Forums
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 83 comments are related to the topic:
What mandate does parliament have to prevent Brexit ?

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
Page 2 of 3  •  Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 83
By:
Charlie
When: 27 Sep 19 19:08

Sep 27, 2019 -- 7:05PM, breadnbutter wrote:


No it doesn’t ,if it did the act of acting on the result would have been written in as legislation ,it wasn’t


Not sure what your No it doesn’t refers to.

By:
breadnbutter
When: 27 Sep 19 19:08
The PM is head of parliament and he and the Queen act for the people ,Parliament was acting against the people who voted in good faith in a legally held referendum .
By:
breadnbutter
When: 27 Sep 19 19:10

Sep 27, 2019 -- 7:03PM, Charlie wrote:


A referendum just asks the government to act on their behalf. No it wasn't binding.


That’s what my reply was in response to .

By:
Charlie
When: 27 Sep 19 19:12
You can't just close down Parliament because you don't like how they're voting. That's why it was found unlawful.
By:
Charlie
When: 27 Sep 19 19:15
A referendum has no legal basis. All it is is an expression of what people would like. Government, Parliament can just say fck that if they want. Politically it would be a bad move but legally ok.
By:
breadnbutter
When: 27 Sep 19 19:21
I disagree but that’s not the point of the thread ,although the fact remains ,prorogation is lawful but the law lords in their supreme knowledge decided that the prorogation was done incorrectly (I think ) .Parliament was not shut down or suspended it was prorogued ,can’t stress this point enough . And it was prorogued to prevent the people being rode over roughshod .I think BJ will try another way and succeed for what it’s worth ,all will become clear imo as to why the Supreme Court ruled the way they did and suspect there is a few good reasons . And bye the way I respect the Supreme Courts decision 100% absolutely .
By:
breadnbutter
When: 27 Sep 19 19:22
Charlie you started out saying one thing and now your onto another and in full waffle ,please give it a rest bud
By:
Charlie
When: 27 Sep 19 19:26
You can't disagree over whether referendums are legally binding in the UK as they aren't.

Parliament wasn't prorogued. Remember Bercow saying that? Supreme Court said it was unlawful.

So my posts are waffle but your's are superb apart from when you get your facts wrong?
By:
Charlie
When: 27 Sep 19 19:26
I get the message I wont bother.
By:
HGS
When: 27 Sep 19 19:30
People wanting Boris to apologise for breaking the law. There was no such law when he did it. The Supreme Court have only just deemed it so. Or am I missing summat?
By:
Charlie
When: 27 Sep 19 19:31
In case he missed it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHlmtEKqXLw

Parliament was not shut down or suspended it was prorogued ,can’t stress this point enough You really should stress this point more.
By:
breadnbutter
When: 27 Sep 19 19:35

Sep 27, 2019 -- 7:03PM, Charlie wrote:


A referendum just asks the government to act on their behalf. No it wasn't binding.


Was the EU referendum "advisory"? - Full Fact
Search domain fullfact.org/europe/was-eu-referendum-advisory/https://fullfact.org/europe/was-eu-referendum-advisory/
A UK referendum will only have the force of law if the Act setting it up says so. In practical terms this would mean someone would be able to go to court to make the government implement the result. The Alternative Vote referendum in 2011, for example, was legally binding in this way.

By:
breadnbutter
When: 27 Sep 19 19:37
So there it is a referendum can be legally binding ,but this one was not ,hence my saying your waffling ,making statements that are incorrect and making out the power of a referendum in the U.K. is worthless when this is not simple not true Charlie ,try and be more accurate please .
By:
Charlie
When: 27 Sep 19 19:50
Ok, I'll change it to not generally legally binding. I'll try and be more accurate. The last one wasn't legally binding as you said.

You said they were legally binding. You also said Parliament was prorogued. So you can apologies for waffling.
By:
breadnbutter
When: 27 Sep 19 19:52
No I never ,I said a lawful referendum
By:
Charlie
When: 27 Sep 19 19:53
I'll try and write that in English. You said referendums in the UK were legally binding. In general they aren't inducing the 1975 one and this one.
By:
breadnbutter
When: 27 Sep 19 19:55
I would not use the term legally binding as I know it was not ,hence my earlier post and what I want to expand this thread on ,”Parliament” (the three house ) know and knew the referendum was non binding ,were the law lords part of that process and if not who acted for the people in this process ,it had to pass through the lords and get two readings in parliament ,who in the entire process considered the wishes of the people ?
By:
breadnbutter
When: 27 Sep 19 19:57
The only two people I can see that have acted in good faith are the PM and H.M Queen Elizabeth
By:
Charlie
When: 27 Sep 19 20:01
The Queen is irrelevant in this. The PM has certainly not acted in good faith. He's trying to bluff and bluster his way through this for his own ends not the good of the nation. He tried to close up shop for six weeks to get his own way and avoid debate. There are very many brighter people in the houses than him. Stifle debate, become a dictator and fck democracy.

Watching footy now,
By:
lfc1971
When: 27 Sep 19 20:03
It was not legally binding in the same way as the Scottish referendum was not legally binding

Why not ?

Because it would be unthinkable for parliament to overturn it

Or at least that’s what we thought Britain was like
By:
lfc1971
When: 27 Sep 19 20:04
Now can you imagine what might happen  if Scotland votes for independence

And Parliament says no , it’s not going to happen

Vote again
By:
lfc1971
When: 27 Sep 19 20:06
Now we know the sort of dishonest individuals remainers are ,

Don’t trust people like that , they don’t deserve to be trusted
By:
breadnbutter
When: 27 Sep 19 20:06

Sep 27, 2019 -- 7:53PM, Charlie wrote:


I'll try and write that in English. You said referendums in the UK were legally binding. In general they aren't inducing the 1975 one and this one.


Where did I say that ,please quote ,if I am wrong and did say that I will apologise and retire from the thread .

By:
lfc1971
When: 27 Sep 19 20:11
When we voted in the referendum no one said at the time it was advisory
This only came into play after the remainers lost

They’re like that , that’s all you need to know when they start waffling about it not being binding

They’re bad losers and liars in truth
By:
breadnbutter
When: 27 Sep 19 20:12
And he never tried to close up shop ,he PROROGUED Parliament .Nor was it for six weeks ,not anything like it ,nor is the HM Queen Elizabeth irrelevant .
By:
breadnbutter
When: 27 Sep 19 20:12
Now hurry up and quote me or move along chap
By:
HGS
When: 27 Sep 19 20:15
lfc1971
It was not legally binding in the same way as the Scottish referendum was not legally binding
Why not ?
Because it would be unthinkable for parliament to overturn it
Or at least that’s what we thought Britain was like


Excellent point lfc. Nailed it.
By:
lfc1971
When: 27 Sep 19 20:16
Can you imagine some clown after Scotland vote for independence ( if they do )

Saying sorry it’s not fking happening , go away it’s advisory

It’s amazing the sh1te remainers pretend to believe
By:
detraveller
When: 27 Sep 19 20:28
Lfc spot on.
By:
lfc1971
When: 27 Sep 19 20:32
that might be a first from detraveller , to me Happy
By:
lfc1971
When: 27 Sep 19 20:35
fooo ! I can’t be rude to you  if you’re going to be nice detraveller :)
By:
lfc1971
When: 27 Sep 19 20:42
What a mess we have made of this , but make no mistake where the blame lies
And it’s with the Labour Party , the libdems , and each and any remainer who tries to overturn
that democratic vote
If that happens it will be the most disgraceful episode in Britain’s long history

And the damage cannot be repaired
By:
breadnbutter
When: 27 Sep 19 20:46
Yes ,nice points Trilby and lfc ,just to add the entire hard/soft Brexit was invented by the remaniacts  upon realising defeat
By:
lfc1971
When: 27 Sep 19 20:47
As soon as the referendum result was known there shouldn’t have been any remainers in Britain

Not one
By:
lfc1971
When: 27 Sep 19 20:50
Now ?  We should leave on Oct 31

Three and a bit years too late
By:
UBLE/REGY
When: 27 Sep 19 22:00
We voted the wrong way in the referendum lfc1971 as far as Parliament were concerned

They think we are better staying in....so they are trying to find anyway they can to avoid Brexit

Another referendum would do it, but is hardly democratic.
By:
detraveller
When: 27 Sep 19 22:05
just to add the entire hard/soft Brexit was invented by the remaniacts upon realising defeat
And they've been milking the Leavers ever since. You can't deny that they've done a good job of it and will eventually succeed.
By:
HGS
When: 27 Sep 19 22:07
Not that difficult really detraveller when probably 3/4 of the house are remainers. And thats before we get to the House Of Lords & Supreme Court which is even heavier balanced towards remain.
By:
irishone
When: 27 Sep 19 22:21
No disrespect to anyone on here but from a european natve why dont you just feck off ?
By:
HGS
When: 27 Sep 19 22:22
LaughLaugh
Page 2 of 3  •  Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
‹ back to topics
www.betfair.com