BS: Brexit again

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 04:05 AM

Ah! the mob is re-forming.......same tactics same people....same bullshit.

Never mind the old pals in the pub act, grow up and address the issues. Try to listen occasionally...and maybe learn.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Iains
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 04:31 AM

I wonder which bigot will spit out their dummy and hurl their toys out of the pram next?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 04:32 AM

The issues have been addressed, and the facts laid out. It's your mate who's incapable of understanding the structure of UK Democracy, and the European Union Referendum Act, 2015.

Address your sarcasm to him.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 04:34 AM

That was for Ake. Iains comment isn't even worthy of a response.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 04:39 AM

And that's my final contribution to this thread. There's no joy in trying to educate pork.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Iains
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 05:25 AM

An interesting summary of referendums in the UK and their legal status, especially pre legislative and post legislative referendums.

One is left with the feeling that a) the result would be ignored.
b) the vote would overwhelmingly be to remain. The fact that the people voted to leave is the only explanation for camoron scuttling off into the wilderness. This is because a leave vote would have to be ratified by Parliament, and there is no way this could be guaranteed.
The entire exercise was a sham, but the government bluff was called when the majority voted for exit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referendums_in_the_United_Kingdom

(It is dangerous to use wikipedia as a source, but in this case I believe it is a clear summary)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 05:53 AM

As far as I can see the issues have been addressed clearly and concisely. The facts have been presented and because they do not concur with certain preconceptions some members are beginning to cry 'foul' even where no foul has been committed. I will ignore this diversionary tactic and I urge others to see it for what it is. I will follow BWMs lead and exit from the thread with a final summary

1. The fact remains that the referendum was never legally binding.
2. The judges have ruled, quite correctly, that parliamentary procedure must be followed.
3. Many promises were made by politicians that have now been broken. The only surprise there is that some people seem shocked by this.

Whether parliament will override the result of the referendum is yet to be seen but there is no conspiracy by 'The elite' to keep us in the EU. Simply laws that have been enshrined for hundreds of years that cannot and should not be broken.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Iains
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 06:02 AM

DtG.
   well said!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 06:24 AM

Steve, my only claim in the OP was that we were promised a binding referendum.
For that I was vilified, insulted and abused but we were, by the government and in a document delivered at tax payers expense to every home in the country.

As ever, I was right and you were wrong.

In this post Steve, you show that you believed the referendum to be binding, so when did you learn the truth?

Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 04 Sep 16 - 06:22 AM

What rubbish. You want the whole population to make an irrevocable decision on an extremely complex matter that will affect the country for many decades (including - especially including - people who are too young to vote). That was a bad choice to begin with, all the worse because that choice was made by Cameron for all the wrong reasons. The very least that should have happened was a huge education programme. Well pigs might fly. With politicians on two opposing sides that was simply never going to happen. The country was peddled lies from both sides and the thresholds for turnout and voting outcome were set way too low. Just over one third of those eligible to vote are dragging us out of the EU. Unconscionable. Indefensible. And lopsided, in that one choice put before the public was irrevocable whereas the other was reversible

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 06:40 AM

McGrath of Harlow - PM
Date: 21 Jun 16 - 01:38 PM

But of course that means not taking the irrevocable gamble of voting for out this week.

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

From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 10:29 AM

An in vote could easily have been overturned by another referendum (and it's a good bet that you'd have been calling for one). The out vote, once buttons have been pushed, is irrevocable.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Raggytash
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 06:44 AM

Where is your written proof professor that "we were promised a binding referendum"

Not your interpretation of what was written but show us what was actually written.

Like almost everyone else on this thread I understood the referendum to be merely advisory.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 06:47 AM

From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 05 Jul 16 - 08:44 PM

The thing is, Teribus, less than 38% of the total electorate, about 17 million out of 46.5 million entitied to vote, have forced an irrevocable decision on this country.

Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 06 Jul 16 - 06:42 AM

Well that response doesn't surprise me in the least, Teribus. But this is not a game. This is an irrevocable, once-and-for-all decision. It is far more serious even then a general election in many regards. It is also lopsided in that a leave vote is irrevocable

Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 02 Sep 16 - 02:26 PM

We have allowed less than 38% of the electorate to make a irrevocable decision based on fear and ignorance

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 06:50 AM

Rag,
See my post 05 Nov 16 - 05:49 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Raggytash
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 07:08 AM

I'll ask again.


Where does it say the referendum is legally binding?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 07:14 AM

"Once buttons have been pushed," Keith. The button is Article 50. No going back once that has been kick-started, despite what Teribus sez. Irrevocable. As far as I can see from here, that is a rock-solid cert. This is not about not doing it. It's about doing it properly. Rule of law, Keith. In fact, to all intents and purposes, the "decision of the people" (all 37% of them) was always intended to be irrevocable. I can't see that anything that's happened so far has changed that, certainly not the court judgement, which had nothing to do with whether brexit happens or not. The referendum was advisory but the government was, and still is, determined to be driven by it. There is, sadly, no political groundswell for overturning it. In effect, as soon as the result was known, the decision was irrevocable. Nothing to do with "advisory" or not, everything to do with politics. The government simply decided, ahead of the vote, to take the advice, whatever it was. Sorry you felt you had to waste all that time nitpicking. Keeps you off the streets, I suppose.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 08:45 AM

I think Mr Shaw is wriggling like a fish on a hook Keith, as you have shown he stated that the vote was irrevocable, not the decision when to press the button. :0)

Most people thought that the vote was important....otherwise why bother with a referendum at all? Why not leave it to corrupt and self serving MP's to carve the matter up to their satisfaction.

The crux of the matter is "free movement", that must be abandoned above all else. It is an exploitative "economic" policy which is wrong on all levels, touted by snake oil salesman Blair as a remedy for all of our economic ills......need I say more.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 09:29 AM

Calm down.

It's very simple. It was never going to be a legally binding referendum. The government put out promises about it being binding which were legally meaningless. The formal decision to comply with the advice given by the public lies with parliament. However it is virtually certain that this decision will be to comply.

The actual referendum only dealt with membership of the EU, not with any other issues, such as whether free movement will be preserved. However it is likely that MPs will in fact vote to deprive us of this right, so there is no real need for advocates of removing free movement to get in a tizzy. It

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 09:41 AM

The government was entitled to promise that it would be bound by the advisory result. What it could not promise is that it would be legally bound. Well, we know what politicians' promises amount to, but in this instance they are actually, so far at least, honouring their promise to be bound. They don't have to honour it and there's still a small chance that they will have to renege. Cameron was not entitled to promise that article 50 would be invoked immediately in the event of a leave vote. Had he for one second thought that he might have to deliver on that promise, he would never have made it. Idiot.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 12:57 PM

And the other thing is, none of those promises included anything about an end to free movement or to membership of the single market. Neither of those are necessarily implied in leaving the EU.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 01:08 PM

The referendum has to adopt the same criteria as any General Election - his has to serve the interests of the entire population, not the first-past-the-post winners, those who voted for, those who voted against and those who didn't vote.
It effects us all so how it is brought about about should be decided by all - or their elected representatives.
That is what the Law Courts decided and that's what makes sense.
Let's see what happens with the appeal - so far we have only had the outraged squeals of the winners.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 05:27 PM

Keith, Akenaton - read THIS, in particular the second and third sentences. The English used is simple enough for even you to understand.

When you've read it, shut up and go away.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 06:22 PM

Neither Liz Truss nor Theresa May will condemn the newspapers that slagged off the judges. It took both of them ages even to "support" the judiciary at all. Bloody disgraceful. Running scared of alienating the right-wing sewer press. No guts, no principles, no honesty. Well I did try to warn people against voting Tory...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Raedwulf
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 08:22 PM

BWM - please don't use this phrase again "There's no joy in trying to educate pork." I absolutely tore into Muppet, sorry, Musket, sorry self-proclaimed Dr Ian Mather for using it a couple of years back. And you know what? Several catters criticised ME for MY language without the slightest comment on his remark. Which left me... surprised, let's say. They couldn't see what was wrong with the phrase whilst bitching at me for using some crude language?


I think Keith is both stupid & ignorant. Not least because he gives a very good impression of being narrow-minded, alongside never, ever, ever, ever, ever admitting he's in the wrong. But "educating pork"? That's vile. It supercilious, pretentious & condescending. If he argues like an idiot, call him an idiot. But don't stoop to "educating pork".

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: bobad
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 08:58 PM

Thus spake Porky.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 09:09 PM

But "educating pork"? That's vile.

But demonstrably more successful than attempting to educate The Professor.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Nov 16 - 09:26 PM

But the fact is that you can't educate pork. We had a pair of Donald Russell pork chops for tea tonight and they wouldn't listen to a word I said. The potential problem comes with whether you're equating people on the forum with unspecified cuts of pork. One of my early girlfriends called me, affectionately, "sausage" all the time and I didn't mind at all. And when I told Mrs Steve that she was having pork belly on Monday night, her eyes fair lit up... Dunno really. It's not such a bad expression...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 07 Nov 16 - 03:02 AM

Thank you for your, no doubt well-meant, advice Raedwulf.

I'm fairly sure it will come as little or no surprise when I tell you to Foxtrot Oscar and mind your own business.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Nov 16 - 05:19 AM

"I think Mr Shaw is wriggling like a fish on a hook Keith, "
A bit rich from# someone who never ever responds put to him - both of you make a point of not doing so (or, in Keith's case, accusing the poster of "made up shit" - a favourite phrase of his)
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Iains
Date: 07 Nov 16 - 05:32 AM

http://www.englishconstitutiongroup.org/damning-letter-from-lord-kilmuir-the-lord-chancellor-to-edward-heath-2/

Have we all been betrayed? Do we actually need Brexit?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Nov 16 - 06:56 AM

Well I hear this morning that May is contemplating trying to force Article 50 through with a "simple vote," bypassing legislation. I sincerely hope that MPs don't fall for that one. If anything needs a proper debate, this does. The other parties should be saying, a proper debate or we'll vote against Article 50. Bloody Tories don't seem to like a good dose of parliamentary democracy up 'em!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Nov 16 - 08:36 AM

Ha Ha, that is exactly what they said about Mr Corbyn and the membership of the Labour Party.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Nov 16 - 08:54 AM

Jim, I often respond to points made by other members, I don't respond if I either don't think the post is sincere, or if the post is abusive.   Sometimes the posts are not worthy of response, if they are simply parroting the same old hackneyed ideology.

On a personal note, you give the impression of always being up for a fight, why don't you calm down and start behaving like one old friend who disagrees with another? Perhaps that would encourage more responses?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Nov 16 - 09:18 AM

"I don't respond if I either don't think the post is sincere,"
I've not long posted four links which directly contradict your persistent claims of the negative effects of immigration - they are neither "insincere nor abusive" - they are the views of experts in the field - along with collected data - you have not responded to any and no doubt you will repeat your spurious claims a later date.
This is common and long-standing practice with you and your accusation of "wiggling" echoes somewhat hollowly when your own behaviour is placed next to Steve's
"why don't you calm down and start behaving like one old friend"
Sorry ake - don't have many extremist right wing friends - can't think of one (though I do have a number of homosxuals and a few immgrants I count as friends).
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Nov 16 - 12:30 PM

Rag,
Where does it say the referendum is legally binding?

Where have I said the referendum is legally binding?

Steve, in these posts you describe the vote itself as irrevocable.
We now know that it can be revoked by Parliament.
You dishonestly claimed to know that all along.

From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 05 Jul 16 - 08:44 PM

The thing is, Teribus, less than 38% of the total electorate, about 17 million out of 46.5 million entitied to vote, have forced an irrevocable decision on this country.

Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 06 Jul 16 - 06:42 AM

Well that response doesn't surprise me in the least, Teribus. But this is not a game. This is an irrevocable, once-and-for-all decision. It is far more serious even then a general election in many regards. It is also lopsided in that a leave vote is irrevocable

Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 02 Sep 16 - 02:26 PM

We have allowed less than 38% of the electorate to make a irrevocable decision based on fear and ignorance

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Nov 16 - 12:32 PM

OK Jim, so I was right and you are up for a fight, your "debating" is influenced by perceived views that you disapprove of....personal dislike.

Thanks for saving me the time and effort of responding to you in the future.
If I had hatred for any member of this forum I certainly would not be looking for responses from them.....There are about half a dozen members who have shown aggression to me, they no longer figure in any discussions I may have here.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Nov 16 - 12:46 PM

BWM,
Keith, Akenaton - read THIS, in particular the second and third sentences. The English used is simple enough for even you to understand.
When you've read it, shut up and go away.

No. Although it says that the government is not required to abide by the vote, the government did assure us that it would.
It did that in an official document and had it delivered, at public expense, to every home in the country.

That was my whole case, and it is correct.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Nov 16 - 12:53 PM

Raedwulf,
I think Keith is both stupid & ignorant.

On what grounds?
Will you identify some false claims from me?
How about just one?
How about the most stupid and ignorant statement I have made?

If you can not do that, you reveal yourself as someone who indulges in gratuitous personal attacks and name calling because you are incapable of replying to what I say.

So, can you Raedwulf?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Nov 16 - 12:55 PM

The fact that the referendum result is readily revocable in legal and constitutional terms doesn't alter the fact that in practical political terms it was irrevocable. When Steve warned that it was irrevocable that was a perfectly valid and prediction.

(Backwoodsman - Date: 06 Nov 16 - 05:27 PM - that link you gave is to the whole lengthy referendum bill. It might be useful to identify the sentences to which you were actually referring.)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Nov 16 - 01:07 PM

Kevin,
When Steve warned that it was irrevocable that was a perfectly valid and prediction.

He and I, and you, believed it was irrevocable.

However, when I said it here I was vilified and abused and accused of ignorance.

Will anyone of you produce a false statement or claim that I have made?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 07 Nov 16 - 01:28 PM

Well that's odd, Kevin. The link I posted in a previous post goes to the whole bill. The link I posted 06 Nov 16 05:27 PM goes straight to the pertinent section - Section 5, Types of Referendum - when I click on it.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 07 Nov 16 - 01:32 PM

Keith, what you believed is irrelevant. What is FACT (you do understand the concept of 'fact', do you?) is what is contained in the Referendum Bill, to which I have linked twice - once to the whole Bill, and again to the relevant section regarding the advisory nature only of the Bill.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 07 Nov 16 - 01:40 PM

Back when I was a teenager in the 70s..
I never knew anybody who went abroad for holidays..

That was a luxury for the rich sophisticated jet set we saw on telly and in magazines..

We counted ourselves lucky to afford an off season september week in the rain in a holiday camp caravan in dorset or devon..

Nice to See Brexiteers are so nostalgic for bringing those times back again for all to enjoy.... 😎

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Nov 16 - 01:44 PM

BWM, here are the sentences you referred to,
"This Bill requires a referendum to be held on the question of the UK's continued membership of the European Union (EU) before the end of 2017. It does not contain any requirement for the UK Government to implement the results of the referendum, nor set a time limit by which a vote to leave the EU should be implemented. Instead, this is a type of referendum known as pre-legislative or consultative, which enables the electorate to voice an opinion which then influences the Government in its policy decisions."

It does not contain any requirement for the UK Government to implement the results of the referendum, but the government assured the people that they would implement it, and I, Kevin, Steve, and the rest of the country, assumed that is what would happen.

What is FACT (you do understand the concept of 'fact', do you?) is what is contained in the Referendum Bill, to which I have linked twice - once to the whole Bill, and again to the relevant section regarding the advisory nature only of the Bill.

It is a FACT that you failed to link to the relevant section, but I found it anyway.

It is a FACT that the government assured the country that it would implement the decision, even though the Bill you keep on about said it did not have to.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 07 Nov 16 - 01:53 PM

.. and a slice of camembert with a glass of wine was a real exotic continental treat
well worth dressing up at the weekend
to go on a bus to the new trendy wine bar in the next big town,
if we thought it might help persuade a girls knickers down later in the evening.... 😋

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Nov 16 - 02:26 PM

"OK Jim, so I was right and you are up for a fight, your "debating" is influenced by perceived views that you disapprove of....personal dislike"
Sory - don't understand a word of that
My debating is based on my opposition to your extremist views - my personal dislike for you is your persistent habit of sprinting off into the sunset whenever you are presented with an uncomfortable set of facts - the ones presented to your continued claim of "adverse effects of immigration".
I have always answered your points directly - you make a point of never answering those can't handle - then repeating those point as if they hadn't been already shot down in flames.
"Will anyone of you produce a false statement or claim that I have made?"
This has reached the point of self harm.
Your dishonesty throughout the "antisemitism" thread beggars belief - you have lied and distorted the views of others consistently.
You first denied making statements and claimed we had made them up then, when you were presented with them you went on to defend them - all over again - hate-filled, brainwashed Irish schoolchildren being among them
When you found you had planted your foot firmly in your mouth you attempted to smear the rest of us with your own, openly-stated antisemitism.
For your own sake - give thi a raest before you do yourself further damage.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 07 Nov 16 - 02:27 PM

It's a FACT that the second link (06 Nov 16 05:27 PM goes straight to Section 5 - Types of Referendum, when I click on it. I can't be held responsible for your IT deficiencies.

I used to defend you and your cronies when Jim, Steve, Musket(s) were ganging up and kicking your balls. I'm beginning to understand now why they found you such a deceitful, annoying little cunt.

Bye Porky.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 07 Nov 16 - 02:53 PM

I have already made but something else has come up that I need assistance with. The leaflet in question has been described as an 'official document'. I do not believe it is. There is a full list of true official documents here and I cannot find the said leaflet listed therein. I am sure it must be me not looking properly but, if it is not an official document, then why is being described as one?

Surely, rather than being an official document, it is simply an advertising brochure laying out the governments reasons for wanting to stay in the EU.

Can anyone help?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: Raggytash
Date: 07 Nov 16 - 03:32 PM

Professor,

If you cannot be bothered to go back through your interminable posts to actually read the things you have actually posted why on earth should I. I have far better things to do with my time.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit again
From: MikeL2
Date: 07 Nov 16 - 03:33 PM

Hi

I do not know what descriptions are contained in any document about the the referendum, and I can't be really bothered to go and look.

What I do know is that the way the referendum was announced to the world by Cameron was that this was a once off opportunity for the country to vote on whether to stay or leave the EU. Furthermore right throughout the campaign he constantly warned the electorate that they should get out and vote because there would be no going back.

Neither I nor any of the many people I have discussed this with ever heard that the result of the referendum would not be binding...quite the opposite.

Cheers

MikeL2