[Politics] Brexit

[Thunder Bolt]

If we were going to exclude your view based on your loation then we'd need to exclude the views of HT and Dave.

Fair comment.

 

[BensGrandad]

The government going to appeal the latest clowns judgement.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

The government going to appeal the latest clowns judgement.

"Clowns" why clowns?

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Fair comment.

Thank you. I'd also point out how much you criticised the issues with ex-pats not getting their voting papers …. and correctly so.

 

[beorhthelm]

hope that parliament doesn't go into recess for the next 4 weeks, if the courts do decide the prorogation must been reversed.

 

[Mtoto]

I think the phrase "have personally caused you anxiety, financial, physical, emotional harm" is slightly dramatic. For me, it's the move to a super state ( and that is the aim ) that is the issue. I've mentioned it before - here in the UK we've moved democratic accountability closer to the people - devolved government ( NI excepted at the moment ) and mayors in many places. Even councils are being bestowed extra powers gradually. An EU super state takes that in completely an opposite direction. I believe power should be with the people and for the people ( and I'm right wing …. ish …. before you start accusing me of being a communist ). I accept our system isn't perfect - for starters the House of Lords but the EU adds another layer. A layer the person in the street has barely any say in - say I don't agree with the actions of the Council of Europe for example, how do I remove any member from it ? Answer, I can't. The published aim of the EU is ever greater political and fiscal union - fine if that's what they want to do but I don't think that is in the best interests of the UK nor indeed the voters of the UK.




Wrong as you often are. This thread is nearly 2500 pages long. I now challenge you to provide one single post in all those pages that even implies I voted leave because of immigration ? You won't be able to because I have NEVER said immigration was my reason for voting leave ….. not once.

Ever closer union, eh? A phrase which dates back to the Treaty of Rome - drawn up by by people with vivid memories of the most brutal war in European history - and which refers, at all times, to "ever closer union of the peoples of Europe", *not* their governments. It's a turn of phrase, a fuzzy aspiration in dark times that a more harmonious future might lie ahead for a continent where nation states had been waging war on each other on a regular basis for more than 1,000 years.

And yet for a hardcore of anti-EU fanatics, it's been seen as unassailable evidence of a dark plot to create a "superstate" ever since. Never mind the veto, which every country has on such a huge change to the set-up *precisely* to address such concerns. It's still the starting point for your argument: the EU is definitely becoming a Superstate, therefore we must leave. I guess there's some sort of chance that you're right, but 62 years is a long time to be plotting. If that were truly the inevitable direction of travel, don't you think we might have got there by now?

And suppose you're not correct, and the Superstate only exists between your ears? In that case, "that's fine if that's what they want to do" is meaningless, because it's not what they want to do. And the UK is therefore about to make the biggest, most historic mistake in its history. How is that in anyone's "interests"?

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

The government going to appeal the latest clowns judgement.

What is Johnson's latest judgement that is being appealed ?

 

[studio150]

You wouldnt expect judges in Scotland to rule any other way in reality

Why?

They are just upholding Scottish law and are impartial, or do you want us to move to where Judges just decide on what the Government tell them to do, regardless of what the law says.

 

[Stato]

According to the news on Smooth Radio, 3 High Court Judges in England have already ruled that it is not a matter that comes under the jurisdiction of the courts. You wouldnt expect judges in Scotland to rule any other way in reality

Presumably followed by: "Well that's Brexit settled then... Here's Randy VanWarmer with 'Just When I Needed You Most."

 

[studio150]

The government going to appeal the latest clowns judgement.

In some circles this would be seen as contempt of Court

 

[Chicken Run]

There has already been two referedums. If we had another, that would be the third one.

Btw the latest polls are showing 54% Remain.

I’m assuming if you’re suggesting the 1975 referendum counts as number 1, that the then EEC is very much the same as the EU now?

 

[Stato]

The government going to appeal the latest clowns judgement.

"Clowns" why clowns?

Presumably because Smooth Radio has moved on to Smokey Robinson and The Miracles.

 

[CHAPPERS]

Does Ben's Grandad work at No 10?

[tweet]1171726506772631553[/tweet]

 

[Stato]

Does Ben's Grandad work at No 10?

[tweet]1171726506772631553[/tweet]

I don't think so. Surely Johnson would have Classic FM on.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Does Ben's Grandad work at No 10?

[tweet]1171726506772631553[/tweet]

'Enemies of the people' again, names, photos and sexual orientation on the front page of The Daily Mail for the Scottish judges tomorrow morning.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I’m assuming if you’re suggesting the 1975 referendum counts as number 1, that the then EEC is very much the same as the EU now?

Each treaty was voted on in turn as it came along by the government of the day.
The aim, even in the 70s was closer union. I understood that at the time, from what Winston Churchill had said, and from Edward Heath.

As I pointed out earlier, if it is the political union that leavers are so opposed to, then why didn't the government just say, we are leaving the EU, but staying in EFTA, which I suspect would have been voted on, done and dusted now. We were in EFTA before we even joined the EEC.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Ever closer union, eh? A phrase which dates back to the Treaty of Rome - drawn up by by people with vivid memories of the most brutal war in European history - and which refers, at all times, to "ever closer union of the peoples of Europe", *not* their governments. It's a turn of phrase, a fuzzy aspiration in dark times that a more harmonious future might lie ahead for a continent where nation states had been waging war on each other on a regular basis for more than 1,000 years.

And yet for a hardcore of anti-EU fanatics, it's been seen as unassailable evidence of a dark plot to create a "superstate" ever since. Never mind the veto, which every country has on such a huge change to the set-up *precisely* to address such concerns. It's still the starting point for your argument: the EU is definitely becoming a Superstate, therefore we must leave. I guess there's some sort of chance that you're right, but 62 years is a long time to be plotting. If that were truly the inevitable direction of travel, don't you think we might have got there by now?

And suppose you're not correct, and the Superstate only exists between your ears? In that case, "that's fine if that's what they want to do" is meaningless, because it's not what they want to do. And the UK is therefore about to make the biggest, most historic mistake in its history. How is that in anyone's "interests"?

I'd suggest you take in to account the direction of travel since 1975. It hardly suggests the aim isn't an EU super state. Throw in the recent murmurings from Macron and Merkal about the need for an EU army and you get even closer to the EU being a state rather than the trading union that we joined. Equally, yes, members have vetos but only in SOME areas. Some members will move towards that ever greater union - France and Germany for example. Others won't - meaning there will be different levels of membership. Something pointed out by Paddy Ashdown many years ago. What is the point of the UK being a 'second class' member ? We might as well leave and let them get on with their union.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Does Ben's Grandad work at No 10?

[tweet]1171726506772631553[/tweet]

The legal activists chose Scotland because the English courts were in summer recess at the time.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

The legal activists chose Scotland because the English courts were in summer recess at the time.

Are you sure about that ? Gina Miller and John Major brought their case almost in parallel.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Going well then.

[tweet]1171731208591597568[/tweet]

[tweet]1171732144164618240[/tweet]