Jump to content
blandy

Should I stay or should I go now - U.K. in/out of the EU (contd.)

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, cyrusr said:

NF Party

For a couple of seconds I actually thought,  (Not the National Front,  are they back again OH no)

Felt an idiot at first but then.............

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

I'm surprised this still needs saying, but you need an election *before* a referendum because there is no majority for passing the legislation needed for a referendum. 

Ah apologies!

Meant to say "agree to an election".

There's clearly no majority for a new referendum because Labour won't whip for it (Corbyn doesn't want it) and even if they had a sudden epiphany, a number of his mainly northern MP's would defy it anyway (they don't want it either).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are 21 homeless and disgruntled MPs now in play. There may well now be an opportunity for some of the more radical parliament suggestions such as a caretaker government or 2nd referendum. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brexit: Judge rejects parliament shutdown legal challenge

 

Quote

A Scottish judge has rejected a bid to have Boris Johnson's plan to shut down parliament ahead of Brexit declared illegal.

The case was brought to the Court of Session in Edinburgh by a cross-party group of 75 parliamentarians, who argued the PM had exceeded his powers.

But Lord Doherty ruled on Wednesday that the issue was for politicians and voters to judge, and not the courts.

He said there had been no contravention of the law by the UK government.

The group of MPs and peers behind the legal challenge, who are headed by SNP MP Joanna Cherry and Liberal Democrat leader Jo Swinson, have indicated they will appeal against the ruling.

The prime minister announced on 28 August he wanted to shut down Parliament, a process known as proroguing, ahead of a Queen's Speech on 14 October.

His political opponents argue Mr Johnson's aim is to avoid parliamentary scrutiny and to stop them passing legislation that would prevent the UK leaving the European Union without a deal on 31 October.

The UK government insists this is not the case, and says proroguing Parliament will allow Mr Johnson to set out his "exciting" legislative plans in the Queen's Speech while still allowing sufficient time for MPs to debate Brexit.

In his ruling, Lord Doherty said the decision to prorogue parliament was, in this case, "political territory and decision making which cannot be measured against legal standards".

Whilst I can see the logic that this is a political decision rather than legal, if parliament is prorogue, it cannot question the advice. As such, how can parliament even be given the opportunity to challenge it?

These issues may already be overtaken shorty, but they have already said they are going to appeal anyway so off to the Supreme Court they go.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, cyrusr said:

Brexit: Judge rejects parliament shutdown legal challenge

 

Whilst I can see the logic that this is a political decision rather than legal, if parliament is prorogue, it cannot question the advice. As such, how can parliament even be given the opportunity to challenge it?

These issues may already be overtaken shorty, but they have already said they are going to appeal anyway so off to the Supreme Court they go.   

What's to stop the Prime minister of the day proroguing for 51 weeks of the year?

Isn't this why you have an Executive, Legislature and Judiciary, to keep the power each weilds in check and ensure it's not being misused in this way?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, desensitized43 said:

What's to stop the Prime minister of the day proroguing for 51 weeks of the year?

Isn't this why you have an Executive, Legislature and Judiciary, to keep the power each weilds in check and ensure it's not being misused in this way?

Yep, exactly. This is probably the reason why they are appealing the Judgment :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Sounds like he could possibly go against the government, wonder if a few more will go today? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NurembergVillan said:

 whereas the right have only had the Tories, unless they were into raving racism.

 

CztzcTtXcAAPkXw.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, tonyh29 said:

 

CztzcTtXcAAPkXw.jpg

Two wrongs etc. In many ways that was a reaction to the rise of UKIP, tabloid demonisation of migrants, and what Blair did years before this.

I had a thought last night in conversation with a family member who voted Labour his whole life but couldn't vote for Blair. I used to think that Blair was wrong for stigmatising as somehow racist all those who dared to question the migration numbers from eastern europe at the time. What I've come to realise is that he was in many ways keeping a lid on the white, mainly English nationalism that's always been there but over the last few years has really exploded into the open.

What Brown is doing there is opening the valve on the pressure cooker. It was wrong. It was nationalistic. It was racist. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

The long awaited return of 'aaaaah but' :) 

the claim was that there was only one right leaning party  ... how else would you like me to counter it , posting a picture of a kitten ?

 

(see also the reply after yours  )

Edited by tonyh29

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

the claim was that there was only one right leaning party  ... how else would you like me to counter it , posting a picture of a kitten ?

 

(see also the reply after yours  )

It's still Whataboutism.

Also, to counter the point, remember that Brown derailed his own election campaign for calling a woman sharing those exact views 'bigoted' 

Edited by StefanAVFC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

It's still Whataboutism.

Also, to counter the point, remember that Brown derailed his own election campaign for calling a woman sharing those exact views 'bigoted' 

so you're saying Brown was an incompetent hypocrite as well as a racist  :D

 

 

yes , i know Brown isn't a racist before you waste your ink

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, desensitized43 said:

Two wrongs etc. In many ways that was a reaction to the rise of UKIP, tabloid demonisation of migrants, and what Blair did years before this.

I had a thought last night in conversation with a family member who voted Labour his whole life but couldn't vote for Blair. I used to think that Blair was wrong for stigmatising as somehow racist all those who dared to question the migration numbers from eastern europe at the time. What I've come to realise is that he was in many ways keeping a lid on the white, mainly English nationalism that's always been there but over the last few years has really exploded into the open.

What Brown is doing there is opening the valve on the pressure cooker. It was wrong. It was nationalistic. It was racist. 

yeah almost certainly , though I think he was trying to counter Griffin at that time , whose racism  has now sort of morphed into a more moderate  (on the surface at least) Farage /UKIP

I think Blair has to take some blame though for where we currently are  ( cue an ahhh but heading in my direction )  , theres been a few articles /books about his  "deliberate policy"   , usually denied  .. but Miliband then apologising for labours immigration policy suggests there may have been something in it at least circa 2004  ( or he was saying anything to get elected   )

 

obligatory quote

The "deliberate policy", from late 2000 until "at least February last year", when the new points based system was introduced, was to open up the UK to mass migration, he said.

Some 2.3 million migrants have been added to the population since then, according to Whitehall estimates quietly slipped out last month

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Tories are very good at Schrodinger's cat. 

Schrodinger's Immigrant - both stealing your job and living off the state

Now we have Schrodinger's No Deal - Both harmless to dismiss everything as fearmongering and scary enough so that we need to on the EU to keep the EU scared of it happening

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

The Tories are very good at Schrodinger's cat. 

You a 100% on the Cat ? It would be something else and we know it 🙂

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â