Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Although if the Supreme Court hearing next month is unsuccessful, the government could still ask the CJEU to provide a view on the legality of the UK constitution
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 1 hour, 2 minutes ago
Although if the Supreme Court hearing next month is unsuccessful, the government could still ask the CJEU to provide a view on the legality of the UK constitution
----------------------------------------------------------------------
<ROFL> I thought brexit was to stay away from CJEU so they cannot have a say in our affairs.
comment by Chunkychips (U6773)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 1 hour, 2 minutes ago
Although if the Supreme Court hearing next month is unsuccessful, the government could still ask the CJEU to provide a view on the legality of the UK constitution
----------------------------------------------------------------------
<ROFL> I thought brexit was to stay away from CJEU so they cannot have a say in our affairs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Assuming the UK remains in the customs union – which the government have “assured” Nissan we will, the UK will remain under the jurisdiction of the CJEU.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
The purpose of a court is to provide lawful unprejudiced decision.
Sections of the media have condemned, and demonised the three High Court judges for doing nothing more than their job. Pathetic.
Don't really care about Britain to be honest since I live in a country that will keep doing well regardless of what these isle folk do.
Why should MPs get to vote on Brexit when a majority of the electorate voted for Brexit. A clear mandate from the people of the UK to leave. MPs as representatives of the electorate should abide by the wishes of them
Get us out !!
comment by Arsene's Optometrist (U5230)
posted 4 minutes ago
Why should MPs get to vote on Brexit when a majority of the electorate voted for Brexit. A clear mandate from the people of the UK to leave. MPs as representatives of the electorate should abide by the wishes of them
Get us out !!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where we all going?
Honestly this nonsense from the Brexiters. There may have been 17 million that voted out, but that is a only a little over 25 per cent of the British Population, don`t the other 75 per cent get a say in anything for evermore now.
The Brexiters and their Media chums are beginning to sound like playground bullies now with their demands for all things Brexit.
The media today shamefully said that the three judges, just doing their job, were the enemy of the country. FFS talk about Facism returning.
Arsene's Optometrist
Parliament will ensure the process has accountability, transparency, and will also protect the economic interests of the UK.
The government wanted to invoke Art50 without giving any detail to Parliament, nor the entire country.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
I agree with Bonkers Boris " Brexit will be a titanic success"
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
sandy
I understand 11 Supreme Court judges will oversee the appeal. Given there is no prior legal precedent to invoke the Royal prerogative, (relating to matters of national interest) it’s inconceivable the decision will be overturned.
What, I suspect the Government are most unhappy about, is the process will be subject to public, (via Parliament) scrutiny. When the general public discover how little leverage the UK have, and find out the cost of EU severance, the Government’s popularity will significantly diminish.
Which IMO is why they have been fighting this in the first place.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by justanotherTopperSpur (U1409)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 2 minutes ago
sandy
I understand 11 Supreme Court judges will oversee the appeal. Given there is no prior legal precedent to invoke the Royal prerogative, (relating to matters of national interest) it’s inconceivable the decision will be overturned.
What, I suspect the Government are most unhappy about, is the process will be subject to public, (via Parliament) scrutiny. When the general public discover how little leverage the UK have, and find out the cost of EU severance, the Government’s popularity will significantly diminish.
Which IMO is why they have been fighting this in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree...Con party still schiitting themselves incase UKIP get their act together.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
After last months Tory conference it appears they have morphed into Ukip anyway
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
OP - It cant go well when sore losers are constantly interfering and trying to reverse the decision can it!
comment by Goobie Pie and a Glass of Sainke (U3245)
posted 20 minutes ago
Honestly this nonsense from the Brexiters. There may have been 17 million that voted out, but that is a only a little over 25 per cent of the British Population, don`t the other 75 per cent get a say in anything for evermore now.
____________________________________
----------------------------------------------------------------------
err, that would mean that over 50% of the other 75% didnt bother voting then wouldnt it, so they lost their opportunity to have a say
comment by justanotherTopperSpur (U1409)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by justanotherTopperSpur (U1409)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 2 minutes ago
sandy
I understand 11 Supreme Court judges will oversee the appeal. Given there is no prior legal precedent to invoke the Royal prerogative, (relating to matters of national interest) it’s inconceivable the decision will be overturned.
What, I suspect the Government are most unhappy about, is the process will be subject to public, (via Parliament) scrutiny. When the general public discover how little leverage the UK have, and find out the cost of EU severance, the Government’s popularity will significantly diminish.
Which IMO is why they have been fighting this in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree...Con party still schiitting themselves incase UKIP get their act together.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
After last months Tory conference it appears they have morphed into Ukip anyway
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You watched it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bits and pieces
comment by Arsene's Optometrist (U5230)
posted 50 minutes ago
Why should MPs get to vote on Brexit when a majority of the electorate voted for Brexit. A clear mandate from the people of the UK to leave. MPs as representatives of the electorate should abide by the wishes of them
Get us out !!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Due to this thing called law.
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 26 minutes ago
sandy
I understand 11 Supreme Court judges will oversee the appeal. Given there is no prior legal precedent to invoke the Royal prerogative, (relating to matters of national interest) it’s inconceivable the decision will be overturned.
What, I suspect the Government are most unhappy about, is the process will be subject to public, (via Parliament) scrutiny. When the general public discover how little leverage the UK have, and find out the cost of EU severance, the Government’s popularity will significantly diminish.
Which IMO is why they have been fighting this in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This.
"Take back control. Take back democracy. Take back rule." Except when we want an unelected leader making decisions that will dramatically affect the UK for many years - without consulting Parliament - the people we elect to make decisions for us.
This is not an attempt to change the referendum result - and those portraying it as such do not understand the case or are dishonest (£350 million pwk for NHS?)
Brexit voting was daft anyway.
16-18 year olds unable to vote, and people over 75 were able to vote and they'll be dead before any of this makes a difference!
If anyone can, Emre Can
Although I still feel the decision (as much as I disagree with it) should be respected.
However if it transpires that following negotiations with the EUC, the deal was not in the UK’s economic interests to pursue, IMO there at least should be the option of pulling out. I’m unsure however if there is statute in Art50 which would grant this.
Sign in if you want to comment
Brexit, it`s going well
Page 1 of 8
6 | 7 | 8
posted on 4/11/16
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 4/11/16
Although if the Supreme Court hearing next month is unsuccessful, the government could still ask the CJEU to provide a view on the legality of the UK constitution
posted on 4/11/16
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 1 hour, 2 minutes ago
Although if the Supreme Court hearing next month is unsuccessful, the government could still ask the CJEU to provide a view on the legality of the UK constitution
----------------------------------------------------------------------
<ROFL> I thought brexit was to stay away from CJEU so they cannot have a say in our affairs.
posted on 4/11/16
comment by Chunkychips (U6773)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 1 hour, 2 minutes ago
Although if the Supreme Court hearing next month is unsuccessful, the government could still ask the CJEU to provide a view on the legality of the UK constitution
----------------------------------------------------------------------
<ROFL> I thought brexit was to stay away from CJEU so they cannot have a say in our affairs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Assuming the UK remains in the customs union – which the government have “assured” Nissan we will, the UK will remain under the jurisdiction of the CJEU.
posted on 4/11/16
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 4/11/16
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 4/11/16
The purpose of a court is to provide lawful unprejudiced decision.
Sections of the media have condemned, and demonised the three High Court judges for doing nothing more than their job. Pathetic.
posted on 4/11/16
Don't really care about Britain to be honest since I live in a country that will keep doing well regardless of what these isle folk do.
posted on 4/11/16
Why should MPs get to vote on Brexit when a majority of the electorate voted for Brexit. A clear mandate from the people of the UK to leave. MPs as representatives of the electorate should abide by the wishes of them
Get us out !!
posted on 4/11/16
comment by Arsene's Optometrist (U5230)
posted 4 minutes ago
Why should MPs get to vote on Brexit when a majority of the electorate voted for Brexit. A clear mandate from the people of the UK to leave. MPs as representatives of the electorate should abide by the wishes of them
Get us out !!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where we all going?
Honestly this nonsense from the Brexiters. There may have been 17 million that voted out, but that is a only a little over 25 per cent of the British Population, don`t the other 75 per cent get a say in anything for evermore now.
The Brexiters and their Media chums are beginning to sound like playground bullies now with their demands for all things Brexit.
The media today shamefully said that the three judges, just doing their job, were the enemy of the country. FFS talk about Facism returning.
posted on 4/11/16
Arsene's Optometrist
Parliament will ensure the process has accountability, transparency, and will also protect the economic interests of the UK.
The government wanted to invoke Art50 without giving any detail to Parliament, nor the entire country.
posted on 4/11/16
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 4/11/16
I agree with Bonkers Boris " Brexit will be a titanic success"
posted on 4/11/16
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 4/11/16
sandy
I understand 11 Supreme Court judges will oversee the appeal. Given there is no prior legal precedent to invoke the Royal prerogative, (relating to matters of national interest) it’s inconceivable the decision will be overturned.
What, I suspect the Government are most unhappy about, is the process will be subject to public, (via Parliament) scrutiny. When the general public discover how little leverage the UK have, and find out the cost of EU severance, the Government’s popularity will significantly diminish.
Which IMO is why they have been fighting this in the first place.
posted on 4/11/16
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 4/11/16
comment by justanotherTopperSpur (U1409)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 2 minutes ago
sandy
I understand 11 Supreme Court judges will oversee the appeal. Given there is no prior legal precedent to invoke the Royal prerogative, (relating to matters of national interest) it’s inconceivable the decision will be overturned.
What, I suspect the Government are most unhappy about, is the process will be subject to public, (via Parliament) scrutiny. When the general public discover how little leverage the UK have, and find out the cost of EU severance, the Government’s popularity will significantly diminish.
Which IMO is why they have been fighting this in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree...Con party still schiitting themselves incase UKIP get their act together.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
After last months Tory conference it appears they have morphed into Ukip anyway
posted on 4/11/16
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 4/11/16
OP - It cant go well when sore losers are constantly interfering and trying to reverse the decision can it!
posted on 4/11/16
comment by Goobie Pie and a Glass of Sainke (U3245)
posted 20 minutes ago
Honestly this nonsense from the Brexiters. There may have been 17 million that voted out, but that is a only a little over 25 per cent of the British Population, don`t the other 75 per cent get a say in anything for evermore now.
____________________________________
----------------------------------------------------------------------
err, that would mean that over 50% of the other 75% didnt bother voting then wouldnt it, so they lost their opportunity to have a say
posted on 4/11/16
comment by justanotherTopperSpur (U1409)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by justanotherTopperSpur (U1409)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 2 minutes ago
sandy
I understand 11 Supreme Court judges will oversee the appeal. Given there is no prior legal precedent to invoke the Royal prerogative, (relating to matters of national interest) it’s inconceivable the decision will be overturned.
What, I suspect the Government are most unhappy about, is the process will be subject to public, (via Parliament) scrutiny. When the general public discover how little leverage the UK have, and find out the cost of EU severance, the Government’s popularity will significantly diminish.
Which IMO is why they have been fighting this in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree...Con party still schiitting themselves incase UKIP get their act together.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
After last months Tory conference it appears they have morphed into Ukip anyway
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You watched it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bits and pieces
posted on 4/11/16
comment by Arsene's Optometrist (U5230)
posted 50 minutes ago
Why should MPs get to vote on Brexit when a majority of the electorate voted for Brexit. A clear mandate from the people of the UK to leave. MPs as representatives of the electorate should abide by the wishes of them
Get us out !!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Due to this thing called law.
posted on 4/11/16
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 26 minutes ago
sandy
I understand 11 Supreme Court judges will oversee the appeal. Given there is no prior legal precedent to invoke the Royal prerogative, (relating to matters of national interest) it’s inconceivable the decision will be overturned.
What, I suspect the Government are most unhappy about, is the process will be subject to public, (via Parliament) scrutiny. When the general public discover how little leverage the UK have, and find out the cost of EU severance, the Government’s popularity will significantly diminish.
Which IMO is why they have been fighting this in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This.
"Take back control. Take back democracy. Take back rule." Except when we want an unelected leader making decisions that will dramatically affect the UK for many years - without consulting Parliament - the people we elect to make decisions for us.
This is not an attempt to change the referendum result - and those portraying it as such do not understand the case or are dishonest (£350 million pwk for NHS?)
posted on 4/11/16
Brexit voting was daft anyway.
16-18 year olds unable to vote, and people over 75 were able to vote and they'll be dead before any of this makes a difference!
posted on 4/11/16
If anyone can, Emre Can
Although I still feel the decision (as much as I disagree with it) should be respected.
However if it transpires that following negotiations with the EUC, the deal was not in the UK’s economic interests to pursue, IMO there at least should be the option of pulling out. I’m unsure however if there is statute in Art50 which would grant this.
Page 1 of 8
6 | 7 | 8