Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Brexit Referendum Brexit Referendum

06-27-2016 , 09:56 AM
if the stablishment can come up with some semi-legitimate reason for staying then im all for it. sturgeon wont let us leave look the laws let her block it there's nowt we can do is satisfactory

but outright ignoring the refyendum ie actual will of the people puts us in a ****ing dark place. i dont fancy going there
06-27-2016 , 09:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by masque de Z
Seriously what happens if the new prime minister refuses to initiate article 50 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdr...European_Union)
in the name of national security interests and re-evaluation of conditions. In what sense is technically ethically or legally binding to violate as leader/government the results of a referendum if the prime minister that promised to do it is now gone? After all governments typically have less than 50%support anyway for great periods of time.

Prediction UK will never leave EU.
It's has no legal standing and ethics aren't really an issue.

Power politics is all that really matters. Heads are going to roll - possibly literally.
06-27-2016 , 10:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by masque de Z
Seriously what happens if the new prime minister refuses to initiate article 50 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdr...European_Union) in the name of national security interests and re-evaluation of conditions. In what sense is technically ethically or legally binding to violate as leader/government the results of a referendum if the prime minister that promised to do it is now gone? After all governments typically have less than 50% support anyway for great periods of time. You do not govern based on what the majority wants you to do on any given moment in time, otherwise what on earth are you doing if not testing your ability to be wiser than the avg person. They can always vote for another if they dont like how you do things and your own party/parliament (depending on alliances) can undermine you and your cabinet too if they think you are becoming arrogantly dangerous in that function. A leader must be able to be flexible and brave. A leader must be able to understand that important long term decisions cannot ever be based or have any indisputable legitimacy if they rely on small margins and prior decisions enjoyed much larger ones and the undecided were a significant fraction of the population plus promises were made either way to voters that were not accurate.

Prediction; UK will never leave EU. This is all a giant joke and a bell warning for Merkel and the other satellite morons that thought EU is their own to do whatever they like without a broadly based sensible sense of justice/consensus for/from all involved that results in symmetric and fair growth everywhere. This is re-evaluation time for EU's soul. This is a wake up call and a moment of coming together to learn from the rage of people not naively apply it if it leads to worse outcomes eventually. That is what leaders are elected for. To do hard things that the public may not initially like and appreciate later. If you exceed the legal authority you have in governing they can always take you down.
Independent Yorkshire.
06-27-2016 , 10:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by chezlaw
It's has no legal standing and ethics aren't really an issue.

Power politics is all that really matters. Heads are going to roll - possibly literally.
Maybe all the heads rolling in the shade cabinet is enough (not literally though, let's be civilized here...)
06-27-2016 , 10:02 AM
Hollande has vowed to kill TTIP.

This kills the last line of resistance amongst my few lefty educated friends who voted Leave as a protest against globalisation. They have all started to express regret and I think this will allow full I told you so mode.
06-27-2016 , 10:03 AM
Daily Mail on John Oliver's Brexit thoughts.



The comment is possibly a joke, the upvotes it got probably aren't though...
06-27-2016 , 10:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by O.A.F.K.1.1
Hollande has vowed to kill TTIP.

This kills the last line of resistance amongst my few lefty educated friends who voted Leave as a protest against globalisation. They have all started to express regret and I think this will allow full I told you so mode.
Lisbon still prevents member states from spending their way out of a recession.
06-27-2016 , 10:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by thethethe
Daily Mail on John Oliver's Brexit thoughts.



The comment is possibly a joke, the upvotes it got probably aren't though...
This sums up how out of reality the Leaves are.

Serious

Kick out America from our backyard ffs!
06-27-2016 , 10:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by O.A.F.K.1.1
Hollande has vowed to kill TTIP.

This kills the last line of resistance amongst my few lefty educated friends who voted Leave as a protest against globalisation. They have all started to express regret and I think this will allow full I told you so mode.
USA will realise it's easier to do trade deals with counties than EU.

Back to the front of the queue ☺
06-27-2016 , 10:11 AM
hurrah! ive always preferred nike anyway
06-27-2016 , 10:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by chezlaw
It's has no legal standing and ethics aren't really an issue.

Power politics is all that really matters. Heads are going to roll - possibly literally.
Exactly (but ethics are relevant then). Where is the legal standing defined? Someone offers a referendum. Another government comes and doesnt recognize (they wouldn't have offered it that way say) that choice because of changing conditions rapidly. Where is the legal binding explicitly stated as a law you cannot violate (unconstitutional etc) given that it takes time to reach the final process and it is conceivable that the world is a very different place by then (possibly requiring a new vote)?

Notice i am not expressing any expert opinion here. I dont have it. I am trying to understand why the markets take this so literally as if it is binding. I am merely speculating there is no such solid legally binding case (i havent seen it in other countries either) and if there is i would like to see a link to it and the exact constitutional description of the contract in place that must be honored no matter what happens next. I can imagine wars, crises anything that a government is forced to deal with suddenly as extreme counter-examples to such legal binding position. This is why i introduced the ethical angle because if something is subtle, ethics is all you have left to apply. The primary ethical responsibility of a government is to defend the interests of the people not to do exactly as told. This of course typically appears as doing most things you promised and reflecting the general will of the people. But governments violate their promises that decided elections all the time. But this is a heavily divided situation with complex ramifications that experts are more capable to recognize.


http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...ign-parliament (older link)

"The simple answer to the question as to whether the EU referendum is legally binding is “no”. In theory, in the event of a vote to leave the EU, David Cameron, who opposes Brexit, could decide to ignore the will of the people and put the question to MPs banking on a majority deciding to remain.

This is because parliament is sovereign and referendums are generally not binding in the UK.

An exception was the 2011 referendum on changing the electoral system to alternative vote, where the relevant legislation obligated the government to change the law to reflect a “yes” vote had that occurred. No such provision was contained within the EU referendum legislation."

Last edited by masque de Z; 06-27-2016 at 10:24 AM.
06-27-2016 , 10:14 AM
hm, start a war with some brown people somewhere and tell the horde well we cant leave now that we're at war? worth consideration

may as well bring the inevitable war with north korea forward a few decades
06-27-2016 , 10:15 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BAIDS
but outright ignoring the refyendum ie actual will of the people puts us in a ****ing dark place. i dont fancy going there
There are times when the appointed parliament has to take responsibility. The people voted them to do that. Having some populist lying *******s trying to get us into hell: preventing that is democracy, or something close to.
06-27-2016 , 10:15 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dereds
Lisbon still prevents member states from spending their way out of a recession.
Given that Germany has built a powerhouse economy on the back of codetermination whereby half or one third dependent on size of a businesses board of directors must comprise of workers representatives, normally Unions and that most of the EU's main economies are well to the left of the UK its possible to make a case that one of the main features of the EU was its ability to defend socialist democratic values in the face of the globalisation neo-liberal agenda vai allowing States which individually had all lost power to global capital to collectively bargain.

TTITP put a bit of dampener on that POV. No more.

Also now we have Brexit, I can see Boris and his Tory chums rushing to fist pump that we can now spend our way out of recession.
06-27-2016 , 10:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BAIDS
hurrah! ive always preferred nike anyway
We need to worry about if the Yanks prefer Adidas.
06-27-2016 , 10:16 AM
Lots of racist incidents lately. Something seems to have emboldened the racists, no idea what. I'm sure that it is entirely unrelated to the victory of the very respectable Brexit campaign.
06-27-2016 , 10:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by masque de Z
Exactly (but ethics are relevant then). Where is the legal standing defined? Someone offers a referendum. Another government comes and doesnt recognize (they wouldn't have offered it that way say) that choice because of changing conditions rapidly. Where is the legal binding explicitly stated as a law you cannot violate (unconstitutional etc) given that it takes time to reach the final process and it is conceivable that the world is a very different place by then (possibly requiring a new vote)?

Notice i am not expressing any expert opinion here. I dont have it. I am merely speculating there is no such solid legally binding case (i havent seen it in other countries either) and if there is i would like to see a link to it and the exact constitutional description of the contract in place that must be honored no matter what happens next. I can imagine wars, crises anything that a government is forced to deal with suddenly as extreme counter-examples to such legal binding position. This is why i introduced the ethical angle because if something is subtle, ethics is all you have left to apply. The primary ethical responsibility of a government is to defend the interests of the people not to do exactly as told. This of course typically appears as doing most things you promised and reflecting the general will of the people. But governments violate their promises that decided elections all the time. But this is a heavily divided situation with complex ramifications that experts are more capable to recognize.


http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...ign-parliament

"The simple answer to the question as to whether the EU referendum is legally binding is “no”. In theory, in the event of a vote to leave the EU, David Cameron, who opposes Brexit, could decide to ignore the will of the people and put the question to MPs banking on a majority deciding to remain.

This is because parliament is sovereign and referendums are generally not binding in the UK.

An exception was the 2011 referendum on changing the electoral system to alternative vote, where the relevant legislation obligated the government to change the law to reflect a “yes” vote had that occurred. No such provision was contained within the EU referendum legislation."
It was an advisory referendum. There's no uncertainty on this - it has no legal force at all.



Sent from my SM-P600 using 2+2 Forums
06-27-2016 , 10:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by plaaynde
There are times when the appointed parliament has to take responsibility. The people voted them to do that. Having some populist lying *******s trying to get us into hell: preventing that is democracy.
erosion of democratic principles plus exponentially increasing the hatred and mistrust which the horde already has for everyone in westminster = we're on the road to drumpftown or worse

goodbye labour, goodbye tory, hello charismatic demagogue

before anyone mentions farage, he's been going 25 years at this and afaik has had one mp in one parliament elected in that time. im thinking of someone much more powerful and much worse

farage = sarah palin in this scenario
06-27-2016 , 10:20 AM
The only crumb in this situation is I just cant see Nigel doing a Hitler.
06-27-2016 , 10:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BAIDS
erosion of democratic principles plus exponentially increasing the hatred and mistrust which the horde has for everyone in westminster = we're on the road to drumpftown or worse

goodbye labour, goodbye tory, hello charismatic demagogue
Maybe that Reese Hogg chap should be PM. Let's really wierd it up.
06-27-2016 , 10:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by O.A.F.K.1.1
Hollande has vowed to kill TTIP.
Didn't know he was crazy too.
06-27-2016 , 10:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by chezlaw
It was an advisory referendum. There's no uncertainty on this - it has no legal force at all.
You know you have to do better than this.
06-27-2016 , 10:22 AM
whats that daily mail woman who was on the apprentice doing these days
06-27-2016 , 10:23 AM
If Boris becomes PM Jamie Oliver has vowed to leave the country.

Nice to have that kind of hedging.
06-27-2016 , 10:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by O.A.F.K.1.1
If Boris becomes PM Jamie Oliver has vowed to leave the country.

Nice to have that kind of hedging.
Googled Jamie Oliver: http://www.jamieoliver.com/recipes/v...F8ALCJefHBz.97

Looks you guys are serious.

      
m