DS Forums

 
 

Gina Miller hates democracy


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 29-12-2016, 15:42
tim59
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 25,218
You and I can see this clearly, but remainers are so sweet and naïve they trust everyone. I tremble for them when they have to face life without the security blanket of the EU.
Funny because this court case is about UK parliament and is being dealt with by the highest court in the uk, would have thought that would please the leavers
tim59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 29-12-2016, 15:44
MargMck
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 17,637
The biggest issue I have with Gina Miller is that she is a liar and a deceiver.
We all know that she cares nothing about the rule of law. She simply wants to stop our exit from the EU and is manipulating our justice system to do so.
I would have more respect for her if she was honest about this.
Spot on. It's a deception, with her happily fronting a campaign for the likes of Blair, Clegg and Branson, lurking behind her designer skirts.
MargMck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 15:46
Annsyre
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 97,113
People voted in the referendum to either stay or leave the EU. The result was clear and that's what we should now do. Once we leave then people can argue over the terms of leaving.

The legal system in general is there to support wealthy people who can afford the best legal experts to fight their corner. Miller is an example of this and for me is no different to rich celebrities who have used the best legal experts to get themselves of charges by using loopholes in the law which are not available to the ordinary person.

Government should not need Parliament to invoke article 50 because as far as the general public were concerned thats what the referendum was for. Its not really surprising that people are bit annoyed that wealthy person armed with some of the best legal experts is trying to derail that process.
We are going to leave.

And Miller is exerccising her legal right.
Annsyre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 15:52
Emyj74
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 591
Well saying the court case is nothing to do with trying to stop the uk leaving the EU, and it was the government who did the ref act and that it was not legally binding in any way. I dont see how you can blame her. She has said that the law needs changing so that referendums are legally binding so if i were you i would take this fight up with your MP,
Of course people are going to blame her. The country had a democratic vote regarding our membership of the of the EU. Vote has not gone her way and she has used her vast wealth to stop us leaving the EU. Not really democratic is it? Next people will be saying that its ok for criminals to use wealthy lawyers to get them off on legal technicalities regardless of whether they commit crimes or not

As for taking issues up with my MP do you really think any MPs listen to the ordinary person on the street?
Emyj74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 15:54
smudges dad
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Fort William
Posts: 22,270
Of course people are going to blame her. The country had a democratic vote regarding our membership of the of the EU. Vote has not gone her way and she has used her vast wealth to stop us leaving the EU. Not really democratic is it? Next people will be saying that its ok for criminals to use wealthy lawyers to get them off on legal technicalities regardless of whether they commit crimes or not

As for taking issues up with my MP do you really think any MPs listen to the ordinary person on the street?
No, she's saying that the HoC should make the decision, rather than using the royal prerogative.
smudges dad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 15:56
Emyj74
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 591
We are going to leave.

And Miller is exerccising her legal right.
People know what she is doing but as most people do not have the funds to ever exercise their legal rights generally its not surprise the criticism she has got.
Emyj74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 15:56
tim59
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 25,218
Of course people are going to blame her. The country had a democratic vote regarding our membership of the of the EU. Vote has not gone her way and she has used her vast wealth to stop us leaving the EU. Not really democratic is it? Next people will be saying that its ok for criminals to use wealthy lawyers to get them off on legal technicalities regardless of whether they commit crimes or not

As for taking issues up with my MP do you really think any MPs listen to the ordinary person on the street?
Well if i were you i would study the court case as its not about her trying to stop the uk leaving, as the uk is leaving. Uk parliament and uk courts are part of the democratic way or dont you agree ?
tim59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 15:57
Emyj74
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 591
No, she's saying that the HoC should make the decision, rather than using the royal prerogative.
Shes hoping that there will never be an agreement in the HoC to the terms of Brexit and therefore it will never happen.
Emyj74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 15:58
Eurostar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 51,606
No, she's saying that the HoC should make the decision, rather than using the royal prerogative.
And the High Court agree with her and it looks like the Supreme Court will too. This is where criticism of Ms Miller completely falls down : she has won her appeal and the courts say she was justified in mounting it.
Eurostar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 16:00
Emyj74
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 591
Well if i were you i would study the court case as its not about her trying to stop the uk leaving, as the uk is leaving. Uk parliament and uk courts are part of the democratic way or dont you agree ?
If the UK is leaving then why do you need parliament to vote on it?
Emyj74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 16:00
alan29
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 20,483
She is trying to stop the EU ref result from happening.
No, she is trying to make sure it is watertight and the lawyers can't mess withnit later.
alan29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 16:13
Dan's Dad
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 6,467
Shes hoping that there will never be an agreement in the HoC to the terms of Brexit and therefore it will never happen.
As I understand the legal situation -
Ms Miller sought a High Court ruling on the legality of the Government 'triggering' Article 50 - which has to be done within the Constitutional requirements of the nation seeking to leave - without direct reference to Parliament.

Ms Miller won her case - the Government appealed the decision, presumably in the hope that the decision may be overturned and that the Government could invoke Article 50 without reference to Parliament.

{Or maybe it was just a ploy to buy time as Government has no real plan as the Tories are still all at sea because of a referendum result they never foresaw or bothered to consider.}

The 'terms of Brexit' are an entirely separate matter, on which Jeremy Corbyn is, at last, voicing his view.

Jeremy Corbyn has accused Theresa May of behaving like Henry VIII or a similar autocratic monarch because of her refusal to commit to putting a final Brexit deal to a vote in parliament.
Dan's Dad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 16:13
tim59
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 25,218
If the UK is leaving then why do you need parliament to vote on it?
Its not about parliament voting on it its about parliament being part of the proces which the government is trying not to have its the government who has tried to by pass parliament.
tim59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 16:17
Emyj74
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 591
Its not about parliament voting on it its about parliament being part of the proces which the government is trying not to have its the government who has tried to by pass parliament.
But why do you need parliament to be part of a process which they are simply going to agree to?

Why all these requests to outline the governments position on brexit if parliament is simply going to agree to the process?
Emyj74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 16:19
LakieLady
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 9,176
It is a lighthearted one for a female no one likes.
Based on a false premise, then. I like her.
LakieLady is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 16:23
tim59
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 25,218
But why do you need parliament to be part of a process which they are simply going to agree to?

Why all these requests to outline the governments position on brexit if parliament is simply going to agree to the process?
Who says parliament will agree with everything in the process, thats what debates are for, parliament debates things, or do you think parliament and courts have no process in the whole of things and the government should be able to do what ever it likes. ( like dictatorships government do )
tim59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 16:24
Ledecestre
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 27
But why do you need parliament to be part of a process which they are simply going to agree to?

Why all these requests to outline the governments position on brexit if parliament is simply going to agree to the process?
Because the process and terms still need to be debated and agreed upon. They're not just going to say "Go ahead Theresa, do as you like!".
Ledecestre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 16:25
jjwales
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,437
Of course people are going to blame her. The country had a democratic vote regarding our membership of the of the EU. Vote has not gone her way and she has used her vast wealth to stop us leaving the EU. Not really democratic is it?
I think her case was actually funded through a crowdfunding campaign. And it will not stop us leaving the EU.

Next people will be saying that its ok for criminals to use wealthy lawyers to get them off on legal technicalities regardless of whether they commit crimes or not
No they won't. You're descending to irrelevant speculation.
jjwales is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 16:26
Emyj74
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 591
Who says parliament will agree with everything in the process, thats what debates are for, parliament debates things, or do you think parliament and courts have no process in the whole of things and the government should be able to do what ever it likes. ( like dictatorships government do )
But the country had a referendum and agreed to leave the EU.

I can understand parliament having vote on the terms we agree once we have left but not on invoking article 50 as the public have spoken and agreed to this. How would the government be a dictatorship by following the wishs of the voters?
Emyj74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 16:27
Dan's Dad
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 6,467
But why do you need parliament to be part of a process which they are simply going to agree to?
If and when Parliament votes on invoking Article 50, do you expect it to be carried nem. con.?
Dan's Dad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 16:32
Emyj74
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 591
If and when Parliament votes on invoking Article 50, do you expect it to be carried nem. con.?
Nope and suspect Gina Miller is hoping that there will be enough delays or MP's who will vote against it to derail it.
Emyj74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 16:34
LakieLady
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 9,176
Of course people are going to blame her. The country had a democratic vote regarding our membership of the of the EU. Vote has not gone her way and she has used her vast wealth to stop us leaving the EU.
Unfortunately, the referendum act was only about calling and holding the referendum, not implementing the result. Regardless of Gina Miller's motives, surely it's best to sort out the legalities of the process before we leave the EU, rather than start the process of leaving and then have to go back to Brussels (or Strasbourg) and say "Oh, sorry, we didn't actually have the legal powers to do that, can we start again?"?
LakieLady is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 16:35
Ledecestre
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 27
But the country had a referendum and agreed to leave the EU.

I can understand parliament having vote on the terms we agree once we have left but not on invoking article 50 as the public have spoken and agreed to this. How would the government be a dictatorship by following the wishs of the voters?
But the vote would be on the terms, as in make the best terms you can before we press the big red button, so we can get a majority consensus on what leaving actually means. What trade tariffs will we have? What about visas? Do we keep an element of freedom of movement or not? These things need to be clear before we actually go ahead. You wouldn't jump from a plane if you weren't sure you had a parachute on.
Ledecestre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 16:37
tim59
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 25,218
But the country had a referendum and agreed to leave the EU.

I can understand parliament having vote on the terms we agree once we have left but not on invoking article 50 as the public have spoken and agreed to this. How would the government be a dictatorship by following the wishs of the voters?
You do understand in law the vote had no legal standing, as all referendums in the uk are not legally binding, and are only advisery. So the legal process should be that parliament has a say in all matters of the process, which the government is not happy with, but its the same gavernment that made the referendum not legally binding on them or future governments.
tim59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 16:39
Dan's Dad
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 6,467
..... the public have spoken and agreed to this.
When votes are cast ''for" and "against" a motion, and there is dissent, then the dissenters cannot be deemed to have 'agreed'.

It is dictatorships that seek to supress dissent, not Parliamentary democracies.

Which do you think is the system that the referendum vote sought to restore power to, according to the leave campaign at any rate?

Do you think the 48% should no longer be heard?
Dan's Dad is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 23:21.