[Politics] Brexit

[Baldseagull]

But if they reject the result of the negotiations we leave anyway. So it seems something of a pointless exercise

I am not sure you are correct. If the European Union Act 2011 is used to give us a referendum, it is not about withdrawal, it is about a change in our relationship with the Union. The question should therefore be, do you accept this change in the relationshp, or do you wish to maintain the status quo?

 

[GT49er]

It seems you are highly suspicious of the Parliament you wish to have greater sovereignty.
I must confess, I am too, I am highly suspicious of people like Rees Mogg and John Redwood who make their living off investment management, arguing for Brexit as a good move for Britain, whilst shifting their investments out of Britain.

I don't agree with everything Parliament decides, to be sure. But you are confusing the particular (Brexit) with the general (pretty much everything else). On Brexit I'm fully aware that a vast majority of Westminster MPs - and the House of Lords - are gung-ho pro EU, and think our being a member is all fine and tickey-boo. They are generally appalled that us plebs have landed them with a mandate to get the hell out of it, and many of them would like to find a way to water down, weasel out of, or otherwise sabotage Brexit.
Once we're safely out, I will happily let Parliament carry on ruling the country, knowing that I can vote the government out every five years if I so wish (that's if a majority of my fellow voters agree with me).

 

[pb21]

Have we pooled/surrendered any sovereignty while members of the EC/EU?

No, and it's an act of subterfuge to suggest we have. We will be no more sovereign in 2019 than 2017.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

Well. we need to something to salvage our reputation in Europe. We're not retreating into an absurd little enclave, honest...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41996872

Hey guess what leavers don't hate Europeans, we just hate the way EU is run, there is the difference. Why can't some remainers get this part?

 

[Hampster Gull]

No, and it's an act of subterfuge to suggest we have. We will be no more sovereign in 2019 than 2017.

We will for sure be a lot more irrelevant, our influence as strong as the value of sterling

 

[Two Professors]

No it isn't.

Professor William Wade is the source of this legal argument.I'd tell you to argue with him,but as you also probably didn't notice,he's dead.

 

[Lincoln Imp]

Have we pooled/surrendered any sovereignty while members of the EC/EU?

It's for others to deal with but I really don't know why you asked this question (to which the answer is clearly Yes). As far as I can see, no one has suggested that no sovereignty has been ceded to the EU. I think that you misread the post you originally responded to which was simply saying that we remain, like every other member of the EU, a sovereign nation.

 

[Two Professors]

Thought I would draw attention to a normal businessman's views on Brexit.For the extremely slow witted,this is from the BBC's Business service today.

 

[The Clamp]

EU leaders repeated state how they intend to pursue further integration. for example Macron mentioned both EU fiscal policy with harmonised Corporate tax and intergration of EU armies in first speech to EU. how is this propaganda? as for VAT i have read a considerable amount relating to a loophole, and its clear as day VAT (and import rules) are harmonised by EU, with a few odd exceptions still standing.



so, its not propaganda, its something we dont have to worry about because we have an exemption? thats the sort of thinking that lost the referendum for remain, because a lot of people didn't believe you, including EU leaders who scoffed at the "agreement" and pointed that it didn't hold water until written into a treaty. we might have maintained exemptions, we might have gained new exemptions from closer integration, if the rest of Europe agreed. but they have no road map for dual speed EU so that all seems very unlikely and in the next round of treaties we'd be fighting just to keep out of the Euro (expected to be mandated in the next treaty for those still outside).

 

[The Rivet]

No, no, no... MPs vote according to their beliefs not according to their constituents. That principle was set out by Burke in the 18th century - "Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion" - and it still holds today,

I wouldn't want MPs acting in any other way; to bow down automatically to public opinion is the way of madness.

No one else seems to have called you out on your stupendously ridiculous assumption that a principle set in the 18th century applies today. Back then we had slaves too. Back then the landowners and aristocracy thought all lower born as morons, dumb. Ladies were centuries away from a legitimate vote. Only landowners had any vote. Of course the arrogant buggers thought they knew best. Here and now in the 21st century that is all different. It is accepted, universally that public servants are just that. Servants to do as WE dictate not what they 'think'

 

[beorhthelm]

View attachment 91176

well played sir; no argument, no debate, just a nice picture. missed a trick not posting a Belgian waffle.

 

[The Rivet]

well played sir; no argument, no debate, just a nice picture. missed a trick not posting a Belgian waffle.

Looks like a vomit concoction to me.

 

[Baldseagull]

Professor William Wade is the source of this legal argument.I'd tell you to argue with him,but as you also probably didn't notice,he's dead.

Professor William Wade was quoted in the piece you posted, he was not the source of the piece.

 

[Baldseagull]

Thought I would draw attention to a normal businessman's views on Brexit.For the extremely slow witted,this is from the BBC's Business service today.

View attachment 91173

Brompton Bicycles are a bit of a luxury item, the Rolls Royce, or rather Morgan of folding Bikes, so they don't really compete on price. They would also be less desireable if they were made in a Chinese factory than hand built in a London workshop. Not a typical product.

 

[Baldseagull]

No one else seems to have called you out on your stupendously ridiculous assumption that a principle set in the 18th century applies today. Back then we had slaves too. Back then the landowners and aristocracy thought all lower born as morons, dumb. Ladies were centuries away from a legitimate vote. Only landowners had any vote. Of course the arrogant buggers thought they knew best. Here and now in the 21st century that is all different. It is accepted, universally that public servants are just that. Servants to do as WE dictate not what they 'think'

No one else has called him out, because he is absolutely correct.

 

[The Rivet]

No one else has called him out, because he is absolutely correct.

No he is not.

 

[Baldseagull]

No he is not.

In the spirit of Panto, Oh yes he is. You choose your man, you don't own his voice.

 

[Gwylan]

No one else seems to have called you out on your stupendously ridiculous assumption that a principle set in the 18th century applies today. Back then we had slaves too. Back then the landowners and aristocracy thought all lower born as morons, dumb. Ladies were centuries away from a legitimate vote. Only landowners had any vote. Of course the arrogant buggers thought they knew best. Here and now in the 21st century that is all different. It is accepted, universally that public servants are just that. Servants to do as WE dictate not what they 'think'

Even by NSC standards, that's a singular bonkers statement.

The Offences against the Person's Act dates from 1828, at a time when only male landowners could vote. Do you think murder shouldn't be a crime because it was a principle established before universal suffrage? The idea that a law or a principle shouldn't apply because it was established some time ago is just bizarre

(and BTW, Britain didn't have slaves when Burke made that speech. There were no slaves as the phrase was understood in the rest of the world but their legal status was unclear. When an American slave, James Somersett escaped and found himself in England, he was not restored to his owners as it was held that slavery was not part of English law - that was in 1772, two years before Burke made his address)

 

[GT49er]

Looks like a vomit concoction to me.

Well, at least it's a change from diced carrots!

 

[Billy the Fish]

It was not in force in 2009, it is the European Union Act 2011. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/12/contents

Interestingly, some think this act also means that we must have a referendum on the result of negotiaitions, you might be hearing a lot more about it in the coming months.

Interesting, thanks for sharing. I'm of the opinion that there will be some kind of fudge at the end, perhaps this could be it.