Could UK U-turn on Referendum Result

[don4l]

Zod said:

don4l said:

Zod said:

ritten constitutions still need to be interpreted judicially. That is why countries with written constitutions have constitutional courts.

I agree with you about the Fixed Term Parliaments Act though. I've been against it since day one.

Most written constitutions in democracies put the will of the people above the will of parliaments.

Up to this point I didn't question the Fixed Term Act, however if the referendum result gets overturned, then an election would be necessary to prevent civil unrest.

Do you have any authority for your first point?

I think it would do you good to read the judgement. It's only 32 pages.

Well in France, Holland, Greece, Ireland the results of referenda are binding.

I've read the summary, and I understand their reasoning. In fact, I didn't expect any other result.

This case highlights the fact that we do not live in a true democracy.

[alfie2244]

Fittster said:

don4l said:

Up to this point I didn't question the Fixed Term Act, however if the referendum result gets overturned, then an election would be necessary to prevent civil unrest.

Yeah, cause pensioners can really go rioting.

Perhap Bojo was right to buy the watercannon after all.

[Dindoit]

Greg66 said:

vonuber said:

don4l said:

Up to this point I didn't question the Fixed Term Act, however if the referendum result gets overturned, then an election would be necessary to prevent civil unrest.

Why is this any different to you saying people who voted remain need to suck it up and move on? Same thing applies.

Quite. Today has exposed a lot of hypocrites and crybabies.

Brexitears

[Jockman]

B'stard Child said:

desolate said:

Pound on the up - may be able to afford some apres when we skiing after all.

Bugger bought my holiday currency yesterday!!!

+1

I will be keeping the currency and using the card whenever possible.

[anonymous-user]

FiF said:

The decision is what it is. In order to Leave we have to do it legally, and if this court case is part of that, so be it.

Exactly. Sense at last.

Why people are whining that the Govt has been prevented from acting unlawfully is baffling.

(Although I edited out the "fractured nation" bit, some steps in that direction would be to shut down the Mail and the Express, and throw that stupid Suzanne Evans woman down a well.)

[chow pan toon]

twoblacklines said:

Article 50 is not going to happen. She never wanted it to happen, she was a strong Remain supporter. They will drag it out until Labor inevitably gets voted back in and hands us back to the EU with even less rights than we had before.

The UK as we know it is finished, this whole debacle has proved we have ZERO power, and that even when our public vote to leave the EU, we can't, because our Goverment won't allow it. End of democracy.

I wonder what would happen if the EU said something like "There are to be no further elections in the UK. Labor stays in period". As we have no power, what could we do about it exactly?

As long as they don't ban sales of tin foil beforehand

[B'stard Child]

Jockman said:

B'stard Child said:

desolate said:

Pound on the up - may be able to afford some apres when we skiing after all.

Bugger bought my holiday currency yesterday!!!

+1

I will be keeping the currency and using the card whenever possible.

Meh not so keen on using cards - prefer cash

[Jockman]

Alex said:

Mark Benson said:

Well, she knows her audience, you have to give her that. Always thought she was the least 'UKIP' of the prominent Kippers, seems a sniff of power and she's away with the rest of them.

However she got one thing right, "Predictably, the same people now quoting 'parliamentary sovereignty' are the very same people who were happy to give it away for last 40yrs."

As Jacob Rees-Mogg said on Sky News today, when the government has used Royal prerogative to give power to the EU, the judges have ruled in favour, but now the government wants to take power *away* from the EU...

I think the reason for the judgement was that rights were being removed from citizens rather than any fundamental affinity with the EU.

[ClaphamGT3]

don4l said:

Zod said:

don4l said:

Zod said:

ritten constitutions still need to be interpreted judicially. That is why countries with written constitutions have constitutional courts.

I agree with you about the Fixed Term Parliaments Act though. I've been against it since day one.

Most written constitutions in democracies put the will of the people above the will of parliaments.

Up to this point I didn't question the Fixed Term Act, however if the referendum result gets overturned, then an election would be necessary to prevent civil unrest.

Do you have any authority for your first point?

I think it would do you good to read the judgement. It's only 32 pages.

Well in France, Holland, Greece, Ireland the results of referenda are binding.

I've read the summary, and I understand their reasoning. In fact, I didn't expect any other result.

This case highlights the fact that we do not live in a true democracy.

Except we do because our constitution is based on the principle of the limitless supremacy of Parliament. This is what the High Court has upheld. The last time I looked, parliament is formed of a membership selected by democratic election......

Overall, Theresa May should - and probably will - be very happy with this result; Brexit has just made a big leap towards the long grass and it won't be her fault

[basherX]

Dindoit said:

Brexitears

Bravo.

[Jockman]

B'stard Child said:

Jockman said:

B'stard Child said:

desolate said:

Pound on the up - may be able to afford some apres when we skiing after all.

Bugger bought my holiday currency yesterday!!!

+1

I will be keeping the currency and using the card whenever possible.

Meh not so keen on using cards - prefer cash

Cards tap into the rate 'du jour' - shirley a better proposition now that the £ has popped a pill?

[Jockman]

basherX said:

Dindoit said:

Brexitears

Bravo.

Lol. Like that.

[anonymous-user]

twoblacklines said:

Article 50 is not going to happen. She never wanted it to happen, she was a strong Remain supporter. They will drag it out until Labor inevitably gets voted back in and hands us back to the EU with even less rights than we had before.

The UK as we know it is finished, this whole debacle has proved we have ZERO power, and that even when our public vote to leave the EU, we can't, because our Goverment won't allow it. End of democracy.

I wonder what would happen if the EU said something like "There are to be no further elections in the UK. Labor stays in period". As we have no power, what could we do about it exactly?

I think you need some stronger medication.

[Zod]

don4l said:

Zod said:

don4l said:

Zod said:

ritten constitutions still need to be interpreted judicially. That is why countries with written constitutions have constitutional courts.

I agree with you about the Fixed Term Parliaments Act though. I've been against it since day one.

Most written constitutions in democracies put the will of the people above the will of parliaments.

Up to this point I didn't question the Fixed Term Act, however if the referendum result gets overturned, then an election would be necessary to prevent civil unrest.

Do you have any authority for your first point?

I think it would do you good to read the judgement. It's only 32 pages.

Well in France, Holland, Greece, Ireland the results of referenda are binding.

I've read the summary, and I understand their reasoning. In fact, I didn't expect any other result.

This case highlights the fact that we do not live in a true democracy.

So we don't have a true democracy because we don't use binding referenda?

Remind me what happened when France and Ireland rejected EU treaties in referenda.

Your final line is Trumpian: "it's rigged."

[Bayerischer]

ClaphamGT3 said:

don4l said:

Zod said:

don4l said:

Zod said:

ritten constitutions still need to be interpreted judicially. That is why countries with written constitutions have constitutional courts.

I agree with you about the Fixed Term Parliaments Act though. I've been against it since day one.

Most written constitutions in democracies put the will of the people above the will of parliaments.

Up to this point I didn't question the Fixed Term Act, however if the referendum result gets overturned, then an election would be necessary to prevent civil unrest.

Do you have any authority for your first point?

I think it would do you good to read the judgement. It's only 32 pages.

Well in France, Holland, Greece, Ireland the results of referenda are binding.

I've read the summary, and I understand their reasoning. In fact, I didn't expect any other result.

This case highlights the fact that we do not live in a true democracy.

Except we do because our constitution is based on the principle of the limitless supremacy of Parliament. This is what the High Court has upheld. The last time I looked, parliament is formed of a membership selected by democratic election......

Overall, Theresa May should - and probably will - be very happy with this result; Brexit has just made a big leap towards the long grass and it won't be her fault

You mean we live in a representative democracy. By "true democracy" I think he means binding referenda

[Oceanic]

And to think just the other day the Brexiters were calling those who were in favour with the status quo or remaining as "Remoaners"

POT, KETTLE, BLACK!!

[Zod]

Jockman said:

Alex said:

Mark Benson said:

Well, she knows her audience, you have to give her that. Always thought she was the least 'UKIP' of the prominent Kippers, seems a sniff of power and she's away with the rest of them.

However she got one thing right, "Predictably, the same people now quoting 'parliamentary sovereignty' are the very same people who were happy to give it away for last 40yrs."

As Jacob Rees-Mogg said on Sky News today, when the government has used Royal prerogative to give power to the EU, the judges have ruled in favour, but now the government wants to take power *away* from the EU...

I think the reason for the judgement was that rights were being removed from citizens rather than any fundamental affinity with the EU.

Rees-Mogg is doubly upset because the court used the judgment from a case brought by his father to rule against his interest in this case.

[anonymous-user]

Bayerischer said:

ClaphamGT3 said:

don4l said:

Zod said:

don4l said:

Zod said:

ritten constitutions still need to be interpreted judicially. That is why countries with written constitutions have constitutional courts.

I agree with you about the Fixed Term Parliaments Act though. I've been against it since day one.

Most written constitutions in democracies put the will of the people above the will of parliaments.

Up to this point I didn't question the Fixed Term Act, however if the referendum result gets overturned, then an election would be necessary to prevent civil unrest.

Do you have any authority for your first point?

I think it would do you good to read the judgement. It's only 32 pages.

Well in France, Holland, Greece, Ireland the results of referenda are binding.

I've read the summary, and I understand their reasoning. In fact, I didn't expect any other result.

This case highlights the fact that we do not live in a true democracy.

Except we do because our constitution is based on the principle of the limitless supremacy of Parliament. This is what the High Court has upheld. The last time I looked, parliament is formed of a membership selected by democratic election......

Overall, Theresa May should - and probably will - be very happy with this result; Brexit has just made a big leap towards the long grass and it won't be her fault

You mean we live in a representative democracy. By "true democracy" I think he means binding referenda

But we can have binding referenda in this country. So does he think "true democracy" means only ever having binding referenda?

[anonymous-user]

Oceanic said:

And to think just the other day the Brexiters were calling those who were in favour with the status quo or remaining as "Remoaners"

POT, KETTLE, BLACK!!

Quite.

And the hairdresser voted Leave. They're now turning on themselves, and the deep divisions in the "Leave Family" are emerging.

Like UKIP on a macro scale.

[feef]

don4l said:

Zod said:

don4l said:

Zod said:

ritten constitutions still need to be interpreted judicially. That is why countries with written constitutions have constitutional courts.

I agree with you about the Fixed Term Parliaments Act though. I've been against it since day one.

Most written constitutions in democracies put the will of the people above the will of parliaments.

Up to this point I didn't question the Fixed Term Act, however if the referendum result gets overturned, then an election would be necessary to prevent civil unrest.

Do you have any authority for your first point?

I think it would do you good to read the judgement. It's only 32 pages.

Well in France, Holland, Greece, Ireland the results of referenda are binding.

I've read the summary, and I understand their reasoning. In fact, I didn't expect any other result.

This case highlights the fact that we do not live in a true democracy.

The outcome of the 1975 referendum was binding as it was written into the Referendum Act 1975.
It had been debated in parliament and the bill was written as such.

The referendum last year was subject to the European Union Referendum Act 2015 which contained no such requirement. I suppose they COULD have put it in there if it had been suitably debated.

The referendum as it was could never have been enacted without a debate in parliament