Calm down princess, it was a British court not a European court decision. That's what you want no? We got our control back...
Chapeau, that's fantastic! 😀
It was binding, unlike the EU one
Which EU one? The one we've just had was advisory.
EDIT - Ignore me, you said "unlike".
I'll go and open some more biscuits.
[quote=lucky7500 ]I can assure that I was. If it was widely known to only be an advisory vote, why has it taken a high court judgement months after the event to get to this point?
You do realise that the High Court hasn't ruled on whether the referendum was advisory, let alone on whether it was widely known to be so?
I'm not sure you've been paying quite as much attention as you claim.
I think this sums it up for me.
The Labour Party really is a total, complete and utter waste of ****ing space, isn't it?
Yes
CorbinIt’s being appealed by the government so we don’t know the outcome of that appeal but what it does mean is that Parliament is going to have to take a decision when the government finally comes up with what its bottom line is on Article 50 clauses. Parliament has to have a say and this is a crucial decision for the future of this country. We’re going to be looking at the issue of market access to Europe, looking at the future of the manufacturing industry, looking at the access of finance services to Europe and of course crucially workplace regulations, environmental regulations and consumer rights. It could delay things of course. Speculation about a general election is always with us.”
Clear as mud, but it seems to me he sees it as an opportunity to debate our initial terms of A50 rather than to avoid it.
But as others have said, whilst he's purged the shadow cabinet, he's still got Milliband era MPs in office.
Surely how members will vote depends on the bill(type of brexit) the government wants being offered. I doubt labour would vote for the hard exit option, and some Tories are not going to stand for the Norway option which is probably why the government wants to keep on with the legal challenge.
One other thing, for those who will now be saying that judges should be 'deposed' (?) and that this is the judiciary suppressing the 'will of the people'?
If this is the case, then why are the government using the exact same process to appeal the decision?
If its good enough for the government to use to try and get their way, then its good enough for the people to use to oppose the tyranny of royal prerogative.
Good point
Brexit has to be either given a chance or there needs to be a General Election. There'll be rioting in the streets if not.
Would you anticipate rioting from the Remainers if it does go through?
Yes, coz that is the norm. Most of my leftist co-workers would go on to mass protest or take up some sort physical actions when they feel they don't get their ways.slowoldman - Member
Would you anticipate rioting from the Remainers if it does go through?
[i]Would you anticipate rioting from the Remainers if it does go through? [/I]
No, because sensible people don't riot 😉
slowoldman - Member
Would you anticipate rioting from the Remainers if it does go through?
Strangely, no.
Think about how unattractive this looks. A court upholds the power of Parliament to determine UK legal landscape. The government appeals.
yey, democracy in action...
The Labour Party really is a total, complete and utter waste of ****ing space, isn't it?
Sadly, yes. Labour seems unable to put forth it's view on what it wants from Brexit. The party line is cautious and the leader seems to lack conviction either way.
Brexit has to be either given a chance or there needs to be a General Election. There'll be rioting in the streets if not.
Not during Eastenders though
http://newsthump.com/2016/11/03/brexit-means-bit of a mess-confirms-prime-minister/
That pretty much sums it up for me.
One gigantic steaming pile of shit - voting for a woolly yes/no outcome on something as complex as Europe/the EU that was twisted to be a personal thing by DC (which is why he lost, because he made it personal), hijacked by the media, by the opportunist politicians to further their own careers, appealing to the truly gutter instincts of people and, rather critically, with absolutely no plan whatsoever of what to do afterwards, no matter what the result.
I strongly suspect that a good proportion of Leave voters put more thought into who they voted for in X-Factor than the likely consequences of the Referendum.
That asides, bookmakers have slashed odds on a second referendum and a general election in 2017 (which will require 2/3rds or more MPs to make happen).
Still no Jammers?
Any reports of suicide bombings near the High Court, and I think we'll know where to look 😀
Brexit has to be either given a chance or there needs to be a General Election. There'll be rioting in the streets if not.
Rioting from whom, exactly? As far as I've seen, the majority of Brexit voters voted that way as a protest vote about "something". Many don't even know what they voted for, so how can they riot in support of it?
Yes, there are people who had well thought out reasons for voting that way but the ones I've met are hardly the rioting type and will take the view that we'll deal with whatever happens, either way.
The only ones who seem to be completely passionate about Brexit are those who come from a borderline racist viewpoint, and I'm not sure many of those would want to stick their heads above the parapet, other than the EDL, or other like-minded people.
Sadly, yes. Labour seems unable to put forth it's view on what it wants from Brexit. The party line is cautious and the leader seems to lack conviction either way.
Which unfortunately is probably how it should be, it's a ridiculous thing to have ONE VIEW on, in as much as it is a ridiculous thing to have a YES/NO referendum on, given the infinite amount of variables in play.
I think caution and lack of conviction is far more honest/preferrable than [b]Brexit means Brexit[/b], or at least it would be if we hadn't already hit the Brexit button...
I still believe there should be a deeper meaning to 'Democracy' than asking a largely uninformed/misinformed public to answer a hugely complicated question and then acting on their response.
I strongly suspect that a good proportion of Leave voters put more thought into who they voted for in X-Factor than the likely consequences of the Referendum.
I think vast majority of people who to leave would still do so. I think what would change is that the number of people who didn't vote would drop, and that Remain would this time win, possibly by as slender a margin as Leave did the first time.
Brexit has to be either given a chance or there needs to be a General Election. There'll be [s]rioting in the streets[/s] mild tutting into a cup of tea, a barely perceptible bit of head shaking, and the odd disapproving look towards the television if not.
FTFY
The hardcore Leave camp. It only takes a few to get it started and crowd behaviour and a lack of willingness to police our own will do the rest.mikey74 - MemberRioting from whom. exactly?
The hardcore Leave camp.
That's my point: Who are the "hardcore leave camp"? Yes, staunch UKIP supporters (if there are any, any more) and the likes of EDL, but who else?
Rioting from whom. exactly?The hardcore Leave camp. It only takes a few to get it started and crowd behaviour and a lack of willingness to police our own will do the rest.
[b]Vive La Revolution!!!!!![/b]
i bet the SPG are bricking it! 😆
[img] 
?format=1000w[/img]
For a second referendum you'd need another referendum act.
Would that referendum be binding?
Would it be 50% +1?
Would it require say 60% of the population to want change?
And is change now defined as staying in and working with other Europeans or walking out quitting on the EU?
I doubt you could actually frame a second referendum.
At least the high court thinks our democracy is sacred. Sovereignty lies in parliament.
There is no prospect of parliament voting against Article 50. There is no prospect of the LibDems winning Richmond Park and, if Theresa May is on the slide, there is a long way to go as she has one of the biggest governmental leads ever in the opinion polls.
Which unfortunately is probably how it should be, it's a ridiculous thing to have ONE VIEW on, in as much as it is a ridiculous thing to have a YES/NO referendum on, given the infinite amount of variables in play.
But at this point the government need to put in place a bill to declare article 50 if they want to. That Bill should describe what their plan is and that should be debated and voted on by the house. That is how democracy works in the UK, the government does not have a mandate to do what it wants, it has to govern with the will of both houses.
As for Jamby check the eu Parliament for a guy in drag with a badly forged letter pretending to be TM delivering article 50
Don't underestimate the ability of the Far Right to whip up hysteria. People were told we'd be swamped with terrorists, "economic migrants", ISIS and funny people stealing jobs last time round. The far right is resurgent in Europe and seems to have allies in the British press.
Thing is, this was all avoidable. If Blair hadn't abandoned those dumped on by Fatcha and successive governments had been quick to address funding of local services instead of sitting back and letting migrants take the blame, then we wouldn't be in this mess.
That is exactly the platform any opposition party should be fighting, in event of a snap election.
Mefty - vote against A50? Maybe, maybe not. But sanction A50 only on the basis of certain conditions (stay in single market perhaps) - entirely plausible.
You all keep treating the Leave voters as a bunch of idiots/morons who had no idea what they were voting for, but at the same time, you assume that they'd now be grateful for a second chance to vote and would change their mind.
I think the number of Leave voters who fit this description are quite small.
My view (having spoken to my relatives, most of whom voted Leave) is that they voted, largely on single issues: immigration, £350m a week, faceless bureaucrats, EU laws screwing British trade and business, London being the centre of it all, politicians not representing them...whatever, but it was usually a single issue vote for each of them. I don't think their views will have changed, yes the economy is a little worse, but it's not greatly effected yet...and most don't understand that it'll be nearly 10 years before it really gets any better...
These people are not morons, but their views might be more parochial than most, many may not have even voted before (and fair play to UKIP/Vote Leave for energising a democratic base that had lain dormant for so long), but their reasons for voting the way they did remain (no pun intended) intact. I don't think the landslide to Remain that many believe will happen, will actually occur.
What chance of brexit doing for two prime ministers in the space of a year? Gordon Brown and David Cameron must be laughing their tits of at the prospect of May taking over as the most incompetent and out of depth PM in recent history.
These people are not morons
If they voted to leave on any of the single issues you listed above then I'm afraid they are morons.
ote against A50? Maybe, maybe not. But sanction A50 only on the basis of certain conditions (stay in single market perhaps) - entirely plausible.
Completely implausible because you cant negotiate until you have triggered Article 50 so can't be any conditions.
Does the Labour Party have a leader?
Mefty - vote against A50? Maybe, maybe not. But sanction A50 only on the basis of certain conditions (stay in single market perhaps) - entirely plausible.
Thats the way I read it too. It won't stop us leaving, but Its the single market (which we'll have to pay for access too), and thus freedom of movement, or nothing.
So... basically, as we were before but with no involvement in the decision making process.
Hurray for Taking Back Control!
You really couldn't make it up
Does the Labour Party have a leader?
From the media appearances, and the parliamentary coverage over the last few weeks, its Andy Burnham, isn't it?
He seems to have reached the point of exasperation and thought "Oh FFS! If you're not going to do it, I suppose someone best at least say something in public!"
I suspsect Jezza is busy deciding on who to deselect, and other more important stuff
Mefty - I mean Parliament imposes conditions on government at the time it authorises A50. Government not allowed to negotiate outside these conditions without returning to parliament.
£350m a week, faceless bureaucrats, EU laws screwing British trade and business
S****!
So they are idiots/morons, then?
is that they voted, largely on single issues: immigration [b]Overblown a D exaggerated [/b], £350m a week[b]lie[/b], faceless bureaucrats[b]mostly scare mongering by the UK not getting properly involvrd[/b], EU laws screwing British trade and business[b]any examples? [/b], London being the centre of it all[b]nothing to do with the eu[/b], politicians not representing them[b]nothing to do with the eu[/b]...whatever, but it was usually a single issue vote for each of them. I don't think their views will have changed, yes the economy is a little worse, but it's not greatly effected yet...and most don't understand that it'll be nearly 10 years before it really gets any better...
That seems like the problem, leaving eu was sold as fixing everything like those diet pills your doc wants to keep secret.
Present a Brexit policy that can be challenged and scrutinised, if they can't pass it go to a general election - you reckon labour would support a bad article 50 idea over an election? UKIP are in tatters at the moment.
Is it coincidence that the address of the high court is 48 The Strand?
This only gets worse. Ok I am a leaver but FFS we have had a vote and need to get on with making the best of a bad job. Negotiations via Parliament is a recipe for total chaos....
....wait a minute....::
... I detect a cunning plan 😉
