Brexit - whats the difference.....

[Mr_Slot5]

The backstop is supposedly just there as an insurance policy if no final deal can be agreed, so on the 31st oct we leave the EU but enter a two year period of continued free trade while a full trade deal is negotiated. Why do we have to agree a backstop now that if a final deal is not reached within two years, the EU rules/laws will then apply to northern ireland and there is no legal right to exit this arrangement without the EU agreeing. Does this sound like the kind of condition any right thinking prime minister would agree to, to just cede away sovereignty from a part of the UK? Talk about negotiating with a loaded gun pointing at your own head.

It's just a BS trap as far as I can tell...maybe I'm missing something? The uk has a greater sovereign right/link to northern ireland than the EU does with ireland, surely. Imagine we tried the opposite and said to protect northern ireland, the republic of ireland needs to be our backstop and in the event no deal is reached after two years must follow uk rules, how would that go down?

Yes but a lot of remainers only want to see it from the side of the EU and what is in the interests of 'the club'.

They seem to not care what powers are ceded to the EU and it's downright strange.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

They seem to not care what powers are ceded to the EU and it's downright strange.

Given the pantomime villain antics of Johnson, the stunning incompetence of May, and over a decade of grinding Tory austerity, I'd happily give the EU more powers, not less. I trust them far more than I do our current government. The EU have conducted themselves with dignity, respect, and have repeatedly held out the hand of friendship to us, in return we've given them an incompetent clown in the form of Johnson to deal with, following on from the sly and untrustworthy May.

I mean, the most powerful man in the UK at the moment is Dominic Cummings, a man who has been held in contempt of parliament and was instrumental in a referendum campaign that broke the law - how many of you remember voting for him?

Then again I feel more European than I do British, despite having been born and bred in Manchester. I don't think being British is anything to be particularly proud of in and of itself, it's just the country I was born in. There are wonderful things about Britain of course, and many great British people, but the fact that they're British doesn't make them intrinsically worth more than anything or anyone else, and TBH I find British exceptionalism to be tiresome in the extreme, and it's behind much of the nonsense of the entire Brexit debate - this stupid idea that somehow we're 'better' than everyone else just because we're British.

We're just human beings, the same as everyone else.

 

[steveh35]

Given the pantomime villain antics of Johnson, the stunning incompetence of May, and over a decade of grinding Tory austerity, I'd happily give the EU more powers, not less. I trust them far more than I do our current government. The EU have conducted themselves with dignity, respect, and have repeatedly held out the hand of friendship to us, in return we've given them an incompetent clown in the form of Johnson to deal with, following on from the sly and untrustworthy May.

I mean, the most powerful man in the UK at the moment is Dominic Cummings, a man who has been held in contempt of parliament and was instrumental in a referendum campaign that broke the law - how many of you remember voting for him?

Then again I feel more European than I do British, despite having been born and bred in Manchester. I don't think being British is anything to be particularly proud of in and of itself, it's just the country I was born in. There are wonderful things about Britain of course, and many great British people, but the fact that they're British doesn't make them intrinsically worth more than anything or anyone else, and TBH I find British exceptionalism to be tiresome in the extreme, and it's behind much of the nonsense of the entire Brexit debate - this stupid idea that somehow we're 'better' than everyone else just because we're British.

We're just human beings, the same as everyone else.

Laura Keunessberg just said on BBC News at 10 the EU is refusing to budge if the EU won't budge how can you negotiate a deal, they are being totally unreasonable and they sure don't seem to want this to end soon.

 

[Playford7]

Can we all just have a moment to laugh at the ‘lib fems’ please.
Ty

 

[thr0b]

The backstop is there to protect Ireland and the EU.

Any problem leavers have with the backstop logically means they know that at the end of the transition, there is likely to be no workable solution to the backstop, ergo it will remain.

As should we.

 

[Harry_BKK]

The backstop is supposedly just there as an insurance policy if no final deal can be agreed, so on the 31st oct we leave the EU but enter a two year period of continued free trade while a full trade deal is negotiated. Why do we have to agree a backstop now that if a final deal is not reached within two years, the EU rules/laws will then apply to northern ireland and there is no legal right to exit this arrangement without the EU agreeing. Does this sound like the kind of condition any right thinking prime minister would agree to, to just cede away sovereignty from a part of the UK? Talk about negotiating with a loaded gun pointing at your own head.

It's just a BS trap as far as I can tell...maybe I'm missing something? The uk has a greater sovereign right/link to northern ireland than the EU does with ireland, surely. Imagine we tried the opposite and said to protect northern ireland, the republic of ireland needs to be our backstop and in the event no deal is reached after two years must follow uk rules, how would that go down?

It is the EU's fault the British people would not have voted to leave had the EU been a great place to be in, it isn't it is full of Luxembourg type leaders, they refuse to reopen the withdraw agreement so how can Johnson negotiate a new deal when they refuse to reopen it?

Corbyn says he will go to Brussels and get a new deal...they will not reopen the agreement how can he get a new deal?

The EU says it's all the UK's fault and the UK has to say what it wants, how can the UK say what it wants when the EU has said deal is closed not being reopened.

Clearly the EU is not open to renegotiation so what do you expect Johnson to do?

The EU is not open to change they have said constantly that they won't reopen the withdraw agreement therefore nothing can be changed until they grow up and start negotiating again like adults and stop blaming the UK for the EU's flaws that caused the UK people to want to leave.

If the EU was so great we wouldn't have voted to leave therefore they need to look at themselves and their rules.

I see the grand delusion is setting in and you started, as expected, the blame game.

As for negotiations, please go through the EU archives and read how willing the UK was to negotiate when it came to the outer border of the EU as it starting exanding after 1990 (e.g. Hungary/Serbia, Austria/Slovenia, Slovenia/Croatia, etc.) and how adamant your representatives (including Farage) were that there will be no budging from the UK site. Not a single iota. Of course, now they are asking for full flexibility. You know, that is called "what goes around, comes around" ...

Johnson in his "hulk-uesque" manner assured everyone that he has some clever alternatives to the backstop. Until now he presented ZERO .....can you read that??? I repeat it just for you..... ZERO

Plus, you will have probably insurmountable problems signing a trade deal with the US (you know, the one Johnson is thinking that he has already in the bag and will bring the UK vast and untold riches ) if there are any issues with the Irish border. The US Congress (the Irish faction) will not ever sign off a trade treaty if the Good Friday Agreement is somehow in jeopardy.

But please...keep on crying ..."wahawahawahawaha, the EU is so bad and the Luxembourg PM, oh, he is bad too" .... and trying to blame anyone and everyone but yourselves and your government. Johnson played a big political gamble and until now lost it in dramatic fashion. Accept it and move on or keep the "cry-me-a-river" going.

One more time, but I am sure it will not sink into your brains..... The EU offered to listen if Johnson can present something viable!!! Period! The buck is in his corner and no one elses.

 

[steveh35]

Can we all just have a moment to laugh at the ‘lib fems’ please.
Ty

The Lib Dems and Swinson have put themselves in a very silly position

Swinson claims if she wins an election that shows UK wants to stay in EU, but even Jo Swinson knows under First Past The Post only Tory or Labour will win so in effect she has in fact stated that the UK won't vote to remain in a general election.

She is also claiming that if Tory or Labour win they have to hold a second referendum but if Lib Dems win there will be no 2nd referendum.

Swinson is also facing a strong SNP challenge in her Scottish constituency so she may not even be an MP after an election.

The Lib Dems have really shot themselves in the foot with this policy and some are bringing the student tuition fees lies back out from the cobwebs.

It has also been noted that the late Paddy Ashdown stated there must be a second referendum as the people must decide.

Not a good week for Jo Swinson her party conference now overshadowed by Boris in Europe tour.

 

[colinsunderland]

 

[Jammie_Ch]

Brexit is the hot topic everywhere even at this casino forum.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

 

[dunover]

there is likely to be no workable solution to the backstop, ergo it will remain.
As should we.

And we could have if remain had won the referendum.

 

[steveh35]

Has Jo Swinson got any brain cells in her head she wants to win an election and gain 300 seats and she goes and calls 17.4m people "insular, closed and selfish".

I would suggest Ms Swinson if you want the Lib Dems to win anything that you might actually need the support of some floating voters who are undecided or swing voters and calling people names and denying the result of the largest democratic vote the UK has ever seen is not likely to help you achieve your aim.

 

[steveh35]

Tony Blair the biggest advocate of remaining in the EU, you would think the Lib Dems might like him but err apparently not.

 

[geordiecolin]

Given that the high court judges are placed in their positions to do the establishments bidding its little wonder that their decissions will be based on suiting an agenda.
Who would have guessed that the Scots deemed that Boris had erred?

 

[geordiecolin]

Has Jo Swinson got any brain cells in her head she wants to win an election and gain 300 seats and she goes and calls 17.4m people "insular, closed and selfish".

I would suggest Ms Swinson if you want the Lib Dems to win anything that you might actually need the support of some floating voters who are undecided or swing voters and calling people names and denying the result of the largest democratic vote the UK has ever seen is not likely to help you achieve your aim.

I think that the Lib Dems have isolated themselves both from some of their core supporters as well as from those that they wished to gain and this time round they will not pick up many seats via tactical voting like they may have done in recent times

 

[steveh35]

Given that the high court judges are placed in their positions to do the establishments bidding its little wonder that their decissions will be based on suiting an agenda.
Who would have guessed that the Scots deemed that Boris had erred?

Actually Sky News did some profile on the judges and quite a few of them have voted against the government before in the article 50 case, so they are not guaranteed to agree with the government.

 

[geordiecolin]

Actually Sky News did some profile on the judges and quite a few of them have voted against the government before in the article 50 case, so they are not guaranteed to agree with the government.

That may well be the case but if the establishment had of wanted Brexit then the whole issue would have been done and dusted long ago

 

[thr0b]

The Lib Dems have a clear policy; they prefer a second referendum. However if they won a majority in an election, their policy is to revoke, as that's a clear mandate on their manifesto. Both are valid positions.

 

[thr0b]

And again, the 2016 referendum had no more legal standing than a survey on Sky News or YouGov or SurveyMonkey. It was advisory. Parliament could have chosen to ignore the advice, and there would have been no comeback legally.

This is basic stuff. I wish leavers could actually understand this.

 

[steveh35]

The Lib Dems have a clear policy; they prefer a second referendum. However if they won a majority in an election, their policy is to revoke, as that's a clear mandate on their manifesto. Both are valid positions.

A clear policy? They are not going to win under first past the post so they know they won't have to implement the revoke they can say anything they want they know they won't be a majority government.

Have you never heard the Lib Dems promise things they can't implement before? a clue student fees.

 

[thr0b]

I don’t see what’s unclear about it. The chances of them winning a majority are slim, hence their preference for a referendum.

And the Lib Dem promise on student fees wasn’t workable as minority partners in a Tory government.

The Tories did a good job there. They managed to get the Lib Dems blamed for the Tory policies. Amazing bit of stagecraft really.

In the same way the Tories are currently painting all the problems of Brexit (which were predicted before the referendum and dismissed as Project Fear) as problems caused by remainers essentially “not below believing hard enough” in Brexit, as if like bringing Tinkerbell back to life we can be immune to the fact that the world has changed in half a century, and the UK on its own is an irrelevance to the rest of the world. And will become more so when the UK is down to England and Wales only.

 

[dunover]

A clear policy? They are not going to win under first past the post so they know they won't have to implement the revoke they can say anything they want they know they won't be a majority government.

Have you never heard the Lib Dems promise things they can't implement before? a clue student fees.

The LD's are an irrelevance. Swindleson is a liar anyway as I doubt the Electoral Commission would sanction another binary referendum anyway due to the first result not being enacted yet. Secondly, it would likely be stopped by judges for this reason, when leavers take it to the Surpeme Court and do the same as the self-publicist Miller did. Their definition of 'democrat' seems to be two fingers to 17.4 million voters, and they are essentially everything the nutters accuse Farage's party of being, i.e. an extremist fringe. And she really needs to see a dentist.

P.S. That video - notably not a mention as of yet on the BBC's website. Funny that. Oh, a few paratroops (white of course!) use an image of Corbum for target practice, gets on BBC News at Ten on TV.

The LD's remind me of the eurocraps we saw in that 2-part documentary filmed in Brussels after the Brexit vote - the public face is very different to the loud-mouthed drunken inepts and tw*ts they really are.

 

[steveh35]

French president and Finnish prime minister tells Boris he has 12 days to come up with a plan or that's it and the UK will have to leave with no deal.

That should upset the remainers and their extension plans.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[goatwack]

Well if the Finnish president says so he'd better pull his finger out

 

[steveh35]

Well if the Finnish president says so he'd better pull his finger out

Sorry have amended the text

 

[ChopleyIOM]

And a slightly more realistic take on the same scenario.

That's the thing with liars, cheats, frauds, scammers, and charlatans - eventually their luck runs out.

Boris Johnson's moment of truth is finally upon us. Yesterday evening the prime minister of Finland, which holds the EU Council's rotating presidency, announced that our favourite cartoon character must submit his legal proposals to replace the backstop by September 30th, or ''it's over''. The deadline provides a generous extension to Angela Merkel's previous offer of 30 days, which expires tomorrow, and allows EU leaders the necessary time to consider any new proposals before the summit on October 17th, when a new deal must be signed off.

Sadly for Johnson, this is not so much an essay crisis as a sci-fi challenge. The UK has had three years to come up with a system which implements different economic regimes for goods on the island of Ireland while obviating the need to check any of them at the land border. It will not suddenly invent one in the next eleven days. If Johnson fails to submit a proposal, the EU will forget about signing a new deal next month. If he does submit one, it will combust the Tory conference on its first day. Not for the first time in his short and dire premiership, the prime minister is completely trapped in a hole of his own making.

---------------

Johnson is quickly discovering that Brexit will ruin him just as it did both his predecessors – and how. He can't accept the current backstop. The Yellowhammer leaks mean he can't accept no-deal. He has to seek a Brexit extension in all circumstances even though he proclaimed he would rather die in a ditch. After weeks of catastrophic blunders and own goals, he is finally set to bury himself under the monument of his own primal hubris. It would take a heart of stone not to laugh.

Link to piece -

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

The UK government has now released its official guidance as to how UK fishermen can sell their fish into the EU after Brexit.

Remember folks, this replaces, 'Catch fish, sell fish'.

Also remember, Brexit was supposed to cut down on all this pesky red tape malarkey.

 

[mack341]

more evidence as to why our civil service love the EU's way of doing things, it's the same blinking technocratic approach they'd take given half a chance, brexiteers want to get rid of this red tape overkill here as well.

I've never thought leaving the EU, in and of its own, would turn the uk into a nirvana/dream country overnight, but to me it's a step in the right direction to restore sovereignty and therefore meaning to our vote at the ballot box.

I can't believe people on the left don't see the value in their 'vote', we've only had it for about 100 years, it can only be they feel the EU is left wing and will always be that way, and therefore better to have the EU impose rules/laws and govern all the countries centrally.

It seems very short sighted and blinkered to me, freedom of movement is one thing but freedom to elect/control politicians who govern over you is more valuable in the long run, and if they have to take orders from an unelected bureaucrat elsewhere, your vote loses meaning.

If the EU had reformed itself along democratic lines with the various new treaties, rather than just being interested in taking greater control over the european nations, it would be more popular. Why not have all the commissioners and ministers democratically elected by the public in each country, so the taxpayer and voter can exert some influence in a direct way on this increasingly large and growing governing body and feel involved in the decisions it makes?

What would be so frightening, it'd be democracy, proven to be the safest system of govt overall other than a benevolent monarch, and there aren't many of them about.

[Ps. excuse me for having a bit of a waffle fest tonight, what with the above and my recent NK thread contributions, subconsciously I'm probably trying to avoid the slots and filling my time with political debate instead ...erm kind of thinking aloud stuff mostly but there might be a good point or two somewhere... ]

 

[nikantw]

....
If the EU had reformed itself along democratic lines ....

Stay and help us reform it then!

 

[mack341]

Stay and help us reform it then!

I wish we could've done, I never objected to europe protecting it's standard of living, traditions and way of life, if that meant some sort of common market was required, a looser coming together based on mutual respect I'd have gone with that, but in reality I think the EU is going in the opposite direction, changing the ways and norms of life, also it's obsessed with rules and control and not with a strong underlying democratic structure that could formulate and approve policies.

That's not to say the uk system of govt is perfect, but there is a possibility of influence from the citizen at the ballot box, I just don't see that with the EU, the MEPs seem pointless and without any power, just nodding sheep really.

There's going to be some sort of fudge with brexit, we've always had one foot out of the room by keeping the pound when countries like germany, france gave up their historic currencies which they were fond of, the EU accepted that we kept sterling so they made allowances there, however that was when we were paying in and following all the other rules to the letter.

I hope Europe prospers and it all works out well, just not sure the EU hierarchy and higher ups are all that people friendly and benevolent, so at some future point there could be major problems, can there be such a thing as full 'political freedom' for the average citizen when the EU plans to take more and more power (and democratic decision making) away from the individual countries.

And if the UK is having so much trouble leaving now, and we're an island with it's own currency, how will other countries, much more entwined, ever leave if they decide they don't like the EU's direction and rules anymore?

 

[Mr_Slot5]

The EU isn't really left wing at all though. It facilitates business and getting the cheapest labour supply where it is required. I'd argue that it certainly doesn't help those at the bottom of society at all. I tend to find that those who support the EU in the UK fall into two camps- those that are not trusting in our own government and see the EU as some sort of safety net and those that directly benefit from the cheap labour in some way...think big business (those that are warning of the dire consequences of Brexit).

 

[mack341]

The EU isn't really left wing at all though. It facilitates business and getting the cheapest labour supply where it is required. I'd argue that it certainly doesn't help those at the bottom of society at all. I tend to find that those who support the EU in the UK fall into two camps- those that are not trusting in our own government and see the EU as some sort of safety net and those that directly benefit from the cheap labour in some way...think big business (those that are warning of the dire consequences of Brexit).

I tend to agree but because of the free movement rule and the virtue signalling politics, people who tend to vote labour or liberal think the EU is left wing or certainly much more left wing than the conservatives in the uk, which is all they really worry about, it's kind of the least worst of two options. Being chained to the EU will steer the uk more left is their hope.

Yep, boiled down, the two things you mention are probably driving motivations for many, 'what's in it for me' sort of thinking; but I don't trust our govt and still voted leave, and many poor people up north in need of a safety net didn't see the EU as being the one that would provide it, but rather have seen services cut here [their existing safety net] to provide a safety net for growing numbers of poor eu migrants arriving on these shores etc..

Politics on the left in the uk has pretty much deserted concerns about class and helping the working class get a better deal in terms of wages etc..., blair and brown started to subsidise low wages with more and more 'benefits in work' type schemes, now labour and the liberals are only really interested in identity politics, the discrimination and lgbt stuff, plus probably climate change, the rest of the policies come far down the pecking order.

Corbyn is a slight shift back to old labour with talk about nationalising the railways etc.., but his mp's, mostly still blairite, aren't keen on that stuff. They're more neo-liberal in outlook, which fits with the EU outlook, I think it was the EU regulations that meant we had to open up our postal market and basically privatise royal mail. So far it seems the same but putting a monopoly into private hands is always risky for the consumer in terms of rising prices and costs. I think the govt still control the stamp prices perhaps or there was an agreement, a bit like the tv licence, that mail costs would rise in line with inflation.

Macron wants or wanted to go down the same route and change practices/policies in france, make them more thatcherite/blairite, but the french were less than keen. People laugh and deride the french for their two hour lunch breaks, and shops being closed, but I think they do still probably have a better quality of life. Their healthcare system is rated one of the best in the world, train travel is also massively cheaper compared to the uk. I don't think they have such a huge wealth inequality as we do. We could probably learn a lot from the other european countries, but we never really have, every project we embark upon costs a fortune, always exceeding the budget, like hs2.

 

[nikantw]

I wish we could've done, I never objected to europe protecting it's standard of living, traditions and way of life, if that meant some sort of common market was required, a looser coming together based on mutual respect I'd have gone with that, but in reality I think the EU is going in the opposite direction, changing the ways and norms of life, also it's obsessed with rules and control and not with a strong underlying democratic structure that could formulate and approve policies.

That's not to say the uk system of govt is perfect, but there is a possibility of influence from the citizen at the ballot box, I just don't see that with the EU, the MEPs seem pointless and without any power, just nodding sheep really.

I hope Europe prospers and it all works out well, just not sure the EU hierarchy and higher ups are all that people friendly and benevolent, so at some future point there could be major problems, can there be such a thing as full 'political freedom' for the average citizen when the EU plans to take more and more power (and democratic decision making) away from the individual countries.

The EU isn't really left wing at all though. It facilitates business and getting the cheapest labour supply where it is required. I'd argue that it certainly doesn't help those at the bottom of society at all.

I agree with all that. But EU isn't the 10 people that make the decisions today, EU is all of us. We failed and it is time to fix it, not break it.
Because no, we can't live alone, no matter how big and strong we are. We need each other.

 

[mack341]

I agree with all that. But EU isn't the 10 people that make the decisions today, EU is all of us. We failed and it is time to fix it, not break it.
Because no, we can't live alone, no matter how big and strong we are. We need each other.

I wish it were so Nik but the brexit negotiations have shown many in the uk that the EU leadership/ top decision makers take a dim, malevolent view of us leaving. I think barnier, the eu lead negotiator is on record saying he will 'have done his job if the deal negotiated is so bad for the uk they will want to remain', which is a lot of ill will aimed towards millions of average people who will suffer from negotiations carried out in bad faith.

In a way many europeans are more political than the british, certainly the french who will riot in numbers if unhappy. I expect as the EU evolves more into a federal super state, more people will wake up and then perhaps change will come about, but it will be difficult with a controlled media and internet on the horizon. I found it interesting that the swedes kept hold of their Krona and didn't ditch it for the euro, so some sort of independent thinking must be there, or perhaps it was the royal family's influence to keep the krona.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

/waits for claims that all 11 judges sitting on the UK Supreme Court are a bunch of biased elite remoaners......

 

[colinsunderland]

excellent news

 

[ChopleyIOM]

This must be awkward for Leavers. After all, Brexit was about returning power to UK courts and institutions from all those pesky Brussels bureaucrats, and now the highest UK court has ruled unanimously that our Prime Minister has broken the law and lied his arse off to the Queen, to our parliament, and to the country.

It's literally impossible to argue with this ruling without trashing those same UK institutions that Leavers claim to care about so much.

 

[mack341]

It's literally impossible to argue with this ruling without trashing those same UK institutions that Leavers claim to care about so much.

Institutions are one thing, the individuals that populate and run them to their interests is another, is it a possibility that after 40 years of the federal eu project underway, and also a 'liberal PC obsessed' agenda taking over the country, that our uk institutions are not what they were or could be?

Having said that, this judgement is what I expected and I doubt it will lead to us remaining in the EU which is obviously what remainers hope and prey for.

The 2016 referendum vote has not been honoured, if it had this legal 'case' would never have happened in the first place.

Democracy has been subverted by the establishment remainers in the civil service and parliament, backed by a liberal media spouting fear and division. That's plain to see, however it is dressed up.

We need a general election now, to 'try' and sort it all out, with clear 'remain' and 'leave' candidates so voters can decide who represents them, if the remainers win the most seats heaven help us, they must be either deluded or naive at best if they think the EU is a kind, democracy friendly organisation. Hence Tony blair's unbridled enthusiasm for it, for god's sake lefties wake up!

 

[ChopleyIOM]

if they think the EU is a kind, democracy friendly organisation.

Well if we're keeping score the only person who's been found guilty of acting unlawfully and actively trying to subvert UK democracy is Boris Johnson.

This is an 11:0 unanimous decision from the UK Supreme Court, which has found, without any outside interference whatsoever, that the Prime Minister of our country acted unlawfully in an attempt to prevent our parliament carrying out its duties.

Are you saying that you think the UK Supreme Court called it wrong?

Anyway, it's all just a liberal Remainer stitch-up, I'm sure. And nothing to do with, oh I dunno, Brexit being one of the most bone-headed decisions ever made in the history of our country.

 

[mack341]

Well if we're keeping score the only person who's been found guilty of acting unlawfully and actively trying to subvert UK democracy is Boris Johnson.

This is an 11:0 unanimous decision from the UK Supreme Court, which has found, without any outside interference whatsoever, that the Prime Minister of our country acted unlawfully in an attempt to prevent our parliament carrying out its duties.

Are you saying that you think the UK Supreme Court called it wrong?

Anyway, it's all just a liberal Remainer stitch-up, I'm sure. And nothing to do with, oh I dunno, Brexit being one of the most bone-headed decisions ever made in the history of our country.

View attachment 114485

Having just watched Hale's summing up, the smugness of the woman is unbelievable, she couldn't hide her delight. These judges or 'justices' as they prefer, are totally unaccountable to the public citizen. They should have to be voted in, they're all elitist pc liberals [not classic liberals] with unfettered power to rule on law.

She did mention something about '1688' and a bill of rights, saying it didn't apply in this case, as it wasn't parlimentary business...I sensed that wasn't a clear cut argument, other prime ministers have prorogued parliament in the past for 'political reasons' and it wasn't challenged [john major -cash for questions scandal] it seems there has been an informal acceptance of the practice previously but not now.

However, strange as it may seem for a leave voter, I don't trust boris 100% as it is, and wouldn't nail my colours to his mast, therefore this judgement doesn't overly bother me.

But probably Parliament should have decided the case by voting no confidence in boris/ called for a general election last week, but the liberal pc merchants want it both ways when it suits them, and will ditch principle for cynical expediency if their goals are at stake.

[I had thought the house of commons was the highest court in the land, as it has the power to pass laws, but as we have a govt sitting without an actual majority maybe that goes out the window ]

 

[goatwack]

Why if it weren't for those meddling liberal Remainer Supreme Court judges we would have got away with it too

 

[sledge13]

Where were these judges when the traitor mps just ignored the march leaving date which was set in law? oh thats fine just ignore that....this is the whole system against the people, BREXIT WILL NEVER HAPPEN, THEY WONT ALLOW IT

 

[dunover]

Anyway, it's all just a liberal Remainer stitch-up, I'm sure. And nothing to do with, oh I dunno, Brexit being one of the most bone-headed decisions ever made in the history of our country.

And there you have just shot yourself in the foot as the decision to leave, bone-headed or not, should NOT be a factor in any judge's ruling here and your statement there seems to infer you believe it was....

What's this 'our country' business anyway, given you don't live in the UK? - I think you missed the 'y' off there!

 

[vorcirion]

And there you have just shot yourself in the foot as the decision to leave, bone-headed or not, should NOT be a factor in any judge's ruling here and your statement there seems to infer you believe it was....

What's this 'our country' business anyway, given you don't live in the UK? - I think you missed the 'y' off there!

Coming from a guy who's happy to get his salary or whatever in euros so brexit doesn't have much of an impact to himself.

 

[dunover]

Coming from a guy who's happy to get his salary or whatever in euros so brexit doesn't have much of an impact to himself.

It benefits me if the Pound falls, but I don't choose to get some, but not all, of my income in Euros, that's just incidental. It's also only one small facet of the Brexit outcome. I'll suffer starvation, famine, food queues, no aspirins on the shelves, travel health insurance etc. just the like everybody else.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

And there you have just shot yourself in the foot as the decision to leave, bone-headed or not, should NOT be a factor in any judge's ruling here and your statement there seems to infer you believe it was....

What's this 'our country' business anyway, given you don't live in the UK? - I think you missed the 'y' off there!

It wasn't a factor in the ruling, as Lady Hale made abundantly clear before she delivered the verdict, and indeed before they even heard the case in the first place.

What I'm getting at as my own personal viewpoint is we're still dealing with the fallout of the ill-conceived bombsite that was the referendum - (and these court cases are part of the bombsite) - and subsequent turmoil since the narrow 52-48 victory that the Leave side has decided was equivalent to stone tablets from God determining that we must leave, whatever the consequences, and whatever the cost, up to and including the UK's Prime Minister now acting unlawfully and lying to the Queen and parliament.

And the UK is still my country of birth, whether or not I now live a short distance away, and I have a lot of family and friends there. (Besides which the IOM will be impacted by a No Deal Brexit whether we like it or not.)

Nice to see that you've decided I'm one of 'the other' as well though, because I don't still live in the UK.

 

[sledge13]

Ahh the old the vote was close so ignore it chestnut, brilliant.

It was a clear result which the mps voted would be folowed, they lied, now its time for action.

 

[cncas2123]

So when they eventually call a second referendum, whats going to happen if the people vote 55% - 45% to leave the EU? Will they say that the referendum was illegal. or will they keep on having referendums every few months until they get the answer they want?
Oh thats right I forgot that on the next referendum they will give 3 options, go with a deal, go without a deal or stay so that they can be sure that they get the result they want.
Democracy died in the UK a long time before BoJo became Prime Minister and I truly hope that the remainers end up with Jeremy Corbyn as PM and suffer 5 years of Venezuela type democracy.......

 

[dunover]

Morons like Swindleson think if they revoke Article 50 or there's another binary referendum, that should we remain that'll be the end of it. Wrong. The genie's out of the bottle now and if you think there's aggro today, wait until 10m+ leavers start disrupting the country with protests, withholding of taxes etc. Because that's what will happen when the fundamental tenet of our country i.e. democracy is effectively annulled and people withdraw their cooperation with the country. Like the UK's version of the Boston Tea Party, but far worse. The remoaners are in cloud cuckoo land as they don't seem to acknowledge this fact, or choose not to.

 

[paul7388]

Morons like Swindleson think if they revoke Article 50 or there's another binary referendum, that should we remain that'll be the end of it. Wrong. The genie's out of the bottle now and if you think there's aggro today, wait until 10m+ leavers start disrupting the country with protests, withholding of taxes etc. Because that's what will happen when the fundamental tenet of our country i.e. democracy is effectively annulled and people withdraw their cooperation with the country. Like the UK's version of the Boston Tea Party, but far worse. The remoaners are in cloud cuckoo land as they don't seem to acknowledge this fact, or choose not to.

We will see what happens if brexit does not go ahead.

But i can guarantee that there may me protests etc. but no way will 10m+ start disrupting the country. There may be some large protests etc. but most people that voted leave will eventually carry on as they are.

But the one thing that really bugs me is all the talk about democracy etc. and giving the people what they voted for etc.

If indeed people believe in democracy then there would be another referendum. After all the first one was not a legally binding one at the time it was to find out what people thought and how many wanted to leave. Only after the results did MP's decide they would go with what the majority voted.

So how can people go on about their democratic rights when they never actually voted on a legal Referendum vote in the first place and certainly never voted for a No Deal Brexit. So surely once and for all there should be a Referendum that is stated from the start the result is Legally Binding whether it is leave with No Deal, Remain or whatever. Or do Democratic rights only apply when it suits.