I think we all know reading between the lines what Our Queen thinks, but the constitution will not let her have her say as I am sure you are aware.
Off Topic OLOF's political thread
- Thread starter MIGHTY
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
Well, Well, Well, the man who some thought / hoped would bring down trump is arrested.
The man who had stacks of evidence against Trump arrested.
The man who accused Trump of Tax fraud arrested.
The man who represented Stormy Daniels arrested.
I said he was crooked.
The man who had stacks of evidence against Trump arrested.
The man who accused Trump of Tax fraud arrested.
The man who represented Stormy Daniels arrested.
I said he was crooked.
You must log in or register to see media
Just going back over the last two pages shows the problems of a binary vote on a complex decision.
People throwing about undemocratic and dictatorship and then asking for the unelected queen to make a stand. Apparently leave means leave and constitutional reform.
The reality of what happened is we had an advisory referendum. Doesn't matter whether that's what people believed or what people were told, that is legally what happened. (The irony being if hadn't been advisory the result would be void and rerun due to corruption).
People voted for various reasons. Some read all the literature and voted for or against accordingly, some just rocked up on the day and made an x based on what their friends suggested, some who voted leave voted to take back control, some to reduce immigration, some to give the Tories a kicking, some because they wanted to give more money to the NHS. In the end it doesn't matter because the vote was narrowly to leave.
Then the next reality is we can not ask those who voted how we want to leave nor did the vote give any indication of that, so it's left to the government to decide. They propose how we leave and parliament votes upon their decision. In the middle of the negotiations the government went back to the people to get a larger majority to strengthen their negotiations and this failed and the electorate reduced their majority. So now the government is trying to pass something but parliament has rejected it.
Parliament is sovereign and the government needs its legislation to pass through parliament.
So you can rage and get red in the face until you blow a gammon gasket but the above is what has happened and how and when and indeed if we leave is now down to parliament. Of course whatever happens or doesn't will have consequences and that is what MP's will have to deal with but they are the ones that will decide.
People throwing about undemocratic and dictatorship and then asking for the unelected queen to make a stand. Apparently leave means leave and constitutional reform.
The reality of what happened is we had an advisory referendum. Doesn't matter whether that's what people believed or what people were told, that is legally what happened. (The irony being if hadn't been advisory the result would be void and rerun due to corruption).
People voted for various reasons. Some read all the literature and voted for or against accordingly, some just rocked up on the day and made an x based on what their friends suggested, some who voted leave voted to take back control, some to reduce immigration, some to give the Tories a kicking, some because they wanted to give more money to the NHS. In the end it doesn't matter because the vote was narrowly to leave.
Then the next reality is we can not ask those who voted how we want to leave nor did the vote give any indication of that, so it's left to the government to decide. They propose how we leave and parliament votes upon their decision. In the middle of the negotiations the government went back to the people to get a larger majority to strengthen their negotiations and this failed and the electorate reduced their majority. So now the government is trying to pass something but parliament has rejected it.
Parliament is sovereign and the government needs its legislation to pass through parliament.
So you can rage and get red in the face until you blow a gammon gasket but the above is what has happened and how and when and indeed if we leave is now down to parliament. Of course whatever happens or doesn't will have consequences and that is what MP's will have to deal with but they are the ones that will decide.
Should be nothing to do with parliament,the people instructed the Government to leave the EU,the government should have held talks with the EU and implimented the best option they could get.
When we have a general election do we ask the losers to set the tax rates and spending ?
Hoax, Chesh. LL would have posted a link if it was true.
If the vote had gone the other way, could we have voted again as it was only advisory?
The word "advisory" was only mentioned AFTER the vote went the way of the majority, when Soros puppet, banana gob Gina Miller got involved
The word "advisory" was only mentioned AFTER the vote went the way of the majority, when Soros puppet, banana gob Gina Miller got involved
Do you have a point or just talking ****,and my names not bill.
She's still your Queen and she didn't stand up for her people and execute Tony Abbott for wearing budgie smugglers so I doubt she's going to intervene on Brexit.
"In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. If the Remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it." Nigel Farage, May 2016.
Gina Miller is the cause of most of the problems with Brexit. Left to our own devises we would have sorted it.
Bloody foreigners
One of the great ironies of Gina Miller’s court case is that if she hadn’t brought and won it, we would be fully signed up to Theresa May’s universally despised withdrawal agreement with Parliament having no control
She basically did the ERG and the DUP a huge favour
You should be embarrassed by your lack of understanding of how Government and Parliament each and every year debate one of the most important aspects of politics. Namely our economic status, likely future performance and government spending plans which will be financed through taxation or borrowing.
This involves the Chancellor of the Exchequer producing a financial statement or Budget to Parliament which in turn becomes the Finance Bill which is scrutinised, debated and possibly amended before having to pass votes both in the lower and upper houses in order for it to be implemented.
The "losers" as you call them have as much say in that process as they now do regarding Brexit but somehow you think that is wrong.
Don't talk ****,go sober up.
Labour,SNP,Greens etc didn't set the spending.
Show us one time when the governments spending has been changed to the oppositions policy.
Last edited:
Actually they did recently - they defeated the Government on the Finance Bill in January
Did they change it and bring in Labours spending plans then ?
Exactly,a pointless post.They didn't take over the spending did they.
I see those debating skills you learn't at the " School of Hard Knocks ' are standing you in good stead.
For some reason you've chosen to be pretty obnoxious to quite a few posters of late, which I think is a shame, but very much your prerogative. Unfortunately though it just makes you come across as a bit of an arse, but as long as it makes you happy and you don't end up having some sort of meltdown then I suppose the drivel you post is fairly harmless in the grand scheme of things.
So reality again - the government proposes it's finance bill and needs parliament to pass it.
Government wanted Fixed Odd's Betting Terminal stakes to be reduced to £2 by October 2020. Parliament wanted it to be introduced by 2019. Their was the threat of a backbench rebellion which coupled with the opposition means the government would have not had the numbers to pass their legislation. Government 0- Parliament 1.
Government caved because that's the reality of how are parliamentary democracy works.
(there are also examples where the government has needed opposition support to pass bills through because they didn't have the numbers themselves to pass legislation)
Could be worse,could be grassing people up for watching football links,some people do that,try to dictate to others what they can do.