Law0 min ago
Is There Any Further Point In "talks" Between Treason And Cob Et Al?
45 Answers
https:/
Both parties are only doing their best to thwart democracy, let's stop the pretense they are trying to move forward on this.
Both parties are only doing their best to thwart democracy, let's stop the pretense they are trying to move forward on this.
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.
//Until Gina Miller and the courts got involved there was no question of Parliament having a vote on the result of the referendum.//
We live in a parliamentary system, spicey. I'd say that rather outweighs anything Cameron's team put on a leaflet. The idea that this could have just been done without involving parliament is a childish fantasy.
We live in a parliamentary system, spicey. I'd say that rather outweighs anything Cameron's team put on a leaflet. The idea that this could have just been done without involving parliament is a childish fantasy.
//Brexit Day is currently to be Halloween, isn't it? I'm not sure we'd need an extension to do another referendum //
Brexit day is 24 weeks tomorrow. time needed to set up a referendum, 22 weeks. number of weeks of parliamentary recess, 10 weeks. time needed after the referendum to implement the result, ?????
even if there was a will in parliament to shorten the referendum process (most of which is question sense-checking out of parliament's control), the clock has already been run down.
we'll need another extension.
Brexit day is 24 weeks tomorrow. time needed to set up a referendum, 22 weeks. number of weeks of parliamentary recess, 10 weeks. time needed after the referendum to implement the result, ?????
even if there was a will in parliament to shorten the referendum process (most of which is question sense-checking out of parliament's control), the clock has already been run down.
we'll need another extension.
….. of course the above timescale makes no allowance for time required by the EU to approve any jointly brokered deal, which must occur before a second referendum (or there might need to be a third referendum if they reject it, and it needs to be tweaked....)
and as yet nobody can agree what the question would be; some say it must be 3 options but which - without deliberately setting one that would split one or other of the votes.....
and as yet nobody can agree what the question would be; some say it must be 3 options but which - without deliberately setting one that would split one or other of the votes.....
In case anyone may have wondered why I made the comment I did in my post at 16.19 on Tuesday, it was because of Youngmafbog's comment at 16.13.
Now that that has been asterisked out, making my response meaningless, I should explain that he had written the four-letter word normally used to designate a male bird!
Now that that has been asterisked out, making my response meaningless, I should explain that he had written the four-letter word normally used to designate a male bird!
// Until Gina Miller and the courts got involved there was no question of Parliament having a vote on the result of the referendum. //
Perhaps not, but there clearly should have been. After all, that's how the UK's Constitution works -- which is, in point of fact what "once the court got involved" actually means. It's no good citing a leaflet, that carries no legal weight (or any other weight, either), as somehow primary.
For reasons that defy proper explanation, Parliament decided to offer a choice to the people but forgot to bother preparing for either outcome of that choice. The fallout remains their fault, particularly Cameron's, but it also remains up to Parliament to sort through it all now that they've created this mess.
Perhaps not, but there clearly should have been. After all, that's how the UK's Constitution works -- which is, in point of fact what "once the court got involved" actually means. It's no good citing a leaflet, that carries no legal weight (or any other weight, either), as somehow primary.
For reasons that defy proper explanation, Parliament decided to offer a choice to the people but forgot to bother preparing for either outcome of that choice. The fallout remains their fault, particularly Cameron's, but it also remains up to Parliament to sort through it all now that they've created this mess.
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.