UK prime minister Boris Johnson

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › UK prime minister Boris Johnson

1 | ... | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | ... | 45

11197 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#2318368 16-Sep-2019 09:20

Varkk: Finally you can present the leave options to the public as a new binding referendum e.g Do you want to invoke article 50 under the terms negotiated in the deal Y/N?

I'm getting a little lost. I didn't even know that "Black Rod" existed till recently.

Article 50 is the legal and political process whereby an EU member state ceases to be a member of the Union.

What deal are you referring to?

Getting off subject, Britain needs a codified constitution. The number of acts of Parliament, court judgments and conventions is ridiculous.

Varkk

643 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2318379 16-Sep-2019 09:47

The deal is the current deal that was negotiated by Theresa May but has failed to be accepted by parliament. This deal outlines the rules for travel and trading with Europe and rules around the Irish border etc. If they want to be truly democratic about it and actually move forward I feel putting either that deal or a no deal exit need to be put to anew referendum against the option of remaining. The way things are this feels like the only legitimate way forward.

The structuring of the referendum would need to be carefully planned out I don't think they can do a straight three way contest between the options. It may need to be more like our change the electoral system one where the vote was do you wish to change the electoral system Y/N? Then if a change is chosen which option do you prefer?

Cameron should have done something similar in the first place. First referendum to begin process, then a second one to confirm once the deal was sorted and people had an idea of what it would be.

SJB

2945 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2318488 16-Sep-2019 13:32

Truly democratic is Parliament abiding by the result of the first referendum. That's been the problem all along. They don't want to.

Sideface

9359 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2318574 16-Sep-2019 14:58

BBC News - Brexit: UK will reject any delay offer, PM to tell Juncker

BREAKING

The UK is not prepared to postpone Brexit beyond the current 31 October deadline, Boris Johnson is to tell European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker at talks on Monday.

The lunchtime meeting in Luxembourg will be the first time the pair have met since the PM took office in July.

A Downing Street source says Mr Johnson will stress he wants to secure a deal by 18 October, after a key EU summit.

But if not possible he will "reject any delay offered" and leave with no deal. ...

MPs have passed a law that would force the prime minister to ask the EU for an extension to the 31 October deadline if a deal was not agreed by 19 October. ...

This defies all logic ... 😕

Sideface

kingdragonfly

11197 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#2318589 16-Sep-2019 15:42

SJB:
Truly democratic is Parliament abiding by the result of the first referendum. That's been the problem all along. They don't want to.

Handle9

11391 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2318597 16-Sep-2019 16:02

SJB:
Truly democratic is Parliament abiding by the result of the first referendum. That's been the problem all along. They don't want to.

I don’t think that is quite right. If there was a Brexit deal that was favourable to the UK then I think it’d be voted through in about 5 minutes. The problem is there isn’t and never will be.

It’s very hard for a politician to go back to their electorate and explain why the price of many consumer items just went up and the economy’s tanking.

Parliament is literally between the devil and the deep blue sea (well shallow channel but you get the idea).

Handle9

11391 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2318599 16-Sep-2019 16:07

kingdragonfly:
Varkk: Finally you can present the leave options to the public as a new binding referendum e.g Do you want to invoke article 50 under the terms negotiated in the deal Y/N?

I'm getting a little lost. I didn't even know that "Black Rod" existed till recently.

Article 50 is the legal and political process whereby an EU member state ceases to be a member of the Union.

What deal are you referring to?

Getting off subject, Britain needs a codified constitution. The number of acts of Parliament, court judgments and conventions is ~~ridiculous~~ british.

FTFY

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

Varkk

643 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2318609 16-Sep-2019 16:14

SJB:

Truly democratic is Parliament abiding by the result of the first referendum. That's been the problem all along. They don't want to.

But the first referendum was shown to be highly flawed. Even if it wasn't many people didn't know what they were voting for as at the time no one knew what a Brexit deal might look like. Now that the details of the possible exit deal has been negotiated surely the democratic thing to do is go back to the public with the question "Do you want the UK to leave the EU under the terms of this deal?"

Back to our electoral system referendum, if the first referendum just asked if we wished to change the electoral system and came back yes. Would it then be OK for parliament to then push ahead and implement a system no one wanted? e.g Only people called 'Fred' may vote. Would it not be right to go back to the people now that the details of the change have been established?

Dingbatt

6756 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2318651 16-Sep-2019 17:46

Varkk:
SJB:

Truly democratic is Parliament abiding by the result of the first referendum. That's been the problem all along. They don't want to.

But the first referendum was shown to be highly flawed. Even if it wasn't many people didn't know what they were voting for as at the time no one knew what a Brexit deal might look like. Now that the details of the possible exit deal has been negotiated surely the democratic thing to do is go back to the public with the question "Do you want the UK to leave the EU under the terms of this deal?"

Back to our electoral system referendum, if the first referendum just asked if we wished to change the electoral system and came back yes. Would it then be OK for parliament to then push ahead and implement a system no one wanted? e.g Only people called 'Fred' may vote. Would it not be right to go back to the people now that the details of the change have been established?

Except the difference in the electoral system referendum is everyone knew t was a two step process. The difficulty with a two step process for Brexit is that the EU doesn't want them to leave, lest it leads to other countries following suit. So conditions would have been even more unpalatable for an exit to ensure failure in the secondary vote.
What should have been done is make the Brexit referendum require a substantial (is 67/33%) majority to change rather than a simple majority. That would have provided a clear mandate. (And probably would have failed).

I kind of scoff at people who complain they lied to by politicians with a particular agenda. Buyer beware really.

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

Handle9

11391 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2318675 16-Sep-2019 18:28

Dingbatt:
Varkk:

SJB:

Truly democratic is Parliament abiding by the result of the first referendum. That's been the problem all along. They don't want to.

But the first referendum was shown to be highly flawed. Even if it wasn't many people didn't know what they were voting for as at the time no one knew what a Brexit deal might look like. Now that the details of the possible exit deal has been negotiated surely the democratic thing to do is go back to the public with the question "Do you want the UK to leave the EU under the terms of this deal?"

Back to our electoral system referendum, if the first referendum just asked if we wished to change the electoral system and came back yes. Would it then be OK for parliament to then push ahead and implement a system no one wanted? e.g Only people called 'Fred' may vote. Would it not be right to go back to the people now that the details of the change have been established?

Except the difference in the electoral system referendum is everyone knew t was a two step process. The difficulty with a two step process for Brexit is that the EU doesn't want them to leave, lest it leads to other countries following suit. So conditions would have been even more unpalatable for an exit to ensure failure in the secondary vote.
What should have been done is make the Brexit referendum require a substantial (is 67/33%) majority to change rather than a simple majority. That would have provided a clear mandate. (And probably would have failed).

I kind of scoff at people who complain they lied to by politicians with a particular agenda. Buyer beware really.

The ship has sailed on a second referendum. Fundamentally the process requires that Britain exit the EU, as decided in their referendum.

It's not going to be what was promised but as you say it must be shocking that a politician lied. Right up there with a dog chasing a cat and a man drinking a beer.

Sideface

9359 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2318680 16-Sep-2019 18:34

Handle9: The ship has sailed on a second referendum. ...

Maybe - but anything is possible right now ...

Sideface

9359 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2318863 17-Sep-2019 05:45

The Times - Boris Johnson gets empty podium treatment in Luxembourg

September 16 2019, 5:00pm

Boris Johnson was subjected to an outspoken attack by Luxembourg’s leader today who accused the prime minister of holding people’s future “hostage for party political gains”.

Mr Johnson, who had joined Brexit talks in Luxembourg, abandoned a planned press conference with Xavier Bettel because of noisy Remain protests by British nationals living in the city.

The debacle overshadowed what had been largely positive discussions with the European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker at which both sides agreed to speed up the process of Brexit negotiations.

Talks are now expected to take place on a daily basis as they try to unlock a compromise deal on the Irish backstop. ...

The week ahead:

Tuesday: The Supreme Court begins to consider the legality of Mr Johnson's decision to suspend parliament until 14 October
Wednesday: The European Parliament to debate Brexit

Sideface

GV27

5897 posts

Uber Geek

#2318869 17-Sep-2019 07:00

Dingbatt:
What should have been done is make the Brexit referendum require a substantial (is 67/33%) majority to change rather than a simple majority. That would have provided a clear mandate. (And probably would have failed).

Is an arbitrary threshold any more democratic than the simple majority that elects the government?

Sideface

9359 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2318890 17-Sep-2019 08:09

GV27:

Dingbatt:
What should have been done is make the Brexit referendum require a substantial (is 67/33%) majority to change rather than a simple majority. That would have provided a clear mandate. (And probably would have failed).

Is an arbitrary threshold any more democratic than the simple majority that elects the government?

Yes it is, when the question is whether or not to permanently change the long-standing legal, electoral, and political structure of an entire country, in a yet-to-be-determined way.

Basically, the UK electorate has been asked to write a blank cheque for a bunch of politicians that they do not, and should not, trust. 😕

Sideface

GV27

5897 posts

Uber Geek

#2318897 17-Sep-2019 08:27

So forcing a simple majority to stay is more democratic than a simple majority wanting to leave being able to leave?

This is where the whole 'pick and choose your democracy' thing becomes a bit of an issue - you can't have it both ways.

1 | ... | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | ... | 45