|
||||||||
Gina Miller hates democracy |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#326 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 505
|
Quote:
This doesn't diminish your comment however my view is she is just using parliamentary process as a smoke screen to attempt to delay Brexit.
My view, and I've no doubt many others, is that as Parliament approved the referendum and by implication the result, the PM does not have to return to Parliament to exit the EU. This decision did not originate from the PM, she didn't even want Brexit, however to her credit she is exercising (well that's still to be proven) the will of the majority of those who bothered to vote. It is in that context that I, and again I believe many other, believe that Gina Millar is using parliamentary process to delay (overturn) a decision that she and her supporter did not want, and hence has become very unpopular. If the PM had woken up one morning and decided that everyone not born in the UK must leave by the end of the year and tried to make that law without parliaments approval, then as her decision did not have (formal) approval by the populous, that would be a different matter and the current legal process would be justified. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#327 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 25,217
|
Quote:
...and neither did the ballot paper say 'use up endless parliamentary time fannying around over the definition of Brexit until everyone agrees or hell freezes over, and then leave.'
May must press the button now and everyone should talk while the clock is running. Better still, as a so called expert on international law explained it, there is no need to invoke article 51 and it's 2 year negotiation period, the UK could leave tomorrow. If true, that would certainly focus everyone rather than procrastinate until the next global extinction... |
|
|
|
|
|
#328 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 20,481
|
My understanding is that the civil service are nowhere near getting the dominoes lined up to trigger A50.
As of now, May has not a single piece of paper to take to the negotiating table. They might actually be glad of any delay so they get more time to get their act together. |
|
|
|
|
|
#329 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 1,812
|
Quote:
I agree with you entirely if Parliament and the people hold the same opinion. However should Parliament vote against the will of the people (who elected them to represent their views) then only an idiot would be convincing themselves that all is well in the world.
Quote:
Please explain how leading Leave Labour / Tory politicians could have brought such legislation when the nether party endorsed leaving the EU in the first place. Think it through.....
The leading Leave politicians were free to propose and vote for legislation to establish a clear exit mechanism at any time in the last few decades. They did NOT do so. And, if they can't get the basics of domestic procedures in place, it should be obvious they are unlikely to rise to the challenge of the complex negotiations involved in either securing an exit deal or a post-exit deal. |
|
|
|
|
|
#330 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,169
|
Quote:
i dont think she made public wether she is for/against brexit. she spotted something nobody else has ..this is what makes her a super star.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#331 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 806
|
Quote:
So Parliament can act against the will of the people? I thought Parliament was created in its current form to represent the people, not oppress them?
Allowing the government to use old prerogative powers to manage the EU withdrawal without significant parliament involvement, would be highly undemocratic especially as we (supposedly) voted to leave the EU as it was undemocratic re our sovereign parliament. We will leave but the process of how is the issue not if. |
|
|
|
|
|
#332 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 4,372
|
Quote:
Legally, yes they do. You can then vote them out at the next election. That's how our parliamentary democracy works.
Tim 'nice but dim' Farron was on Question Time and the issue of MP's potentially voting against article 51 came up and he openly agonised on how he is trying to reconcile his personal views with how his constituents voted in the referendum. To me, the honourable thing to do would be to resign as an MP and let the constituents vote in a new MP based on their views about the EU. There's no easy answer however we can't have a Parliamentary democracy that gives the people an opportunity to direct national affairs, only to take it away from them because they 'chose the wrong answer'. We can laugh about Russian elections being decided years in advance, we don't want to be heading down that road. |
|
|
|
|
|
#333 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 37,482
|
Quote:
...and neither did the ballot paper say 'use up endless parliamentary time fannying around over the definition of Brexit until everyone agrees or hell freezes over, and then leave.'
May must press the button now |
|
|
|
|
|
#334 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 37,482
|
Quote:
MPs are not elected to represent peoples' views.
That has never been the case in the UK. They are elected to represent their constituents best interests, and if they win the general election, to act in the nation's best interests. They aren't and never have been puppets. |
|
|
|
|
|
#335 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 20,481
|
Quote:
You are of course correct. However given the process we are going through that could bring the current political system close to collapse.
Tim 'nice but dim' Farron was on Question Time and the issue of MP's potentially voting against article 51 came up and he openly agonised on how he is trying to reconcile his personal views with how his constituents voted in the referendum. To me, the honourable thing to do would be to resign as an MP and let the constituents vote in a new MP based on their views about the EU. There's no easy answer however we can't have a Parliamentary democracy that gives the people an opportunity to direct national affairs, only to take it away from them because they 'chose the wrong answer'. We can laugh about Russian elections being decided years in advance, we don't want to be heading down that road. |
|
|
|
|
|
#336 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 4,372
|
Quote:
What is the point of a vote after the negotiations are complete? We leave the EU two years after triggering A50, whether we've agreed to a deal or not. She could negotiate the worse deal on Earth that pleases no one and voting against it will just mean the chaos of no deal at all when we leave, and probably 1000 court cases being launched to challenge anything anyone tries to do. Utter madness.
Quote:
I didn't mention Stalin. There are many flavours of dictatorships.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#337 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,772
|
Quote:
...and neither did the ballot paper say 'use up endless parliamentary time fannying around over the definition of Brexit until everyone agrees or hell freezes over, and then leave.'
May must press the button now and everyone should talk while the clock is running. Better still, as a so called expert on international law explained it, there is no need to invoke article 51 and it's 2 year negotiation period, the UK could leave tomorrow. If true, that would certainly focus everyone rather than procrastinate until the next global extinction... |
|
|
|
|
|
#338 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,772
|
Quote:
Advisory or not do you believe the result to be ambiguous? Do you not believe that the PM has been given the legal right to act on the will of the people? I actually thought that politicians are elected to carry out the will of the people?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#339 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,582
|
Quote:
In the eyes of millions of voters it most certainly was binding. To not honour it would be catastrophic for UK democracy.
If the legal system is forced aside by May "on behalf of the people", she'll then use that power she's been given to push through other Tory policies such as increasing pension age even further, cutting benefits to the most in need, sweeping away the thousands of British deaths caused by her government, the snooper's charter etc. She'll be able to brush away any legal attempts to hold her to account because the "force of the people" will have given her power over the law. Once invoked, she'll claim it to be binding. Just as Thatcher destroyed the unions and businesses have cut pay ever since without being held to account, May will diminish the power of the legal system to hold the government to account at a time when the government has been discovered to have lied over deaths caused by the DWP. |
|
|
|
|
|
#340 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 43,686
|
Quote:
i dont think she made public wether she is for/against brexit. she spotted something nobody else has ..this is what makes her a super star.
Gina Miller @SCMDirect for #StrongerIn or interviews one of which is prior to her legal case http://www.thebanker.com/Comment-Pro...the-EU?ct=true Gina Miller | 31/05/2016 9:00 am Gina Miller: the UK is stronger and safer in the EU We are stronger, safer and better off in Europe than we would be out on our own. As individuals and business people we know no partnership is perfect. Which is why we always need to argue for reform, now, tomorrow and into the future, just as prime ministers in the past – such as Harold Wilson, Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair – have. Leaving Europe would risk our prosperity, threaten our safety and diminish our influence in the world. I believe we have no choice but to remain and reform from within http://www.evidenceinvestor.co.uk/gi...city-prepared/ But first, I couldn’t speak to Gina without asking her about the story that’s propelled her into the spotlight in recent weeks — her successful High Court action against the UK Government for trying to trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty without a debate in Parliament. Although, like Gina, I supported Remain in the referendum, I respect the result |
|
|
|
|
#341 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 15,071
|
Quote:
We only send the EU about 250m a week. The 350 is a lie.
![]() ![]() We "only" send about £250m a week! So that's all right then. ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#342 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 43,686
|
Quote:
We only send the EU about 250m a week. The 350 is a lie.
|
|
|
|
|
#343 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 37,482
|
Quote:
Possibly after rebates but what we get back is not completely under our control it is spent where we are told to spend it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#344 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 713
|
Quote:
I love this post. I just love it when remainers say this, as if it's tuppence. Thank you, thank you for making my day. Have a drink on me.
![]() ![]() We "only" send about £250m a week! So that's all right then. ![]() ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#345 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 1,059
|
Quote:
Ditto, so made my day too. £250m is an eye watering amount to give to the nonsense that is the EU, that sort of money could make such a difference to the NHS for example.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#346 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 4,372
|
Quote:
He lost an argument where he'd strongly backed the other side. He had to resign. That's why he didn't stay on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#347 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 4,372
|
Quote:
Electoral suicide, and it would break the "trust"
that is needed between the voters and parliament.And I reckon he knew he had screwed up big time and didn't have a fekkin clue about implementing the outcome. Not a clue. |
|
|
|
|
|
#348 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 4,372
|
Quote:
We only send the EU about 250m a week. The 350 is a lie.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#349 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 4,372
|
Quote:
Thats why we have elections - to get rid of governments.
They are elected to govern - the clue is in the name. Referendums are advisory as has been pointed out, but it would be a suicidal government that ignored the result. The activity in the High Courts is not about ignoring the referendum. Its about making sure that it happens legally so that it can't be challenged later. Parliament fell down badly when it framed the referendum bill. It is fairly common for poor legislation to be clarified later in the courts. And that is what is happening here. All the drama and hyperbole whipped up by some parts of the press is from ignorance. Journalists are not constitutional lawyers. Oppression is a very real problem in some countries. Not in ours. Yes elections allow us to remove governments that we don't like however this situation is different. Removing this government on the basis that they sold the electorate a lie about a referendum does nothing to progress Brexit, especially when none of the main parties stand for leaving the EU. That said your post attempts to deflect from the real issue which is Parliament potentially not implementing the will of the people. Hide behind the legal position if you want, however if Parliament does not rubber stamp leaving the EU (which then makes a mockery of the legal challenge), then all hell will break loose! |
|
|
|
|
|
#350 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 4,372
|
Quote:
You said the law needs changing, I asked which one.
That's exactly what is required.[/quote] |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 20:08.






