the snap general election thread

StevieJ

Conrad wrote: »

Clegg and other key Remain campaigners endlessly dismissed a Norway type deal as the worst of all worlds, fax democracy.

Why the change of heart?

Does that mean that Brexiteers were putting it up as an option? :-)

Filo25

Westminster voting intention:

CON: 47% (+10)
LAB: 30% (-)
LDEM: 7% (-1)
UKIP: 5% (-9)
GRN: 3% (-1)

(@Survation / phone method)
Chgs. w/ GE


On who would you trust to negotiate the best Brexit deal for Britain:

T. May: 62%
J. Corbyn: 20%

(via @Survation)


On who would you trust to protect the NHS:

T. May: 42%
J. Corbyn: 39%

(via @Survation)


On who would you trust to manage the economy:

T. May: 62%
J. Corbyn: 21%

(via @Survation)


On who would you trust to promote a fairer society:

T. May: 46%
J. Corbyn: 37%

(via @Survation)

antrobus

Interesting.

The BBC is reporting that Labour have excluded three activists for backing a "progressive alliance", as in favouring the National Health Action Party candidate in South West Surrey rather than the Labour candidate.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39854942

South West Surrey is (of course) Jeremy Hunt's seat. He got almost 60% of the vote in 2015, well ahead of second place UKIP. The National Health Action Party came fourth. It doesn't look like the kind of seat where any kind of 'deal' would make a difference.

sevenhills

mrginge wrote: »

She's given the 48% the chance to vote for Tim Farron. What more could she have done?

Theresa May has been warned she could face a fresh court challenge over Brexit, after a retired Scottish doctor claimed the law requires there to be a second referendum on any withdrawal agreement.
Dr Andrew Watt, a former radiologist from Glasgow, sent a letter before action – usually the first step in taking disputes to court – to the Prime Minister, in which he argued Section 2 of the European Union Act 2011 requires a referendum before the UK can leave the EU.
He said the act, which was designed to trigger a referendum in the event of a new EU treaty that would transfer powers to the bloc from the UK, calls for the Government to have a referendum before it can ratify any treaty that amends or replaces the EU or the functioning of the bloc.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-brexit-court-challenge-second-referendum-dr-andrew-watt-a7709136.html


If we do leave the EU, we are a long way off yet. Has Theresa May given any details about what she thinks will happen, no, I thought not.

antrobus

sevenhills wrote: »

..Dr Andrew Watt, a former radiologist from Glasgow, sent a letter before action – usually the first step in taking disputes to court – to the Prime Minister, in which he argued Section 2 of the European Union Act 2011 requires a referendum before the UK can leave the EU.....

S2 EUA 2011 states;

A treaty which amends or replaces TEU or TFEU is not to be ratified unless—

(a)a statement relating to the treaty was laid before Parliament in accordance with section 5,
(b)the treaty is approved by Act of Parliament, and
(c)the referendum condition or the exemption condition is met.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/12/section/2

So any new treaty requires ratification by a referendum. Triggering Article 50 is not a treaty. Besides, we have already had a referendum that has ratified that decision.

I suppose it might be argued that any post-Brexit deal might constitute a "treaty which amends or replaces TEU or TFEU", and that would need to ratified by a referendum. But we have the Supreme Court to sort out that sort of thing.

P.S. I suppose you could also trawl through s4 to look at the exemptions.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

sevenhills wrote: »

Theresa May has been warned she could face a fresh court challenge over Brexit, after a retired Scottish doctor claimed the law requires there to be a second referendum on any withdrawal agreement.
Dr Andrew Watt, a former radiologist from Glasgow, sent a letter before action – usually the first step in taking disputes to court – to the Prime Minister, in which he argued Section 2 of the European Union Act 2011 requires a referendum before the UK can leave the EU.
He said the act, which was designed to trigger a referendum in the event of a new EU treaty that would transfer powers to the bloc from the UK, calls for the Government to have a referendum before it can ratify any treaty that amends or replaces the EU or the functioning of the bloc.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-brexit-court-challenge-second-referendum-dr-andrew-watt-a7709136.html


If we do leave the EU, we are a long way off yet. Has Theresa May given any details about what she thinks will happen, no, I thought not.

A nice attempt at fear-mongering but flawed, methinks.
As said elsewhere, I think the EU bureaucrats would have picked up on this idea long ago if it was a runner.

Also, besides the fact that your report there is from over a week ago read the first comment below that report:

The Queen (or King) in Parliament is sovereign and no Parliament can bind a subsequent Parliament.

The effect of those two principles is that Parliament can enact anything it wishes and in law it will be valid.

So if a 2011 Act says a referendum is required, then a Parliament sitting in 2017, 2018 or whenever can say, "The 2011 Act is repealed, and a second referendum is not necessary" and in law that will be the case.The

mrginge

sevenhills wrote: »

Theresa May has been warned she could face a fresh court challenge over Brexit, after a retired Scottish doctor claimed the law requires there to be a second referendum on any withdrawal agreement.
Dr Andrew Watt, a former radiologist from Glasgow, sent a letter before action – usually the first step in taking disputes to court – to the Prime Minister, in which he argued Section 2 of the European Union Act 2011 requires a referendum before the UK can leave the EU.
He said the act, which was designed to trigger a referendum in the event of a new EU treaty that would transfer powers to the bloc from the UK, calls for the Government to have a referendum before it can ratify any treaty that amends or replaces the EU or the functioning of the bloc.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-brexit-court-challenge-second-referendum-dr-andrew-watt-a7709136.html


If we do leave the EU, we are a long way off yet. Has Theresa May given any details about what she thinks will happen, no, I thought not.

Ooh a letter before action. How scary.
Is that the level of desperation we're at now.

kabayiri

wotsthat wrote: »

Although the good news for Labour is that this snap election means Corbyn will be 73 at the next election so highly unlikely to still be in charge.

Won't help them much if Diane Abbott takes over but maybe they've learnt something from the Miliband/ Corbyn years.

Nah !

Labour's shortlisting policy towards candidates will ensure we end up with consistent quality amongst the Labour MP ranks.

Rebecca Long-Bailey typifies this.

Consistently rubbish then !

StevieJ

Why is a second referendum on leaving the EU (when terms are known) so scary? I don't mean putting it up as an option now as this would obviously impinge on the negotiations, but a later decision when negotiations are complete.

mrginge

StevieJ wrote: »

Why is a second referendum on leaving the EU (when terms are known) so scary? I don't mean putting it up as an option now as this would obviously impinge on the negotiations, but a later decision when negotiations are complete.

What would be the point of that?