Brexit bill passed into law, House of Lords to go.

[The_Equalizer]

Mob rules coming our way...

The O2 arena could become the new colosseum.

Don't you mean coming the UK's way? You're no where near us.

[GB9]

I'd give up NAT. Does anyone else want to gave a go or do we just leave him to wallow enjoyably in his ignorance?

Good on then. Sell me how one side only needing 40% to win is fair? Or is it only when it's the side you support?

[d000hg]

"Fair" is a great word isn't it GB9. It can mean whatever you want it to mean, and normally whatever you happen to think is right.

I think NAT already explained adequately.

You are aware that MANY democratic systems (parliaments around the world, courts, etc) require a specific margin of majority or even a unanimous result in some cases? This is entirely normal and generally the more momentous the thing being voted on is, the larger the majority needs to be.

Would it be "Fair" if you were accused of murder and 5 of 12 thought you were innocent so you got given life?

[NotAllThere]

It is not uncommon for referendums to have such a skewing...

...
So if indi2 gets a 50.01% leave the UK majority, do would you make the same 60:40 observation?

I asked him that too. He doesn't answer awkward questions.

Neither of you asked me that. But I'm not surprised that you think I have - plain facts do seem to confuse you.

I think a 66% majority for Scotland to leave the union would be appropriate. It would demonstrate overwhelming popular support for it, if achieved.

WTO requires 100% majority to admit new members. Let's hope that Britain's WTO membership isn't just through the EU.

Tony Blair's New Labour in 1997 got 43% of the popular vote - Labour won by a landslide, getting 64% of the seats.

The fairness of these things is a matter of opinion. There's no hard and fast rule.

[The_Equalizer]

Neither of you asked me that. But I'm not surprised that you think I have - plain facts do seem to confuse you.

I think a 66% majority for Scotland to leave the union would be appropriate. It would demonstrate overwhelming popular support for it, if achieved.

WTO requires 100% majority to admit new members. Let's hope that Britain's WTO membership isn't just through the EU.

A UK party needs 40% of the popular vote to form a government.

The fairness of these things is a matter of opinion. There's no hard and fast rule.

I was referring to ScooterScot.

[PurpleGorilla]

Brexit bill passed into law, House of Lords to go.

Would it be "Fair" if you were accused of murder and 5 of 12 thought you were innocent so you got given life?

Judges pass sentence juries decide guilt or innocence (in your example) if a unanimous verdict as opposed to a majority verdict is required, a judge will stipulate this before the case begins. If a jury passes a unanimous verdict (when not required) the judge may take this into consideration and pass a stiffer sentence.

You could argue that the slim majority only endorses a soft brexit. But Cameron was explicit that a leave vote was to leave the single market.

[NickFitz]

Has anybody else mentioned that the thread title is contradictory - if it hasn't been through the Lords yet, it hasn't been passed into law

Such imprecision of thought doesn't bode well for the intensive international trade negotiations the Brexiteers like to pretend they'll be able to complete in twenty-four months

[BrilloPad]

Of course the HoL will pass this into law. They believe in the will off the people.

They are too worried that if they don't vote for it they will be voted out at the next HoL election.

[BrilloPad]

Last HoL election I voted for the Aleaping party...

[GB9]

"Fair" is a great word isn't it GB9. It can mean whatever you want it to mean, and normally whatever you happen to think is right.

I think NAT already explained adequately.

You are aware that MANY democratic systems (parliaments around the world, courts, etc) require a specific margin of majority or even a unanimous result in some cases? This is entirely normal and generally the more momentous the thing being voted on is, the larger the majority needs to be.

Would it be "Fair" if you were accused of murder and 5 of 12 thought you were innocent so you got given life?

You haven't got a proper argument, have you?

- It happens elsewhere
- it's really important

Therefore the odds have to be skewed?

You're not really democratic, are you? What if 60% gave the wrong answer? What about 70% Surely to change everyone has to agree?

No, I'm afraid not in this instance. In this instance, everyone's vote was equal. Obviously a concept you don't grasp. No wards, no constituencies. People in Consett were equal to people in Westminster.

You don't like that do you?