Donate SIGN UP

Drop The Brexit Case Appeal?

Avatar Image
Khandro | 09:12 Sat 19th Nov 2016 | News
57 Answers
Oliver Letwin thinks it a bad idea to go to the Supreme Court preferring the issue to be settled in Parliament. Do you think he has a point?
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-38034411
Gravatar

Answers

21 to 40 of 57rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Khandro. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Eddies 10/26 you are so correct, I can see this happening.
Question Author
Keep seeing 'The Will of the People' it is ONLY the will of 51.9% of those who bothered to vote, so around 36% of 'The People'. Less if you take into account those who were under 18 at the time of the referendum but will be effected by it . A majority of them were in favour of 'Remain'.
So a long way from being 'The Will of the People'.
Eddie, you keep posting the same things over and over again,Boring
You're only saying this because the 'will of the people' doesn't agree with what you wanted. If the remainers had won with the same majority you wouldn't be on here every few days saying it's a long way from the will of the people.
“Mikey, Khandro said it was " a point of law" I just would like to know what law it is a point of,”

“I am not doubting what the court has said I just want to know what law is involved.”

It is not a Statute, danny, so there is no legislation to refer to. The High Court ruled on a matter of the procedure adopted by the government to invoke A50. Government believed they could do so exercising the “Royal Prerogative” and the High Court ruled they cannot. The High Court and the Supreme Court often rule on matters which are not Statutory law.

I said following the High Court ruling (having read it in full) that I doubted it would be overturned on appeal (though stranger things have happened). The government is entitled to make its appeal to the Supreme Court but personally I think they would be better served to simply introduce the matter before Parliament as the High Court has ruled.

Yes, Eddie, you do keep posting the same “four-fifths of five-eights of sod all” argument. We’ve done it to death. Although I must say the introduction of your “babes-in-arms” diversion is a new twist. You suggest that “the majority of them were in favour of remain”. Firstly nobody knows that. The contention is only anecdotal and based on surveys (about as reliable as the opinion polls). Secondly, young people are not afforded the vote because, as everybody knows, until they reach the age of 18, they still know everything and have nothing to learn. It would be manifestly unfair to allow a vote to be skewed by such people.
Eddie may keep saying this but it is still true. Just as in America, must people didn't vote for Trump ( only just over 25% did), most people in Britain did not vote to leave the EU.

An comfortable truth perhaps, but a truth nevertheless.
^Just to say, if the result had been reversed I would still be saying the same thing, if the 'Leavers' kept stating that it was 'the will of the people'
The result was NOT a majority of the electorate either way, if it had been I would not have a case to put.
Oliver Letwin, Director of the Brexit Unit, 24 June 2016 – 14 July 2016.

Wow! Did he really last 20 days? He is obviously speaking fom his vast experience at the centre of the Brexit melee. He could have been a successor to Cameron, if only he wasn't tragically brain dead.
What percentage of the UK population voted for Labour's so-called 1997 landslide victory though Mikey,

23-28% max?
^ % of overall voters soz.
Order Limit you can't compare a General Election with a Referendum, a referendum is a two way choice only.
“…most people in Britain did not vote to leave the EU. “

And by the very same token, Mikey, most people (even more than your “most”) did not vote to remain. Trot out the argument about those failing to vote preferring the status quo if you will (an argument that could not have been used had the vote been reversed by the same margin). All I can say is that if that’s what they wanted, knowing there was a chance of a Leave vote prevailing, they should have voted. It is no more valid to suggest that those not voting preferred the status quo than to say those same people preferred a change.

The rules of engagement for the referendum were quite clear – the majority of those voting would prevail. And I won’t even begin to address the ridiculous argument that the vote is not valid because children – who it is quite true will be effected by the outcome for the longest period of time - did not have a vote.
I just wonder what proportion of the electorate were just so confused (like the Scottish referendum), that even on voting day they were still none the wiser what the argument was about and felt unable to formulate an opinion either way?

Certainly, I heard it several times on Question Time and elsewhere that individuals just did not understand the advantages and disadvantages and so the easiest question to answer on paper became an insuperable one.

Of course, both sides were to blame for spouting ridiculous claims that addled many a brain meaning that many could not see the wood for the trees.
Well said ag. I think the most intelligent among us probably didn't vote.
"I just wonder what proportion of the electorate were just so confused (like the Scottish referendum), that even on voting day they were still none the wiser what the argument was about and felt unable to formulate an opinion either way?"

They probably make up a fair few of the 28% who did not vote. These are the voters who some people who argue about the validity of the poll (see above) suggest that since they did not vote to leave they should be counted as de facto "Remainers". If they didn't understand the issues and didn't vote they were neither Leavers nor Remainers and their numbers should not be considered.
Agreed NJ. It would be interesting to see how they would vote now, considering the dogs dinner of a leaving process we find ourselves in.
Throughout the referendum campaine I was hoping there would be a decisive vote one way or the other. But the result was close to what I consider the worst possible, a 50/50 split. ( 51.9/48.1 is near 50/50 in my opinion) Such a close call was bound to cause controversy.
I wonder what would be happening now if the Brexit vote had been a small majority for remain? As the PM was for remain, I suspect nothing, except protests from the Brexit side which would be ignored.

If Parliament is to have the last say on Brexit why did we spend £10M on the referendum?
Zacs-Master
Agreed NJ. It would be interesting to see how they would vote now, considering the dogs dinner of a leaving process we find ourselves in.




Leaving is proving to be a nightmare.
Rather than members of the EU ... it appears we are prisoners of the EU.

21 to 40 of 57rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Drop The Brexit Case Appeal?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.