Brexit again...

[Fosse69]

Are the Chinese attempting to Nationalise The London Stock Exchange under the cover of Brexit chaos? 

[Regal Beagle]

3 hours ago, Fosse69 said:

Parliament is sovereign, a government without a majority is subject to parliament, all are subject to the law of the land. Parliament can make and rescind laws, but they have to obey them. Others with pots of money have their ways.

In legal terms, parliament is sovereign. But they cannot implement laws or interpret them and set precedents. That is for the executive and the judiciary. 

The Gov are unlikely to be able to propose new legislation successfully without a majority, but that doesn't mean that parliament can all of a sudden step in and take over the executive. 

You can't seriously be looking at a situation where the government and the people want the same thing but parliament is wilfully blocking it and avoiding an election in the process and think that it is the government acting out? 

[Fosse69]

4 minutes ago, Regal Beagle said:

In legal terms, parliament is sovereign. But they cannot implement laws or interpret them and set precedents. That is for the executive and the judiciary. 

The Gov are unlikely to be able to propose new legislation successfully without a majority, but that doesn't mean that parliament can all of a sudden step in and take over the executive. 

You can't seriously be looking at a situation where the government and the people want the same thing but parliament is wilfully blocking it and avoiding an election in the process and think that it is the government acting out? 

Strange idea of sovereignty, MPs are selected by the people, they group together to do things, stop things, by agreement. If you want to blame anyone, blame Cameron for his 5 year parliaments as well as Brexit. 

[Paul6754]

5 hours ago, Regal Beagle said:

I'll reconsider my position when you tell me how the EU budget for 2015 is wrong.

Until then, it's done and dusted Paul, I'm not getting into the net/gross garbage with you.

It's an interesting argument you have there though "If you take all of the money the UK paid to the EU and half it, you get half of what Boris claimed we paid to the EU".

 

Great, thanks for that Paul.

 

Can we put this one to bed now?

The EU budget figure you cite is wrong or never existed because the Office of National Statistics (GB) report says that 19bn (equivalent to 365m/week) was never sent to the EU. The ONS report says "In 2016, the UK’s gross contribution to the EU amounted to £19bn. However, this amount of money was never actually transferred to the EU",  this is because of the rebates and money the UK gets back from the EU.

The net/gross figure isn't garbage at all it's absolutely central to how much the UK pays into the EU. 

RB, I would have thought rather than put this one to bed that you would want to back up your point with the link to the information that led you on several occasions to claim the 350m figure was correct and cited in a 2015 EU Budge. You also claimed comments were made in the EU 2015 budget report that the ca 350m/week was after  rebates and money back to the UK had been deducted and this clearly is not the case according to the ONS.

The Red Bus message is/was one of the main reasons why people voted Leave and shouldn't be brushed under the carpet, unless you can reference and substantiate your claim it brings into question the credibility of everything you've posted on this subject.

[geosname]

9 hours ago, Fosse69 said:

Are they not there to judge whether people including MPs are abiding or not with the law. It is not possible for Merkel to close the German Parliament in such a fashion, nor should such a procedure be available here. Nor is all the mumbo-jumbo tapping on the door required. A week`s break between sessions should be perfectly adequate. Personally I would move Parliament to a more central position, say Birmingham, convert HP into a museum, House of Horrors would be a suitable theme, with fireworks displays on the 5th of each month.

Their first job is to determine the applicable law and the facts.

Their second task is to determine if the facts breach the applicable law.

Is there a law or convention to prevent parliament being prorogued?

Obviously not.

Is there a law or convention that determines the maximum or minimum time proroguement should last?

Obviously not.

Is there a law or convention that determines when proroguement should or should not take place?

Obviously not.

Is it in the executives decision to prorogue parliament?

Obviously

Therefore it has to be asked what law has been broken.

If the executive can do it the obvious conclusion to draw from the case is that it was determined the reasons why it was done breached the law.

This is the dangerous bit...... the judiciary deciding why the executive makes a lawful decision... any decision.... opens the door to legal challenges beging brought against any and every decision any executive makes.

I'm not saying the decision to prorogue was the correct decision.

[geosname]

3 hours ago, Fosse69 said:

Strange idea of sovereignty, MPs are selected by the people, they group together to do things, stop things, by agreement. If you want to blame anyone, blame Cameron for his 5 year parliaments as well as Brexit. 

I would argue the MPs are elected by the people..... selected by the party they represent.

[geosname]

9 hours ago, Fosse69 said:

 Personally I would move Parliament to a more central position, say Birmingham, convert HP into a museum, House of Horrors would be a suitable theme, with fireworks displays on the 5th of each month.

Me too

[Aussie Rules]

•  

• 4 hours ago, Regal Beagle said:

  • In legal terms, parliament is sovereign. But they cannot implement laws or interpret them and set precedents. That is for the executive and the judiciary. 
  • The Gov are unlikely to be able to propose new legislation successfully without a majority, but that doesn't mean that parliament can all of a sudden step in and take over the executive. 
  • You can't seriously be looking at a situation where the government and the people want the same thing but parliament is wilfully blocking it and avoiding an election in the process and think that it is the government acting out? 

By the same token RB, an Executive Government riding rough shod over Parliament and the people smacks of a dictatorial regime - in my opinion.

Decisions taken by the Prime Minister and Cabinet must be subject to the scrutiny of Parliament representing the people. To do otherwise is akin to executive rule by faceless bureaucrats.

As for the idea the a Government and people want the same thing? I give you Brexit.

 

[Regal Beagle]

6 hours ago, Paul6754 said:

The EU budget figure you cite is wrong or never existed because the Office of National Statistics (GB) report says that 19bn (equivalent to 365m/week) was never sent to the EU. The ONS report says "In 2016, the UK’s gross contribution to the EU amounted to £19bn. However, this amount of money was never actually transferred to the EU",  this is because of the rebates and money the UK gets back from the EU.

The net/gross figure isn't garbage at all it's absolutely central to how much the UK pays into the EU. 

RB, I would have thought rather than put this one to bed that you would want to back up your point with the link to the information that led you on several occasions to claim the 350m figure was correct and cited in a 2015 EU Budge. You also claimed comments were made in the EU 2015 budget report that the ca 350m/week was after  rebates and money back to the UK had been deducted and this clearly is not the case according to the ONS.

The Red Bus message is/was one of the main reasons why people voted Leave and shouldn't be brushed under the carpet, unless you can reference and substantiate your claim it brings into question the credibility of everything you've posted on this subject.

Fine, you think the officially published eu budget is wrong.

If they cant even get that right we should probably leave eh? 

[Regal Beagle]

4 hours ago, Aussie Rules said:

•  
•  

By the same token RB, an Executive Government riding rough shod over Parliament and the people smacks of a dictatorial regime - in my opinion.

Decisions taken by the Prime Minister and Cabinet must be subject to the scrutiny of Parliament representing the people. To do otherwise is akin to executive rule by faceless bureaucrats.

As for the idea the a Government and people want the same thing? I give you Brexit.

 

Agreed but that isnt what is happening. Parliament is trying to tell us that they've had 3 years of debates but these 4-5 days are key? 

The government has the support of the people. Parliament does not.

There is surely no other reason that corbyn would twice turn down an election but for him knowing he would lose. 

Give us the clean brexit we voted for or a general election. Remainers have had their way for 3 years. Enough is enough.

[Howjy04]

I’ve never been a Boris fan but he appears to be the only with a definitive plan,We Leave.NOBODY knows what the opposition party (Labour)want .Five different versions have been put forward in the last week.A GE is the only solution,that would give us a referendum of sorts  and a new Government.

Question ,If opposition parties want to discuss what’s going on  why don’t they all meet up somewhere instead of  bumping their gums  and moaning about it?Answer,none of them have a definite plan and can ‘t agree on anything.

Solution ,General Election.

[Gora Vale]

is that a cunning plan? 

[Jacko51]

I see the released Yellowhammer document is virtually identical to the one released by the Sunday Times which ministers told us was out of date. Their honesty astonished me!

[mr.hobblesworth]

2 hours ago, Howjy04 said:

I’ve never been a Boris fan but he appears to be the only with a definitive plan,We Leave.NOBODY knows what the opposition party (Labour)want .Five different versions have been put forward in the last week.A GE is the only solution,that would give us a referendum of sorts  and a new Government.

Question ,If opposition parties want to discuss what’s going on  why don’t they all meet up somewhere instead of  bumping their gums  and moaning about it?Answer,none of them have a definite plan and can ‘t agree on anything.

Solution ,General Election.

No Deal ruled out and put beyond the reach of Johnson's duplicitous machinations, and then a general election in which Labour will pledge to negotiate a deal with the oft repeated red lines and take it back to the people with 2 options; leave with a deal or remain. Admittedly, Labour's position on what we will campaign for when it comes to that is currently up in the air but it seems to be going they way of either neutral (and allowing each MP to campaign for whichever side they see fit) or remain. I was at my local CLP meeting on Tuesday and there was some heated debate as to whether we should campaign for remain; I personally favour the neutral option.

[Aussie Rules]

4 hours ago, Regal Beagle said:

Agreed but that isnt what is happening. Parliament is trying to tell us that they've had 3 years of debates but these 4-5 days are key? 

The government has the support of the people. Parliament does not.

There is surely no other reason that corbyn would twice turn down an election but for him knowing he would lose. 

Give us the clean brexit we voted for or a general election. Remainers have had their way for 3 years. Enough is enough.

I read it differently RB i.e. it is the behaviour of Boris Johnson unilaterally telling both the Parliament and people what he wants re Brexit. Further, whatever its shape currently I cannot see how it can be interpreted the government has the support of the people.