Jump to content

Brexit again...


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Jacko51 said:

Chris Bryant MP for one would strongly dispute that assertion. 

There would probably be a number of people who may dispute it.

A number of people would dispute the speaker has been impartial. 

It's a matter of opinion..... neither of which are necessarily mine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 13.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • geosname

    1641

  • Fosse69

    1462

  • For Us All

    1405

  • Regal Beagle

    1054

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I don't accept the narrative that the EU is destroying our sovereignty and is any more anti-democratic than a country that has just elected a PM based on less than 0.01% the electorate, including 15 y

I don't agree.  There are a considerable number of male MPs who talk utter rubbish and don't know what they're talking about.  Andrew Bridgen for example, was on Radio 5 telling the world that as an E

This is reaching the stage of two bald blokes arguing over a comb. Tweak May’s backstop, put it back to the Commons, vote without three line whips and get it done. 

Posted Images

8 minutes ago, VantaaVale said:

Parliament suspension ruled unlawful

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-49661855

This could potentially be very serious for Boris Johnson - only potentially at the moment as the Government will appeal to the Supreme Court - but if they uphold the decision he will not only have misled Parliament he will have misled the Queen as well. Both issues requiring a resignation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Regal Beagle said:

It's all in this thread in the last few months and it is already determined so I'm not needlessly going to go round in that particular circle any more.

If you post evidence that the EU budget is wrong, I'll reconsider my position. As it stands, the best source of information we have demonstrates that it was a true and reasonable statement. That's really all there is to say on it.

Considering the Red Bus message was one of the most important policies in the Brexit Referendum and swayed many people into voting Leave it is important to get to the truth, especially when the lie has been denied.

The GB Office for National Statistics clearly shows the the 350m/week for the NHS as a result of leaving the EU is absolutely a lie.

In 2016 the UK paid 18.9bn pounds to the EU, When Thatcher's rebate is deducted together with the money which comes back to the public and private sectors in the UK it leaves a net contribution to the EU of 9.4bn which equates to approx. 180.8m/week, about half of what johnson claimed.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/articles/theukcontributiontotheeubudget/2017-10-31

You should reconsider your position.

Edited by Paul6754

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Paul6754 said:

 Considering the Red Bus message was one of the most important policies in the Brexit Referendum and swayed many people into voting Leave it is important to get to the truth, especially when the lie has been denied.

The GB Office for National Statistics clearly shows the the 350m/week for the NHS as a result of leaving the EU is absolutely a lie.

In 2016 the UK paid 18.9bn pounds to the EU, When Thatcher's rebate is deducted together with the money which comes back to the public and private sectors in the UK it leaves a net contribution to the EU of 9.4bn which equates to approx. 180.8m/week, about half of what johnson claimed.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/articles/theukcontributiontotheeubudget/2017-10-31

You should reconsider your position.

According to Cummings today, another big factor was keeping Farage off the BBC just prior to the vote. Frightens the middle classes apparently, as well as the horses!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Heatwave said:

This could potentially be very serious for Boris Johnson - only potentially at the moment as the Government will appeal to the Supreme Court - but if they uphold the decision he will not only have misled Parliament he will have misled the Queen as well. Both issues requiring a resignation. 

The judiciary interfering with the executive..... now that's a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, geosname said:

The judiciary interfering with the executive..... now that's a problem.

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Heatwave said:

This could potentially be very serious for Boris Johnson - only potentially at the moment as the Government will appeal to the Supreme Court - but if they uphold the decision he will not only have misled Parliament he will have misled the Queen as well. Both issues requiring a resignation. 

Should be all right couple of the chaps were in the same dorm at Eton.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Paul6754 said:

Considering the Red Bus message was one of the most important policies in the Brexit Referendum and swayed many people into voting Leave it is important to get to the truth, especially when the lie has been denied.

The GB Office for National Statistics clearly shows the the 350m/week for the NHS as a result of leaving the EU is absolutely a lie.

In 2016 the UK paid 18.9bn pounds to the EU, When Thatcher's rebate is deducted together with the money which comes back to the public and private sectors in the UK it leaves a net contribution to the EU of 9.4bn which equates to approx. 180.8m/week, about half of what johnson claimed.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/articles/theukcontributiontotheeubudget/2017-10-31

You should reconsider your position.

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?

Edited by Regal Beagle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, geosname said:

The judiciary interfering with the executive..... now that's a problem.

Do you find it funny how they seemingly don't care about a consitutional crisis all of a sudden when you have Parliament and the Judiciary stepping in on the Government's business?

What would they be saying if it was an open remainer Government under attack from Parliament and the Judiciary?

The supreme court will overturn this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Regal Beagle said:

Do you find it funny how they seemingly don't care about a consitutional crisis all of a sudden when you have Parliament and the Judiciary stepping in on the Government's business?

What would they be saying if it was an open remainer Government under attack from Parliament and the Judiciary?

The supreme court will overturn this.

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Reporting Posts and Ignoring Users

    Moderators don't read everything. Please don't assume we'll spot rule breaking (e.g. personal abuse) - use the orange report button above a post to alert them.

    If you can't get on with another forum user you can select the "ignore" option. Simply click on the link below, type in their username and save - Click here




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy