Consequences of Brexit [part 7] Read first post before posting

[Litotes 63]

3 hours ago, Lockdoctor said:

A General Election is not the same as a Referendum.  Of cause the opposition party should not support issues they don't agree with during a Parliament after a General Election and support issue they agree with.   A referendum is only ever about one single issue and the winners should take all after the binary choice as been decided by the democratic people.

But my parents voted in the 70s to be part of the EU (not called that then) in a referendum, then this one has come along and undemocratically overturned that choice.

So much for winner takes all...

 

Not very democratic!

[Lockdoctor 10]

1 hour ago, Litotes said:

But my parents voted in the 70s to be part of the EU (not called that then) in a referendum, then this one has come along and undemocratically overturned that choice.

So much for winner takes all...

 

Not very democratic!

Your parents voted to either remain or leave the EEC in 1975.  Remain won the 1975 referendum.  The organisation the UK people voted to remain in 1975 is not the same organisation the UK people voted to leave  in 2016.  Nothing has been overturned and the 2016 EU referendum result is  most definitely  not undemocratic.  Unlike the 1975 democratic referendum result the 2016 democratic  result still hasn't been implemented.

[ads36 222]

And it won't be if we leave without a deal.

 

(What with the leave campaign assuring us that we'd leave with a deal. No deal being dismissed as 'project fear')

[Pettytom 1]

2 minutes ago, ads36 said:

And it won't be if we leave without a deal.

 

(What with the leave campaign assuring us that we'd leave with a deal. No deal being dismissed as 'project fear')

One of the easiest deals in human history .

 

Or, so I heard.

[Top Cats Hat 10]

6 minutes ago, Lockdoctor said:

 the 2016 democratic  result still hasn't been implemented.

It has been implemented.

 

It was an advisory only referendum and because a slight majority of those who voted, voted to leave, the government accepted the ‘advice’ and pledged to leave, therefore the result was implemented.

 

The rest is up to Parliament.

 

And because the majority of people then and now believe that we should remain in the EU, taking the ‘advice’ of a minority has proved somewhat difficult.

[Lockdoctor 10]

13 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

It has been implemented.

 

It was an advisory only referendum and because a slight majority of those who voted, voted to leave, the government accepted the ‘advice’ and pledged to leave, therefore the result was implemented.

 

The rest is up to Parliament.

 

And because the majority of people then and now believe that we should remain in the EU, taking the ‘advice’ of a minority has proved somewhat difficult.

It is irrelevant that the referendum was advisory because Parliament have long since accepted the advice the democratic people gave them on 23rd June 2016 by passing into law that our country is leaving the EU.  You need to listed to Jacob Rees-Mogg  who is the new leader of the House of Commons because he explains the legal situation very well.

[Top Cats Hat 10]

6 minutes ago, Lockdoctor said:

It is irrelevant that the referendum was advisory because Parliament have long since accepted the advice the democratic people gave them on 23rd June 2016 by passing into law that our country is leaving the EU.  

So you agree that the referendum result has been implemented and that it now a matter for Parliament?

[Pettytom 1]

9 minutes ago, Lockdoctor said:

It is irrelevant that the referendum was advisory because Parliament have long since accepted the advice the democratic people gave them on 23rd June 2016 by passing into law that our country is leaving the EU.  You need to listed to Jacob Rees-Mogg  who is the new leader of the House of Commons because he explains the legal situation very well.

Let’s hope that he explains the legal situation better than he managed to write about prominent Victorians.

 

Here’s a reminder of his “staggeringly silly ...  pompous schoolboy composition”

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/19/jacob-rees-mogg-book-the-victorians-12-titans-who-forged-britain

 

The well of Tory talent is truly running dry.

[Litotes 63]

2 hours ago, Lockdoctor said:

Your parents voted to either remain or leave the EEC in 1975.  Remain won the 1975 referendum.  The organisation the UK people voted to remain in 1975 is not the same organisation the UK people voted to leave  in 2016.  Nothing has been overturned and the 2016 EU referendum result is  most definitely  not undemocratic.  Unlike the 1975 democratic referendum result the 2016 democratic  result still hasn't been implemented.

But if the results of the 2016 advisory referendum is enacted, then the 1975 result will be overturned - democratic overthrow through mob rule!

 

Alternatively, the organisation that people voted to leave in 2016 is not the same one that it is in 2019, and because you maintain when something changes, you have the 'democratic' right to another referendum, then you actually back up the claims for another referendum - thank you for supporting our democratic cause.

[Lockdoctor 10]

11 hours ago, Litotes said:

But if the results of the 2016 advisory referendum is enacted, then the 1975 result will be overturned - democratic overthrow through mob rule!

 

Alternatively, the organisation that people voted to leave in 2016 is not the same one that it is in 2019, and because you maintain when something changes, you have the 'democratic' right to another referendum, then you actually back up the claims for another referendum - thank you for supporting our democratic cause.

You don't understand what overturning an election result is.  An election result is only overturned if the body responsible for an election judge something improper has occurred.  Sometimes election results are overturned if the result is close and a recount happen.  The 1975 referendum result was fully implemented so will never be overturned.

 

There have been no significant changes to the EU since 2016 other than one of the members have democratically voted to leave the organisation and triggered Article 50.  I didn't maintain when something changes there is a democratic right to have another referendum.  However, there was justification to have the 2016 EU referendum so long after the 1975 referendum because of the time factor and amount of changes which have happened over the years. There is no justification for our country to have another EU referendum until a significant time has passed after the implementation of the democratic 2016 EU result.

[Robin-H 11]

20 hours ago, Top Cats Hat said:

And even if they did, the one in 2016 was an advisory referendum with only 37% of the electorate voting to leave and 36% voting to stay.

 

Anyone trying to claim any kind of democratic mandate from that result needs to give their head a wobble.

What figures would you agree was a democratic mandate? 

[Albert the Cat 0]

2 hours ago, Lockdoctor said:

You don't understand what overturning an election result is.  An election result is only overturned if the body responsible for an election judge something improper has occurred.  Sometimes election results are overturned if the result is close and a recount happen.  The 1975 referendum result was fully implemented so will never be overturned.

 

There have been no significant changes to the EU since 2016 other than one of the members have democratically voted to leave the organisation and triggered Article 50.  I didn't maintain when something changes there is a democratic right to have another referendum.  However, there was justification to have the 2016 EU referendum so long after the 1975 referendum because of the time factor and amount of changes which have happened over the years. There is no justification for our country to have another EU referendum until a significant time has passed after the implementation of the democratic 2016 EU result.

Justification is not just based on time. If Parliament cannot pass a motion because there is no consensus then a referendum is very much an option to proceed. The other options are a general election or revoking A50. 

 

I actually love to break it to you, a “no deal” scenario is absolutely not an option. There is simply not the parliamentary arithmetic to make it happen. The Tories will have a majority of ONE. That is assuming the 30 or so Tory MPs vote with the government that have said they won’t support no deal. 

 

The PM cannot prorogue Parliament either because legislation is in place to prevent him from doing it. 

 

A General Election is happening before October 31st if he genuinely wants to take us out of the EU. This actually creates a strange situation. A GE can only be called if two thirds of Parliament agree to have one. So what would happen if a two thirds majority isn’t secured?