Legal action launched re Article 50

BJV

Samsonite1 wrote: »

I just feel the public is not equipped to make this decision and judging by feedback from voters, they just prove my point on a daily basis!

Again!!!! Poor little public? Not a brain cell between them. How could they have the knowledge and the right to vote on a decision so important.

I mean honestly, really? You genuinely believe that the public should not of been able to vote? Ok well lets take it to the next level lets make sure that only the elite can vote! Oooh then their are women??? too many hormones lets make sure that can not vote either? Then the old??? dementia and all that.

Then there is age. At 18 I had no idea what I wanted to wear the next day so lets raise the age limit.

Then oh hey !!!!!! it in for a penny in for a pound, lets go for it why not just remove everyone's right to vote!

Again I stress there was a vote. The public voted. It may not be the way in which some people wanted it to go but that is what happened. How pretentious to say that there will be legal proceedings? How is that helping the markets confidence? How shorted sighted to think that the public are not able to make decisions about things that will affect them?

HornetSaver

The difference between an advisory and binding referendum is very simple.

A Government is duty-bound to respect the result of a legally conducted referendum in all circumstances (hence, to give one example, the emphasis of the SNP on ensuring that the 2014 referendum was declared legal even though it maintained that it was capable of organising a free and fair vote without Westminster's involvement).

Parliament is duty-bound to respect a binding referendum, and honour-bound to respect an advisory referendum. The referendum bill did not include a clause stating that the result of the referendum would be acted upon in a specific way (which would have made it binding), and therefore Parliament will need to take action.

Should it fail to, there will undoubtedly be a general election, which will no doubt introduce a majority of MPs who either support, or declare that they are going to back, the invokation of Article 50.

Samsonite1

BJV wrote: »

Again!!!! Poor little public? Not a brain cell between them. How could they have the knowledge and the right to vote on a decision so important.

I mean honestly, really? You genuinely believe that the public should not of been able to vote? Ok well lets take it to the next level lets make sure that only the elite can vote! Oooh then their are women??? too many hormones lets make sure that can not vote either? Then the old??? dementia and all that.

Then there is age. At 18 I had no idea what I wanted to wear the next day so lets raise the age limit.

Then oh hey !!!!!! it in for a penny in for a pound, lets go for it why not just remove everyone's right to vote!

Again I stress there was a vote. The public voted. It may not be the way in which some people wanted it to go but that is what happened. How pretentious to say that there will be legal proceedings? How is that helping the markets confidence? How shorted sighted to think that the public are not able to make decisions about things that will affect them?

You trying to prove my point? This vote was purely an opinion rather than a decision. There were no policies in place to deal with the outcome so how could anyone be in a position to make the right decision? The referendum only served to tell us what the public "think" not "know".

Ok, maybe I was unfair - the fault is of the referendum itself - there should have been a much longer and proper process with ratified commitments on either side - it was more of a marketing war, which does not help the country in any way.

ruggedtoast

Ha. If the Tories thought they were divided before the referendum then that'll be nothing to a parliamentary debate on actually activating, or not, article 50.

There will be Claptons all over the home counties literally exploding when they realise it's never going to happen.

CLAPTON

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Ha. If the Tories thought they were divided before the referendum then that'll be nothing to a parliamentary debate on actually activating, or not, article 50.

There will be Claptons all over the home counties literally exploding when they realise it's never going to happen.

Good to see that toxic toastie is still on the side of the political elite, the bankers, the CBI, the IMF, BBC, Cameron, Clegg, Brown, Blair and the IRA loving and racist clique Corbyn/McDonnell/Abbott and still wants to grind the people of Greece into the dirt.

We held a fair and transparent referendum: if the political elite overturn the people's vote that will be a very bad day for democracy but I will not be surprised.
I shall still hold the vast majority of my fellow citizens in high esteem.

PixelPound

CLAPTON wrote: »

Good to see that toxic toastie is still on the side of the political elite, the bankers, the CBI, the IMF, BBC, Cameron, Clegg, Brown, Blair and the IRA loving and racist clique Corbyn/McDonnell/Abbott and still wants to grind the people of Greece into the dirt.

We held a fair and transparent referendum: if the political elite overturn the people's vote that will be a very bad day for democracy but I will not be surprised.
I shall still hold the vast majority of my fellow citizens in high esteem.

They wouldn't dare overturn it directly, i.e. have a debate and decide to remain. MP's wouldn't want to lose their seats and you can see english tories in rural seats not wanting to upset constituents and face deselection. What seems to be going on is exploring ways to negate the vote, which is why there is all the idea of delaying invoking article 50 and wanting to negotiate, so that eventually the people will be given a choice of options, one of which will be for remain.

BJV

Samsonite1 wrote: »

You trying to prove my point? This vote was purely an opinion rather than a decision. There were no policies in place to deal with the outcome so how could anyone be in a position to make the right decision? The referendum only served to tell us what the public "think" not "know".

Ok, maybe I was unfair - the fault is of the referendum itself - there should have been a much longer and proper process with ratified commitments on either side - it was more of a marketing war, which does not help the country in any way.

Ok maybe I was a little abrupt too. The issue was not the question should we stay in or out it was the way in which people where given the information. Lots of speculation and mis-information on both sides.

The question of even if they had the information could / should they have been given the choice? The issue for me is that if we start making decisions like that without the public where will it end. Who gets to decide who gets to choose?

As for it being longer ? I don't think that it would of changed anything instead it would of been just more misinformation.

I just wish that now it is all done we could all try and show the rest of the world and the markets that it is business as normal.

BJV

CLAPTON wrote: »

Good to see that toxic toastie is still on the side of the political elite, the bankers, the CBI, the IMF, BBC, Cameron, Clegg, Brown, Blair and the IRA loving and racist clique Corbyn/McDonnell/Abbott and still wants to grind the people of Greece into the dirt.

We held a fair and transparent referendum: if the political elite overturn the people's vote that will be a very bad day for democracy but I will not be surprised.
I shall still hold the vast majority of my fellow citizens in high esteem.

I don't think even the big wigs can be so vain and detached from the rest of us to think that there would not be uproar if they over turn the vote?

Samsonite1

BJV wrote: »

Ok maybe I was a little abrupt too. The issue was not the question should we stay in or out it was the way in which people where given the information. Lots of speculation and mis-information on both sides.

The question of even if they had the information could / should they have been given the choice? The issue for me is that if we start making decisions like that without the public where will it end. Who gets to decide who gets to choose?

As for it being longer ? I don't think that it would of changed anything instead it would of been just more misinformation.

I just wish that now it is all done we could all try and show the rest of the world and the markets that it is business as normal.

I think you are right - the length of it all would probably just compound misinformation. I think that some information could not be known until the result was known (e.g. how the world is reacting to it). The business as normal thing is not so straight forward as some businesses are looking to make changes quickly - they always were ready to but until we had decided to leave the EU, it was still beneficial to be based in the UK.

And to that last point, I wonder if things would have been different had the campaigns been forced to have fully researched plans in place rather than fake marketing?

We now have to backtrack (or the government anyway) to backfill what Leave voters thought they were voting for - i.e. the vote was only for the desire to leave the EU and was not to spend £350m per week on the NHS or reduce immigration - that was just marketing. Now we need realistic promises/policies/plans on how to exit and probably a way of getting further public support for them (election or other) because if the options presented are not what Leave voters wanted then we could end up with a situation where 48.1% of the public did not want to leave the EU and only a certain proportion of Leave voters are happy with the Leave deal - that surely is not going to be a good thing?

With all that said and done, if I see some solid plans in place to make things work as well as they did or better, then I would get behind it. At the moment, there is not much to get behind - let's hope the politicians can get over their in-fighting soon and get back to serving the public ASAP!

Rinoa

According to Guido one of the businesses behind this action is Zoopla.

And who owns Zoopla? The Daily Mail.

Make of that what you will.

http://order-order.com/2016/07/04/zoopla-behind-anti-brexit-legal-action/#disqus_thread