BS: Brexit again

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 11:47 AM

but we are armed to the teeth.. we got conkers, water pistols....

And Marmite!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Raedwulf
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 11:58 AM

Nonono, Steve. North of Watford Gap, south of Scotland; it's all Yaaarkshuuure, remember? Mind you, 10:59. Nail, again. Remind not to make any Yorkshire remarks when you're holding a hammer, would you? ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 12:33 PM

Raedwulf, leaving aside the untrue personal attack on me, you said,

"So why should I waste my time looking for links? I knew that the Ref was NLB before it happened. Steve knew. Kevin knew. As Steve so accurately says, the fact that YOU did not is YOUR problem."

The fact is that the government stated that the result would be binding, and delivered that statement to every household in the country to make sure that everyone knew that fact.

Did the government confide in you three separately?

You have all been abusive to me, but I have produced hard evidence for what I said, and none of you can support your claims.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 12:38 PM

Say dood night, Professor.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 12:44 PM

Why Greg?
Dood grief, it is not 5pm here yet.

BTW, please identify any statement of mine you wish to challenge, and why.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: DMcG
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 12:55 PM

Well according to this link (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-senior-conservative-mps-seize-on-a-forgotten-government-pledge-to-let-parliament-decide-the-a7366316.html) Cameron said back in 210 it could not be binding. You don't have to believe the Independent of course.   It will be recorded in Hansard.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: DMcG
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 12:58 PM

2010. They were not that forward thinking!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 01:24 PM

Keith, it doesn't matter what the confounded leaflet said. Actually, the problem is more with what it should have said but didn't. And Cameron was not entitled to promise what he promised about Article 50, end of. He would have been overriding the sovereignty of parliament had he done so and would probably have had his head cut off. The problem here is that he made that promise hubristically, certain in the knowledge that he would win the referendum. What a twat. And just look what he's brought on us. Chaos. Have a little read:

From Wiki (which must be accurate because I sent Jimmy Wales my annual ten quid yesterday). Yes the bloody leaflet, mentioned below, muddies the waters and is currently giving succour to panic-stricken brexiteers, but that's only because it was badly drafted.

The Act        

The act legislated for a referendum to be held in the United Kingdom and Gibraltar on whether to remain a member of the EU, to be conducted by the Electoral Commission and overseen by an appointed "Chief Counting Officer" (CCO) and a "Deputy chief counting officer" (DCCO) who will declare the final result for the United Kingdom and by regulation orders the Secretary of State to appoint a date for the holding of the referendum under the following circumstances:

The Referendum must be held no later than 31 December 2017.
The Referendum cannot be held on 5 May 2016 or 4 May 2017.
The Electoral Commission is the public body under the terms of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 that was given the task to raise public awareness ahead of polling day, and to oversee the conduct of the referendum.

The act made no provision for the result to be legally binding on the government or on any future government.The result of the referendum was to be a single majority vote of the United Kingdom and Gibraltar with no super majorities, double majorities of the constituent countries or any minimum turnout threshold required for the vote to pass. The act did not specify any specific consequences that would follow the result of the referendum. In the event of a "Leave" vote, the government would decide whether, when, and under what circumstances, the UK would invoke Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union to begin a two-year process of negotiations for Britain to leave the EU.European Union law would remain enforceable in the United Kingdom until or unless the European Communities Act 1972 were repealed.

The referendum

In accordance with the Act and the public duty of the Electoral Commission, an impartial guide was posted to every household in the UK and Gibraltar in the week beginning of 16 May 2016.

Limitation        

This Bill required a referendum to be held on the question of the UK's continued membership of the European Union before the end of 2017. The bill neither contained any requirement for the UK Government to implement the results of the referendum (although the government advisory leaflet 'Why the Government believes that voting to remain in the European Union is the best decision for the UK' clearly states 'This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide.'), nor did it say explicitly that the referendum is only advisory. On November 3, 2016, the High Court in London ruled that the referendum is only advisory, also known as pre-legislative or consultative, which enables the electorate to voice an opinion which then influences the Government in its policy decisions. The UK does not have constitutional provisions which would require the results of a referendum to be implemented, unlike, for example, the Republic of Ireland, where the circumstances in which a binding referendum should be held are set out in its constitution. In interpreting the intent of the referendum to be advisory by default, the court considered the precedents of previous UK referendums. The referendums held in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland in 1997 and 1998 are examples of advisory referendums, where public opinion was tested before legislation was introduced. In contrast, the legislation which provided for the referendum held on AV in May 2011 would have implemented the new system of voting without further legislation, provided that the boundary changes also provided for in the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituency Act 2011 were also implemented. In the event, there was a substantial majority against any change. The 1975 referendum was held after the re-negotiated terms of the UK's EC membership had been agreed by all EC Member States and the terms set out in a command paper and agreed by both Houses.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 01:44 PM

Now there ya go again Steve, confusing The Professor with facts......

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 01:50 PM

The leaflet was and is the elephant in the room, Greg, as was Cameron's impossible promise. But leaflets don't make laws. Lawmakers make laws, and in this country we calls 'em MPs and peers.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 01:56 PM

The promise in the leaflet is as valid as the promise to stop immigration and spend the money that we give to the EU on the NHS. Not worth the paper it is printed on. It is nothing like hard evidence. Hard evidence is what Steve provides by way of what the actual referendum act states. It is freely available and always has been. It has always been known that the referendum was purely advisory and to state otherwise is misleading.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Raedwulf
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 01:56 PM

You have, as almost always, produced fuck all, Keith. Many people KNEW that before the Ref. YOUR ignorance is YOUR problem. As per bleeding usual, of course, it's not you, it's everyone else, etcetera, etcetera. Because YOU didn't know... Your ignorance is either everyone else's fault. Or a lie. Because you couldn't possibly be "not in possession of all of the facts", could you? Not Keith Acheson, no....

Yes, seen it all before; me & many others. We knew. Did you not know? Or did you just not WANT to know? And, typical KeithA, keep trying to pretend that your main point is a "fact" when it isn't. The fact, the VERY REAL fact, is that an election pamphlet isn't a legal document. Which is all, and no more, that the judiciary have pointed out this week (alright, they didn't precisely, but you keep trying to raise the matter of "der grubbimint promissid..." what they weren't entitled to promise. In a pamphlet. Which you, apparently & stupidly, took as gospel. Because you wanted to, presumably.). A "fact" you sadly can't let go of...

No, Keith. You demand "facts", but you quote facts that aren't facts, you ignore facts that are facts. You always have done. A fact is only a fact if it supports the argument YOU want to make. If it doesn't, it can be ignored or dismissed. This isn't "an untrue personal attack" on you, it's a statement of opinion, based on personal experience. An opinion that, I do no doubt, many other Catters down the years who have tried to debate with you would agree with.

My opinion of you is that, whilst you are sometimes right, and whilst I have sometimes spoken on the same side of an argument, you are mostly stupid (incapable of understanding) & ignorant (not in possession of the necessary information to be able to form a balanced opinion). That is not an "attack". It's an opinion based on too many years of reading the shit that you shovel onto Mudcat. I don't like thinking ill of anyone, so don't imagine I take any pleasure in writing this. I'm just being "honest Injin".

Sometimes you are right. Sometimes you are wrong. But, mostly, you couldn't argue your way out of a wet paper bag and, sadly, you don't even realise how poor a debater you are. There's no way of making you understand it either, because all criticism will be dismissed; "untrue personal attack", QED. Which is a shame, because you are capable of putting together a good argument. It's just that it's usually based on a purblind, narrow-minded, "only the facts I like" foundation.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 01:58 PM

I took the time and trouble to read the EU Referendum Legislation today - heavy reading indeed. Nowhere does it say that the result of the referendum will be binding.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/36/contents/enacted

QED.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 02:20 PM

Keith, it doesn't matter what the confounded leaflet said.

Yes it does, because it was a pledge to every person in the land that the referendum would be binding.
It was never an issue until the people voted the wrong way, according to their betters.

Many people KNEW that before the Ref. YOUR ignorance is YOUR problem.
No need to be abusive, unless that is all you can manage.

Look at Question Time from last Thursday.
Both the Labour and Conservative MPs said that Parliamentarians voted six to one for a referendum in the belief it would be binding.

How clever of you to be better informed than all our MPs.
If I am ignorant, they must all be too!
Not fit to decide on the issue in that case.
Why will you not tell us who informed you, but failed to inform the rest of the country?

I took the time and trouble to read the EU Referendum Legislation today - heavy reading indeed. Nowhere does it say that the result of the referendum will be binding.

It does not say it would not be binding, but that is what the people and the Parliament were led to believe.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 02:25 PM

But it's the LEGISLATION that sets the rules. You know - the Sovreignty of the U.K. Parliament that you Brexiteers said you were voting for.

Or were you all lying in your fucking teeth about that too?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 02:27 PM

Thank you, BWM, but you need not have. Every single source from the ardently pro-EU lobby to the rabidly anti-EU media have never said it was legally binding. It seems that the only people who did not know that fact are right here on Mudcat. Fancy that! :-)

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 02:33 PM

Are we to assume then that every other promise made during the referendum campaign is binding as well?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Raedwulf
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 02:57 PM

"Many people KNEW that before the Ref. YOUR ignorance is YOUR problem.
No need to be abusive, unless that is all you can manage."

Oh, do tell, Keith! What is "abusive" about pointing out that you were not in possession of all of the facts (ignorant) when you repeatedly admit it? Am I being abusive when I say you display stupidity because you insist on claiming stupid things like "It does not say it would not be binding, but that is what the people and the Parliament were led to believe."

I didn't believe that. I knew it wasn't true. So did Steve, Kevin, BWM, Dave... At the moment, a random Mudcat poll says the 5 out of 6 UK voters knew that the Ref was NLB. But, apparently, 83% of UK voters are liars or deluded or something, because KeithA didn't know what the rest of us know...

Could you offer better proof of everything I've been saying about you than this, Keith? Oh, and that's never mind the "fact" that you cherry pick one quote out of my post that you think (wrongly) that you can argue with whilst ignoring the rest (because if Keith ignores it, it isn't real, it doesn't exist, nobody could possibly think those nasty things about that nice Mr Acheson...)

Sorry, Keith. I really don't mean to get on your case, and I don't doubt you are a nice bloke. I'm sure I'd quite happily buy you a pint if we wound up in the same pub / beer tent / whatever (no, you will not promptly pour it over my head because that would be Sacrilege!!! ;-) ). But you are cheating / being a rotten debater again. You are talking tripe, insisting that you are right, and ignoring everything that several people are pointing out to you that are dead, flat wrong about.

Still, at least you seem to have stopped declaring that you are providing "facts" and demanding that the rest of us produce them!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Iains
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 03:00 PM

As there was no legislation in place to make the referendum result binding it would appear to have been a very expensive, worthless fiasco.
Also the argument posed by some that our elected mps must be wiser that the electorate also takes some believing.
It would seem that to have high office then being a former member of the bullington bully boys is regarded as an asset for males. The CV's of many of our members of Parliament would seem extremely lightweight in terms of having a real qualification for the job.
Camoron was a typical example-a vastly overpaid member of the meedjah circus prior to becoming elected.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: DMcG
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 03:04 PM

Add me as another Dave who knew it was advisory, as in my first post in this thread...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 03:06 PM

It's not a question of our elected MPs being wiser than the electorate. It's a question of what the legislation says, and the Sovreignty of Parliament!

Give me fuckin' strength!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: DMcG
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 03:10 PM

I haven't rewatched Question Time and I admit I wasn't giving it my full attention but while I remember the statement that the vote for the referendum bill was 6:1 in favour of the bill, I don't recall them mentioned they believed it was binding. I may have missed it.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 03:12 PM

And, as a rabid spelling-pedant, I offer my heartfelt apologies for my constant mis-spelling of Sovereignty throughout this thread, and perhaps others. 😜😎

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Iains
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 03:14 PM

Using capitals and underlining items does not add to your debating skills.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 03:26 PM

It's intended to work like a hammer, to drive it into a few thick skulls.
The two points aren't debateable, THEY ARE FACT!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 04:24 PM

No promise made by a politician has any legal force whatsoever. I'd have thought that people would have taken on board that elementary constitutional principle by now.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 04:45 PM

Ya mean Trump's NOT gonna build that wall, and Mexico AIN'T gonna pay for it?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 05:22 PM

David Cameron didn't imagine for one second that he would ever have to deliver on his "Article 50 Tomorrow" promise. When he lost the vote he was totally stuffed, and that was one of the main reasons. He couldn't deliver, so he buggered off dead quick like. He lied to us, just like Gove, Johnson and Farage lied to us. What a bloody shambles. But never mind, because "the British people have spoken." All 37% of 'em. After months of being fed a pack of lies. Still, we mustn't think of overturning the result, must we? Far too undemocratic!

Never ever thought I'd find meself on the same side as Ken Clarke... 🙁

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Stanron
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 05:57 PM

I do love a good conspiracy theory. Not only the Remainiacs lied to us, but the Disbe-leavers lied to us as well. They all lied to us. Infamy! Infamy!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 06:07 PM

It's what politicians do for a living. The exception being Jeremy Corbyn, and he gets put down for not being a proper politician because he's doesn't act that way.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 06:16 PM

But it's the LEGISLATION that sets the rules. You know - the Sovreignty of the U.K. Parliament that you Brexiteers said you were voting for.
Or were you all lying in your fucking teeth about that too?

Sad that you can not make a point without swearing.
There were lots of lawyers involved in setting up the referendum.
They told us it would be binding, but knew a legal challenge would be possible.
They decided to keep it quiet in case, unthinkably, the people did not vote as they were supposed to.

They could have repealed those medieval laws to make their promises true, but safer to keep them as a get out clause.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 06:21 PM

Dave,
Thank you, BWM, but you need not have. Every single source from the ardently pro-EU lobby to the rabidly anti-EU media have never said it was legally binding. It seems that the only people who did not know that fact are right here on Mudcat

I quoted a Labour and a Conservative MP who stated that MPs voted 6 to 1 for a referendum believing it to be binding.
So not just Mudcatters.
Those Mudcatters who claim they did know are unable to say how they knew.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 06:24 PM

Say good night, Professor. Its almost 22:30

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 06:27 PM

Dave again,
Are we to assume then that every other promise made during the referendum campaign is binding as well?

We are not talking about campaign slogans.
This was a pledge from the government about the referendum itself.

Raedwulf,
I didn't believe that. I knew it wasn't true. So did Steve, Kevin, BWM, Dave...

Look at Question Time from last Thursday.
Both the Labour and Conservative MPs said that Parliamentarians voted six to one for a referendum in the belief it would be binding.

How clever of you to be better informed than all our MPs.
If I am ignorant, they must all be too!
Not fit to decide on the issue in that case.
Why will you not tell us who informed you, but failed to inform the rest of the country?

Why did none of you once mention that snippet od knowledge in any of the discussion here before the referendum?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 06:36 PM

It's not a question of our elected MPs being wiser than the electorate. It's a question of what the legislation says, and the Sovreignty of Parliament!

Parliament has always been overwhelmingly pro EU.
All three parties have always been pro EU.
That is why the people demanded a referendum and Cameron had to concede one or UKIP would have taken a huge swathe of their votes and maybe even won the General Election as they had already won the EU election.

Had it been revealed that a legal challenge was likely, UKIP would have promised a binding referendum by changing laws as necessary, and again hammered the big three.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 06:39 PM

Fantasy. Entertaining fantasy.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 06:43 PM

I haven't rewatched Question Time and I admit I wasn't giving it my full attention but while I remember the statement that the vote for the referendum bill was 6:1 in favour of the bill, I don't recall them mentioned they believed it was binding. I may have missed it.

You did.
I will transcribe their statements if you like, but it is all available on BBC iPlayer.
It is the first question, and the first two respondents.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 06:48 PM

Steve,
Fantasy. Entertaining fantasy.

No Steve. Facts that you can not challenge.

Prove me wrong by identifying any falsehood in my posts.
Good luck with that Steve.
You might have to stick to lying personal attacks on me.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 06:54 PM

Winning the EU Election when most people didn't vote was no guide for what could happen in a General Election.

All that is interesting, Keith, but it didn't happen. It wasn't a binding referendum, no matter what any MPs or journalists might have said.

However, no need to worry. MPs who were against Brexit will of course vote for it, especially where their constituencies voted for it. They'll present that as being because it's the democratic thing to do, but in reality it's because they think voting for what they believe would put their re-election in danger.

And I suspect that would also mean they'll vote to take away our right to freedom of movement, even though that wasn't in the referendum, because they'll assume that the Brexiters would want that.

So all in all I suspect this will all end up as a storm in a teacup.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 06:54 PM

You have had every conceivable fact laid out for you already in this thread. We've been very patient with you. When you get someone like you who claims that UKIP might have won the last election, well I do wonder what planet you're on. Fantasy, Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: DMcG
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 07:17 PM

Ok, I have now listened to the first part of question time again. The first speaker, Sajid Javid, immediately changed the question from whether it was legally binding to whether it was morally binding, and the second didn't say anything about the legal side but that because of the result most mp would vote in accordance with the result. Javid also said that when MPs voted for it most thought it was binding but left vague whether he meant legally or morally.

Which leaves us in the same position, I think. MPs may consider themselves bound for reasons of personal morality and conviction. That is quite a different thing to whether they are bound in law.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 07:26 PM

Javid was absolutely all over the place in Question Time. Very unprofessional. Totally unprepared for the inevitable questions of the day.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 07:37 PM

I knew it was non binding because many sources told me it was so. I then read the legislation that was open, free and available to everyone and confirmed it was an advisory referendum only. I have known from day 1 that it was so and I am surprised that anyone thought otherwise. If any MPs thought it was legally binding then they are fools. I suspect that, like many other politicians, they are not fools but are lying. Although that is merely my opinion but born out of experience.

I am not talking about campaign slogans when I speak of promises. I am talking about what politicians said. Or lied about. They said they would stop immigration. They said they would spend our EU contribution on the NHS. They said they would abide by the results of the referendum. Which of these lies anyone believes is their own business. From my point of view, I believe none.

If anyone believes one and not the others, I am suspicious of their reasoning.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 07:44 PM

I am suspicious of their reasoning

Or lack thereof....

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 08:29 PM

Hey, Keith, get a load of this. From the Daily Mail, two weeks before the referendum.

MPs will block Brexit even if we vote to leave the EU in the referendum, according to David Cameron's father-in-law.

Lord Astor said he did not believe there would be a majority in the House of Commons to repeal the legislation that underpins our membership of the bloc.

The bizarre scenario is possible because the national ballot is only advisory - and most politicians support staying inside the EU.

There has already been speculation that MPs could prevent us quitting the European single market, as Brexit campaigners have suggested should happen if there is an Out vote on June 23.

Lord Astor - a Tory peer and Samantha Cameron's stepfather - made the prediction as he set out his support for keeping ties with Brussels, despite delivering a devastating critique of the way it functions.

From the DAILY BLOODY MAIL, Keith. Samcam's dad, Keith! Only advisory! Well whaddya know. The Mail knew it, Samcam's dad knew it (therefore Cameron knew it), we all knew it. Just poor ol' Keith in this big, wide world didn't know it. You should get out more, Keith! 😂

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 09:20 PM

Just poor ol' Keith in this big, wide world didn't know it.

And that's only the tip of the cornucopia of things The Professor doesn't know - even after he's been repeatedly told.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 09:23 PM

Mates.. draw back...

you've let Keith drag you into his game on his terms of combat....

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 09:32 PM

I haven't. That road leads to madness.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 09:56 PM

Are you listening, Keith?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Nov 16 - 09:57 PM

💯!