|
-
Originally Posted by said
That is the tradition of the country as we have always accepted it. You cannot pick and choose which parts of democracy you want to suit your own agenda -
By questioning both party's inalienable right to challenge Parliamentary decisions, that's exactly what you're doing.
When it was put to the people to join the EEC, the majority won! There were a huge number who did not want to join - but who followed the rules and took the result gracefully. Even when Heath admitted that he lied to the people about the EEC - they were angry but did not scream about it.
I thought you were the fount of knowledge on all things EU. The decision on whether or not to join the EC was not put to the people.
You are in Canada - you can only go by the media - so I know it is more difficult to follow the issue.
And where, pray tell, do you get your information from? Daily dispatches from Downing Street? Intimate phone conversations with Nige?
From the number of your posts which include information C&Pd from various media sources, I can see that's where you get the majority of your information from. The rest is just a Trumpian like personal viewpoint.
As for difficult to follow. It's 2019, print media is going the way of the dinosaur. What's happening in the world, from media news to multiple other non media sources, is available to anyone with fingers, eyes, and a network connection.
I have several acquaintances in Canada - and as they see it, they are saying a second referendum should be called. I am not surprised - they may be highly educated people but they do not follow British democracy had they have done so - they would have realised the futility of doing that. First of all it breaks with British tradition,
Oh my, surely you realise that Canada, like the UK, is a constitutional monarchy with a Westminster style parliamentary democracy? We don't have to follow British democracy in an attempt to understand it. We have exactly the same democracy in this country, and have done since confederation in 1867. Prior to that, land colonised by the British from 1497 on, was under direct British rule.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
Check Todays Deals on Ebay.co.uk
Check Todays Deals On Amazon.co.uk
-
Originally Posted by local
A few verses of the red flag seemed apposite for the anti-democracy extremists.
Their big beef it seems is they were deprived of some days to further frustrate the will of the people, considering they have been doing it for 3 years complaining about a 4 day loss seems a tad pedantic.
Still the little treasures are playing right into Boris's hand and their pyrrhic victories will come back to haunt them.
The public will see who is stopping democracy so I say let them have their moments in the sun.
It is not a 4 day loss it is 5 weeks, Bojo is being extremely economical with the truth including the Party Conference period as Parliament doesn't normally get Prorogued for that period, it is normally a time when nothing is scheduled but any urgent business is dealt with as necessary, Bojo has stopped that.
The public will see who is stopping democracy, it is Jacob Rees Mogg and his cronies, the election will see them sent back from whence they came.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 2 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by said
You are in Canada - you can only go by the media - so I know it is more difficult to follow the issue. I have several acquaintances in Canada - and as they see it, they are saying a second referendum should be called. I am not surprised - they may be highly educated people but they do not follow British democracy had they have done so - they would have realised the futility of doing that. First of all it breaks with British tradition,
I should also have added that, when it comes to prorogation being used for the wrong purpose, we have more experience of that than the UK does. Our previous PM prorogued Parliament on several occasions, once to stop the opposition from unseating him and forming a coalition government. The outcry from parliamentarians and the general public was even louder than the one you've just seen in the UK.
And we're used to referendums too. Quebec has held two referendums to separate from Canada.
The Brits should have learned from Quebec's referendum
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by seivad
And where, pray tell, do you get your information from? Daily dispatches from Downing Street? Intimate phone conversations with Nige?
*tittering*
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 1 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by said
That is the tradition of the country as we have always accepted it. You cannot pick and choose which parts of democracy you want to suit your own agenda - it does not work that way. If these rebels seek to oppose the traditions of the country, if they change the people's rights - then the UK is no longer a democracy. There are a few hundred MP's who oppose their own leader. What if all those MP's claiming to be supporting the people, are in the pay of the EU? I am not saying that they are - but this is a situation which could happen if we do not keep to our traditions. Those who voted in the referendum were all British citizens, fully aware of the voting system and what it stands for, they had their say in that referendum! There should have been no argument they should accept the result - hell imagine this same farce every time there was a general election! When it was put to the people to join the EEC, the majority won! There were a huge number who did not want to join - but who followed the rules and took the result gracefully. Even when Heath admitted that he lied to the people about the EEC - they were angry but did not scream about it.
This present event could well mean the end of democracy in the UK as we know it, if those who oppose the result are allowed to overturn it. They won't - but they are trying everything they can! People vote for what they see is right! The majority of those people win the vote! Everyone in the country has to accept it! What we go on having two, three, a dozen referendums?? How ridiculous would that be! The Brexit supporters are fighting for that democracy - that is the whole point.
The rebel MP's - The ERG are dozens not hundreds also some of them also represent constituencies that voted remain,
The 1975 Referendum result less than 8.5m voted out an emphatic remain victory.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by seivad
I should also have added that, when it comes to prorogation being used for the wrong purpose, we have more experience of that than the UK does. Our previous PM prorogued Parliament on several occasions, once to stop the opposition from unseating him and forming a coalition government. The outcry from parliamentarians and the general public was even louder than the one you've just seen in the UK.
And we're used to referendums too. Quebec has held two referendums to separate from Canada.
The Brits should have learned from Quebec's referendum
Quebec separating from Canada is similar to the Scottish situation - but nothing like the Brexit issue. Quebec is the second largest economy in Canada and is therefore very important to the country. Similarly, Scotland is important to the UK for its North Sea Oil. Neither the British nor the Canadian government wanted to be separated from the province nor the country.
In the case of Brexit - the UK economy relies heavily on the finance sector. This sector gains no benefit whatever from the EU, in fact as far as Finance goes the EU is redundant.
Much of the imports to the UK are not actually from the EU. They are counted as being so, because they pass through the Netherlands.
There is a lot of corruption everywhere in the World - the EU is no different. It has its own protectionalist system that is detrimental to European business, it has also had several incidences of internal fraud.
There is no proof available, of course there would not be - but it is heavily rumoured that here in the UK, it is the EU who is behind the recent turmoil in Parliament. They are the only people who could infiltrate the government, since there are several leading people who receive monetary rewards from it. No - it is not conspiracy theories.
Why now, why not back in March? How would anyone else benefit from these events? We are leaving the EU it has been passed in law - it could not possibly benefit the population of the UK to remain in the Union. Remember Brexit was not an off the cuff decision. There are strong reasons for wanting to come out of the EU. The UK is being left far behind - (for instance, the Tiger countries) - because the establishment has grown far too large and unwielding to be able to move with the market trends. The EU has control over any new technology in Europe, it can either market it or keep it under wraps due to its protectionalism policies. The UK regularly develops new technology, paid mainly for by our businesses and some small grant from the EU - we need to be able to use that new work to be able to move forward. Peace in Europe? Yeah, right! There has been more European unrest since we joined the EU than ever before. The EU holds a close alliance with the US to engage in war in the Gulf countries - in the UK, we see no reason why so many thousands of innocent people have to die. I guess the EU will go and hold the US's hand when it invades Venezuela??.
You will notice that most of the voters for Brexit are middle class people. The EU promoted minority groups where they could to look good - and they rewarded the top people in the country. But the whole set up ignored the middle working groups who worked at perhaps several jobs, just to be able to pay their way without any gratitude. These people generate the economy. True a lot of this has to do with our own government - but the restrictions of the EU certainly make things worse.
Just where is the Remain argument? No-one has ever made one yet! So what on earth are these remain people screaming for, if they don't know themselves? The UK has managed for several hundreds of years - why is it so impossible for it to do so now. If the break did not happen now - it would in the near future.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by said
Just where is the Remain argument? No-one has ever made one yet! So what on earth are these remain people screaming for, if they don't know themselves? The UK has managed for several hundreds of years - why is it so impossible for it to do so now. If the break did not happen now - it would in the near future.
The Remain argument is for the Status Quo, they are not the ones screaming, it is the rabid 'No Dealers' who are screaming like 2 year olds who have just lost their cuddly toy, the UK joined because the country was on its knees, other countries had modernised and were thriving whilst we imported rotting food which had been held at customs and exported dying livestock. We will see post Oct 31st how it pans out.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 4 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by said
In the case of Brexit - the UK economy relies heavily on the finance sector. This sector gains no benefit whatever from the EU, in fact as far as Finance goes the EU is redundant.
Why do you insist on peddling this nonsense? Do you think because the financial sector doesn't actually crate up cash and ship it abroad, that it isn't affected by us leaving the EU?
Brexit will hammer Britain's financial services - and no-one seems to have noticed: Early in the negotiations, British financial firms realised they would lose the valuable 'passporting' rights that allow them to do business in any other European country with minimal extra regulatory scrutiny. About £1trn of assets have been moved from the UK to the EU27, according to EY. Some 7,000 financial services jobs are expected to go in the near future.
This is far fewer than pessimistic early predictions had assumed. London will remain Europe's leading financial centre for the foreseeable future, thanks to its depth of expertise, the predictability of its legal system, the attractiveness of the city as a place to live and the use of English.
But the long-term outlook is poor. Loss of market access will likely result in a steady drip-feed of jobs and capital moving from the UK to the EU.
And:
As with many other sectors, though, it is very exposed to the risks associated with a no deal Brexit.
Currently, the EU-wide system of passporting system enables firms authorised in one member state to operate anywhere in the single market without needing further regulatory approval.
After Brexit, the UK will no longer have access to this system, and will instead move into an arrangement based on ‘regulatory equivalence’: if the European Commission judges a country’s regulatory regime to match that of the EU in intent and outcome, it may then grant market access.
However, equivalence has two key weaknesses from the UK’s perspective. First, it is not as extensive as passporting, and large parts of financial services business, such as banking and deposit-taking, or selling investment products to retail consumers are out of scope.
And:
The only certainty of Brexit is that, whatever the outcome, change is coming. The trade relationship between the UK and the EU will not be the same after the transition/implementation period (however long that ends up being) comes to an end and Brexit kicks in. The implications for the UK go further afield than Europe, as most of its trade (including financial services) with around 60 non-EU countries is conducted through deals with the EU that will no longer exist once the UK leaves the EU.
Much of the imports to the UK are not actually from the EU. They are counted as being so, because they pass through the Netherlands.
Over 30% of our food comes directly from EU countries. 48% is from us. The rest is through EU deals. Whichever countries it passes through is completely immaterial.
There is a lot of corruption everywhere in the World - the EU is no different. It has its own protectionalist system that is detrimental to European business, it has also had several incidences of internal fraud.
There is no proof available, of course there would not be - but it is heavily rumoured that here in the UK, it is the EU who is behind the recent turmoil in Parliament. No - it is not conspiracy theories.
Yes, it is conspiracy theories. Unless you've proof of such nonsense, it's a conspiracy theory. 'Heavily rumoured' my backside. Can you point to a single link where this is 'heavily rumoured', outside any swivel-eyed lunatic Brexiteer website? Of course not.
It's heavily rumoured that the Royal Family are alien lizards. Makes about as much sense.
Peace in Europe? Yeah, right! There has been more European unrest since we joined the EU than ever before. The EU holds a close alliance with the US to engage in war in the Gulf countries - in the UK, we see no reason why so many thousands of innocent people have to die. I guess the EU will go and hold the US's hand when it invades Venezuela??.
When were we last at war with an EU country? And are you saying we don't follow the USA into war? Iraq, for example?
The EU promoted minority groups where they could to look good - and they rewarded the top people in the country.
Which minority groups? Who have been promoted where they could look good?
Just where is the Remain argument? No-one has ever made one yet!
Oh FFS, there have been posts and posts, pages and pages and pages written on this site alone arguing for the benefits of remaining. You've just chosen to ignore them all.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 3 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by said
Quebec separating from Canada is similar to the Scottish situation - but nothing like the Brexit issue. Quebec is the second largest economy in Canada and is therefore very important to the country. Similarly, Scotland is important to the UK for its North Sea Oil. Neither the British nor the Canadian government wanted to be separated from the province nor the country.
Quebec contributes around 20% of the Cdn. GDP. During the period before the last referendum, there was a large exodus of businesses and people from Quebec to Ontario. Separation would also have cut Canada in two, and cut off the Maritime provinces from the rest of Canada. As was the case with Scotland, they wanted a divorce, but still demanded sex.
My point, and the then PM's point, was that referendums on something that brings overwhelming change should require an overwhelming number of votes in favour. A simple majority is not enough. All the more so if the referendum question lacked clarity, which both the Brexit referendum and the Quebec referendum question did.
Just where is the Remain argument? No-one has ever made one yet! So what on earth are these remain people screaming for, if they don't know themselves? The UK has managed for several hundreds of years - why is it so impossible for it to do so now. If the break did not happen now - it would in the near future.
There are none so blind as those who will not see.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 1 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by Alikado
It is not a 4 day loss it is 5 weeks, Bojo is being extremely economical with the truth including the Party Conference period as Parliament doesn't normally get Prorogued for that period, it is normally a time when nothing is scheduled but any urgent business is dealt with as necessary, Bojo has stopped that.
The public will see who is stopping democracy, it is Jacob Rees Mogg and his cronies, the election will see them sent back from whence they came.
There are at least two honourable QC's who may argue with you there.
Anthony Speaight QC
Stanley Brodie QC
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
|
Search Qlocal (powered by google)
Privacy & Cookie Policy
Check Todays Deals On Amazon.co.uk
Check Todays Deals on Ebay.co.uk
Booking.com
Supporting Local Business
Be Seen - Advertise on Qlocal
UK, Local Online News Community, Forums, Chats, For Sale, Classified, Offers, Vouchers, Events, Motors Sale, Property For Sale Rent, Jobs, Hotels, Taxi, Restaurants, Pubs, Clubs, Pictures, Sports, Charities, Lost Found
UK,
UK News,
|