[Politics] Brexit

[theonlymikey]

I doubt that very much. By going against what her PM is asking she's getting herself involved ….. something QE II has ensured she has never done during her whole time on the throne.

I'm sorry but agreeing to prorogue parliament to facilitate a constitutional change such as Brexit would also be considered by many as involvement.

Boris has put the queen in a lose lose situation.

The Queen could quite justifiably decline if enough MP's indicate to her advisers this is against the will of the people and or parliament.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

I've been saying this all along - the best interpretation of the vote was for a very soft Brexit, and arguably even leavers can see that that'd be worse than remaining - hence I don't believe there's a real mandate to leave.

I'm not sure I see your logic ? Are you suggesting because of the narrow margin the leave vote was for a very soft Brexit, while if it had been a bigger margin it would have suggested support for a harder Brexit ?

 

[A1X]

[TWEET]1166649263377592320[/TWEET]

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Nothing says "democracy" like your unelected head of state closing your parliament down at the behest of an unelected Prime Minister.

Is this what you mean by 'taking back control'? I thought Parliament is sovereign?

Are you genuinely happy and comfortable about this seizure and snuffing out of democratic process? Direct question to you all below - would love to hear whether you're 'Brextreemists' or not.
[MENTION=28109]Wellesley[/MENTION] [MENTION=1365]Westdene Seagull[/MENTION] [MENTION=22389]bashlsdir[/MENTION] [MENTION=14132]Two Professors[/MENTION] [MENTION=33253]JC Footy Genius[/MENTION]

I've already given my opinion ….. in NSC parlance 'Fence'. If you're forcing me to decide - i.e. allow MPs to continue with the shitstorm they've created and still not make a decision or close down Parliament to actually get the thing done once and for all ? Then, with a heavy heart, I'd go for the latter.

 

[Notters]

I'm not sure I see your logic ? Are you suggesting because of the narrow margin the leave vote was for a very soft Brexit, while if it had been a bigger margin it would have suggested support for a harder Brexit ?

That's exactly what I'm saying although I should clarify that my view is that the only solution is a referendum with IN/Out, then if out, deal or no deal (though you'd think deal would win in this instance, no?)

 

[beorhthelm]

Of course there may be a plan. This might enable Johnson to bring back the WA to parliament at around the 20th October and say "vote for this or it's no deal going through".

im certain that the plan. WA with a adjustment from EU, or no deal. theres no other option open at that point. MPs took too long squabbling about different options, ignoring the default position that they passed was to leave on the leave date.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

I'm sorry but agreeing to prorogue parliament to facilitate a constitutional change such as Brexit would also be considered by many as involvement.

Boris has put the queen in a lose lose situation.

The Queen could quite justifiably decline if enough MP's indicate to her advisers this is against the will of the people and or parliament.

By declining Her Majesty would be breaking the unwritten rule that she always will approve what is asked of her by her PM. That's the easiest, or in this case the closest, way she can avoid becoming involved.

 

[Seasidesage]

There is only one solution to my mind. Dissolve parliament and go to the country. Force the various parties to stand on their position on Brexit if that means suspending Brexit until a new consensus is formed so be it.
This continual maneuvering trying to force through Brexit without the majority required to do so is damaging the country and creating yet more division.

 

[theonlymikey]

By declining Her Majesty would be breaking the unwritten rule that she always will approve what is asked of her by her PM. That's the easiest, or in this case the closest, way she can avoid becoming involved.

The constitution or lack thereof it would seem, works on the basis MP's are elected to represent the people of whom they are elected.

If the leader of the state is not acting in the interests of the people, every single poll produced shows he wouldn't be in this case, she can absolutely advise it is up to parliament to decide.

She would absolutely be implicit letting this happen against the will of parliament and would undermine the basis of parliament itself.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

That's exactly what I'm saying although I should clarify that my view is that the only solution is a referendum with IN/Out, then if out, deal or no deal (though you'd think deal would win in this instance, no?)

We're going to have to agree to disagree then. I can't see how the margin of success in a binary referendum could possibly indicate support or otherwise for how 'hard' an exit we should go for. I agree though that if put to the vote 'deal' would win over 'no deal'

 

[Thunder Bolt]

By declining Her Majesty would be breaking the unwritten rule that she always will approve what is asked of her by her PM. That's the easiest, or in this case the closest, way she can avoid becoming involved.

The Speaker can ask the Queen to say what Johnson is doing is unconstitutional. She asks the leader of the most seats if they can form a government.
Johnson is saying basically, that he can't. So she could ask another leader if they can form a government.
That is constitutional. If only the Remain parties could get their acts together (which they may well do now)

As for the vote on October 14th, it is still blackmail. It's my deal or no deal is coercion, not that I think he will get a deal as the red lines won't be moved.

Don't forget, this is only the Withdrawal Agreement. We've got at least 10 years of negotiating to do after that.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

Nothing says "democracy" like your unelected head of state closing your parliament down at the behest of an unelected Prime Minister.

Is this what you mean by 'taking back control'? I thought Parliament is sovereign?

Are you genuinely happy and comfortable about this seizure and snuffing out of democratic process? Direct question to you all below - would love to hear whether you're 'Brextreemists' or not.
[MENTION=28109]Wellesley[/MENTION] [MENTION=1365]Westdene Seagull[/MENTION] [MENTION=22389]bashlsdir[/MENTION] [MENTION=14132]Two Professors[/MENTION] [MENTION=33253]JC Footy Genius[/MENTION]

Yes I'm happy about it.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

28th August 2019 - The day democracy died in the UK.

We now enter a short 'clownocracy' before autocracy/dictatorship.

Oh well. In the main it was good while it lasted.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

[tweet]1166405125352673280[/tweet]

 

[Si Gull]

This has now gone way beyond Leave or Remain. An unelected prime minister has taken the decision to suspend parliamentary democracy. This is a coup and we should be worried.

 

[stewart12]

Yes I'm happy about it.

shocking

 

[theonlymikey]

It gets worse.

"If MPs pass a no confidence vote next week then we won’t resign. We won’t recommend another government, we’ll dissolve parliament, call an election between November 1-5 and there’ll be zero chance of Grieve legislation,” says senior official.

How angry are you now? This was never about democracy, clearly.

 

[theonlymikey]

Do not prorogue Parliament - Petition

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/269157

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

So IF the Queen Agrees to suspend Parliament, is she then agreeing to parliamentary democracy being overruled? Is she taking back power to the monarchy? The UK is is in a constitutional crisis right now, caused by stupid people calling a referendum, stupid people voting to leave the EU, and more stupid people trying to run roughshod over a system that has governed the UK pretty well for nearly four hundred years. Good luck everyone!

Bill Cash thinks it's brilliant.

 

[Simster]

shocking

It's not. bashlsdir is a massive fckwit and can't see beyond the end of his nose. As we've seen on this thread countless times, he has the IQ of a badger. He's only ok with it because it's enacting something he agrees with, even though it is CLEARLY an abuse of parliamentary process.