I am not going to argue about it. 
I just say I am fascinated by it.
3 Likes
No, but it wasn’t any of the elite ‘few’ that made this decision, aside from one of their member creating the opportunity out of stupidity. The great majority of them in Britain are pro-europe. Of course that’s not the only evidence that the UK isn’t an oligarchy, but it’s enough for now. Your comment about the monarchy was wrong as well, if I were British I’d be a republican (I’m an Irishman living over here btw), but they don’t actually have any power.
1 Like
Well that remark about Monarchy was made because I believe that only a republic can truly be a democracy. That being said I also do believe that you can retrofit democratic institutions upon a monarchy and make it, for all (most) practical purposes, behave like a democracy. Heck most of Western European monarchies are more democratic than bunch of nominal republics out there. But still there is something atavistic about it.
2 Likes
I don’t think this whole mess is a result of just one individual. Cameron made a decision to run a referendum but the conflict within his own party involved quite a bit more than one person.
1 Like
Why not just hold another national referendum with the question being, “Are you sure!?”
2 Likes
In fact, the Remain campaign never mentioned World War III, it was Boris Johnson who said:
the prime minister is […] warning us that world war three is about to break out unless we vote to remain
5 Likes
Oh, why does it not surprise me. The Brexit/Trump parallels are numerous…
2 Likes
I hope not. The prospect of the kippers doing well (which I am worried will happen if there is an election too soon after the Brexit vote) makes the idea of keeping Theresa May as prime minister appealing in comparison.
1 Like
Under the Fixed Term Parliament Act introduced by the coalition, there can only be an early election if a Commons vote for dissolution is passed by a two thirds majority, or if the government calls - and loses - a vote of confidence in the Commons. Unlike before, the government cannot attach a vote of confidence to a regular Bill passing through Parluament (as John Major did to secure passage of the Maastricht Treaty).
May could only call an early election if Labour votes for one. That’s an open question, Labour is doing catastrophically in the polls and would benefit from some time to try and heal in Opposition. An election now will see them lose enormous numbers of seats and we’ll go from a very small Tory majority to one more like the numbers we saw during the Thatcher years. It would however, probably finish the Corbyn project.
2 Likes
It might not be pretty, but at least it happened.
1 Like
It was explained before the referendum. Everyone who was paying attention, which appears to be a relatively small proportion of the electorate, knew this, just as they knew that the £350 million on the side of a bus was bullshit.
But now the same people whining that the voters should have known that of course the electorate should have known they were never going to deliver on the bus promise are complaining that it’s unfair that the status of the referendum wasn’t made clearer.
(It’s not just those people; that you didn’t realise the legal status of the referendum doesn’t mean you are one of the people saying it was okay to lie on the bus.)
But while it was clear that the referendum wasn’t legally binding, what was not clear (and was known to be unclear; this court case was not a surprise) was whether the government could take action as the government, or it needed to be parliament.
The referendum made it clear that a narrow majority of those who voted said they wanted to leave, but nothing about what the new status should be, other than that it was no longer full membership of the EU. One might, for example, think that since the Conservative manifesto said “Yes to the Single Market”, that would be a priority (so-called “soft” Brexit), rather than appeasing the “fuck the economy, just keep the foreigners out” faction. Now at least the whole of Parliament will have a say.
2 Likes
It was officially and explicitly advisory. https://twitter.com/mattholehouse/status/794192857838002176
1 Like
The Brexiteers are all upset about the wording of the voting leaflet:
1 Like
Heh. Even if it had been written on the side of a bus, it wouldn’t outweigh the Constitution; which is not written down anywhere.
From the Briefing Paper for the European Union Referendum Bill, c/o the House of Commons Library:
Types of referendum
This Bill requires a referendum to be held on the question of the UK’s
continued membership of the European Union (EU) before the end of
- It does not contain any requirement for the UK Government to
implement the results of the referendum, nor set a time limit by which a
vote to leave the EU should be implemented. Instead, this is a type of
referendum known as pre-legislative or consultative, which enables the
electorate to voice an opinion which then influences the Government in
its policy decisions.
which means what it says, and presumably has greater weight than a leaflet.
Come to think of it, perhaps the Brexiteers have a valid complaint about the process, since the leaflet gave the erroneous impression that the referendum was legally binding. Let’s have the vote again.
ETA: Entertainingly, from the Vote Leave leaflet, a pdf here:
• Taking back control is a careful change, not a sudden
stop - we will negotiate the terms of a new deal before
we start any legal process to leave
1 Like
interesting, makes all the bleating in the press today about abuse of judicial powers all the more laughable.
ha. behold the legal power of the mighty leaflet.
would the PLP risk some of their own seats to finally get rid of Corbyn?
Doesn’t seem to be the masses who want to end taxes though. Is that more than just another line to distract from the elites who want to ONLY tax the masses, and not the elites.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
