[Merged]Brexit stuff (part 2)

[BlasterBates]

People getting in a flap over nothing, no-one is going to vote against Brexit , but....hark is that rustling the sound of amendments being prepared in the back rooms of parliament,....oooh hopefully not otherwise weeks or months of parliamentary debating time will have to be put aside to allow the amendments to be put to the house and adequately debated.

[DodgyAgent]

You're probably one of those who never left the UK, but if you had taken a ferry, eurotunnel or plane abroad (except to Ireland) you would have noticed that your passport was checked at re-entry

fair enough but if I did ever leave the country (having of course got myself something that is apparently called a passport) am I legally entitled to enter that country? or do the border people have the right to prevent me from entering?

[GB9]

We must be on the circular line;-)

"Liberal Democrat leader Tim Farron, a supporter of remaining in the EU, said: "Ultimately, the British people voted for a departure but not for a destination"

So why is he desperate to stop the departure? Oh, because he knows better of course.

[GB9]

It's called arithmetic. 1.25m people out of 5m is a LOT. 1.25m out of 1 billion people is tiny.

Ok. Most arrogant and stupid post of the day.

That's not how democracy works in this country.

[sirja]

So parliament voted 6:1 for a referendum and now they are going to vote against the result. Where exactly in the tiny binary world in which people like you live in does this fit?

I've just read the judgement, the court makes it clear, that Referendum's in the UK are advisory only, unless clearly stated in the enabling act. By convention MPs are expected to vote their concise on any issue. As I've said before I feel for the good of the nation the MP's should accede to the will of the people and vote to trigger Article 50, but it must be clear that there is absolutely noting 'illegal' if they decide to do otherwise.

[scooterscot]

I'm confused, which undemocratic union are we trying to leave

Thank goodness a private individual sought about challenging this ludicrous government.

[GB9]

I've just read the judgement, the court makes it clear, that Referendum's in the UK are advisory only, unless clearly stated in the enabling act. By convention MPs are expected to vote their concise on any issue. As I've said before I feel for the good of the nation the MP's should accede to the will of the people and vote to trigger Article 50, but it must be clear that there is absolutely noting 'illegal' if they decide to do otherwise.

I don't think anyone is saying it's illegal.

I do think there would be some very nasty and undesirable outcomes though.

[Old Greg]

I've just read the judgement, the court makes it clear, that Referendum's in the UK are advisory only, unless clearly stated in the enabling act. By convention MPs are expected to vote their concise on any issue. As I've said before I feel for the good of the nation the MP's should accede to the will of the people and vote to trigger Article 50, but it must be clear that there is absolutely noting 'illegal' if they decide to do otherwise.

How did the advisory nature of the referendum not get picked up in debate (or was it)? What a mess this whole thing is.

The unpalatable solution may be to have a new referendum which is not simply advisory.

An alternative would be for parliament to agree to trigger Article 50, but place whatever conditions for oversight they see fit. Probably not as clean.

[GB9]

I'm confused, which undemocratic union are we trying to leave

Thank goodness a private individual sought about challenging this ludicrous government.

I would explain but it requires an IQ greater than 6 to understand.

[MrMarkyMark]

How did the advisory nature of the referendum not get picked up in debate (or was it)? What a mess this whole thing is.

I always heard plenty of people saying a referendum was only advisory in any case.
Certainly an expensive way to prove it