EU-BREXIT - Page 109 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in Europe's nation states, the E.U. & Russia.

Moderator: PoFo Europe Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum, so please post in English only.
User avatar
By JohnRawls
#14980363
Ter wrote:So indeed, none of them elected, all of them bureaucrats (unless with "council" you meant the counsil of heads of state)


Ter, stop warping the situation. As i said multiple times, your understanding of Eurosceptic in Europe is flawed. None of the Europesceptic that were elected wanted to veto this. NONE, not even a single one. This includes both elected governments, head of states or bureucrats whereever they might be. I understand it is hard to come to terms with this for you but that is the reality.
User avatar
By Nonsense
#14980365
Istanbuller wrote:Remaining in the EU is not an option.

Corbyn's calls for second referendum or general election is stupid. He is just a moron and not in charge of anything.

No deal- Hard Brexit is now in charge of the process. Ready for International Britain?



Nonsense -

Westminster MP's are so stupid that they make Theresa MAY look 'smart', how cool is that. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Parliament has no right to hijack the sovereignty of the people arising from the referendum result.

The 'BREXIT' business taking place in parliament will bring severe repercussions to those 'remain' MP's & the Labour Party's election prospects.

That is true for the Tories too & for our form of 'democracy' if that's what you call it.

The Labour Party under CORBYN are subversive of democracy, they are intent on nullifying the decision of the PEOPLE to LEAVE the E.U.

The Labour Party 2005 election Manifesto promised a REFERENDUM on Europe, once elected, they then DENIED the PEOPLE their DEMOCRATIC choice, for which, amongst other things, they were elected to do.


The Labour Party manifesto 2005
84
EU can do and what it cannot. It strengthens the voice of national parliaments
and governments in EU affairs. It is a good treaty for Britain
and for the new Europe.We will put it to the British people in a referendum
and campaign whole-heartedly for a ‘Yes’ vote to keep Britain
a leading nation in Europe.



It's clear that Labour cannot be trusted in power to deliver a mandate or to be honest about their policies & decisions.
Last edited by Nonsense on 16 Jan 2019 22:30, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
By Potemkin
#14980368
Nonsense wrote:Nonsense -

Westminster MP's are so stupid that they make Theresa MAY look 'smart', how cool is that. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Parliament has no right to hijack the sovereignty of the people arising from the referendum result.

Actually, from a constitutional viewpoint, the people have no right to hijack the sovereignty of Parliament simply because Parliament granted them its permission to vote in a referendum.

The 'BREXIT' business taking place in parliament will bring severe repercussions to those 'remain' MP's & the Labour Party's election prospects.

That is true for the Tories too & for our form of 'democracy' if that's what you call it.

Britain has a representative democracy, not a direct democracy. Parliament is sovereign, not the people.
By Atlantis
#14980371
layman wrote:The smart move, even if you are a Brexiteer, is to cancel article 50 which will reset the clock but not prevent you calling it again. In fact it would even give brexiteers more leverage.


No, that's not possible. It may be possible to cancel Art. 50, but that would mean an end to Brexit. The law cannot be interpreted to use cancellation and re-enactment as a tactical delaying tool.

Anyways, after more than two years, there really is no point in continuing the negotiations - at least not with this government. The only sensible thing is to get a new government with different priorities, which would be able to negotiate a different deal with the EU.

By rights, T. May should resign after this historic defeat; however, since the Tories are spineless creatures, they will try to crawl on, no matter what happens to the country. We can only hope that there are a couple of Tory MPs who do the right thing tonight by voting against the government.

Corbyn's poll ratings aren't too good, but as the snap election showed, polls can be very wrong, and Corbyn's ratings don't reflect Labor potential because of the smear campaign against him.

I have no doubt that Labor would win and/or have a comfortable majority with the LibDems and the SNP. I can't imagine any sane person voting for the Tories after the shitshow of the last couple of years.

I predict that a Labor government will easily come to an agreement with the EU on the basis of a customs union, which would eliminate the backstop and all other problems the present government has created.

Just get rid of the government.
User avatar
By Nonsense
#14980372
Potemkin wrote:Actually, from a constitutional viewpoint, the people have no right to hijack the sovereignty of Parliament simply because Parliament granted them its permission to vote in a referendum.


Britain has a representative democracy, not a direct democracy. Parliament is sovereign, not the people.



Nonsense -
The PEOPLE are NOT hijacking the sovereignty of parliament, people have full sovereignty of their own rights & parliament derives it's rights from the people for a limited period for which parliament is in existence, that is from the opening of parliament, to the closing of parliament at the end of the 5 year FIXED TERM.

Thereafter, if no election is held, there is no 'parliament'.
A referendum IS 'DIRECT' democracy, which is entirely separate from the form of democracy through elections.

In FACT, it is more powerful for being direct, because politicians are INSTRUCTED by the democratic will of the people to DELIVER those actions & NOT to modify policies, as is the case for instance with not implementing the manifesto policy of 'free' TV licences for the over 75's.
User avatar
By Londonbiker
#14980373
Beren wrote:https://twitter.com/WilliamsJon/status/1085277084702986242/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1085277084702986242&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fpolitics%2Flive%2F2019%2Fjan%2F15%2Fbrexit-vote-parliament-latest-news-may-corbyn-gove-tells-tories-they-can-improve-outcome-if-mays-deal-passed-politics-live

ImagePeople’s Vote supporters celebrate the defeat of Theresa May’s deal in Parliament Square. Photograph:
Antonio Olmos for the Observer
They want to be careful what they wish for, and a 2nd referendum & GE isn't on the cards either.

Blair & Rudd campaign people vote mob getting into hysteria thinking they have it in the bag....
User avatar
By Potemkin
#14980375
Nonsense wrote:Nonsense -
The PEOPLE are NOT hijacking the sovereignty of parliament, people have full sovereignty of their own rights & parliament derives it's rights from the people for a limited period for which parliament is in existence, that is from the opening of parliament, to the closing of parliament at the end of the 5 year FIXED TERM.

No, actually Parliament derives its rights from the Crown, which was the original source of sovereignty in the Middle Ages. In fact, most of the history of Britain in the 17th century was the history of how Parliament wrested its rights from the monarchy. It was not a gentle or peaceful process. The people themselves have no legal sovereignty, either then or now.

Thereafter, if no election is held, there is no 'parliament'.
A referendum IS 'DIRECT' democracy, which is entirely separate from the form of democracy through elections.

In FACT, it is more powerful for being direct, because politicians are INSTRUCTED by the democratic will of the people to DELIVER those actions & NOT to modify policies, as is the case for instance with not implementing the manifesto policy of 'free' TV licences for the over 75's.

It is indeed a form of direct democracy, but it has no legal force. It is advisory only, and its result is not legally binding on Parliament. The people are not sovereign. Parliament is sovereign.
By demima
#14980386
Londonbiker wrote:They want to be careful what they wish for, and a 2nd referendum & GE isn't on the cards either.

Blair & Rudd campaign people vote mob getting into hysteria thinking they have it in the bag....


I actually walked through the crowd of 'protestors' yesterday in Westminster. Remainers calling for a 'peoples vote', whatever the **** that is was the most progress/lib dem/middle class crowd I've ever seen in a demo. It's of course all funded and run by dodgy ex Progress funders and PR types.

The only thing we need in this country is a general election and a Labour government led by Jeremy Corbyn.
User avatar
By Londonbiker
#14980392
demima wrote:
I actually walked through the crowd of 'protestors' yesterday in Westminster. Remainers calling for a 'peoples vote', whatever the **** that is was the most progress/lib dem/middle class crowd I've ever seen in a demo. It's of course all funded and run by dodgy ex Progress funders and PR types.

The only thing we need in this country is a general election and a Labour government led by Jeremy Corbyn.

A Jeremy Corbyn Labour led Government is the last thing the U.K. needs right now.

It’ll be like going from a headache to a migraine..
By demima
#14980401
The only alternative to the Tories in the UK is Labour, simple fact. So, either you vote Tory and continue with austerity and the destruction of our public services and increased spivvery, or Labour that will invest to grow and not punish the workers for the benefit of the rich.
User avatar
By Londonbiker
#14980403
demima wrote:The only alternative to the Tories in the UK is Labour, simple fact. So, either you vote Tory and continue with austerity and the destruction of our public services and increased spivvery, or Labour that will invest to grow and not punish the workers for the benefit of the rich.
Sorry but that's utter tosh, austerity has been required as Labour is totally incompetent in everything from economics, immigration to beng anti-Business.

The city is petrified of a JC led Labour government & so is the EU, hardly a credible endorsement even by Brussels standards.
User avatar
By Potemkin
#14980404
Londonbiker wrote:Sorry but that's utter tosh, austerity has been required as Labour is totally incompetent in everything from economics, immigration to beng anti-Business.

The city is petrified of a JC led Labour government & so is the EU, hardly a credible endorsement even by Brussels standards.

As opposed to the brilliant competence of the Tories, eh? Lol. :excited:
#14980407
Potemkin wrote:As opposed to the brilliant competence of the Tories, eh? Lol. :excited:
I concur the Tories have handled it (under May) badly however it's not over yet.

The way ahead is WTO unless Brussels gets real & there's no sign of that yet.
#14980408
Londonbiker wrote:I concur the Tories have handled it (under May) badly however it's not over yet.

The way ahead is WTO unless Brussels gets real & there's no sign of that yet.

Part of the incompetence of the Tories is due to their mulish insistence that everyone else should just let them have everything their own way. Neither politics nor life itself work that way.
User avatar
By Londonbiker
#14980434
Potemkin wrote:Part of the incompetence of the Tories is due to their mulish insistence that everyone else should just let them have everything their own way. Neither politics nor life itself work that way.


Well it doesn’t help when the U.K. has a remain HofC & HofL, Cabinet & Civil Service being dictated by a staunch remain treasury, everything has been thrown up in the air & a move from the status quo has upset many within the Westminster bubble, shame.

Brexit has been the overdue overhaul British Politics has needed.
User avatar
By Nonsense
#14980439
[quote="Potemkin"]No, actually Parliament derives its rights from the Crown, which was the original source of sovereignty in the Middle Ages. In fact, most of the history of Britain in the 17th century was the history of how Parliament wrested its rights from the monarchy. It was not a gentle or peaceful process. The people themselves have no legal sovereignty, either then or now.


Nonsense -

I am fully informed on current & past constitutional arrangements in this country thank you.

Potemkin - "The people themselves have no legal sovereignty, either then or now".


Nonsense -

Neither does parliament in the sense of permanence, because it is time limited,thats why we have have those arrangements under the 'Crown' , because it is the 'sovereignty' within the state & enables continuity with law,security, order, etc.

Sovereignty exist between the 'Crown' & people through parliament.

People could quite easily decapitate the monarchy system, should they so desire, I would advise against it, but, it requires 'hard pruning'. :lol: :lol:

Parliament is not permanent, it is temporal, the 'State' exist ONLY as long as the people wish it, were it to be decided by the people to have outlived it's purpose, a revolution or other means would entail it's replacement, that is what the French,Russians etc chose in the past.

It is, like international treaties, based upon the consent of the people,once withdrawn, as in the referendum, it is finished, one way or another.

'Sovereignty' is conferred on an institution like parliament, through the people, that's how it aquires it's 'sovereign' power, through the process of election, without which, it has no 'power' & that power is the people's power.



Potemkin -
It is indeed a form of direct democracy, but it has no legal force. It is advisory only, and its result is not legally binding on Parliament. The people are not sovereign. Parliament is sovereign.

Nonsense -

Normally, in some countries they are, in others, not, however, the 2016 referendum was was NOT 'advisory' , it was 'legal' & made binding by parliament..

It was made 'legal' by way of passage through parliament, by notifying the E.U under Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty(all thanks to GORDO), for which E.U dictate that any country seeking exit from the E.U under Article 50, has 2 years of membership left, thereafter, it is deemed to have left the E.U, which is the date of 29 March 2019.

That date was determined by the rules of Article 50, as the last day of U.K membership, only effected by our notifying them of our wish to leave, by way of referendum.
It is a political decision to include that promise of a referendum in the Conservative manifesto, which PROMISED to DELIVER the RESULT of that REFERENDUM,that is the basis of the decision to hold that referendum, also to abide by the result, the 'legal' part began with the notification to leave the E.U.

Under current LAW(LEGAL :roll: :roll: ) passed by parliament, with Royal Assent, we LEAVE 29 March 2019...period.


LABOUR have no political credibility in fulfilling any promise in regards to a future referendum on europe, thanks to Gordon BROWN.
User avatar
By Beren
#14980475
JohnRawls wrote:Ter, stop warping the situation. As i said multiple times, your understanding of Eurosceptic in Europe is flawed. None of the Europesceptic that were elected wanted to veto this. NONE, not even a single one. This includes both elected governments, head of states or bureucrats whereever they might be. I understand it is hard to come to terms with this for you but that is the reality.

The Irish government is the only one that would ever possibly veto an agreement or deal between the UK government and the EU, but such a deal or agreement will obviously never ever materialise no matter how hard the British are pushing.

The Guardian wrote:May said holding an election now was “not in the national interest”. She said:

"It would deepen division when we need unity, it would bring chaos when we need certainty, and it would bring delay when we need to move forward, so I believe this House should reject this motion.

At this crucial moment in our nation’s history, a general election is simply not in the national interest."


Corbyn accused May of heading a “zombie government” and said any previous government would have resigned if they it had lost as badly as May’s did last night.
He said:

"Last week they lost a vote on the finance bill, that’s what called supply. Yesterday they lost by the biggest margin ever, that’s what’s regarded as confidence. By any convention of this House, by any precedence, loss of both confidence and supply should mean they do the right thing and resign ...

This government cannot govern and cannot command the support of parliament on the most important issue facing our country. Every previous prime minister in this situation would have resigned and called an election and it is the duty of this House to lead where the government has failed."

Whether it's in the national interest or not, I think it is, what else should come next? Some more negotiations with the EU like she still has the authority necessary? It's amazing she's still trying to sell herself as a patriotic technocrat with a high sense of duty and the national interest in her mind only while she's just clinging to her position like a limpet. As a matter of fact people should pour onto the streets and demand her resignation. Like some French do with Macron, although his government stands firmly.

User avatar
By Nonsense
#14980484
The confidence vote is lost by the opposition, it is however, a pyrrhic 'victory'.

The TORIES are now running scared of a CORBYN election victory, which is a definite proposition, what I have previously called, The 'Nuclear' option.

In effect, the Tories, with their chums, the DUP, have carried out the 'turkey' vote, by backing the incompetence of their 'leader', have probably ensured that they do lose the next election & will enjoy opposition for a very long duration.

I suspect that Theresa MAY will announce her resignation soon after 29th March this year, that a leadership race will follow during the parliamentary break, or, less likely followed by a general election.
User avatar
By JohnRawls
#14980497
This was predictable.

So right now the path is opened for 2 scenarios:

1) Lets call it the Mega Bad: Hard Brexit actually happens. Which would mean that that not only UK will crash out of the EU without the deal but Corbyn will also come to become the PM. Why is this mega bad? Well because as stated before, UK can be succesful after leaving the EU but it requires neo-liberal style economics of severely cutting taxes and axing healthcare, subsidies and education. Even more. To the point of scrapped universal healthcare. Obviously Corbyn is never gonna do it, so situation just went from really bad to absolutely catastrophic for UK in the mid and long term. I was always under the impression that it is unlikely that Tories will be able to do this but with labour in power the chances of a new succesful model appearing outside of the UK is absolutely fucking 0. As stated by smart people from the UK, there is no will in the country to do this kind of change.

2) Lets call it an okay scenario. Brexit gets delayed but whatever way the MPs deem fit. If this happens then Corbyn will probably come to power anyways during the next election but Brexit will probably be so compromised by that point that labour will just cancel it all together. Note that this prediction kinda account for a small "economic crysis" that probably will happen somewhere around 2019-2020. Lets just call it market correction of sorts. Nothing catastrophic but coupled with Brexit instability + Crysis it will put the final nail in the Brexits grave.

Edit: On a side note. It seems Guy Verhovstadt(Yeah, probably massacred his name) has gone full apeshit(in his usual manner) but also fully went to the hardliner camp. So the EU parlaiment might try to veto any extensions. (I doubt they have the power to do that though)
  • 1
  • 107
  • 108
  • 109
  • 110
  • 111
  • 328

First you post a UN resolution that doesn't contr[…]

https://twitter.com/GAMZIRI24/status/1782513808746[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

Startup in Muscovy : mother of a Muscovite soldier[…]

Got to watch the lexicon. Heritable is not a real[…]