Jump to content

BREXIT


JohnfromUK
 Share

Recommended Posts

*Another Advisory Referendum 

The 2016 EU Referendum took all of 13 Months to plan legislate and deliver..

3.5 years later, the result of that referendum has not been enacted because of those parliamentarians who continue to not respect it.

‘Scrutiny’ is the key word being utilised by remainers to frustrate its delivery, in order to ultimately stop or delay the leave mandate.

Remainers are pushing to legislate for a ‘people’s vote’ (another referendum) but few understand the complex workings and inevitable ‘scrutiny’ that would be required!

The Speaker is biased, Parliament is ‘dead’ the government are toothless tigers, the opposition are divided, the SNP the DUP have their own agenda, the Brexit Party aren’t represented and the remaining parties are irrelevant, that leaves us, the electorate, frustrated, deeply divided, disenfranchised, ignored and betrayed, not knowing where we will be tomorrow let alone next week...

What is required for a referendum to be held in the UK?

Legislation – Primary legislation is needed to provide the legal basis for the referendum and to specify details that are not in standing legislation, including the referendum question, the franchise, the date of the referendum, and the conduct rules for the poll (although the latter two are often ultimately left to secondary legislation).

Question testing – The Electoral Commission has a statutory duty to assess the ‘intelligibility’ of the referendum question, a process that usually takes 12 weeks.

Preparation for the poll itself – The Electoral Commission and local officials need time to prepare for administering the poll and regulating campaigners. The Commission recommends that the legislation should be clear at least six months before it is due to be complied with.

Regulated referendum period – The UK’s referendum legislation – the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act (PPERA) – specifies a minimum 10-week campaign period, during which campaign regulation applies.

It would be extremely naive to think that the leave camp and their representatives would allow a free uninterrupted flow of events to path the way to another referendum, it would be extremely costly, not just to the public purse, but more importantly to our political constitution and parliamentary procedure, trust has already been lost, to repeat this referendum would have consequences that would bring the UK to its knees, that’s not democracy, it’s dictatorial!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 4.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

12 hours ago, Scully said:

The plan was to leave! What is so difficult to understand? We don’t NEED a deal to leave, why would we? Only those who want to remain are insistent on a deal, and now we have a deal they won’t accept it....because IT WAS NEVER ABOUT A DEAL! 
Yes, I want to leave without a deal. 

On a side note in reference to an earlier reply to a post of mine....if you want to bring god into the debate then we’ll have to resort to PM’s, where I’ll be more than happy to accommodate. 

For the sake of clarification, was? 

How poorly formed the leave argument is.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How poorly formed is your understanding of democracy! Sadly when democracy is destroyed and people like you also lose the protection of living in a democracy you might end up regretting supporting people who believe they are above democracy. Remember Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot Mugabe and Mao were all far too clever to listen to democracy and look what fun living under them was.

 

David.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

Interesting to note that Brexiteer MPs are incensed at Bercows refusal to hold a second vote on the BoJo deal yet vehemently oppose offering the same to the UK public...

I wasn't aware we had had a vote on the Boris deal 😹

5 minutes ago, Newbie to this said:

Fits right in, in the EU with corruption being second nature.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/donald-tusk-poland-president-plane-crash-2010-warsaw-court-russia-a8318316.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

Think about it.

Has parliament voted on it, no. 

Have we voted on it, no. 

So how has anyone been denied a SECOND  vote? 

And, when did the Brexit MPs DENY  the public a second vote on anything to do with Brexit? 

If anyone in the house wants a vote, or a 2nd vote, or a 3rd, when it comes to delaying Brexit, it doesn't appear to be a problem, does it? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Has parliament voted on it, no. 

Have we voted on it, no. 

So how has anyone been denied a SECOND  vote? 

And, when did the Brexit MPs DENY  the public a second vote on anything to do with Brexit? 

If anyone in the house wants a vote, or a 2nd vote, or a 3rd, when it comes to delaying Brexit, it doesn't appear to be a problem, does it? 

 

Surely a leave vote in the 2016 referendum was a vote based on:

  • Leave with a deal or without a deal
  • Leave with a deal
  • Leave without a deal
  • Eeny, meeny, miny, moe  (I'll check what the EU is on google tomorrow)

The first and second bullet choices were effectively a vote for whatever the government / Parliament agreed (or as it transpires thus far, not agreed).

I don't expect you to subscribe to the above because if you develop the logic further it points directly to the need for a second public vote to try to break the deadlock. I'm sure I don't need to remind you that leaving without a deal has only about 20% of public support (and party allegiances aside probably less than that in Parliament). I'm also pretty confident you don't advocate the eeny, meeny route...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

Surely a leave vote in the 2016 referendum was a vote based on:

  • Leave with a deal or without a deal
  • Leave with a deal
  • Leave without a deal
  • Eeny, meeny, miny, moe  (I'll check what the EU is on google tomorrow

Weirdly, it didn't say any of that on the ballot. 

It didn't say it on the 9 million quids worth of leaflet, kindly sent to us to explain the vote, and its repercussions. 

8 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

don't expect you to subscribe to the above because if you develop the logic further it points directly to the need for a second public vote to try to break the deadlock. I'm sure I don't need to remind you that leaving without a deal has only about 20% of public support (and party allegiances aside probably less than that in Parliament). I'm also pretty confident you don't advocate the eeny, meeny route

As I explained previously, due to electoral law, another ref, would take over a year, cost the public purse around £15 bn, and achieve what? 

Clarity, don't be ridiculous! 

WE have clarity now, are you arguing that there isn't more people inclined to leave now, than there was in 2016? 

A 2nd ref is a costly delaying tactic, costly to the tax payer, business, and in international standing. 

Pointless. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

I wasn't aware we had had a vote on the Boris deal

There has been no vote on Johnson's deal.  The vote was to an amendment (the so called Letwin amendment, voted on as amendment A) to the deal, not the deal itself  ........ and that passing meant that the government withdrew the bill from that session.  If you believe there was a vote - by what majority did it pass or fail please?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Weirdly, it didn't say any of that on the ballot. 

It didn't say it on the 9 million quids worth of leaflet, kindly sent to us to explain the vote, and its repercussions. 

As I explained previously, due to electoral law, another ref, would take over a year, cost the public purse around £15 bn, and achieve what? 

Clarity, don't be ridiculous! 

WE have clarity now, are you arguing that there isn't more people inclined to leave now, than there was in 2016? 

A 2nd ref is a costly delaying tactic, costly to the tax payer, business, and in international standing. 

Pointless. 

Precisely, and partly the reason why we are where we are.

Call it deadlock or livelock or whatever else you want but we are pretty much stuck at the moment - what do you suggest in order to move forward?

Where / what is this clarity you mention?

I'm arguing nothing of the sort, the polls are clear, frame the question a different way and legislate the outcome - well worth £15B in the long run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

There has been no vote on Johnson's deal.  The vote was to an amendment (the so called Letwin amendment, voted on as amendment A) to the deal, not the deal itself  ........ and that passing meant that the government withdrew the bill from that session.  If you believe there was a vote - by what majority did it pass or fail please?

I'm assuming the question was for Raja? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JohnfromUK said:

I'm happy to hear an answer from anyone who can provide it.  I do not believe there has been a vote, so I believe the Speaker is out of order.

 

1 hour ago, Rewulf said:

Has parliament voted on it, no. 

To confirm , there has not been a vote :good:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

I'm arguing nothing of the sort, the polls are clear

So we are in agreement , the majority of the public still want to leave, so no need for remain to be on the ballot of a theoretical 2nd ref/peoples vote.
Indeed, one could argue , there is no need for a 2nd ref at all, the matter could be settled via a cheaper, and quicker way, a GE.
If you want Boris's deal, vote tory , if you want no deal, vote BP,  If you want to go back to 1960 s USSR , vote labour.

 

35 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

frame the question a different way

See above.

 

36 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

well worth £15B in the long run.

Glad you think so, next thing , youll be blaming the tories for wasting public funds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

Agreed, no vote. The speaker explained his logic based on neither changes in substance or circumstance.

Its widely accepted that bercow broke convention, as , no vote had been held, so it wasnt a re run without changes or circumstance.
Bercow is obviously now acting without control ,and his bias is made clear, thats why the guns are being leveled at him.

The man is an utter hypocrite, with his own agenda starting to become apparent , he will do very well in his new role in the EU.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

So we are in agreement , the majority of the public still want to leave, so no need for remain to be on the ballot of a theoretical 2nd ref/peoples vote.
Indeed, one could argue , there is no need for a 2nd ref at all, the matter could be settled via a cheaper, and quicker way, a GE.
If you want Boris's deal, vote tory , if you want no deal, vote BP,  If you want to go back to 1960 s USSR , vote labour.

 

See above.

 

Glad you think so, next thing , youll be blaming the tories for wasting public funds.

Not quite, we agree what the polls say. polls are always right, right?

I'd vote lib dem (you didn't even include them as an option, lol)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

I'd vote lib dem (you didn't even include them as an option, lol)

I don't consider them a viable option, given their policies and past history. 

If you want a protest vote, vote Green, at least they don't change with the wind. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...