Off Topic

Brexit: UK votes to leave the EU

  • Last Updated:
  • Mar 24th, 2017 8:41 am
Tags:
None
Deal Addict
Jan 17, 2012
2218 posts
72 upvotes
Toronto
MexiCanuck wrote:
Nov 3rd, 2016 2:16 pm
silky28 wrote:
Nov 3rd, 2016 2:02 pm
As normal, the will if the people meams nothing. A "hairdresser" complained to the courts that Brexit cannot proceed without a parliamentary vote and the court agreed. 3 judges ruled that Brexit will need a vote on parliament before it is triggered.
In the interest of accuracy,
Financial entrepreneur Gina Miller, a lead claimant in the case, said the lawsuit wasn't an attempt to stop Brexit — just to ensure that Parliament is sovereign.
Hairdresser Deir Santos is described as "another claimant".
Seems like a smart way for the courts to shut down Brexit without attacking the referendum...if they tried to invalidate the vote it would be seen as undemocratic so they have just separates the call for Brexit from the triggering of it. So to trigger Brexit the governmenr would need a seperate parliamentary approval meabing Brexit would likey not be triggered.
This doesn't seem to me to be much of a threat. The majority Conservatives have a prime minister who said she would have the UK leave the EU and, acording to the article the opposition supports implementing the referendum result.
Of course there is a mandate for leaving the EU, and we have to accept and respect the result of the referendum," the opposition Labour Party's Brexit spokesman, Keir Starmer, told the BBC. "But the terms, and how we leave the EU, are vitally important."
Except for there are Conservative MPs that are against Brexit and only supported the referendum because they assumed it would fail. The bigger issue is that this is the court trying to stop an act of parliament by manipulating referendum.
Deal Guru
User avatar
Nov 15, 2004
13413 posts
1255 upvotes
Toronto
silky28 wrote:
Nov 3rd, 2016 4:08 pm
MexiCanuck wrote:
Nov 3rd, 2016 2:16 pm
silky28 wrote:
Nov 3rd, 2016 2:02 pm
As normal, the will if the people meams nothing. A "hairdresser" complained to the courts that Brexit cannot proceed without a parliamentary vote and the court agreed. 3 judges ruled that Brexit will need a vote on parliament before it is triggered.
In the interest of accuracy,
Financial entrepreneur Gina Miller, a lead claimant in the case, said the lawsuit wasn't an attempt to stop Brexit — just to ensure that Parliament is sovereign.
Hairdresser Deir Santos is described as "another claimant".
Seems like a smart way for the courts to shut down Brexit without attacking the referendum...if they tried to invalidate the vote it would be seen as undemocratic so they have just separates the call for Brexit from the triggering of it. So to trigger Brexit the governmenr would need a seperate parliamentary approval meabing Brexit would likey not be triggered.
This doesn't seem to me to be much of a threat. The majority Conservatives have a prime minister who said she would have the UK leave the EU and, acording to the article the opposition supports implementing the referendum result.
Of course there is a mandate for leaving the EU, and we have to accept and respect the result of the referendum," the opposition Labour Party's Brexit spokesman, Keir Starmer, told the BBC. "But the terms, and how we leave the EU, are vitally important."
Except for there are Conservative MPs that are against Brexit and only supported the referendum because they assumed it would fail. The bigger issue is that this is the court trying to stop an act of parliament by manipulating referendum.
This is the parliament voting on it. How are they trying to stop themselves?
Could HAVE, not could OF. What does 'could of' even mean?
Deal Addict
Jan 17, 2012
2218 posts
72 upvotes
Toronto
Piro21 wrote:
Nov 3rd, 2016 4:16 pm
silky28 wrote:
Nov 3rd, 2016 4:08 pm
MexiCanuck wrote:
Nov 3rd, 2016 2:16 pm


In the interest of accuracy,



Hairdresser Deir Santos is described as "another claimant".



This doesn't seem to me to be much of a threat. The majority Conservatives have a prime minister who said she would have the UK leave the EU and, acording to the article the opposition supports implementing the referendum result.

Except for there are Conservative MPs that are against Brexit and only supported the referendum because they assumed it would fail. The bigger issue is that this is the court trying to stop an act of parliament by manipulating referendum.
This is the parliament voting on it. How are they trying to stop themselves?
What are you talking about? Parliament already voted to have a referendum and the leave side won. The courts have now decided that they will need a separate vote of parliament to trigger the results of the referendum. Basically the courts accept the result of the referendum but deny that with the referendum came an order to act. They now want a separate vote on the order to act. They have turned the referendum into a useless survey.

And I will repeat...the Conservatives tabled the Brexit referendum because they promised to but thinking it would fail. The courts are now giving them a tool to ignore the results of the referendum that parliament has already voted on.
Deal Guru
User avatar
Nov 15, 2004
13413 posts
1255 upvotes
Toronto
silky28 wrote:
Nov 3rd, 2016 4:27 pm
Piro21 wrote:
Nov 3rd, 2016 4:16 pm
silky28 wrote:
Nov 3rd, 2016 4:08 pm


Except for there are Conservative MPs that are against Brexit and only supported the referendum because they assumed it would fail. The bigger issue is that this is the court trying to stop an act of parliament by manipulating referendum.
This is the parliament voting on it. How are they trying to stop themselves?
What are you talking about? Parliament already voted to have a referendum and the leave side won. The courts have now decided that they will need a separate vote of parliament to trigger the results of the referendum. Basically the courts accept the result of the referendum but deny that with the referendum came an order to act. They now want a separate vote on the order to act. They have turned the referendum into a useless survey.

And I will repeat...the Conservatives tabled the Brexit referendum because they promised to but thinking it would fail. The courts are now giving them a tool to ignore the results of the referendum that parliament has already voted on.
Yes, ignore the result of the not legally binding referendum that the UK parliament agreed to. They said they'd hold the referendum to see what people's opinions were. They never said they'd go along with it (and they never legally had to). Read up:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/04/world ... .html?_r=0

The public at large can't just vote to strip away rights from a large part of the population without it going by the legal system first.
Could HAVE, not could OF. What does 'could of' even mean?
Penalty Box
Nov 23, 2012
1451 posts
251 upvotes
Toronto
Terrible article.
The content of the deal must be ratified by Parliament. Parliament can't stop it from happening.
Deal Addict
Jan 17, 2012
2218 posts
72 upvotes
Toronto
Piro21 wrote:
Nov 3rd, 2016 4:35 pm
silky28 wrote:
Nov 3rd, 2016 4:27 pm
Piro21 wrote:
Nov 3rd, 2016 4:16 pm


This is the parliament voting on it. How are they trying to stop themselves?
What are you talking about? Parliament already voted to have a referendum and the leave side won. The courts have now decided that they will need a separate vote of parliament to trigger the results of the referendum. Basically the courts accept the result of the referendum but deny that with the referendum came an order to act. They now want a separate vote on the order to act. They have turned the referendum into a useless survey.

And I will repeat...the Conservatives tabled the Brexit referendum because they promised to but thinking it would fail. The courts are now giving them a tool to ignore the results of the referendum that parliament has already voted on.
Yes, ignore the result of the not legally binding referendum that the UK parliament agreed to. They said they'd hold the referendum to see what people's opinions were. They never said they'd go along with it (and they never legally had to). Read up:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/04/world ... .html?_r=0

The public at large can't just vote to strip away rights from a large part of the population without it going by the legal system first.
The referendum was ordered by parliament. The issue here is not whether Brexit is legal or not ie. whether they can leave Brexit...it issue is whether they need parliamentary approval to trigger it. The court, essentially, has decided that Brexit and triggering Brexit are separate issues. The Conservatives will, no doubt, be arguing that this was never the intention.
Deal Addict
Jan 17, 2012
2218 posts
72 upvotes
Toronto
Parliament can reject the triggering mechanism thereby leaving Brexit on-hold indefinitely.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
May 9, 2007
5508 posts
550 upvotes
Vancouver Island, BC
I took a look at the enabling legislation.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/36/enacted

I don't see anything in the Act that makes the result binding.

Parliamentary democracies don't use referenda very often, and I can't think of one in which the result has been binding. A government might ignore the result at its own peril, but it seems to me that the court's decision is consist with parliamentary democracies.
Earthlings, you're evicted.
You are not getting the damage deposit back.

God
Deal Guru
User avatar
Oct 14, 2003
13597 posts
758 upvotes
Ah conservatives that blame "liberal judges" for upholding laws. So funny, it never gets old.
Science
is the new
rock 'n'
roll.
Deal Addict
Jan 17, 2012
2218 posts
72 upvotes
Toronto
From what I understand of it, there was nothing specifically in the legislation about enacting the results of the referendum nor did it state it was purely advisory...the court determined for parliament that it is the latter.
[OP]
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Dec 12, 2005
7604 posts
461 upvotes
Brexit there be a soft or hard exit.Parliament cannot say Brexit is not acknowledge but can delay it for years.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Dec 7, 2012
21968 posts
4448 upvotes
GTHA
silky28 wrote:
Nov 3rd, 2016 2:02 pm
As normal, the will if the people meams nothing. A "hairdresser" complained to the courts that Brexit cannot proceed without a parliamentary vote and the court agreed. 3 judges ruled that Brexit will need a vote on parliament before it is triggered.
Brexit not shutdown, delayed...

The UK government may be forced to delay the start of exit negotiations with the European Union, after its Brexit bill suffered a setback in the upper house of parliament.
The legislation must now be approved again by the lower house, before the talks can get under.
Al Jazeera's Paul Chaderjian reports.

Deal Expert
User avatar
Dec 7, 2012
21968 posts
4448 upvotes
GTHA
Northern Ireland snap vote to test Brexit
The people of Northern Ireland vote on Thursday in an election to decide who commands power in the province.
The vote was prompted by the collapse of a power-sharing agreement instituted almost 20 years ago.
The two dominant political groups are completely opposed on what should happen in the wake of the Brexit vote.
Al Jazeera's Laurence Lee reports from Belfast.

× < >
Rotate image Save Cancel

Top