But what vote?
No one can agree even in the UK and that's before we start the proper negotiations, I hate to sound like a Brexshiteers but I have some sympathy with the idea that this is (in danger of becoming) merely an obstruction of the political process
It is a fantasy to believe that Parliament is going to be able to agree a strategy.
No one can agree even in the UK and that's before we start the proper negotiations, I hate to sound like a Brexshiteers but I have some sympathy with the idea that this is (in danger of becoming) merely an obstruction of the political process
Totally get that, it just highlights how absurd the whole thing is.
It is a fantasy to believe that Parliament is going to be able to agree a strategy.
well thats a problem isn't it and probably why it's going to be a massive cluster something...
As with many things the lawyers are already perusing the Fairline and Bently brochures
[I]For some sheer unbridled lunacy I can highly recommend listening to UKIP leadership hopeful Suzanne Evans on the R4 Today show (8:20), as she discusses Farage's call to arms and her view on the judiciary.[/I]
F***ing nutter, can't see beyond her dogmatic views.
It seem that are representatives have really lost control of their emotions over the past 4-5 days. The debate has descended to farcical levels now not helped by the absurd media coverage including the broadsheets. I was driving late last night and listening to a R4 debate at around midnight - there was some lady trying to justify the crap that the Torygraph had been saying (Judges v the people) She's was clearly articulate and intelligent but trying here very best to play down the latter.
It may well be that parliament fails to agree a workable strategy, but does that mean it can simply be bypassed?
Can we set a precedent whereby a government's self imposed problems can be solved simply through bypassing the democratic process?
Parliament manages to make many difficult decisions through debate and compromise. If there is no debate, there will only be what the current government want, and that will not be representative of what the 52% wanted.
It may well be that parliament fails to agree a workable strategy, but does that mean it can simply be bypassed?
I think we then have to fall back on ancient statute, and it then has to be settled by jousting
Trail by Combat!
Perhaps Enola's cunning plan is to have us thrown out of the EU for breach of its core values.
It may well be that parliament fails to agree a workable strategy, but does that mean it can simply be bypassed?
No the CoJ have explained why
Can we set a precedent whereby a government's self imposed problems can be solved simply through bypassing the democratic process?
There was a vote!! Ok CMD started this but the country lapped it up.
The democratic process will be respected by passing the AoP and allowing A50 to be triggered. The delay helps no one. We have to start negotiating and soon - this absurdity is going to go on too long as it is.
Trail by Combat
On the stay side Paddy killer Ashdown as our champion.
Who are you Outters putting forward?
Please be gove ,please be gove ,please be gove.
Gove or Farage and I'll happily take up cudgels. In a properly organised contest of course - no random violence please.
I'll have a go at Jousting her champion
[img]
There was a vote!!
Yes, but our 'democratic process' is not to simply have referenda on anything really complex and difficult and blindly follow the result.
šÆ really???
This is sounding more and more like - we, the "chosen we", dont like what the great unwashed have said, so we will ignore/frustrate them
We have GE when people dont understand the issues but we accept that - and remember all the BS with the Scottish referendum?
People have a right to vote however ill-informed they may be. That's how it works - yes it flawed - but its better than the alternative. We even have one version here, actually in its second iteration now, which proves this point very well. We dont silence the ignorant in this country.
mike: that's not a joust. That's a PiƱata š
[quote=teamhurtmore ]This is sounding more and more like - we, the "chosen we", dont like what the great unwashed have said, so we will ignore/frustrate them
You write that like it's a bad thing.
We have GE when people dont understand the issues but we accept that
We've done this one (multiple times) with a GE we might get 5 years of shit (though actually nothing close to the scale of change precipitated by this vote), but it's not even the case that the people get 5 years to recognise they've got it wrong - governments don't tend to do really mad things because they know they'll get found out. There is not chance to throw out leaving the EU, so they (think they) can get away with anything.
That's how it works - yes it flawed - but its better than the alternative. We even have one version here, actually in its second iteration now, which proves this point very well.
You're thinking of parliamentary democracy? Yes that works - for a limited definition of "works" (clearly there are ways to improve it a lot, but let's not get into that here). I don't see how that provides any evidence that direct democracy is a good thing, and recent evidence suggests the complete opposite - all sorts of alternatives to that which are clearly better.
We dont silent the ignorant.
No - preferably you provide them with something else to vote on where their ignorance does no harm. I'm a big fan of XF, BGT, SCD for that purpose.
I'm sure I'm coming across as arrogant and elitist in this post - but in my defence they started it.
We have GE when people dont understand the issues but we accept that
Yes, but you're voting for representatives, not a specific action.
People have a right to vote however ill-informed they may be.
Hang on - are you advocating direct democracy instead of representative?
We dont silence the ignorant in this country.
Problem is we don't appear to educate them either. They become a political tool rather than citizens.
We dont silence the ignorant in this country.
Given the present situation, I think its about time we started. We can begin with Iain Duncan Smith and some duct tape
Just because people exist, does not mean they should be put in charge of the country. Sorry, that's just stupid.
By all means have referenda to gague opinion on certain issues, then act appropriately. But you have to ask the right questions.
You write that like it's a bad thing.
It is - its undemocratic
No - preferably you provide them with something else to vote on where their ignorance does no harm.
Until they come up with the "correct" answer.
"Wow", and not in a good way!! Im dead against Brexshit but that is subordinate to protecting the democratic process. The latter is even more important
"This is sounding more and more like - we, the "chosen we", dont like what the great unwashed have said, so we will ignore/frustrate them"
It was looking that way from 7am on the morning of the result. Backtracking all round.
The Establishment have probably called this right.
We won't leave unless the likely fall out of leaving is less than the fall out of ignoring the 4pc spread in the referendum. (Whatever leaving means.)
Just because people exist, does not mean they should be put in charge of the country. Sorry, that's just stupid.
Thats no way to talk about HM Opposition.
The right question?? The last one was hardly difficult mol.
More like we're aware of what leavers voted against (the EU), but not what they expect to replace it other than the promises made by Vote Leave. Parliament is the right place to scrutinise the discussion beyond that. Not necessarily in frustrating exercise of A50, but framing how negotiations will be managed and the acceptability (or not) of what can negotiated if / when all the Vote Leave promises cannot be met.This is sounding more and more like - we, the "chosen we", dont like what the great unwashed have said, so we will ignore/frustrate them
THM let the 3 Brexiteers put their case to the parliament. I think when they do the only ones protesting will be Jamby/Chewkw and the EDL
THM - in the scheme of things GE's don't really matter. I do however object to the 'great unwashed' (your words) being able to take away personal rights and freedoms that I hold dear based on the b***sh** lies of the likes of Farage, Gove, Johnson et al who won't be affected anyway and who have their own very dubious agenda's to follow. Hitler was voted into power on the back of a democratic election and look how well that ended. As someone else has pointed don't confuse democracy with ochlocracy. Do none of you Brexiteers read or understand history though possibly not in this post truth world - you'll be telling us that the Terror was a proper and valid expression of the democratic will of the sans culottes next.
The democratic process will be respected by passing the AoP and allowing A50 to be triggered.
But she who must be obeyed wanted to bypass Parliament. How else does an Act get passed?
Nipper - I am against Brexshit. Always have been.
So Mike what exactly do you want the nutters to put before the house. This is the start of a negotiation process. The great washed in the house, know the range of options and there strengths and weaknesses. We do not have the luxury of an a la carte menu to chose from in advance. In contrast, we have to placate and negotiate with 27 parties who we have pissed off and insulted.
Its a fantasy to believe that we will have a sensible further debate - just look at the last few days....
But she who must be obeyed wanted to bypass Parliament. How else does an Act get passes?
Yes and she has had her wrists slapped. We know that. Move on.
THM - in the scheme of things GE's don't really matter.
We really have entered a screwed up world!!!!
Did I miss the invite to the mass piss-up? š
So Mike what exactly do you want the nutters to put before the house.
At the moment I'll take Corbyns 4 lines
I can't see how the Outters are all upset about the vote.
We are all going to get steak it's just we get to choose how it's cooked.
Stop ****ing moaning . You "won" .
[quote=teamhurtmore ]It is - its undemocratic
Democracy is the means, not the end. The ultimate objective is to make people's lives better, and actually the things which matter to people are food, shelter, warmth, friends, family... Getting what you voted for in an abstract way is way down that list.
And as for Enola and her comments on the freedom of the press - the Brexopaths have falsely called fire and substitute congress for parliament:
The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic. [...] The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent.
Remind me, is he blocking or not? š
Sounds like he basically wants the status quo (not an unreasonable position) but that is not what was voted for, so rather disingenuous.
Sounds like he basically wants the status quo (not an unreasonable position) but that is not what was voted for, so rather disingenuous.
Personally that middle band at bugger all either side sounds like the status quo
teamhurtmore Ā» It is - its undemocratic
5 minutes listening to the regulars in my local would soon put you straight on allowing 'the people' to decide anything
Getting what you voted for in an abstract way is way down that list.
šÆ How abstract is the majority saying that they do not want to be part of the EU? Seems pretty real to me.
(Mistakenly) this is what the "Great" British public want and this is what they are going to get.
Just because we dont like the result doesnt meant that we abandon the principles that make us stronger.
"At the moment I'll take Corbyns 4 lines"
All of which can be achieved without any negotiation at all.
Although on workers rights, how would you determine if our rights slipped behind in future - it's a bit subjective.
OK - I am on the losing side here š
Totalitarianism Rules OK
Are we going to allow Etonions and redheads to vote in future? š
5 minutes l[s]istening to the regulars in my local[/s] on the indy threads would soon put you straight on allowing 'the people' to decide anything
FTFY - I am now getting what you mean though. Not a bad plan after all!!! š
It is a fantasy to believe that Parliament is going to be able to agree a strategy.
If that is the case, then why would that be?
If the government can't even get Tory MPs to back a plan drawn up and proposed by its PM, then perhaps it is a plan that needs improving.
The idea that that PM can do whatever they want, in cases where she can't get agreement from parliament, is a worrying one. Parliament will seek to amend, and in their eyes improve, the stratagy proposed, which is what they are supposed to do. If they aren't allowed to do that, then why not get rid of MPs and just vote for one leader who calls all the shots?
The Leave campaign must be held accountable for its promises before the referendum.
Their lies have created an awful situation.
Im not even sure what we have much to negotiate so the whole charade is a bit pointless
its basically Norway option or nothing
Who are they? A group of X-party nutters. They are neither the government nor the Oppo (does that exist yet BTW?). How do you hold them responsible - a kangaroo court?
The Leave campaign must be held accountable for its promises before the referendum.
[img] 
[/img]
