|
Post by Progenitor A on Mar 3, 2018 20:46:49 GMT 1
Two dangerous men that pay lip service to a democracy they tacitly despise are suddenly champions or referendums!
We all know who these people are ; Blair and Major are simply the masthead of their campaign to thwart the democratic decision of the British people
And what do these people think will happen if they succeed in persuading their establishment chums to reverse Brexit? Do they imagine that the British people will meekly accept such a reversal and happily fall back n the 2-party system of ‘parliamentary democracy’ with the Lib-Dems smirking in the wings?
That will simply not happen. What will happen is that the rage of the voters at this disdainful abnegation of the democratic will may destroy our political system as we have know it for the last 100 years.
These dangerous people simply have to look to Continental Europe to see what the anger of voters at being patronised and bullied by a self-regarding ‘elite’ has produced; right wing parties are on the ascendant in Germany, in Italy, in Poland, in Hungary, in the Czech Republic, in Austria, in the Netherlands, in France
These dangerous people are playing with fire; for so long have they been used to having their own way, disregarding the concerns of the voters, making a mockery of democracy, that they simply do not know how angry the people are at what they have done to our country and what they plan to do to our democracy
Blair, (would you believe this) is to make a speech to the EU asking them to change the rules of freedom of movement—this is the man who, alone amongst European Nations, threw Britain’s doors open to mass immigration from new EU member states
Blair whose criminally inept planning for post-war Iraq led directly to death of tens of thousands of innocents; Blair who encouraged mass immigration into the UK, sending his Ministers to the sub-continent to recruit immigrants, ‘in order to rub the nose of the Conservatives in the dirt’; Blair the man who promised a referendum on the EU then changed his mind (just like that) because he thought we could not be trusted; Blair is now the CHAMPION of a SECOND referendum on EU membership. Never has there been such unashamed display of narcissistic cynicism in British politics
Major, who refused a referendum on the Maastricht Treaty, or even a Commons free vote on the Maastricht Treaty is now demanding (would you believe) a second EU referendum on EU membership and a free Parliamentary vote to accept or reject the EU negotiations
Not content with the damage they inflicted upon our country during their appalling Premierships, they now dance naked around a boiling cauldron , which, if they upset it, will surely consume them with the British Institutions of which they are a part
|
|
|
Post by aquacultured on Mar 4, 2018 0:39:15 GMT 1
I think you need to explain that, Nay.
What is: this disdainful abnegation of the democratic will may destroy our political system as we have know it for the last 100 years?
What referendum overriding Parliamentary Sovereignty (PS) had happened in 1918? PS was still nobbut a fledgling then.
Constitutionally, we don't need a Referendum, but a general Election after a Parliamentary vote, if necessary.
|
|
|
Post by alancalverd on Mar 5, 2018 21:03:16 GMT 1
I don't recall a parliamentary vote after
8 March 1973: Northern Ireland – Northern Ireland sovereignty referendum on whether Northern Ireland should remain part of the United Kingdom or join the Republic of Ireland (yes to remaining part of the UK) 5 June 1975: UK – Membership of the European Community referendum on whether the UK should stay in the European Community (yes) 1 March 1979: Scotland – Scottish devolution referendum on whether there should be a Scottish Assembly (40 per cent of the electorate had to vote yes in the referendum, although a small majority voted yes this was short of the 40 per cent threshold required to enact devolution) 1 March 1979: Wales – Welsh devolution referendum on whether there should be a Welsh Assembly (no) 11 September 1997: Scotland – Scottish devolution referendums on whether there should be a Scottish Parliament and whether the Scottish Parliament should have tax varying powers (both referendums received a yes vote) 18 September 1997: Wales – Welsh devolution referendum on whether there should be a National Assembly for Wales (yes) 7 May 1998: London – Greater London Authority referendum on whether there should be a Mayor of London and Greater London Authority (yes) 22 May 1998: Northern Ireland – Northern Ireland Belfast Agreement referendum on the Good Friday Agreement (yes) 3 March 2011: Wales - Welsh devolution referendum on whether the National Assembly for Wales should gain the power to legislate on a wider range of matters (yes) 5 May 2011: UK – referendum on whether to change the voting system for electing MPs to the House of Commons from first past the post to the alternative vote (no, first past the post will continue to be used to elect MPs to the House of Commons) 18 September 2014: Scotland – referendum on whether Scotland should become an independent country (no, the electorate voted 55 per cent to 45 per cent in favour of Scotland remaining within the UK.
So why now?
|
|
|
Post by aquacultured on Mar 6, 2018 16:07:20 GMT 1
I don't recall a parliamentary vote after 8 March 1973: Northern Ireland – Northern Ireland sovereignty referendum on whether Northern Ireland should remain part of the United Kingdom or join the Republic of Ireland (yes to remaining part of the UK) 5 June 1975: UK – Membership of the European Community referendum on whether the UK should stay in the European Community (yes) 1 March 1979: Scotland – Scottish devolution referendum on whether there should be a Scottish Assembly (40 per cent of the electorate had to vote yes in the referendum, although a small majority voted yes this was short of the 40 per cent threshold required to enact devolution) 1 March 1979: Wales – Welsh devolution referendum on whether there should be a Welsh Assembly (no) 11 September 1997: Scotland – Scottish devolution referendums on whether there should be a Scottish Parliament and whether the Scottish Parliament should have tax varying powers (both referendums received a yes vote) 18 September 1997: Wales – Welsh devolution referendum on whether there should be a National Assembly for Wales (yes) 7 May 1998: London – Greater London Authority referendum on whether there should be a Mayor of London and Greater London Authority (yes) 22 May 1998: Northern Ireland – Northern Ireland Belfast Agreement referendum on the Good Friday Agreement (yes) 3 March 2011: Wales - Welsh devolution referendum on whether the National Assembly for Wales should gain the power to legislate on a wider range of matters (yes) 5 May 2011: UK – referendum on whether to change the voting system for electing MPs to the House of Commons from first past the post to the alternative vote (no, first past the post will continue to be used to elect MPs to the House of Commons) 18 September 2014: Scotland – referendum on whether Scotland should become an independent country (no, the electorate voted 55 per cent to 45 per cent in favour of Scotland remaining within the UK. 8 March 1973: Northern Ireland – Northern Ireland sovereignty referendum on whether Northern Ireland should remain part of the United Kingdom or join the Republic of Ireland (yes to remaining part of the UK) 5 June 1975: UK – Membership of the European Community referendum on whether the UK should stay in the European Community (yes) 1 March 1979: Scotland – Scottish devolution referendum on whether there should be a Scottish Assembly (40 per cent of the electorate had to vote yes in the referendum, although a small majority voted yes this was short of the 40 per cent threshold required to enact devolution) 1 March 1979: Wales – Welsh devolution referendum on whether there should be a Welsh Assembly (no) 11 September 1997: Scotland – Scottish devolution referendums on whether there should be a Scottish Parliament and whether the Scottish Parliament should have tax varying powers (both referendums received a yes vote) 18 September 1997: Wales – Welsh devolution referendum on whether there should be a National Assembly for Wales (yes) 7 May 1998: London – Greater London Authority referendum on whether there should be a Mayor of London and Greater London Authority (yes) 22 May 1998: Northern Ireland – Northern Ireland Belfast Agreement referendum on the Good Friday Agreement (yes) 3 March 2011: Wales - Welsh devolution referendum on whether the National Assembly for Wales should gain the power to legislate on a wider range of matters (yes) 5 May 2011: UK – referendum on whether to change the voting system for electing MPs to the House of Commons from first past the post to the alternative vote (no, first past the post will continue to be used to elect MPs to the House of Commons) 18 September 2014: Scotland – referendum on whether Scotland should become an independent country (no, the electorate voted 55 per cent to 45 per cent in favour of Scotland remaining within the UK. So why now? An impressive list of referendums, until you spot that it repeats itself after the (first) 18 September 2014 entry. I say this because I wouldn’t want anyone to think that referendums have become such an apparently pervasive part of our constitution. Most of the list concerns single nations of the UK, apart from England. A vote in the UK Parliament would have been inappropriate, particularly as England MPs are the majority. The outcome of the two UK referendums in the list would not have triggered a vote in Parliament, as the status quo was not disturbed. As for the 2016 referendum, the combination of the massive constitutional effect of the vote, the narrowness of the majority, the mess that the executive keeps getting itself into, and the constitutional position that all referendums in the UK are advisory cries out for a vote in the UK Parliament.
|
|
|
Post by alancalverd on Mar 6, 2018 16:39:14 GMT 1
Not all "no change" results by any means. Devolution of powers from a national to a regional government, handing over Northern Ireland to a bunch of murderers, the change in status from Common Market (bad) to European Union (worse)....even the Mayor of London was a major shift in power and politics which affected everyone in the country to some extent.
The only problem with Brexit is that it didn't go the way the government wanted it to, but they were bound to accept it, and HM Loyal Opposition, though led by dyed-in-the-wool Eurosceptics, were thus bound to oppose something they actually wanted and clearly had the popular vote. Hence the apparent pig's ear of "negotiation".
There's nothing to negotiate! On Liberation Day we will become an independent nation like any other, and since the EU will remain a single unit, we only need to negotiate with one body to bind all the remaining states into whatever we agree.
Here's a neat twist, in case any politicians are reading this: resolve the Irish border question by asking the Irish to propose whatever they want. If they want a transparent border, that becomes a problem for the EU, not the UK. Irish citizens have a unique (pre-EU) right to live, work and vote in the UK and to register for UK taxes and benefits. If they want a hard border, no problem at all - the EU has hard borders with everyone else.
|
|
|
Post by aquacultured on Mar 7, 2018 0:59:58 GMT 1
Not all "no change" results by any means. Devolution of powers from a national to a regional government, handing over Northern Ireland to a bunch of murderers, the change in status from Common Market (bad) to European Union (worse)....even the Mayor of London was a major shift in power and politics which affected everyone in the country to some extent. Well, of course. But those things were agreed in advance, by dint of the 'logic' of devolution. And yes, I'm not sure not giving those in the rest of the UK any say (lightly weighted, of course) in those matters is a good idea, if the starting point is a United Kingdom. Here's a neat twist, in case any politicians are reading this: resolve the Irish border question by asking the Irish to propose whatever they want. If they want a transparent border, that becomes a problem for the EU, not the UK. Irish citizens have a unique (pre-EU) right to live, work and vote in the UK and to register for UK taxes and benefits. If they want a hard border, no problem at all - the EU has hard borders with everyone else. (If any politicians are watching, they'll be of the trousering sort, mark my words. They'll be pocketing £4 a week and spending £25 or more. They're not to be trusted with the nation's finances. Schmucks.) I agree with your proposal on the Irish Question, so far as it goes. If only either side in the Brexit debate had addressed the issue at the time, or even in the last year, before the DUP became so influential.
|
|
|
Post by alancalverd on Mar 7, 2018 1:44:59 GMT 1
Well, of course. But those things were agreed in advance, by dint of the 'logic' of devolution. So Parliament decides that, for example, Northern Ireland will be governed by a group of murderers IF a referendum so wishes, and that's OK by your constitutional principles. And Parliament decides that the UK will leave the EU IF a referendum so wishes, but that's NOT OK by your constitutional principles. Which suggests that your constitutional principle is that a referendum is binding unless you dislike the result. A politician in the making. My apologies for repeating the list of referendums- copy and paste error, now corrected!
|
|
|
Post by aquacultured on Mar 7, 2018 13:19:26 GMT 1
You're overinterpreting what I posted. That doesn't matter, however. The reality is that I've accepted the outcome of the referendum, and don't want a second referendum. That would be adding more wrong-headedness to the original wrong-headedness.
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Mar 7, 2018 18:17:51 GMT 1
You're overinterpreting what I posted. That doesn't matter, however. The reality is that I've accepted the outcome of the referendum, and don't want a second referendum. That would be adding more wrong-headedness to the original wrong-headedness. It seems that what you do want is for parliament to overturn the most democratic decision ever taken by the British people
|
|
|
Post by aquacultured on Mar 7, 2018 19:47:29 GMT 1
No, it seems that you'd've been happy for the executive to do what they choose without any input from Parliament.
I think that makes me more democratic than you.
So there.
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Mar 7, 2018 19:57:21 GMT 1
No, it seems that you'd've been happy for the executive to do what they choose without any input from Parliament. I think that makes me more democratic than you. So there. I will be happy if ,for a change, the executive choose to do what the people want, especially when that want has been expressed so clearly
|
|
|
Post by aquacultured on Mar 8, 2018 0:10:43 GMT 1
The executive, clear? - clear?!
Haven't you noticed they're all over the place?
I'm concentrating on getting the least worst result.
How about you?
|
|
|
Post by alancalverd on Mar 8, 2018 8:31:19 GMT 1
If I recall correctly, the question put was "Should the UK leave the EU?" to which the answer was "yes". The mechanism for leaving has been set out in various treaties. All the executive was required to do, it has done: cement all existing applicable EU law into UK law, then pull the trigger.
Gamble Aware says "when the fun stops, stop." You have been throwing money at the EU in ever-increasing amounts since 1975, for the privilege of seeing the UK's primary industries destroyed and legal system perverted. How much more fun do you want?
The only problem is the inability of politicians to walk away from the Golden Trough.
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Mar 8, 2018 8:39:31 GMT 1
The executive, clear? - clear?!Haven't you noticed they're all over the place? I'm concentrating on getting the least worst result. How about you? Now be clear Would your 'least worst' result be Britain renmaining in the EU?
|
|
|
Post by aquacultured on Mar 8, 2018 16:23:14 GMT 1
Remember, shortly before the referendum vote Farage predicted it would go 52% to 48% in favour of Remain, which was too narrow a majority to accept, so the fight would go on.
So it’s natural that people like Blair and Clegg take the same approach from the other side.
As I’ve said, I wouldn’t argue for another referendum. That would only deepen the already gross divisiveness, xenophobia and general unpleasantness engendered by the 2016 one.
Would I like the UK to remain in the UK, as the least worst result? Of course I would. But we would’ve lost so much goodwill from most of the 27 that remaining a member would be pretty uncomfortable.
Anyway, it’s not an option on offer. What might be on offer further down the line is a massive split in the Tory Party, followed by a General Election, a non-Tory government, and better UK-EU cooperation and problem-solving.
|
|