Brexit - The Final

Fair enough. Unfortunately, it will probably be the case that we'll still be rule-takers if we want to trade with lots of other places (hence, the current brouhaha with our Guinness-drinking elements)


What, you believed a politician? And they let you vote? :-D

I chose to interpret that as "I know this old codger who's 99 years old and looking a bit frail. I'm guessing he won't be around for a second referendum, should one be advantageous to me or my party"

The problem, from my point of view, is that there is an outside chance it might not be able to be undone, and, if it can, we'll be significantly worse off than if we stayed.

Meanwhile, we're hoping that our politicians can fix the rudder, patch the canvas (not to mention deal with a rather large mutiny and calls for the bow to turn around and head back to Port Brussels) and find us favourable winds to sail into the future. Can't say I'm that optimistic and I am more concerned for my children's' futures being out than being in (And so are they, and my eldest will be eligible to vote in any putative future referendum and General Election. Number 2 can vote in Scottish elections and polls. Number 3 is too young to vote but far more pragmatic - he's simply refining his very cunning plan for total world domination)
Have a like for your Dickensianesque extended metaphor.

Now fcek off, I do the purple prose in this thread! :D
 
Bercow was obviously well prepared for an attack on himself as he had the dates and figures to hand in response. He has obviously been expecting this which shows that he realises that he is open for attack.
Or he anticipated whining?
 
Nope.
Adhering to Parliamentary precedent.
Showing your colours. Do you honestly think he would have refused a motion if it had been presented by one of his favoured Remain MPs? He would have found some ‘precedent’ to allow it no doubt. The sooner he goes the better for Parliament - he is not impartial and hasn’t been for some time.
 
Thanks for clarifying, but to be honest, I don’t know my arse from my elbow when it comes to where we are with the current shenanigans! :grin:
we're all learning as we go along.

Bercow stated the last WA could not be brought without significant changes as that one had been voted on twice in the same parliament. He allowed two votes and subsequently a third. This one has has been been scuppered by an amendment, but not voted upon as Parliament has reserved it's vote. That means according to Bercow It must get two goes as it is materially different and is not in the same session of parliament. But my main gripe against Bercow is he is allowing the opposition- now the remainers to mask their inherent opposition to leaving as issues with the agreement. He has not demanded that if the Opposition wish to revoke A 50 they should try to do so separately because they would lose that.

It follows that those who Like BL who support the view that parliament should consider the referendum non binding despite their actions in supporting the issuance of A 50 should demand the resignation of those MPs who have reneged on their party promises. IMHO the General election of 2017 still stands-that elected the Government and parliament tasked with the oversight, not the impediment of it. That is outside their remit.

However Parliament also voted through the nonsense that is Lisbon and A 50 and they will have to live with it. Perhaps a vote should be held on sequestration of assets by those MPs opposing to reimburse assets wasted. That should concentrate minds wonderfully- they're all rich enough
 
Showing your colours. Do you honestly think he would have refused a motion if it had been presented by one of his favoured Remain MPs? He would have found some ‘precedent’ to allow it no doubt. The sooner he goes the better for Parliament - he is not impartial and hasn’t been for some time.
I think he would.
 
/
Ensuring tbe process is scrutinised and not rushed.
Hurried law is bad law.
You don't say?



How did MPs pass the Benn Act?

The route to passing this legislation involved a three-step process.


  1. MPs passed a Standing Order No. 24 motion (an emergency debate motion) on 3 September to take control of the order paper the following day. It included provisions which allowed the bill to go through all Commons stages on 4 September.
  2. Peers voted to timetable the passage of the bill in the House of Lords so that they could pass it on 5 and 6 September.
  3. The bill received Royal Assent on 9 September.
 

Brotherton Lad

LE
Kit Reviewer
we're all learning as we go along.

Bercow stated the last WA could not be brought without significant changes as that one had been voted on twice in the same parliament. He allowed two votes and subsequently a third. This one has has been been scuppered by an amendment, but not voted upon as Parliament has reserved it's vote. That means according to Bercow It must get two goes as it is materially different and is not in the same session of parliament. But my main gripe against Bercow is he is allowing the opposition- now the remainers to mask their inherent opposition to leaving as issues with the agreement. He has not demanded that if the Opposition wish to revoke A 50 they should try to do so separately because they would lose that.

It follows that those who Like BL who support the view that parliament should consider the referendum non binding despite their actions in supporting the issuance of A 50 should demand the resignation of those MPs who have reneged on their party promises. IMHO the General election of 2017 still stands-that elected the Government and parliament tasked with the oversight, not the impediment of it. That is outside their remit.

However Parliament also voted through the nonsense that is Lisbon and A 50 and they will have to live with it. Perhaps a vote should be held on sequestration of assets by those MPs opposing to reimburse assets wasted. That should concentrate minds wonderfully- they're all rich enough
UK referenda are non-binding. Them's the rules (unless the legislation says otherwise, viz the AV referendum). I struggle to understand why you don't know that fact.
 
Bercow starting to get it with both barrels from the back benches, on both sides.
Must be awkward for him, he's more used to watching Sally getting it from both barrels
 

Bravado_Bravado

On ROPS
On ROPs
The referendum was advisory, not binding.
It is that simple.
This one has been done to death. It was clearly stated that the results would be respected. Not only that but we had a GE where the Labour and Tory parties both stood on manifestos that stated they would honour the results. We also had a parliamentary vote on it which was passed.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top