BREXIT

[das]

Here we go again. Now we need some really cunning tactical measures to complete our democratic vote of 2016.

[vmaxphil]

I think we need a ge right now to clear the carp out of parliament and start again, not that will make any difference though in the long run 

[SpringDon]

14 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

Nigel Farage tweet: "The calling of a Queen's Speech and prorogation is the worst political decision ever. Dominic Cummings must go."

I knew I'd one day find something he said that I agreed with 🙂

Farage  sounding reasonable; that’s how bad things have got.

[Scully]

21 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

Don't forget, he'd rather lay dead in a ditch.

😂 I seriously doubt it; he’s a politician! 

[JRDS]

I didn't expect anything else from this lot of Remoaning judges.

Edited September 24, 2019 by JRDS

[Raja Clavata]

8 minutes ago, Scully said:

😂 I seriously doubt it; he’s a politician! 

Fair point 👍

[Rewulf]

10 minutes ago, das said:

Here we go again. Now we need some really cunning tactical measures to complete our democratic vote of 2016.

LETS BE AVIN YOOOUUUU ! 

[ditchman]

34 minutes ago, Mice! said:

Never, have you watched the Matrix?

yeah ........at least the matrix had a bloody ending..........

no doubt there will be a cunning plan somewhere along the line.......

 

the media are pooping their pants in delight ....over all this.....wellll at least someone is happy

Edited September 24, 2019 by ditchman

[Rewulf]

Lets be really clear on this.
Did you really expect any other result ? Really?

Any legislation that supported us leaving (at all) fails at parliamentary or judicial stage, and any options that suggest giving the decision back to the people are dismissed.
Decide for yourself why this is, and whether its democratic or not.

But dont for one moment quote legality, because this is being made up as they go along.
Its only illegal because they have just decided it is.

[Raja Clavata]

28 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Yes I know I dont trust polls, polls predicted a remain result remember ?

But theres barely one out there that doesnt predict a con win, and thats now, if we dont leave come Halloween , those labour leave voters are gonna be pretty annoyed.

sorry missed this, I think the key parameter is who does deals with who.

[Rewulf]

3 minutes ago, ditchman said:

the media are pooping their pants in delight ....over all this.....wellll at least someone is happy

I am detecting a subtle change in the bias of the media, especially the beeb reporters.

They seem somewhat jaded with the efforts by the remainers to stop Brexit, realising now that , no deal was not the bogey, its leave itself they are trying to stop, despite obvious public opinion, especially outside the London bubble.

[timps]

59 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

This could still be overturned in an even more ironic step at the EU supreme court.

Nope the  European Court of Human Rights or the Court of Justice of the European Union cannot overrule the UK Supreme court. What actually happens is any cases that are directly applicable European Union law are referred by the UKSC to the Court of Justice of the European Union and not heard by them.

[Retsdon]

In the meantime, away from the Punch and Judy show of British domestic politics, Barnier has nixed Boris's half-baked rehash of May's Lancaster House ideas - as anyone with half a brain knew he inevitably would.

You'd have thought that it would be obvious by now after all this time that EU isn't going to tear up its own rule book to accommodate a 3rd party country.  And that would suggests that Boris and friends are either a) thick as posts, or b) don't want a deal of any kind and are just pretending to negotiate while running down the clock.

My guess is b), and that Britain will be out of the EU on Halloween. 

[Rewulf]

3 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

sorry missed this, I think the key parameter is who does deals with who.

Definitely, but I think the writings on the wall if you think about it..

1 minute ago, Retsdon said:

b) don't want a deal of any kind and are just pretending to negotiate while running down the clock.

My guess is b), and that Britain will be out of the EU on Halloween. 

I concur.

 

2 minutes ago, timps said:

Nope the  European Court of Human Rights or the Court of Justice of the European Union cannot overrule the UK Supreme court. What actually happens is any cases that are directly applicable European Union law are referred by the UKSC to the Court of Justice of the European Union and not heard by them.

Im sure you know more about it than me, I just read it somewhere.

It was more of a tongue in cheek thing anyway, as such cases literally take YEARS !
Like I say, the whole idea of it, to my mind , is to expose certain factions for what they are, there was no real tactical advantage.

[grrclark]

1 hour ago, Rewulf said:

Or maybe just bought off, financially or otherwise ?

Not like a judge to ever make the wrong decision either is it ?

Think about it, they are making a decision based upon the law, English law is based on precedent, of which there is none in this case.
So they have basically now MADE a law, based on their OPINION around the matter.
Stormy seas ahead now captain.

That’s not wholly accurate.

Part of our legal system is based on precedent, but precedent is not absolute, i.e. precedent can be established and followed in a lower court, but over ruled by a higher court and there is no absolute need for precedent to exist to pass a judgement. The Inner House of the Court of Session had already ruled in favour of the claimants, the Supreme Court upheld that.

With 11 supreme judges arriving at a unanimous outcome I don’t think we can possibly level any accusation of impropriety towards them.  They have made a reasoned judgement based on the evidence presented and their learned interpretation of the law, not simply opinion.

The same level of propriety cannot be considered of all those who oppose Brexit however and no matter of meretricious argument or sophistry disguises the truth that there is a concerted campaign to oppose the outcome of the referendum at all costs.

In this case Boris has had a significant lapse of judgement or received ill considered advice.  I don’t think it merits him resigning however as that would not advance the country in any way just now.

The opposition need to support a call for a general election though and let the voters make their decision on the suitability of the bufoon.  (He will get the highest voter share all the same, but will it bring a majority?)

[Rewulf]

3 minutes ago, grrclark said:

Part of our legal system is based on precedent, but precedent is not absolute, i.e. precedent can be established and followed in a lower court, but over ruled by a higher court and there is no absolute need for precedent to exist to pass a judgement. The Inner House of the Court of Session had already ruled in favour of the claimants, the Supreme Court upheld that.

Im not sure I have disagreed with that ?
The higher court in this case being the supreme court has judged, using their knowledge of the ....

 

5 minutes ago, grrclark said:

evidence presented and their learned interpretation of the law,

Does opinion not come into it?
Although they are supposed to be unbiased politically, can we say that their political opinions have not come into their decisions ?
Another court said that the judiciary should not rule on political decisions ?

Surely a precedent has now been set , that the judiciary can now interfere in political decisions ?
A veritable Pandoras box .

9 minutes ago, grrclark said:

The same level of propriety cannot be considered of all those who oppose Brexit however and no matter of meretricious argument or sophistry disguises the truth that there is a concerted campaign to oppose the outcome of the referendum at all costs.

Its  shame we cant take them to court for this ?

 

10 minutes ago, grrclark said:

In this case Boris has had a significant lapse of judgement or received ill considered advice.  I don’t think it merits him resigning however as that would not advance the country in any way just now.

As stated , I believe it to be a tactic, I dont see where the advantage was.

 

11 minutes ago, grrclark said:

The opposition need to support a call for a general election though and let the voters make their decision on the suitability of the bufoon.  (He will get the highest voter share all the same, but will it bring a majority?)

Why would they, when they know they will lose ?
Theoretically, they could keep going for another 2 years like this,
Theoretically they could change the law regarding the fixed term Parliament act ect.#

Will we have to take them to court ?

[Retsdon]

You have to wonder how long Johnson can remain as Prime Minister though. He's lost every single vote that his government has put in front of Parliament, and now his political initiative to prorogue (who ever even knew that word 2 months ago!) has been declared unlawful by 11 Law Lords, without a single dissenting voice.

If nothing else it just shows what desperately  p*** poor judgement the man has. It doesn't exactly inspire confidence.

[Capt Christopher Jones]

[grrclark]

3 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Im not sure I have disagreed with that ?
The higher court in this case being the supreme court has judged, using their knowledge of the ....

 

Does opinion not come into it?
Although they are supposed to be unbiased politically, can we say that their political opinions have not come into their decisions ?
Another court said that the judiciary should not rule on political decisions ?

Surely a precedent has now been set , that the judiciary can now interfere in political decisions ?
A veritable Pandoras box .

Its  shame we cant take them to court for this ?

 

As stated , I believe it to be a tactic, I dont see where the advantage was.

 

Why would they, when they know they will lose ?
Theoretically, they could keep going for another 2 years like this,
Theoretically they could change the law regarding the fixed term Parliament act ect.#

Will we have to take them to court ?

I don’t believe that I could ever further an argument to remove any doubts of partiality on behalf of the judges, but 11 supreme justices reaching a unanimous outcome should really put that doubt beyond reach.

Have the judges strayed into the political space?  I think advocates going forward will argue both sides of that question and I think hereafter we will see more litigious actions around political decision, the first Millar case opened that box.

It isn’t completely without precedent though, there have been cases in Scotland that i’m aware of, i’m sure there has been in England & Wales too.  Obviously not quite the same.

I wish we could have legal recourse to challenge the parliamentarians that I believe are acting mendaciously, but sadly it seems that the parliament is subject to less scrutiny via the courts than the executive; unless of course in the case of the EU Withdrawal Bill 2 (The Benn Bill) when parliament took control of proceedings and that could be subject to judicial appeal should you feel strongly enough about it, had sufficient cause to challenge it and had deep enough pockets to fund it.

I should add, being denied a direct opportunity to hold those parliamentarians to account via a GE is, I think, the greatest insult to our democracy so virtuously defended by those sovereign parliamentarians who are denying us that choice.  Hypocrites one and all who voted against.

The FTPA is and was an act of democratic vandalism. 

[Walker570]

Sod the weather squirrels staying in bed....I've given up on this Brexit garbage.  When 14yr olds are given the stage at the UN and  criminals get released after a third of the sentence given, then I will just get up in the morning and go enjoy myself and wait for the next General Election and the resulting carnage.  Bring it on.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

1 minute ago, Walker570 said:

Sod the weather squirrels staying in bed....I've given up on this Brexit garbage.  When 14yr olds are given the stage at the UN and  criminals get released after a third of the sentence given, then I will just get up in the morning and go enjoy myself and wait for the next General Election and the resulting carnage.  Bring it on.

I completely agree, hopefully someone might just resurrect the Guy Fawkes option!

[figgy]

Tightchoke I said the same to my wife couple of hours ago. The whole lot of them could with going. Guy Fawkes wasn't wrong. Think a lot of the country feels let down by our so called politicians and total disregard of democracy.

[dodeer]

The emigration rate for brits moving abroad but specifically Hungary is rising steadily.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

If this ruling from the Supreme Court leads to questioning Boris Johnson's integrity and position as Prime Minister, when will someone mount a legal challenge to get MPs to do the bidding of the electorate?

[Vince Green]

I thought parliament made the laws and the Judiciary interpreted them?. Not any more it seems.

This judgement is massively more significant than it appears at face value. Never before has the Court claimed power over Parliament. Its actually a hijack.