The rules in election does not specific what slogan a party can use so unless you can show me that certain slogan cannot be used in election campaign then it is all legitimate. As I said before different parties might simple interpret the information differently.
Over and out.

Now we are getting somewhere. You can’t tell the difference between morally right and legal. Just because there isn’t a specific law forbidding something doesn’t mean that it is perfectly acceptable to do something.

Ninfan – much as I revere Tony as a British political icon his view here is irrelevant. Referenda have very little place in a mature democracy. Also his time has gone, past, prologue – he is as relevant now as James VI.

in the words of Farage 52/48 is unfinished business. So quite clear that there is no mandate.

“the shambolic mess of the tory policy on this cannot stand up to any scrutiny”

LOL, you can’t blame the parties for this. This shabolic mess is directly down to us, the people.

tjagain – Member
One thing to consider – why is May so determined to stop any debate in the Commons? MY guess it is because she knows the shambolic mess of the tory policy on this cannot stand up to any scrutiny.

She has the mandate so should not be bog down by irrelevant delays that is my interpretation.

slowoldman – Member
So here are the judges who will decide on the appeal
Supreme Court Judges

Let’s see if these judges apply common sense this time.

Shackleton – Member

Let’s just leave it at our last forum exchanges as I think both of us have provided both sides of the story.

Thought you’d gone to bed Chewkw

By the way judges are employed to apply the law not common sense (whatever that way actually be). They may apply common sense in interpreting the law, but law is where it’s at.

Don’t worry I’m sure the MPs will support you’re rather extremist views

wow the world really has gone topsy turvy

ninfan using Benn over Thatcher who said referendums were

“a device of dictators and demagogues.”

mrmo – Member
in the words of Farage 52/48 is unfinished business. So quite clear that there is no mandate.

He is just being “conservative”, polite and respectful of the Brexit victory when he said that. He knows and we know Brexit has won big time. It is not an election. It IS a Referendum.

Brexit Won a Referendum. It can only happen Once in a lifetime. I suspect most will not see similar referendum again because EU will disintegrate in the near future.

Referenda have very little place in a mature democracy.

You’re mistaking ‘representative democracy’ for the same thing as ‘mature democracy’

You only need to look at Switzerland to see a functioning, mature democracy that embraces referenda successfully.

KImbers – actually, Attlee said that, Fatch just agreed with him

“Big time” 😆

No, as Tony Benn pointed out regards EU referenda, those elected to parliament are lent powers, by the people, to use on their behalf, and they have no right to hand those powers away to somebody else (the EU). His contention was that only the people could do that.

I think you’re deliberately disingenuous. You know as well as I do that this is about trying to use non-parliamentary methods to overturn domestic, UK law.

It doesn’t matter how they became law; they are law. Their provenance is an irrelevance.

Your latest argument is as follows: as these laws were enacted as a result of our agreements with Europe, and as I have decided that this was an unfair handing-over of power, therefore those laws are null.

Nonsense.

As you haven’t gone to bed, and especially as you’ve made a point of responding to me for most of the evening, I’d like you to prove where I’ve not accepted the referendum result. You’re big on wanting things proven, so this’ll be easy for you.

He is just being “conservative”, polite and respectful of the Brexit victory when he said that. We know Brexit has won big time.

Apart from Farage saying it when he was worried he would lose before the vote.

igm – Member
“Big time”

Yes, big time. Do you know why? If you win an election it is just for short term perhaps lasting one term or two and three if you are good.

Win a Referendum, on the other hand, is like winning an election that last forever.

You will not have similar referendum in this life and perhaps anymore if EU is no longer viable.

Ninfan – is that the same Switzerland that are tying themselves in knots over the 2014 referendum on freedom of movement of labour? I rest my case

You only need to look at Switzerland to see a functioning, mature democracy that embraces referenda successfully.

yeah look how well their last EU referndum worked out for them, booted out of erasmus and science programmes badly affected
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/22/switzerland-votes-for-compromise-to-preserve-relations-with-eu

Yes, big time. Do you know why? If you win an election it is just for short term perhaps lasting one term or two and three if you are good.
Win a Referendum, on the other hand, is like winning an election that last forever.

I’d still like to know what Britain has won. I can see politicians and their cronies are winning in a fairly narrow sense, but the UK? Not looking like winners so far.

igm – Member
By the way judges are employed to apply the law not common sense (whatever that way actually be). They may apply common sense in interpreting the law, but law is where it’s at.

It is about applying common sense in law.

Common sense says if judges overturn the will of the people and the referendum result then they are no longer applying common sense in law. If they do that then they have just made a mockery out of the law, Govt and the British. You lot will look foolish if the judges do that.

Maybe we’ll leave the EU and may be we won’t – I don’t know and to be honest I’m starting not to care. Maybe the wreckers who want to destroy Britain, Fox, Davis, Farage et al will win. But they will lose, for they will inherit a country half what it was. And most of the people who drive, or perhaps drove, the country forward to ever greater things will be disillusioned, disenfranchised and likely to be seeking other opportunities. To the lunatics, I leave the asylum.

I suppose it’ll sort the net immigration numbers.

You will not have similar referendum in this life and perhaps anymore if EU is no longer viable.

You’re right. I’d be surprised if anyone would get away with the same level of blatant lying again.

You lot will look foolish if the judges do that.

Why?

Do answer I’m starting to enjoy your stream of unconsciousness.

Common sense says if judges overturn the will of the people and the referendum result then they are no longer applying common sense in law. If they do that then they have just made a mockery out of the law, Govt and the British. You lot will look foolish if the judges do that.

Probably just as well that they didn’t nor have any intention of doing so. I’m so glad you finally agree!

referendums are a very blunt instrument
reducing our relationship with the EU down to a yes no answer was a huge mistake

because as we all now know brexit means whatever you want it to mean

to get it down to yes/no the campaigns are forced to stoke populism to win their argument

now we have government in paralysis unable to decide what it is they want to implement

jambalaya – Everyone inc Remainers said Brexit meant leaving the single market as per the video I posted weeks ago.

Everyone apart from Cameron’s Conservative Govt?

Honestly, A….revisionism is one thing, but-

Shackleton- apologies, you are correct. I got sucked in for a minute.

igm – Member
Maybe we’ll leave the EU and may be we won’t – I don’t know and to be honest I’m starting not to care.

The British people have decided to overturn the decision made by ex-PM Heath 43 years ago, so I think you should simply just let it go and go with the flow, otherwise you will be stressed.

Maybe the wreckers who want to destroy Britain, Fox, Davis, Farage et al will win. But they will lose, for they will inherit a country half what it was. And most of the people who drive, or perhaps drove, the country forward to ever greater things will be disillusioned, disenfranchised and likely to be seeking other opportunities. To the lunatics, I leave the asylum.

What needs to be done shall be done.

I suppose it’ll sort the net immigration numbers.

Up to the Govt to decide really.

I’m actually surprised that the brexshitters haven’t called for a second referendum. There was such a narrow margin the last time that surely they have demonstrated over the last 4 and a bit months how organised and by how much the UK will benefit and we can clearly see the EU quaking in its boots that a second referendum will give them the consolidating lanslide victory that will put this issue to bed once and for all.
Otherwise all I hear is the desperate bleating of brexshitters telling me I’m wrong.

How long before TM is former prime minister Theresa May?

If she loses at the Supreme Court presumably the honourable thing is either to resign or call a GE?

jambalaya – Everyone inc Remainers said Brexit meant leaving the single market as per the video I posted weeks ago.

jambafact #421

– in reality we had very prominent outers offering the norway & switzerland relationships as models of what we might negotiate

I’m not sure that “common sense” is a good guide for lawmakers, what with it being a largely subjective term used by people to legitimise whatever their opinion might be about a given issue.

How about words like jurisprudence, sovereignty, constitution, democracy, convention?

No?

Cos’ that might elevate this debate a bit above its current level.

If she loses at the Supreme Court presumably the honourable thing is either to resign or call a GE?

Obvious flaw is obvious. Until you can prove that she is honourable, I’m saying she ain’t.

Chewkw – not stressed. Personally I’m doing very nicely. Pay rise, more interaction with some interesting areas of our business. But I do care about those who are potentially about to get a kicking as a result of Brexit. I work in the north east and they are about to suffer “big time”. The vulnerable always get the biggest kicking sadly.

On immigration numbers, have a think about what I might have meant, ‘cos you ain’t there yet.

Captain – sorry rookie mistake

Thankfully the UK respects the rules of law, so whether it is common sense or not, parliament must have a say on Brexit.

captainsasquatch – Member
I’m actually surprised that the brexshitters haven’t called for a second referendum. There was such a narrow margin the last time that surely they have demonstrated over the last 4 and a bit months how organised and by how much the UK will benefit and we can clearly see the EU quaking in its boots that a second referendum will give them the consolidating lanslide victory that will put this issue to bed once and for all.
Otherwise all I hear is the desperate bleating of brexshitters telling me I’m wrong.

Referendum is once in a life time.

No need to call for another referendum within this life time perhaps even forever regarding EU.

A win is a win regardless of the percentage margin and in this referendum Brexit won.

Where does it say it is once in a lifetime?
Lifetime of what, who?
And more importantly what did you win? ( I ll help you, control like UK laws by UK judges) .

But he is a bureaucrat, not a Briton. He won bureaucracy in the great Faragista bureaucracy give away. Bureaucracy jobs for bureacracyish people.

Wow. It’s like a drug this. Set you mind free and just string random words together like Chewkw. I can see why he’s happy, the freedom. I mean it doesn’t mean anything, but wow freedom.

igm – Member
Chewkw – not stressed.

Glad to hear that. Not taking the mickey by the way.

fin25 – Member
I’m not sure that “common sense” is a good guide for lawmakers, what with it being a largely subjective term used by people to legitimise whatever their opinion might be about a given issue.

How about words like jurisprudence, sovereignty, constitution, democracy, convention?

No?

Cos’ that might elevate this debate a bit above its current level.

The first day I attended my law lecture the lecturer mentioned the term common sense many times regarding the application of law.

That is how the law is interpreted as far as I know. I ain’t arguing with my law lecturer put it this way.

Not taking the mickey by the way

I am. It’s fun

By the way your law lecturer, though probably less qualified than the former Olympic fencer, was right. And you listened, well done. Pity you didn’t understand.