|
Post by M on Aug 28, 2019 11:09:40 GMT
If the house democratically votes government down the leader of the opposition becomes PM. A leader who has actually been democratically chosen with a far bigger mandate than any other political leader in this country. Don't like it? Tough shit, that's democracy. Ken Clarke? That was the other idea It's also democracy to have a break in Parliament before the Queen's speech. Ken Clarke isn't the leader of the opposition. He's a government MP. The vote of no confidence is in the government, not Boris. You can't have a vote saying we don't trust the government and just pick a different government MP to lead the government. That's not how it works.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Aug 28, 2019 11:09:46 GMT
No I’m not afraid of democracy. Like you, I believe that if a vote is democratically held the result should be respected and enacted. Once that has been done everyone can move forward and if there is a debate about the wisdom of the result, other actions or proposals could be considered. But, like you, I believe the first result should be respected before anything else occurs. (the fact that it hasn’t been does not change the fact that it should be. Differing opinions isn't a bad thing. It's there to be debated. Opinions can change and if they don't the majority rules. There's your democracy. Back to that then, our parliament was democratically chosen with the power to choose our course of action regardless of it being something you or I like or not. So they can debate if they should leave with no deal, May's deal or even ask the people what they would prefer. Parliament wants to do that, one chap doesn't. That's not democracy regardless of you liking it or not. Providing what Boris is doing doesn't break parliamentary rules, what he is doing is by definition democratic.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Aug 28, 2019 11:10:07 GMT
Running around in circles aren't we really.
Both sides arguing that the other is trampling on democracy and not accepting any argument from the other. Two wrongs don't make a right springs to mind.
The whole process has been a disaster from start to finish. The UK was relatively fine as it was before the referendum and will be in a worse state whatever the outcome now is.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Aug 28, 2019 11:12:20 GMT
I agree , we have to leave this bureaucratic centrist dictatorship that acts in the interest of Germany and France as soon as possible. Follow the will of the people. It is dangerous, as you say, not to. But that is a totally different argument. You know that as well. Part of the same issue that we as a country are grappling with. ..... independence, representation, sovereignty, identity, democracy, EU/UK, Countries/ member states, Brussels/ London, culture.....
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Aug 28, 2019 11:16:38 GMT
As I've said it is unfortunate that the UK government had been put in this position in order to try to leave the EU. I don't suppose he wants to do it. The people are sovereign, its my guess that if he achieves a clean BREXIT even using this unnacceptable approach he will be lauded by most British people for showing strength, courage and leadership....and escaping the clutches of the EU. So you don't see it as a betrayal? No, the previous 3 years have been a betrayal, he's having to fight fire with fire
|
|
|
Post by Eggybread on Aug 28, 2019 11:17:33 GMT
I thought Brexit was supposedly all about “democracy” and “sovereignty of Parliament”, only for a conman PM to shut down Parliament to satisfy his tax evading paymasters. On 23 March 1933, Adolf Hitler and his National Socialist Party orchestrated passing the Enabling Act of 1933 that gave the German Cabinet - in effect, Chancellor Adolf Hitler - the power to enact laws without the involvement of the Reichstag. With no need for parliamentary approval, this rendered the German parliament itself impotent. Boris, far from emulating Churchill, is becoming the dictator. But it all doesnt matter so long as we leave the EU.
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Aug 28, 2019 11:18:49 GMT
They didn't though did they as two extensions have proved. There is no mandate for no deal, only a few right wing fruit loops in the ERG think it will be any good....probably for their own wallets. It's only the default position for reckless predominantly right wing bastards. Parliament voted to start A50 no deal was the default, May's 'no deal is better than a bad deal' etc. etc.
|
|
|
Post by M on Aug 28, 2019 11:18:49 GMT
Differing opinions isn't a bad thing. It's there to be debated. Opinions can change and if they don't the majority rules. There's your democracy. Back to that then, our parliament was democratically chosen with the power to choose our course of action regardless of it being something you or I like or not. So they can debate if they should leave with no deal, May's deal or even ask the people what they would prefer. Parliament wants to do that, one chap doesn't. That's not democracy regardless of you liking it or not. Providing what Boris is doing doesn't break parliamentary rules, what he is doing is by definition democratic. I accept it isn't illegal but how is it democratic to remove the democratic process?
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Aug 28, 2019 11:20:01 GMT
Providing what Boris is doing doesn't break parliamentary rules, what he is doing is by definition democratic. I accept it isn't illegal but how is it democratic to remove the democratic process? The democratic process has been followed, parliament voted to instigate article 50, now they are trying to thwart it
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Aug 28, 2019 11:23:37 GMT
They didn't though did they as two extensions have proved. There is no mandate for no deal, only a few right wing fruit loops in the ERG think it will be any good....probably for their own wallets. It's only the default position for reckless predominantly right wing bastards. Parliament voted to start A50 no deal was the default, May's 'no deal is better than a bad deal' etc. etc. Oh I know. Why did the 'legal default position' not get applied in March or June and why does it look like being applied now. Can you spot any differences?
|
|
|
Post by M on Aug 28, 2019 11:24:58 GMT
I accept it isn't illegal but how is it democratic to remove the democratic process? The democratic process has been followed, parliament voted to instigate article 50, now they are trying to thwart it Not entirely accurate. You have overlooked that parliament voted in March to reject no deal Brexit.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Aug 28, 2019 11:25:44 GMT
Providing what Boris is doing doesn't break parliamentary rules, what he is doing is by definition democratic. I accept it isn't illegal but how is it democratic to remove the democratic process? Simple. If the proroguing of Parliament is within the rules of parliament then the proroguing of Parliament is democratic.
|
|
|
Post by Gary Hackett on Aug 28, 2019 11:26:50 GMT
Running around in circles aren't we really. Both sides arguing that the other is trampling on democracy and not accepting any argument from the other. Two wrongs don't make a right springs to mind. The whole process has been a disaster from start to finish. The UK was relatively fine as it was before the referendum and will be in a worse state whatever the outcome now is. I voted for Brexit but yes you're right, it's a total disaster and needs putting to bed.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Aug 28, 2019 11:27:14 GMT
Parliament voted to start A50 no deal was the default, May's 'no deal is better than a bad deal' etc. etc. Oh I know. Why did the 'legal default position' not get applied in March or June and why does it look like being applied now. Can you spot any differences? The difference is we now have a government commited to delivering on the outcome of the referendum.
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Aug 28, 2019 11:28:24 GMT
I thought Brexit was supposedly all about “democracy” and “sovereignty of Parliament”, only for a conman PM to shut down Parliament to satisfy his tax evading paymasters. On 23 March 1933, Adolf Hitler and his National Socialist Party orchestrated passing the Enabling Act of 1933 that gave the German Cabinet - in effect, Chancellor Adolf Hitler - the power to enact laws without the involvement of the Reichstag. With no need for parliamentary approval, this rendered the German parliament itself impotent. Boris, far from emulating Churchill, is becoming the dictator. But it all doesnt matter so long as we leave the EU. Gott im himmel!
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Aug 28, 2019 11:30:15 GMT
I thought Brexit was supposedly all about “democracy” and “sovereignty of Parliament”, only for a conman PM to shut down Parliament to satisfy his tax evading paymasters. On 23 March 1933, Adolf Hitler and his National Socialist Party orchestrated passing the Enabling Act of 1933 that gave the German Cabinet - in effect, Chancellor Adolf Hitler - the power to enact laws without the involvement of the Reichstag. With no need for parliamentary approval, this rendered the German parliament itself impotent. Boris, far from emulating Churchill, is becoming the dictator. But it all doesnt matter so long as we leave the EU. Very similar to this man who also wants centralised power and control over all of Europe.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Aug 28, 2019 11:31:31 GMT
Oh I know. Why did the 'legal default position' not get applied in March or June and why does it look like being applied now. Can you spot any differences? The difference is we now have a government commited to delivering on the outcome of the referendum. They key difference is the unprecedented shutting down of democratic debate. Do you think there is a majority for a No Deal Brexit in the country?
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Aug 28, 2019 11:34:30 GMT
I thought Brexit was supposedly all about “democracy” and “sovereignty of Parliament”, only for a conman PM to shut down Parliament to satisfy his tax evading paymasters. On 23 March 1933, Adolf Hitler and his National Socialist Party orchestrated passing the Enabling Act of 1933 that gave the German Cabinet - in effect, Chancellor Adolf Hitler - the power to enact laws without the involvement of the Reichstag. With no need for parliamentary approval, this rendered the German parliament itself impotent. Boris, far from emulating Churchill, is becoming the dictator. But it all doesnt matter so long as we leave the EU. Very similar to this man who also wants centralised power and control over all of Europe. Has Klopp had a shave?
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Aug 28, 2019 11:34:37 GMT
We voted to leave
Everyone decided to implement it
Then most of parliament tried to thwart it
Boris said we are leaving. It was no deal or the EU tried some compromise
This shit has gone on longer enough
Just implement the referendum result and get us out.
We will be fine.
|
|
|
Post by yeokel on Aug 28, 2019 11:35:32 GMT
No I’m not afraid of democracy. Like you, I believe that if a vote is democratically held the result should be respected and enacted. Once that has been done everyone can move forward and if there is a debate about the wisdom of the result, other actions or proposals could be considered. But, like you, I believe the first result should be respected before anything else occurs. (the fact that it hasn’t been does not change the fact that it should be. Differing opinions isn't a bad thing. It's there to be debated. Opinions can change and if they don't the majority rules. There's your democracy. Back to that then, our parliament was democratically chosen with the power to choose our course of action regardless of it being something you or I like or not. So they can debate if they should leave with no deal, May's deal or even ask the people what they would prefer. Parliament wants to do that, one chap doesn't. That's not democracy regardless of you liking it or not. “ Differing opinions isn't a bad thing.” Agreed “ Opinions can change and if they don't the majority rules.” Agreed. “ …. our parliament was democratically chosen with the power to choose our course of action regardless of it being something you or I like or not.” No. Our parliament was chosen as a result of an election where the two biggest parties campaigned that they would “respect the result of the referendum”. They were elected as a consequence of that declaration and should be abiding by their own declaration whether I, you or they like it. “ So they can debate if they should leave with no deal, May's deal or even ask the people what they would prefer.” No. That is not what they said they would do and not what they were elected to do. “ Parliament wants to do that, one chap doesn't.” Not all of parliament, and it’s more than “one chap”. “ That's not democracy” What they have been doing for the past three years is “not democracy”, but you recognise that yourself. “ regardless of you liking it or not.” It has nothing to do with me or whether I like it or dislike it. As it happens, I’m not sure I like what Boris seems to be proposing although I need to know a lot more about it before I can be sure of my mind on this. But if, as Prime Minister of the UK, he has the right to do this then, as you’ve said, “that’s democracy”.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Aug 28, 2019 11:36:47 GMT
The difference is we now have a government commited to delivering on the outcome of the referendum. They key difference is the unprecedented shutting down of democratic debate. Do you think there is a majority for a No Deal Brexit in the country? Dont give me this absolute fucking bollocks about democratic debate. You are as bad as them. We have had three years of anti-democratic rhetoric. The default position with out a deal is leave on WTO terms. If all parties cannot agree a deal WTO it is.
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Aug 28, 2019 11:39:12 GMT
It really is a bit rich for MP's to be complaining about this - as outrageous as it undoubtedly is - given that they have rejected the Withdrawal Agreement three times.
They've had three years to sort this out and failed miserably. The bottom line is that they don't want to leave, full stop and it has blown up in their faces.
The irony of it of course is that most of the plans they came up with actually did tie us to the Single Market and Customs Union, which the Withdrawal Agreement actually does and which is why the ultra Brexiters are opposed to it.
Theresa May should've just revoked Article 50 when they rejected the WA for the third time and Parliament should then have faced the consequences of their (in)action.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Aug 28, 2019 11:40:14 GMT
They key difference is the unprecedented shutting down of democratic debate. Do you think there is a majority for a No Deal Brexit in the country? Dont give me this absolute fucking bollocks about democratic debate. You are as bad as them. We have had three years of anti-democratic rhetoric. The default position with out a deal is leave on WTO terms. If all parties cannot agree a deal WTO it is. So why wasn't that position in March and June? The Fat Dictator hasn't got the slightest mandate for this.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Aug 28, 2019 11:43:10 GMT
Dont give me this absolute fucking bollocks about democratic debate. You are as bad as them. We have had three years of anti-democratic rhetoric. The default position with out a deal is leave on WTO terms. If all parties cannot agree a deal WTO it is. So why wasn't that position in March and June? The Fat Dictator hasn't got the slightest mandate for this. The remain campaign saying our means out. No going back Gives him all the mandate he need. The problem you and others have is separating brexit from party politics. Not your fault. As the parliamentarians did not do their job and sort it out together from the start.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Aug 28, 2019 11:43:10 GMT
The difference is we now have a government commited to delivering on the outcome of the referendum. They key difference is the unprecedented shutting down of democratic debate. Do you think there is a majority for a No Deal Brexit in the country? To your last question - yes, I do. Because that is what was voted for in the referendum. Parliament has been defying democracy ever since the referendum albeit within the rules of our democratic system. Which is fine. I find it somewhat funny when people who were happy to use parliamentary procedure to thwart democracy are now furious when parliamentary procedures are used to thwart their ambitions.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Aug 28, 2019 11:49:31 GMT
The last poll conducted gave those in a favour of a No Deal Brexit as a shade over 20%
So he is shutting down Parliament to give people something they didn't vote for in 2016 and want even less now.
Somebody's taking back control that is for bastard certain and it isn't the forgotten working clas communities of the industrial Heartwastelands
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Aug 28, 2019 11:50:16 GMT
with Boris abuse of his powers as pm and overriding the parliament for his own political gin it is now ore important than ever that we make a stand against this corrupt and unconstitutional government to this end please sign this petition A petition to stop the prorogation of Parliament has gained more than 120,000 signatures. "Parliament must not be prorogued or dissolved unless and until the Article 50 period has been sufficiently extended or the UK's intention to withdraw from the EU has been cancelled," sign it here link
|
|
|
Post by maxplonk on Aug 28, 2019 11:52:05 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Aug 28, 2019 11:56:03 GMT
Parliament voted to start A50 no deal was the default, May's 'no deal is better than a bad deal' etc. etc. Oh I know. Why did the 'legal default position' not get applied in March or June and why does it look like being applied now. Can you spot any differences? We have somebody in charge who isn't bending over with their arse in the air being shafted by George Sorros's puppets ?
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Aug 28, 2019 11:57:36 GMT
The democratic process has been followed, parliament voted to instigate article 50, now they are trying to thwart it Not entirely accurate. You have overlooked that parliament voted in March to reject no deal Brexit. You have overlooked that that vote wasn't legally binding unlike article 50.
|
|