ChatterBank1 min ago
Another Waste Of Time....
156 Answers
https:/
Can we just get out with no deal now?
Can we just get out with no deal now?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. 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.
//1. The EU Council doesn't want No Deal.
2. The UK Parliament doesn't want No Deal.
3. The UK electorate almost certainly doesn't want No Deal//
We'll never find out about no 3, will we, Jim? Even if we had a second referendum the "people who matter" wouldn't risk putting the option "No Deal" to plebiscite.
And the deceit of the"people who matter" would be supported by all the "people who know better".
I won't congratulate you yet on your victory and the skillful methods by which you've attained it: I still cling to the (probably irrational hope) that I who was fortunate enough to be born in a sovereign and free nation will die in that same place.
I have no direct (ias in Dawkins' "selfish gene") investment in that future, but I have a surrogate interest, namely my late wife's grand-children, three of whom I celebrated my step-daughter's birthday with last Saturday.
2. The UK Parliament doesn't want No Deal.
3. The UK electorate almost certainly doesn't want No Deal//
We'll never find out about no 3, will we, Jim? Even if we had a second referendum the "people who matter" wouldn't risk putting the option "No Deal" to plebiscite.
And the deceit of the"people who matter" would be supported by all the "people who know better".
I won't congratulate you yet on your victory and the skillful methods by which you've attained it: I still cling to the (probably irrational hope) that I who was fortunate enough to be born in a sovereign and free nation will die in that same place.
I have no direct (ias in Dawkins' "selfish gene") investment in that future, but I have a surrogate interest, namely my late wife's grand-children, three of whom I celebrated my step-daughter's birthday with last Saturday.
Just one more thing for the night (unless there's another reply to my posts): I want to re-emphasise that I am absolutely not rejoicing. I'm angry, instead. For different reasons from the Brexit supporters on AB, but anger all the same. It's hard not to be angry that Parliament is incapable of resolving this.
v-e: //
I won't congratulate you yet on your victory ... //
I haven't won anything, and even if we remain in the EU I still don't think I'll have won. In that case, the country will have wasted at least three years, and probably more, chasing something that it gave up on and almost certainly tearing itself apart, politically at least, in the process. Any more victories like that and we'd be done for.
I won't congratulate you yet on your victory ... //
I haven't won anything, and even if we remain in the EU I still don't think I'll have won. In that case, the country will have wasted at least three years, and probably more, chasing something that it gave up on and almost certainly tearing itself apart, politically at least, in the process. Any more victories like that and we'd be done for.
Like I say, TTT, read Section 25 of the Act in question. Essentially, the definition of exit day has always been in force, but its effects (Sections 1-7, including repeal of the ECA) are not. From an admittedly still-developing legal understanding, I think this means that we don't repeal the ECA until a Commencement Order has been laid, which in turn implies that the Government (and, to a lesser extent, Parliament) have agreed on the terms of our leaving.
Nor did mine, Pixie. But I don't see that it matters. If there are multiple plausible destinations to "leave" to, then just agreeing to "leave" isn't enough: you have to pick one.
Still, this raises an interesting hypothetical question: would the result have been materially different if the question had been changed? Say, to "Should the UK give Notification under Article 50 of the TEU of its intention to withdraw from the EU?" Perhaps that's a question for another thread, although as far as I can see the answer to my question would be "no, it wouldn't have changed the result".
Still, this raises an interesting hypothetical question: would the result have been materially different if the question had been changed? Say, to "Should the UK give Notification under Article 50 of the TEU of its intention to withdraw from the EU?" Perhaps that's a question for another thread, although as far as I can see the answer to my question would be "no, it wouldn't have changed the result".
I based No. 3. on the evidence I have at my disposal. Citing multiple polls, petitions, questionnaires, etc, isn't remotely the same as "making it up".
The ultimate test would be a further referendum with that option on the ballot paper. At that point, we'll know for certain one way or the other. The balance of evidence leans towards No Deal being a minority option.
The ultimate test would be a further referendum with that option on the ballot paper. At that point, we'll know for certain one way or the other. The balance of evidence leans towards No Deal being a minority option.
" several MPs said tonight that we leave on the 12th..."
Maybe they did, but "several MPs said" isn't going to outweigh what is actually in the law.
I mean the Treaties themselves are a different matter, but it only requires a request to, and agreement from, the EU Council, on April 10th, to change that. Whether or not that comes is a matter for next week. But the people charged with making the decisions are heavily against No Deal, and, rightly or wrongly, will work to avoid it if they possibly can.
Maybe they did, but "several MPs said" isn't going to outweigh what is actually in the law.
I mean the Treaties themselves are a different matter, but it only requires a request to, and agreement from, the EU Council, on April 10th, to change that. Whether or not that comes is a matter for next week. But the people charged with making the decisions are heavily against No Deal, and, rightly or wrongly, will work to avoid it if they possibly can.
Jim, it would make sense to believe that anyone who wanted to remain tied to the EU would play it safe and vote to stay, rather than a flat out, bald "leave". It is also easier to keep the status quo for anyone unsure. There is no reason, other than wishful thinking, to believe that "leave" translated to "leave, but not quite really in practice"
It's pretty clear that nobody in the official Leave campaigns was promoting a vision of the future along the lines of accepting the present Withdrawal Agreement. But it is equally clear that some of the chief advocates of Brexit were anticipating some sort of negotiations and a new deal of some kind. No Deal was rarely talked of, at least as far as I can remember, and certainly not as the starting point.
At best, this makes us both wrong: the vote in 2016 was equivocal on the question of leaving without a deal. It therefore should stand to reason that it requires a further, unambiguous, referendum to clear up that point.
At best, this makes us both wrong: the vote in 2016 was equivocal on the question of leaving without a deal. It therefore should stand to reason that it requires a further, unambiguous, referendum to clear up that point.
Well, possibly. But 12th April is the new 29th March, and we all know how excited you were about that one. "End of" turned out to be premature, while, perhaps, "Surprised you struggle to grasp this jim" ought to be reconsidered?
Right now I'm worried that the most likely outcome is MV4 and the House finally giving in to May's demands.
Right now I'm worried that the most likely outcome is MV4 and the House finally giving in to May's demands.
//Right now I'm worried that the most likely outcome is MV4 and the House finally giving in to May's demands//
Which would require a sacrifice of principle by even more of the members.
It's Sodom and Gomorrah time, isn't it?
"0 And the Lord said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous;
21 I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not, I will know.
22 And the men turned their faces from thence, and went toward Sodom: but Abraham stood yet before the Lord.
23 And Abraham drew near, and said, Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?
24 Peradventure there be fifty righteous within the city: wilt thou also destroy and not spare the place for the fifty righteous that are therein?
...
32 And he said, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak yet but this once: Peradventure ten shall be found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for ten's sake".
OK, enough's a enough. God, get the fire and brimstone out.
If there's any decent man among that lot, or any woman worth her salt, get out now!
Which would require a sacrifice of principle by even more of the members.
It's Sodom and Gomorrah time, isn't it?
"0 And the Lord said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous;
21 I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not, I will know.
22 And the men turned their faces from thence, and went toward Sodom: but Abraham stood yet before the Lord.
23 And Abraham drew near, and said, Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?
24 Peradventure there be fifty righteous within the city: wilt thou also destroy and not spare the place for the fifty righteous that are therein?
...
32 And he said, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak yet but this once: Peradventure ten shall be found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for ten's sake".
OK, enough's a enough. God, get the fire and brimstone out.
If there's any decent man among that lot, or any woman worth her salt, get out now!
On Friday 29th March, ironically, the Vote Leave campaign that was fronted by Boris Johnson and Michael Gove during the referendum campaign dropped its appeal over a £61,000 fine it incurred last July for spending more than its £7m limit on that campaign.
You might think that in these circumstances the referendum vote would be overturned by a court. But it can't be, as the vote was "advisory" according to a Supreme Court judgement in December 2016. This means that any decision to have a fresh referendum would have to be made by the government and Parliament would have to pass a referendum act and, instead, the government and Parliament have been pressing on with Brexit.
So, we have the situation that the vote was either advisory
or it should be re-run because it was not advisory.
But when our MPs, to whom we're trying to give back control apparently, who could've overturned the vote long before now, instead plough on with their hung parliament that we voted for, with their referendum-respecting Remain majority that we voted for, trying to implement some kind of Brexit and unsurprisingly getting nowhere, no dealers bleat that they're not getting their way. Well guess what ... nobody is getting their way.
You might think that in these circumstances the referendum vote would be overturned by a court. But it can't be, as the vote was "advisory" according to a Supreme Court judgement in December 2016. This means that any decision to have a fresh referendum would have to be made by the government and Parliament would have to pass a referendum act and, instead, the government and Parliament have been pressing on with Brexit.
So, we have the situation that the vote was either advisory
or it should be re-run because it was not advisory.
But when our MPs, to whom we're trying to give back control apparently, who could've overturned the vote long before now, instead plough on with their hung parliament that we voted for, with their referendum-respecting Remain majority that we voted for, trying to implement some kind of Brexit and unsurprisingly getting nowhere, no dealers bleat that they're not getting their way. Well guess what ... nobody is getting their way.
Latest Posts
Crosswords2 mins ago
My Dearest Friend Ducksie - R I P
ChatterBank4 mins ago
News9 mins ago
Film, Media & TV9 mins ago
 |
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |