or go no problem ... End of the UK and hello Independent England. Im very cool with that personally. ????

[RuamRudy]

13 minutes ago, englishoak said:

What country would you expect the UK government to serve other than the UK ?

Sorry if I wasn't clear - I certainly had no intention of suggesting that our current UK government was interested in the betterment of the people; I intended to imply that they were serving themselves as individuals. 

 

14 minutes ago, englishoak said:

Scotland has its own parliament but its people decided overwhelmingly to stay under the wing of the UK thus its Judiciary defers to the supreme court in England which represents the highest court of the lands.

I am not sure that you are correct there. If you were, you would be suggesting that English law is superior to Scots law, but that, to my (admittedly limited) understanding, is not the case. There is no overriding law across the UK; the Supreme Court considers the application of the law applicable to the court in question. It is possibly simply a matter of fact that, until now, there has never been an occasion where Scots law was a direct challenge to the UK government, contrary to that of an English court. 

18 minutes ago, englishoak said:

That means nobile officium does not and cannot apply to the Supreme court, sorry dream on

If I am correct, the Supreme Court will rule in accordance with Scots Law; as Nobile Officium is a valid instrument under Scots law, it is very applicable. 

 

19 minutes ago, englishoak said:

This is the price Scotland pays for all those handouts.

A cheap and ill informed dig.

 

21 minutes ago, englishoak said:

If England had a say about Scotland leaving youd have been shown the door out by a massive majority. 

But your Westminster government knew better - otherwise they wouldn't have spent millions on the lies of the Better Together campaign. This is the government that won't even subsidise a spare room in a pensioner's home, but they will 'subsidise' an entire country? Wisen up, my friend, and show some gratitude to your neighbours from whom your country has been sponging from for decades. 

 

 

[englishoak]

55 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

I am not sure that you are correct there. If you were, you would be suggesting that English law is superior to Scots law, but that, to my (admittedly limited) understanding, is not the case. There is no overriding law across the UK; the Supreme Court considers the application of the law applicable to the court in question. It is possibly simply a matter of fact that, until now, there has never been an occasion where Scots law was a direct challenge to the UK government, contrary to that of an English court.

 

If I am correct, the Supreme Court will rule in accordance with Scots Law; as Nobile Officium is a valid instrument under Scots law, it is very applicable. 

 

 

 

My understanding is there would have to be an adjudication on one or the other yes, howecver consider both Englands court case ruling vs Gina Miller and Today N Ireland had a similar claim brought and also the ruling was in favour of the UK Gov. That would be two courts of the UK jurisdiction ruling for the UK gov vs Scotlands against.  I would say Scotlands courts have no precedence over the UKs supreme court and cannot turn an englaih law court into a Scottish Supreme one as I understand it but hey this is Brexit we are talking about and dodgy dealings abound  with the courts and timing atm.

55 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

A cheap and ill informed dig.

 

Sorry It wasnt meant as a dig, there is always a price to pay for being in a club. 

 

55 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

But your Westminster government knew better - otherwise they wouldn't have spent millions on the lies of the Better Together campaign. This is the government that won't even subsidise a spare room in a pensioner's home, but they will 'subsidise' an entire country? Wisen up, my friend, and show some gratitude to your neighbours from whom your country has been sponging from for decades. 

 

 

Im pretty well informed I think, Scotland has a population of 5m while England has 55, Your kids have free Uni education worth approx 60k per head and free prescriptions,  England does not. The Scottish taxes referred to above is 90% oil revenue, not peoples income taxes, the English pic is income taxes not business, so its comparing Scottish oil taxes with English income taxes, not very fair as a comparison.  in contrast 35% of the entire UK tax revenues come from the city of London and financial related services. Personal and income  taxes paid are also far greater in England than all other parts of the UK yet the price of living is far far higher specifically in the south of England, there is no difference in the minimum wage though. 

 

The standard of living of those with jobs and on benefits in my experience having lived in all nations but N Ireland in the UK is far better in the north of England and north of the border than it is in the south, again I dont care or am I complaining,  its just how it breaks down. Nor do I blame the Scottish parliament, every party or gov is out for itself and what it can gain out of self interest, thats expected and natural. I would rather Scotland was not our problem as much as you I expect and i blame Westmonster wholly and entirely for not rectifying that possibly when the chance was there, I hope it comes again and would love to see the end of the UK perse.

 

Im wise enough to know the political elite, sycophants and parties do not, never have nor will represent or even truly care about the people, its just one big circus show and a ticket to a golden pension and if lucky some fancy titles. I also know England as a nation will never be given a vote for independence, unlike Scotland and for that I am truly jealous ????

 

Thanks for the chat and if I upset you with any comment Im sorry it was never meant to be personal. 

 

Anyways to get back to Boris, hes got the talk but hes not a Nationalist sadly and no better than the rest of the usual political reprobates 

[DannyCarlton]

2 hours ago, englishoak said:

I hear you, To ensure our Children got a proper education we left Thailand a decade ago. It was the humane thing to do

My children live in the UK. If yours do, I suggest that you think again about wanting a no deal Brexit, for their sakes.

 

The rest of your post is factless rhetoric, which has been debunked many times before, so you'll excuse me for not repeating the process.

[englishoak]

17 minutes ago, DannyCarlton said:

My children live in the UK. If yours do, I suggest that you think again about wanting a no deal Brexit, for their sakes.

 

The rest of your post is factless rhetoric, which has been debunked many times before, so you'll excuse me for not repeating the process.

 

You have your opinion and I have mine,  i have zero fears about the UK longterm kids will be fine, just learn to code ????. Its all scaremongering, nothing ever stays the same and no one has a crystal ball... might as well worry about the global warming scam weve only got 10 years to save the planet you know but pay your green taxes, stop eating meat and it will all be just fine... heard the same claims rehashed  all my life and none of it ever comes to pass,  Its all BS and fearpeddling. There are no facts as it hasnt happened yet, its all projections based on assumptions which never mature as claimed or there would be a  lot of very rich forecasters and no traders. The reverse is true.

 

You cant even tell us what your fears are or any facts because they havnt happened its all assumptions based on projections of the worst scenarios ... how about you actually give us some facts you think will happen .. 3% gdp over the next 30 years maybe  ? pffft thats nothing over that time period  £ devaluation will be more than that in the next 10. 

 

Can I sell you some land in Phuket ? cheap cheap. ???? 

[Rookiescot]

55 minutes ago, englishoak said:

 

I. I agree under Scottish Law it has the right to determine cases brought before it. However , you are making the same argument about ceding supremacy to the English supreme court as leave were about ceding to the EU courts. The only difference but a crucial one is we as the UK collective which Scotland had previously voted to remain with when asked....  voted to leave.

 

2. Agreed, without prejudice to you and being brutally honest, Scotland IS and remains by their own choice and large margin a vassal state to England. As does Wales and N Ireland.

 

3 Disagree, a collective nation cannot have two masters and Scotland is not independent and chose that state freely to remain and under the rule of etc etc. 

 

Personally I would like to see Ireland as one unified nation, Scotland ruling itself, truly independent with no handouts and Wales too if they wish it but most of all I would wish for my own country England to be responsible for only ourselves instead of what I see as carrying the rest of the UK.

 

The best way for that to happen I believe is for Brexit to go through, preferably with another referendum at some point, which I think would be even more of a leave margin now and more the longer its delayed, then Scotland should have another vote, with the rest of the UK having a say, Bye bye Scotland, then N & S Ireland be given a vote on unification.. Bye bye N Ireland... Ask Wales next as thats only fair and stay or go no problem ... End of the UK and hello Independent England. Im very cool with that personally. ????

1. Scotland voted to remain in the UK. That is indisputable fact despite my best efforts for independence to be returned. However the referendum result did not cede Scots law to be subjugated to English law. Scotlands right to its own system of law is actually enshrined in the Act of Union.  

 

2. Although the Act of Union pertains to be a union of equals it was never that. Englands greater population and by default the number of MP's returned to Westminster has always dwarfed those of the Celtic nations. Ergo Westminster is the English parliament. Now this was an arrangement which largely worked while the two nations broadly had similar interests but in the last 30 years or so the two countries have started to diverge. Hence the rise of the Scottish independence movement.

 

3. Given what I have pointed out above why do you feel it is acceptable that Westminster is required to issue laws which are only legal in England and Scots law may be ignored? Surely if it is a UK parliament then laws should be legal in all parts of the UK.

[BobBKK]

I was really surprised Courts interfering in politics. Bercow is totally at fault for allowing Parliament to be taken over as it has and his comments yesterday were disgraceful bias.

[RuamRudy]

32 minutes ago, englishoak said:

Thanks for the chat and if I upset you with any comment Im sorry it was never meant to be personal. 

 

Absolutely no need to apologise as no offence taken.

[batata]

the guy is beaten so many times... he should play the Robert Duran card """NO MAS..."

Rober Duran 1980 fight VS Sugar Ray

[englishoak]

7 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

1. Scotland voted to remain in the UK. That is indisputable fact despite my best efforts for independence to be returned. However the referendum result did not cede Scots law to be subjugated to English law. Scotlands right to its own system of law is actually enshrined in the Act of Union.  

 

2. Although the Act of Union pertains to be a union of equals it was never that. Englands greater population and by default the number of MP's returned to Westminster has always dwarfed those of the Celtic nations. Ergo Westminster is the English parliament. Now this was an arrangement which largely worked while the two nations broadly had similar interests but in the last 30 years or so the two countries have started to diverge. Hence the rise of the Scottish independence movement.

 

3. Given what I have pointed out above why do you feel it is acceptable that Westminster is required to issue laws which are only legal in England and Scots law may be ignored? Surely if it is a UK parliament then laws should be legal in all parts of the UK.

1 May I suggest whilst you are correct you are also smart enough to know that in practical reality this  is not so. A nation cannot have two equally high law courts imo it was folly to allow divergence and not expect ever more demands. One must prevail, Westminster has no jurisdiction over the Scottish parliament and I see no reason to allow the reverse. Also the Majority must have sway over the minority or demos it isnt, thats socialism. 

 

2 I agree yet Westminster imo most of the time does not act on or in the Interests of England as a nation but I would argue as often against England as a nation in favour of the Union. Basically we have a Union bias parliament not an English one which I believe we should have no less than Scotland has its own and Wales. I am not a unionist by any means as you can probably tell.

 

3 if all laws were equal in the UK I would be happy but they arnt are they ? There is both good and bad in that, we cant cherry pick.  

[JonnyF]

1 hour ago, BobBKK said:

I was really surprised Courts interfering in politics. Bercow is totally at fault for allowing Parliament to be taken over as it has and his comments yesterday were disgraceful bias.

Bercow has long been a disgrace. He doesn't even pretend to be impartial any more. The chaos has has allowed to unfold is staggering.

 

His latest comments on blocking No Deal...

 

"If that demands additional procedural creativity in order to come to pass, it is a racing certainty that this will happen, and that neither the limitations of the existing rule book nor the ticking of the clock will stop it doing so.”

 

Disgraceful.

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, englishoak said:

might as well worry about the global warming scam weve only got 10 years to save the planet you know but pay your green taxes, stop eating meat and it will all be just fine... heard the same claims rehashed  all my life

Deleted.

[ThaiBunny]

2 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Bercow has long been a disgrace. He doesn't even pretend to be impartial any more. The chaos has has allowed to unfold is staggering.

It's fascinating that the Democrat Speaker in the House of Reps in the USA keeps playing by the rules and won't support moves to impeach Trump, whom all and sundry agree was elected President by exactly the same sort of people whom - it is alleged - voted for Brexit, whereas the Speaker of the Mother of Parliaments is simply making it up as he goes along so as to frustrate the will of the people who voted for Brexit

[Laughing Gravy]

3 hours ago, david555 said:

no baiting , just answering your comment  ,nothing more …..

So now also emojis are disturbing you …? And I am not interesting in a bickering conversation .

You really do like to put words in people mouths, so to speak. Where have I said that emojis are disturbing me? I can tell you nowhere. I clearly said that you use them to make yourself feel better. Either post the truth or don't bother.

 

The last sentence is music to my ears. Stop posting nonsense then.

[Slip]

3 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Bercow has long been a disgrace. He doesn't even pretend to be impartial any more. The chaos has has allowed to unfold is staggering.

 

His latest comments on blocking No Deal...

 

"If that demands additional procedural creativity in order to come to pass, it is a racing certainty that this will happen, and that neither the limitations of the existing rule book nor the ticking of the clock will stop it doing so.”

 

Disgraceful.

I didn't write the following, but I couldn't put it better myself, and sorry JonnyF, but in my opinion you are just plain wrong.  Hoorah for Bercow- a better class of Tory than Boris & Co.

 

There seems to be an increasing confusion over the concept of impartiality (often mistakenly referred to as being "unbiased").

 

The Speaker's role is to represent Parliament. He/she is only required to exercise impartiality over political party affiliations, not the business of Parliament. When the Government of whatever day puts itself in opposition to Parliament, they also put themselves in opposition to the Speaker of the House of Commons. It really is as simple as that.

 

It is very unfortunate that, once again, the Tory party has conflated its own tribal concerns with government business and constructed the narrative that "as the natural party of government" (self-awarded title) any opposition to party will is a national betrayal.

 

There are very good reasons why "Parliament" and "Government" are distinct and separate terms, because it is not the role of Parliament to merely rubber stamp the will of the governing party. Far from being a traitor or a betrayer, Bercow has clearly exemplified why this should be so.