Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The ERG today is to the Conservative Party what Militant was to the Labour Party in the early 1980s. Toxic." Yes I think we could see a split - a bit like the "gang of 4" - when they left Labour and started a new party. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The ERG today is to the Conservative Party what Militant was to the Labour Party in the early 1980s. Toxic. Yes I think we could see a split - a bit like the "gang of 4" - when they left Labour and started a new party. " Except the SDP went off to be a bit more centrist... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread: Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means. Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences. Parliament and there the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed. How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum?" That isn't the case at all. They want brexit, but not on the terms of the withdrawal agreement that treason may has brought back. Donald Tusk has a free trade deal offer which they are willing to accept as well as leaving on WTO terms. A leadership contest could be completed in under two weeks, very quickly indeed. If may loses the vote, she would remain in place until her successor takes over. This is not comparible in any way to the suggestion, or "clamouring" from a certain number of people for a second ref. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We live in a political world where the rule of 'caveat emptor' rules supreme and like it or not the 'snake oil' poison salesmen sold 52% of those who voted bought the poison cure-all and now we all need to drink the cool-aide and pray our share does not kill us and our loved ones while the salesmen cavort round their pot of poison. I just hope that at the end of this tragedy the survivors string up the criminals who sold us this con-job. " kill us and our loved ones not like you to go over the top will lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"They are being flushed out. They are in the wrong party and need to bog off and join UKIP because that is exactly where they should be. A small tiny single issue party that is an irrelevance." In fairness to UKIP (not something I though I’d ever say), their agenda is different to that of the ERG. The ERG has one single mission. Fuck the poor. Where as UKIP is more, fuck the foreign poor. Not sure if they really belong together. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread: Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means. Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences. Parliament and there the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed. How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum? That isn't the case at all. They want brexit, but not on the terms of the withdrawal agreement that treason may has brought back. Donald Tusk has a free trade deal offer which they are willing to accept as well as leaving on WTO terms. A leadership contest could be completed in under two weeks, very quickly indeed. If may loses the vote, she would remain in place until her successor takes over. This is not comparible in any way to the suggestion, or "clamouring" from a certain number of people for a second ref." Another person in who's world everything is really easy. You are just regurgitating headlines and phrases with no understanding of what they mean 
What is this deal "on offer"? Any idea? Have you read it or heard a rumour?
What exactly are WTO terms? Any clue?
If a leadership contest is completed within two weeks does that mean that we end up with a new policy on Brexit or the same one? What was voted for in the general election? If we have the same policy then we should still have May's deal as it was her Brexit means Brexit that the minority government came to power on supported by the Northern Irish party that does not represent the referendum views of its nation.
If we have a different Brexit policy then the population will not have been consulted about it will they? It will have been decided by Conservative MPs and then geriatric party members (look at the demographic).
Compare this to the clamour for another referendum based on experience rather than fairy dust and unicorn tears.
A change in national policy based on the decision of everyone on the country rather than the tiniest of minorities and demographics furthest removed from the general population.
You know your stuff  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We live in a political world where the rule of 'caveat emptor' rules supreme and like it or not the 'snake oil' poison salesmen sold 52% of those who voted bought the poison cure-all and now we all need to drink the cool-aide and pray our share does not kill us and our loved ones while the salesmen cavort round their pot of poison. I just hope that at the end of this tragedy the survivors string up the criminals who sold us this con-job. " Said by someone who voted Leave. You bought the 'poison-cure' and the 'con-job' because you voted Leave didn't you Will. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We live in a political world where the rule of 'caveat emptor' rules supreme and like it or not the 'snake oil' poison salesmen sold 52% of those who voted bought the poison cure-all and now we all need to drink the cool-aide and pray our share does not kill us and our loved ones while the salesmen cavort round their pot of poison. I just hope that at the end of this tragedy the survivors string up the criminals who sold us this con-job. Said by someone who voted Leave. You bought the 'poison-cure' and the 'con-job' because you voted Leave didn't you Will. "I remember him saying on more than one occasion he wanted everyone to suffer!  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread: Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means. Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences. Parliament and there the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed. How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum? That isn't the case at all. They want brexit, but not on the terms of the withdrawal agreement that treason may has brought back. Donald Tusk has a free trade deal offer which they are willing to accept as well as leaving on WTO terms. A leadership contest could be completed in under two weeks, very quickly indeed. If may loses the vote, she would remain in place until her successor takes over. This is not comparible in any way to the suggestion, or "clamouring" from a certain number of people for a second ref." Why are Conservative MPs allowed to change their mind on the vote they had after the referendum for their leader, because some have changed their mind, but the people are not allowed to have a second vote on BREXIT. Strange logic. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread: Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means. Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences. Parliament and there the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed. How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum? That isn't the case at all. They want brexit, but not on the terms of the withdrawal agreement that treason may has brought back. Donald Tusk has a free trade deal offer which they are willing to accept as well as leaving on WTO terms. A leadership contest could be completed in under two weeks, very quickly indeed. If may loses the vote, she would remain in place until her successor takes over. This is not comparible in any way to the suggestion, or "clamouring" from a certain number of people for a second ref. Why are Conservative MPs allowed to change their mind on the vote they had after the referendum for their leader, because some have changed their mind, but the people are not allowed to have a second vote on BREXIT. Strange logic. " one to add to my list of brexit paradoxs. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread: Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means. Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences. Parliament and there the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed. How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum? That isn't the case at all. They want brexit, but not on the terms of the withdrawal agreement that treason may has brought back. Donald Tusk has a free trade deal offer which they are willing to accept as well as leaving on WTO terms. A leadership contest could be completed in under two weeks, very quickly indeed. If may loses the vote, she would remain in place until her successor takes over. This is not comparible in any way to the suggestion, or "clamouring" from a certain number of people for a second ref. Why are Conservative MPs allowed to change their mind on the vote they had after the referendum for their leader, because some have changed their mind, but the people are not allowed to have a second vote on BREXIT. Strange logic. " Depends on whether about 7,000,000 letters have gone in I suppose.... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread: Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means. Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences. Parliament and there the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed. How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum? That isn't the case at all. They want brexit, but not on the terms of the withdrawal agreement that treason may has brought back. Donald Tusk has a free trade deal offer which they are willing to accept as well as leaving on WTO terms. A leadership contest could be completed in under two weeks, very quickly indeed. If may loses the vote, she would remain in place until her successor takes over. This is not comparible in any way to the suggestion, or "clamouring" from a certain number of people for a second ref. Why are Conservative MPs allowed to change their mind on the vote they had after the referendum for their leader, because some have changed their mind, but the people are not allowed to have a second vote on BREXIT. Strange logic. Depends on whether about 7,000,000 letters have gone in I suppose.... " 48 of 330 is 14% 14% of 33,500,000 is 4,700,00 We've had 700,000+ marching and over 1,000,000+ million on 4 separate petitions, in favour of another vote on BREXIT. If we're not already at 14% we're very nearly there. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'I accept the confidence vote result but Theresa May should still meet the Queen and resign' - the ponce of darkness (aka JR Mogg) ... yeah just highlights that the brexcrement have a hypocritical stance when it comes to democracy" More vacuous piffle from the Mogg.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread: Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means. Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences. Parliament and there the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed. How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum? That isn't the case at all. They want brexit, but not on the terms of the withdrawal agreement that treason may has brought back. Donald Tusk has a free trade deal offer which they are willing to accept as well as leaving on WTO terms. A leadership contest could be completed in under two weeks, very quickly indeed. If may loses the vote, she would remain in place until her successor takes over. This is not comparible in any way to the suggestion, or "clamouring" from a certain number of people for a second ref. Why are Conservative MPs allowed to change their mind on the vote they had after the referendum for their leader, because some have changed their mind, but the people are not allowed to have a second vote on BREXIT. Strange logic. " Nicely put | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread: Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means. Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences. Parliament and there the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed. How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum? That isn't the case at all. They want brexit, but not on the terms of the withdrawal agreement that treason may has brought back. Donald Tusk has a free trade deal offer which they are willing to accept as well as leaving on WTO terms. A leadership contest could be completed in under two weeks, very quickly indeed. If may loses the vote, she would remain in place until her successor takes over. This is not comparible in any way to the suggestion, or "clamouring" from a certain number of people for a second ref. Why are Conservative MPs allowed to change their mind on the vote they had after the referendum for their leader, because some have changed their mind, but the people are not allowed to have a second vote on BREXIT. Strange logic. Depends on whether about 7,000,000 letters have gone in I suppose.... 48 of 330 is 14% 14% of 33,500,000 is 4,700,00 We've had 700,000+ marching and over 1,000,000+ million on 4 separate petitions, in favour of another vote on BREXIT. If we're not already at 14% we're very nearly there. " The threshold is 15%...each one of that 15% has to write a letter....and there are 317 tory MPs, not 330. The electorate is 48,000,000. 15% of 48,000,000 is over 7,000,000. A million on 4 seperate petitions? The same million, perhaps? That doesn't equal 4,000,000....unless you think some people's votes should be worth more than others. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I saw his interview straight after the result. Zero humility. Knife straight in again. The leader of a party within a party. War is openly declared now. I found it cringeworthy. Embarrassing even. For the country. Another day in the nation’s ongoing nervous breakdown." The parade of pointless ERG types who have been trotting out vacuous tosh today (and many other days too) has been truly gobsmacking. How these creatures ever got elected is beyond me: Baker, Francois, Bridgen, Mogg, Jenkin all complete wastes of space with ideas above their station | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread: Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means. Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences. Parliament and there the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed. How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum? That isn't the case at all. They want brexit, but not on the terms of the withdrawal agreement that treason may has brought back. Donald Tusk has a free trade deal offer which they are willing to accept as well as leaving on WTO terms. A leadership contest could be completed in under two weeks, very quickly indeed. If may loses the vote, she would remain in place until her successor takes over. This is not comparible in any way to the suggestion, or "clamouring" from a certain number of people for a second ref. Why are Conservative MPs allowed to change their mind on the vote they had after the referendum for their leader, because some have changed their mind, but the people are not allowed to have a second vote on BREXIT. Strange logic. Depends on whether about 7,000,000 letters have gone in I suppose.... 48 of 330 is 14% 14% of 33,500,000 is 4,700,00 We've had 700,000+ marching and over 1,000,000+ million on 4 separate petitions, in favour of another vote on BREXIT. If we're not already at 14% we're very nearly there. The threshold is 15%...each one of that 15% has to write a letter....and there are 317 tory MPs, not 330. The electorate is 48,000,000. 15% of 48,000,000 is over 7,000,000. A million on 4 seperate petitions? The same million, perhaps? That doesn't equal 4,000,000....unless you think some people's votes should be worth more than others." Who cares? The question was why they should have an opportunity to change their minds when they'd already made a decision once a couple of years ago? "Because they wrote some letters" is a child's answer. You're going for micro-victories over the maths bit avoiding the substantive point. Surprise, surprise | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread: Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means. Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences. Parliament and there the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed. How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum? That isn't the case at all. They want brexit, but not on the terms of the withdrawal agreement that treason may has brought back. Donald Tusk has a free trade deal offer which they are willing to accept as well as leaving on WTO terms. A leadership contest could be completed in under two weeks, very quickly indeed. If may loses the vote, she would remain in place until her successor takes over. This is not comparible in any way to the suggestion, or "clamouring" from a certain number of people for a second ref. Why are Conservative MPs allowed to change their mind on the vote they had after the referendum for their leader, because some have changed their mind, but the people are not allowed to have a second vote on BREXIT. Strange logic. Depends on whether about 7,000,000 letters have gone in I suppose.... 48 of 330 is 14% 14% of 33,500,000 is 4,700,00 We've had 700,000+ marching and over 1,000,000+ million on 4 separate petitions, in favour of another vote on BREXIT. If we're not already at 14% we're very nearly there. " Is this more of your legal logic or are you trying to bend the truth? Unfortunately it wouldn't stand up in any court, you evidently need to do a lot more studying!  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread: Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means. Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences. Parliament and there the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed. How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum? That isn't the case at all. They want brexit, but not on the terms of the withdrawal agreement that treason may has brought back. Donald Tusk has a free trade deal offer which they are willing to accept as well as leaving on WTO terms. A leadership contest could be completed in under two weeks, very quickly indeed. If may loses the vote, she would remain in place until her successor takes over. This is not comparible in any way to the suggestion, or "clamouring" from a certain number of people for a second ref. Why are Conservative MPs allowed to change their mind on the vote they had after the referendum for their leader, because some have changed their mind, but the people are not allowed to have a second vote on BREXIT. Strange logic. Depends on whether about 7,000,000 letters have gone in I suppose.... 48 of 330 is 14% 14% of 33,500,000 is 4,700,00 We've had 700,000+ marching and over 1,000,000+ million on 4 separate petitions, in favour of another vote on BREXIT. If we're not already at 14% we're very nearly there. The threshold is 15%...each one of that 15% has to write a letter....and there are 317 tory MPs, not 330. The electorate is 48,000,000. 15% of 48,000,000 is over 7,000,000. A million on 4 seperate petitions? The same million, perhaps? That doesn't equal 4,000,000....unless you think some people's votes should be worth more than others. Who cares? The question was why they should have an opportunity to change their minds when they'd already made a decision once a couple of years ago? "Because they wrote some letters" is a child's answer. You're going for micro-victories over the maths bit avoiding the substantive point. Surprise, surprise "They have to submit their letters to express their desire for change. Child's answer? They're the rules. As for the question "why they should have an opportunity to change their minds when they'd already made a decision once a couple of years ago?".... Everyone had an opportunity to vote to stay in a 'referendum' last year....it was called the general election, Tory and Labour manifestos both promised to leave. The Liberal Party's key manifesto pledge was to stop brexit. How did the liberals do again? In Scotland, the SNP stand on stopping Brexit...and yet they lost seats in the election. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread: Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means. Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences. Parliament and there the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed. How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum? That isn't the case at all. They want brexit, but not on the terms of the withdrawal agreement that treason may has brought back. Donald Tusk has a free trade deal offer which they are willing to accept as well as leaving on WTO terms. A leadership contest could be completed in under two weeks, very quickly indeed. If may loses the vote, she would remain in place until her successor takes over. This is not comparible in any way to the suggestion, or "clamouring" from a certain number of people for a second ref. Why are Conservative MPs allowed to change their mind on the vote they had after the referendum for their leader, because some have changed their mind, but the people are not allowed to have a second vote on BREXIT. Strange logic. Depends on whether about 7,000,000 letters have gone in I suppose.... 48 of 330 is 14% 14% of 33,500,000 is 4,700,00 We've had 700,000+ marching and over 1,000,000+ million on 4 separate petitions, in favour of another vote on BREXIT. If we're not already at 14% we're very nearly there. The threshold is 15%...each one of that 15% has to write a letter....and there are 317 tory MPs, not 330. The electorate is 48,000,000. 15% of 48,000,000 is over 7,000,000. A million on 4 seperate petitions? The same million, perhaps? That doesn't equal 4,000,000....unless you think some people's votes should be worth more than others." Somewhat hilariously the petition for a second referendum has over 1 million votes
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/final-say-petition-brexit-referendum-peoples-vote-eu-theresa-may-downing-street-a8664981.html
Find another technicality
Don't let that distract you from answering why the Conservative party should be allowed to change it's mind after two years but the British people can't  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" In Scotland, the SNP stand on stopping Brexit...and yet they lost seats in the election." Scotland vote 62 per cent to stay in the EU in 2016. The SNP won 60 per cent of the seats in the 2017 General Election. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread: Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means. Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences. Parliament and there the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed. How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum? That isn't the case at all. They want brexit, but not on the terms of the withdrawal agreement that treason may has brought back. Donald Tusk has a free trade deal offer which they are willing to accept as well as leaving on WTO terms. A leadership contest could be completed in under two weeks, very quickly indeed. If may loses the vote, she would remain in place until her successor takes over. This is not comparible in any way to the suggestion, or "clamouring" from a certain number of people for a second ref. Why are Conservative MPs allowed to change their mind on the vote they had after the referendum for their leader, because some have changed their mind, but the people are not allowed to have a second vote on BREXIT. Strange logic. Depends on whether about 7,000,000 letters have gone in I suppose.... 48 of 330 is 14% 14% of 33,500,000 is 4,700,00 We've had 700,000+ marching and over 1,000,000+ million on 4 separate petitions, in favour of another vote on BREXIT. If we're not already at 14% we're very nearly there. The threshold is 15%...each one of that 15% has to write a letter....and there are 317 tory MPs, not 330. The electorate is 48,000,000. 15% of 48,000,000 is over 7,000,000. A million on 4 seperate petitions? The same million, perhaps? That doesn't equal 4,000,000....unless you think some people's votes should be worth more than others. Somewhat hilariously the petition for a second referendum has over 1 million votes
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/final-say-petition-brexit-referendum-peoples-vote-eu-theresa-may-downing-street-a8664981.html
Find another technicality
Don't let that distract you from answering why the Conservative party should be allowed to change it's mind after two years but the British people can't "Petitions are pointless, as the petition to stop David Cameron sending out his pro EU one sided, taxpayer funded £9 million quid propaganda leaflet during the referendum campaign had over one million signatures, but he and the government ignored the petition and still sent out the leaflet anyway. Why do you think a People's Vote petition should be listened to now when that one was ignored during the referendum campaign in 2016. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread: Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means. Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences. Parliament and there the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed. How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum? That isn't the case at all. They want brexit, but not on the terms of the withdrawal agreement that treason may has brought back. Donald Tusk has a free trade deal offer which they are willing to accept as well as leaving on WTO terms. A leadership contest could be completed in under two weeks, very quickly indeed. If may loses the vote, she would remain in place until her successor takes over. This is not comparible in any way to the suggestion, or "clamouring" from a certain number of people for a second ref. Why are Conservative MPs allowed to change their mind on the vote they had after the referendum for their leader, because some have changed their mind, but the people are not allowed to have a second vote on BREXIT. Strange logic. Depends on whether about 7,000,000 letters have gone in I suppose.... 48 of 330 is 14% 14% of 33,500,000 is 4,700,00 We've had 700,000+ marching and over 1,000,000+ million on 4 separate petitions, in favour of another vote on BREXIT. If we're not already at 14% we're very nearly there. The threshold is 15%...each one of that 15% has to write a letter....and there are 317 tory MPs, not 330. The electorate is 48,000,000. 15% of 48,000,000 is over 7,000,000. A million on 4 seperate petitions? The same million, perhaps? That doesn't equal 4,000,000....unless you think some people's votes should be worth more than others. Somewhat hilariously the petition for a second referendum has over 1 million votes
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/final-say-petition-brexit-referendum-peoples-vote-eu-theresa-may-downing-street-a8664981.html
Find another technicality
Don't let that distract you from answering why the Conservative party should be allowed to change it's mind after two years but the British people can't
Petitions are pointless, as the petition to stop David Cameron sending out his pro EU one sided, taxpayer funded £9 million quid propaganda leaflet during the referendum campaign had over one million signatures, but he and the government ignored the petition and still sent out the leaflet anyway.
Why do you think a People's Vote petition should be listened to now when that one was ignored during the referendum campaign in 2016. "No, petitions are not pointless. They register an intent. You don't believe in polls do you? How else does the population indicate it's position other than elections every five years and referenda that you think should happen only once in a generation? Governments don't have to pay attention to anyone, but they should shouldn't they? Should they have paid attention to the march against the Iraq war? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread: Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means. Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences. Parliament and there the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed. How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum? That isn't the case at all. They want brexit, but not on the terms of the withdrawal agreement that treason may has brought back. Donald Tusk has a free trade deal offer which they are willing to accept as well as leaving on WTO terms. A leadership contest could be completed in under two weeks, very quickly indeed. If may loses the vote, she would remain in place until her successor takes over. This is not comparible in any way to the suggestion, or "clamouring" from a certain number of people for a second ref. Why are Conservative MPs allowed to change their mind on the vote they had after the referendum for their leader, because some have changed their mind, but the people are not allowed to have a second vote on BREXIT. Strange logic. Depends on whether about 7,000,000 letters have gone in I suppose.... 48 of 330 is 14% 14% of 33,500,000 is 4,700,00 We've had 700,000+ marching and over 1,000,000+ million on 4 separate petitions, in favour of another vote on BREXIT. If we're not already at 14% we're very nearly there. The threshold is 15%...each one of that 15% has to write a letter....and there are 317 tory MPs, not 330. The electorate is 48,000,000. 15% of 48,000,000 is over 7,000,000. A million on 4 seperate petitions? The same million, perhaps? That doesn't equal 4,000,000....unless you think some people's votes should be worth more than others. Somewhat hilariously the petition for a second referendum has over 1 million votes
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/final-say-petition-brexit-referendum-peoples-vote-eu-theresa-may-downing-street-a8664981.html
Find another technicality
Don't let that distract you from answering why the Conservative party should be allowed to change it's mind after two years but the British people can't
Petitions are pointless, as the petition to stop David Cameron sending out his pro EU one sided, taxpayer funded £9 million quid propaganda leaflet during the referendum campaign had over one million signatures, but he and the government ignored the petition and still sent out the leaflet anyway.
Why do you think a People's Vote petition should be listened to now when that one was ignored during the referendum campaign in 2016. "1 million or 100,000? You are a bit loose with your "facts" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We live in a political world where the rule of 'caveat emptor' rules supreme and like it or not the 'snake oil' poison salesmen sold 52% of those who voted bought the poison cure-all and now we all need to drink the cool-aide and pray our share does not kill us and our loved ones while the salesmen cavort round their pot of poison. I just hope that at the end of this tragedy the survivors string up the criminals who sold us this con-job. Said by someone who voted Leave. You bought the 'poison-cure' and the 'con-job' because you voted Leave didn't you Will.
I remember him saying on more than one occasion he wanted everyone to suffer! "...and of course you have just tried to get one of your micro-victories but you haven't actually addressed the thread as usual | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread: Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means. Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences. Parliament and there the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed. How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum? That isn't the case at all. They want brexit, but not on the terms of the withdrawal agreement that treason may has brought back. Donald Tusk has a free trade deal offer which they are willing to accept as well as leaving on WTO terms. A leadership contest could be completed in under two weeks, very quickly indeed. If may loses the vote, she would remain in place until her successor takes over. This is not comparible in any way to the suggestion, or "clamouring" from a certain number of people for a second ref. Why are Conservative MPs allowed to change their mind on the vote they had after the referendum for their leader, because some have changed their mind, but the people are not allowed to have a second vote on BREXIT. Strange logic. Depends on whether about 7,000,000 letters have gone in I suppose.... 48 of 330 is 14% 14% of 33,500,000 is 4,700,00 We've had 700,000+ marching and over 1,000,000+ million on 4 separate petitions, in favour of another vote on BREXIT. If we're not already at 14% we're very nearly there. The threshold is 15%...each one of that 15% has to write a letter....and there are 317 tory MPs, not 330. The electorate is 48,000,000. 15% of 48,000,000 is over 7,000,000. A million on 4 seperate petitions? The same million, perhaps? That doesn't equal 4,000,000....unless you think some people's votes should be worth more than others. Somewhat hilariously the petition for a second referendum has over 1 million votes
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/final-say-petition-brexit-referendum-peoples-vote-eu-theresa-may-downing-street-a8664981.html
Find another technicality
Don't let that distract you from answering why the Conservative party should be allowed to change it's mind after two years but the British people can't
Petitions are pointless, as the petition to stop David Cameron sending out his pro EU one sided, taxpayer funded £9 million quid propaganda leaflet during the referendum campaign had over one million signatures, but he and the government ignored the petition and still sent out the leaflet anyway.
Why do you think a People's Vote petition should be listened to now when that one was ignored during the referendum campaign in 2016.
No, petitions are not pointless. They register an intent.
You don't believe in polls do you?
How else does the population indicate it's position other than elections every five years and referenda that you think should happen only once in a generation?
Governments don't have to pay attention to anyone, but they should shouldn't they?
Should they have paid attention to the march against the Iraq war?"Micro victory.
Should the government have paid attention to the petition against Cameron's pro EU, one sided taxpayer funded remain propaganda leaflet which got over 1 million signatures in 2016?
The fact is the government didn't pay attention to it and still spent £9 million of taxpayers money on it and still sent it out to every house in the country. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread: Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means. Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences. Parliament and there the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed. How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum? That isn't the case at all. They want brexit, but not on the terms of the withdrawal agreement that treason may has brought back. Donald Tusk has a free trade deal offer which they are willing to accept as well as leaving on WTO terms. A leadership contest could be completed in under two weeks, very quickly indeed. If may loses the vote, she would remain in place until her successor takes over. This is not comparible in any way to the suggestion, or "clamouring" from a certain number of people for a second ref. Why are Conservative MPs allowed to change their mind on the vote they had after the referendum for their leader, because some have changed their mind, but the people are not allowed to have a second vote on BREXIT. Strange logic. Depends on whether about 7,000,000 letters have gone in I suppose.... 48 of 330 is 14% 14% of 33,500,000 is 4,700,00 We've had 700,000+ marching and over 1,000,000+ million on 4 separate petitions, in favour of another vote on BREXIT. If we're not already at 14% we're very nearly there. The threshold is 15%...each one of that 15% has to write a letter....and there are 317 tory MPs, not 330. The electorate is 48,000,000. 15% of 48,000,000 is over 7,000,000. A million on 4 seperate petitions? The same million, perhaps? That doesn't equal 4,000,000....unless you think some people's votes should be worth more than others. Somewhat hilariously the petition for a second referendum has over 1 million votes
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/final-say-petition-brexit-referendum-peoples-vote-eu-theresa-may-downing-street-a8664981.html
Find another technicality
Don't let that distract you from answering why the Conservative party should be allowed to change it's mind after two years but the British people can't
Petitions are pointless, as the petition to stop David Cameron sending out his pro EU one sided, taxpayer funded £9 million quid propaganda leaflet during the referendum campaign had over one million signatures, but he and the government ignored the petition and still sent out the leaflet anyway.
Why do you think a People's Vote petition should be listened to now when that one was ignored during the referendum campaign in 2016.
1 million or 100,000? You are a bit loose with your "facts" "Try using Google to look it up, that is if you are able to? Is using an Internet search engine beyond your capability? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread: Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means. Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences. Parliament and there the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed. How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum? That isn't the case at all. They want brexit, but not on the terms of the withdrawal agreement that treason may has brought back. Donald Tusk has a free trade deal offer which they are willing to accept as well as leaving on WTO terms. A leadership contest could be completed in under two weeks, very quickly indeed. If may loses the vote, she would remain in place until her successor takes over. This is not comparible in any way to the suggestion, or "clamouring" from a certain number of people for a second ref. Why are Conservative MPs allowed to change their mind on the vote they had after the referendum for their leader, because some have changed their mind, but the people are not allowed to have a second vote on BREXIT. Strange logic. Depends on whether about 7,000,000 letters have gone in I suppose.... 48 of 330 is 14% 14% of 33,500,000 is 4,700,00 We've had 700,000+ marching and over 1,000,000+ million on 4 separate petitions, in favour of another vote on BREXIT. If we're not already at 14% we're very nearly there. The threshold is 15%...each one of that 15% has to write a letter....and there are 317 tory MPs, not 330. The electorate is 48,000,000. 15% of 48,000,000 is over 7,000,000. A million on 4 seperate petitions? The same million, perhaps? That doesn't equal 4,000,000....unless you think some people's votes should be worth more than others." Somrthings shouldn't be taken as serious argument. As for the 330, you're correct, that was the figure for 2015/17. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread: Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means. Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences. Parliament and there the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed. How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum? That isn't the case at all. They want brexit, but not on the terms of the withdrawal agreement that treason may has brought back. Donald Tusk has a free trade deal offer which they are willing to accept as well as leaving on WTO terms. A leadership contest could be completed in under two weeks, very quickly indeed. If may loses the vote, she would remain in place until her successor takes over. This is not comparible in any way to the suggestion, or "clamouring" from a certain number of people for a second ref. Why are Conservative MPs allowed to change their mind on the vote they had after the referendum for their leader, because some have changed their mind, but the people are not allowed to have a second vote on BREXIT. Strange logic. Depends on whether about 7,000,000 letters have gone in I suppose.... 48 of 330 is 14% 14% of 33,500,000 is 4,700,00 We've had 700,000+ marching and over 1,000,000+ million on 4 separate petitions, in favour of another vote on BREXIT. If we're not already at 14% we're very nearly there. The threshold is 15%...each one of that 15% has to write a letter....and there are 317 tory MPs, not 330. The electorate is 48,000,000. 15% of 48,000,000 is over 7,000,000. A million on 4 seperate petitions? The same million, perhaps? That doesn't equal 4,000,000....unless you think some people's votes should be worth more than others. Somewhat hilariously the petition for a second referendum has over 1 million votes
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/final-say-petition-brexit-referendum-peoples-vote-eu-theresa-may-downing-street-a8664981.html
Find another technicality
Don't let that distract you from answering why the Conservative party should be allowed to change it's mind after two years but the British people can't
Petitions are pointless, as the petition to stop David Cameron sending out his pro EU one sided, taxpayer funded £9 million quid propaganda leaflet during the referendum campaign had over one million signatures, but he and the government ignored the petition and still sent out the leaflet anyway.
Why do you think a People's Vote petition should be listened to now when that one was ignored during the referendum campaign in 2016.
1 million or 100,000? You are a bit loose with your "facts"
Try using Google to look it up, that is if you are able to? Is using an Internet search engine beyond your capability? "Petitions UK Government and Parliament This petition was submitted during the 2015–2017 Conservative government View other petitions from this government Petition STOP CAMERON spending British taxpayers’ money on Pro-EU Referendum leaflets Prime Minister David Cameron plans to spend British taxpayers’ money on a pro-EU document to be sent to every household in the United Kingdom in the run up to the EU referendum. We believe voters deserve a fair referendum - without taxpayer-funded biased interceptions by the Government. More details We, the petitioners, demand the Government STOPS spending our money on biased campaigning to keep Britain inside the European Union. The Great British Public have waited since 1975 for a vote on our relationship with Brussels. No taxpayers’ money should be spent on campaign literature to keep Britain inside the EU. This petition is closed This petition ran for 6 months 221,866 signatures | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We, the petitioners, demand the Government STOPS spending our money on biased campaigning to keep Britain inside the European Union. The Great British Public have waited since 1975 for a vote on our relationship with Brussels. No taxpayers’ money should be spent on campaign literature to keep Britain inside the EU. This petition is closed This petition ran for 6 months 221,866 signatures "that's almost as big a waste of time as the righties for racism fiasco in london last sunday | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread: Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means. Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences. Parliament and there the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed. How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum? That isn't the case at all. They want brexit, but not on the terms of the withdrawal agreement that treason may has brought back. Donald Tusk has a free trade deal offer which they are willing to accept as well as leaving on WTO terms. A leadership contest could be completed in under two weeks, very quickly indeed. If may loses the vote, she would remain in place until her successor takes over. This is not comparible in any way to the suggestion, or "clamouring" from a certain number of people for a second ref. Why are Conservative MPs allowed to change their mind on the vote they had after the referendum for their leader, because some have changed their mind, but the people are not allowed to have a second vote on BREXIT. Strange logic. Depends on whether about 7,000,000 letters have gone in I suppose.... 48 of 330 is 14% 14% of 33,500,000 is 4,700,00 We've had 700,000+ marching and over 1,000,000+ million on 4 separate petitions, in favour of another vote on BREXIT. If we're not already at 14% we're very nearly there. The threshold is 15%...each one of that 15% has to write a letter....and there are 317 tory MPs, not 330. The electorate is 48,000,000. 15% of 48,000,000 is over 7,000,000. A million on 4 seperate petitions? The same million, perhaps? That doesn't equal 4,000,000....unless you think some people's votes should be worth more than others. Somewhat hilariously the petition for a second referendum has over 1 million votes
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/final-say-petition-brexit-referendum-peoples-vote-eu-theresa-may-downing-street-a8664981.html
Find another technicality
Don't let that distract you from answering why the Conservative party should be allowed to change it's mind after two years but the British people can't
Petitions are pointless, as the petition to stop David Cameron sending out his pro EU one sided, taxpayer funded £9 million quid propaganda leaflet during the referendum campaign had over one million signatures, but he and the government ignored the petition and still sent out the leaflet anyway.
Why do you think a People's Vote petition should be listened to now when that one was ignored during the referendum campaign in 2016.
1 million or 100,000? You are a bit loose with your "facts"
Try using Google to look it up, that is if you are able to? Is using an Internet search engine beyond your capability?
Petitions
UK Government and Parliament
This petition was submitted during the 2015–2017 Conservative government
View other petitions from this government
Petition
STOP CAMERON spending British taxpayers’ money on Pro-EU Referendum leaflets
Prime Minister David Cameron plans to spend British taxpayers’ money on a pro-EU document to be sent to every household in the United Kingdom in the run up to the EU referendum. We believe voters deserve a fair referendum - without taxpayer-funded biased interceptions by the Government.
More details
We, the petitioners, demand the Government STOPS spending our money on biased campaigning to keep Britain inside the European Union.
The Great British Public have waited since 1975 for a vote on our relationship with Brussels. No taxpayers’ money should be spent on campaign literature to keep Britain inside the EU.
This petition is closed
This petition ran for 6 months
221,866 signatures
"Wrong one fella, try again. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We, the petitioners, demand the Government STOPS spending our money on biased campaigning to keep Britain inside the European Union. The Great British Public have waited since 1975 for a vote on our relationship with Brussels. No taxpayers’ money should be spent on campaign literature to keep Britain inside the EU. This petition is closed This petition ran for 6 months 221,866 signatures
that's almost as big a waste of time as the righties for racism fiasco in london last sunday "The Brexit betrayal rally to give it its proper name, which was conducted peacefully, while far left loons predicted widespread violence but were proved wrong. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We live in a political world where the rule of 'caveat emptor' rules supreme and like it or not the 'snake oil' poison salesmen sold 52% of those who voted bought the poison cure-all and now we all need to drink the cool-aide and pray our share does not kill us and our loved ones while the salesmen cavort round their pot of poison. I just hope that at the end of this tragedy the survivors string up the criminals who sold us this con-job. Said by someone who voted Leave. You bought the 'poison-cure' and the 'con-job' because you voted Leave didn't you Will.
I remember him saying on more than one occasion he wanted everyone to suffer!
...and of course you have just tried to get one of your micro-victories but you haven't actually addressed the thread as usual "I was addressing the thread by confirming the previous poster's claims! Can you not remember how he wanted everyone to suffer and bring the country to it's knees so he could see the end of the Tories or do you have the same memory problems has Will! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread: Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means. Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences. Parliament and there the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed. How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum? That isn't the case at all. They want brexit, but not on the terms of the withdrawal agreement that treason may has brought back. Donald Tusk has a free trade deal offer which they are willing to accept as well as leaving on WTO terms. A leadership contest could be completed in under two weeks, very quickly indeed. If may loses the vote, she would remain in place until her successor takes over. This is not comparible in any way to the suggestion, or "clamouring" from a certain number of people for a second ref. Why are Conservative MPs allowed to change their mind on the vote they had after the referendum for their leader, because some have changed their mind, but the people are not allowed to have a second vote on BREXIT. Strange logic. Depends on whether about 7,000,000 letters have gone in I suppose.... 48 of 330 is 14% 14% of 33,500,000 is 4,700,00 We've had 700,000+ marching and over 1,000,000+ million on 4 separate petitions, in favour of another vote on BREXIT. If we're not already at 14% we're very nearly there. The threshold is 15%...each one of that 15% has to write a letter....and there are 317 tory MPs, not 330. The electorate is 48,000,000. 15% of 48,000,000 is over 7,000,000. A million on 4 seperate petitions? The same million, perhaps? That doesn't equal 4,000,000....unless you think some people's votes should be worth more than others. Somewhat hilariously the petition for a second referendum has over 1 million votes
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/final-say-petition-brexit-referendum-peoples-vote-eu-theresa-may-downing-street-a8664981.html
Find another technicality
Don't let that distract you from answering why the Conservative party should be allowed to change it's mind after two years but the British people can't
Petitions are pointless, as the petition to stop David Cameron sending out his pro EU one sided, taxpayer funded £9 million quid propaganda leaflet during the referendum campaign had over one million signatures, but he and the government ignored the petition and still sent out the leaflet anyway.
Why do you think a People's Vote petition should be listened to now when that one was ignored during the referendum campaign in 2016.
1 million or 100,000? You are a bit loose with your "facts"
Try using Google to look it up, that is if you are able to? Is using an Internet search engine beyond your capability?
Petitions
UK Government and Parliament
This petition was submitted during the 2015–2017 Conservative government
View other petitions from this government
Petition
STOP CAMERON spending British taxpayers’ money on Pro-EU Referendum leaflets
Prime Minister David Cameron plans to spend British taxpayers’ money on a pro-EU document to be sent to every household in the United Kingdom in the run up to the EU referendum. We believe voters deserve a fair referendum - without taxpayer-funded biased interceptions by the Government.
More details
We, the petitioners, demand the Government STOPS spending our money on biased campaigning to keep Britain inside the European Union.
The Great British Public have waited since 1975 for a vote on our relationship with Brussels. No taxpayers’ money should be spent on campaign literature to keep Britain inside the EU.
This petition is closed
This petition ran for 6 months
221,866 signatures
Wrong one fella, try again. "According to itv and their list of top petitions it’s number 12. https://www.itv.com/news/2017-01-31/petitions-what-are-the-10-most-signed-and-what-have-they-achieved/ Tho we both know my google skills are rank amateur. Maybe you can help ?  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We, the petitioners, demand the Government STOPS spending our money on biased campaigning to keep Britain inside the European Union. The Great British Public have waited since 1975 for a vote on our relationship with Brussels. No taxpayers’ money should be spent on campaign literature to keep Britain inside the EU. This petition is closed This petition ran for 6 months 221,866 signatures
that's almost as big a waste of time as the righties for racism fiasco in london last sunday
The Brexit betrayal rally to give it its proper name, which was conducted peacefully, while far left loons predicted widespread violence but were proved wrong."apart from the comedic punch up between the football thugs before the righties for racism fiasco got under way ... that was hilarious | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread: Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means. Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences. Parliament and there the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed. How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum? That isn't the case at all. They want brexit, but not on the terms of the withdrawal agreement that treason may has brought back. Donald Tusk has a free trade deal offer which they are willing to accept as well as leaving on WTO terms. A leadership contest could be completed in under two weeks, very quickly indeed. If may loses the vote, she would remain in place until her successor takes over. This is not comparible in any way to the suggestion, or "clamouring" from a certain number of people for a second ref. Why are Conservative MPs allowed to change their mind on the vote they had after the referendum for their leader, because some have changed their mind, but the people are not allowed to have a second vote on BREXIT. Strange logic. Depends on whether about 7,000,000 letters have gone in I suppose.... 48 of 330 is 14% 14% of 33,500,000 is 4,700,00 We've had 700,000+ marching and over 1,000,000+ million on 4 separate petitions, in favour of another vote on BREXIT. If we're not already at 14% we're very nearly there. The threshold is 15%...each one of that 15% has to write a letter....and there are 317 tory MPs, not 330. The electorate is 48,000,000. 15% of 48,000,000 is over 7,000,000. A million on 4 seperate petitions? The same million, perhaps? That doesn't equal 4,000,000....unless you think some people's votes should be worth more than others. Somewhat hilariously the petition for a second referendum has over 1 million votes
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/final-say-petition-brexit-referendum-peoples-vote-eu-theresa-may-downing-street-a8664981.html
Find another technicality
Don't let that distract you from answering why the Conservative party should be allowed to change it's mind after two years but the British people can't
Petitions are pointless, as the petition to stop David Cameron sending out his pro EU one sided, taxpayer funded £9 million quid propaganda leaflet during the referendum campaign had over one million signatures, but he and the government ignored the petition and still sent out the leaflet anyway.
Why do you think a People's Vote petition should be listened to now when that one was ignored during the referendum campaign in 2016.
1 million or 100,000? You are a bit loose with your "facts"
Try using Google to look it up, that is if you are able to? Is using an Internet search engine beyond your capability?
Petitions
UK Government and Parliament
This petition was submitted during the 2015–2017 Conservative government
View other petitions from this government
Petition
STOP CAMERON spending British taxpayers’ money on Pro-EU Referendum leaflets
Prime Minister David Cameron plans to spend British taxpayers’ money on a pro-EU document to be sent to every household in the United Kingdom in the run up to the EU referendum. We believe voters deserve a fair referendum - without taxpayer-funded biased interceptions by the Government.
More details
We, the petitioners, demand the Government STOPS spending our money on biased campaigning to keep Britain inside the European Union.
The Great British Public have waited since 1975 for a vote on our relationship with Brussels. No taxpayers’ money should be spent on campaign literature to keep Britain inside the EU.
This petition is closed
This petition ran for 6 months
221,866 signatures
Wrong one fella, try again. "Guess it's a Centaur "fact"
Of course, Google does adapt to your search history so who knows what rabbit whole you point yourself towards | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We, the petitioners, demand the Government STOPS spending our money on biased campaigning to keep Britain inside the European Union. The Great British Public have waited since 1975 for a vote on our relationship with Brussels. No taxpayers’ money should be spent on campaign literature to keep Britain inside the EU. This petition is closed This petition ran for 6 months 221,866 signatures
that's almost as big a waste of time as the righties for racism fiasco in london last sunday
The Brexit betrayal rally to give it its proper name, which was conducted peacefully, while far left loons predicted widespread violence but were proved wrong."Interesting diversion. "Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread: Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means. Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences. Parliament and therefore the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed. How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum?" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If we have a general election. And the governments tell us their manifesto. If they don't deliver after 2 years . Can we have a people's vote to get them out ? . No I did not think so" What a decisive argument
5 years.
We already know that they can't deliver what anybody wants because there was no manifesto.
Brexit was everything to everyone.
No tax and lavishly funded public services. Who wouldn't vote for that? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We, the petitioners, demand the Government STOPS spending our money on biased campaigning to keep Britain inside the European Union. The Great British Public have waited since 1975 for a vote on our relationship with Brussels. No taxpayers’ money should be spent on campaign literature to keep Britain inside the EU. This petition is closed This petition ran for 6 months 221,866 signatures
that's almost as big a waste of time as the righties for racism fiasco in london last sunday
The Brexit betrayal rally to give it its proper name, which was conducted peacefully, while far left loons predicted widespread violence but were proved wrong.
Interesting diversion.
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread:
Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means.
Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences.
Parliament and therefore the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed.
How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum?""Hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences? You say that as if it's somehow anti democratic? Hard Brexit is the default legal position if a deal can't be passed in Parliament. It's the default legal position because that is what parliament voted for and legislated for in the EU Withdrawal bill. Hard Brexit fulfills the result of the referendum which was to Leave the EU, and the people voted by majority to Leave, no ifs, no buts, just Leave. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We, the petitioners, demand the Government STOPS spending our money on biased campaigning to keep Britain inside the European Union. The Great British Public have waited since 1975 for a vote on our relationship with Brussels. No taxpayers’ money should be spent on campaign literature to keep Britain inside the EU. This petition is closed This petition ran for 6 months 221,866 signatures
that's almost as big a waste of time as the righties for racism fiasco in london last sunday
The Brexit betrayal rally to give it its proper name, which was conducted peacefully, while far left loons predicted widespread violence but were proved wrong.
Interesting diversion.
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread:
Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means.
Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences.
Parliament and therefore the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed.
How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum?"
Hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences? You say that as if it's somehow anti democratic? Hard Brexit is the default legal position if a deal can't be passed in Parliament. It's the default legal position because that is what parliament voted for and legislated for in the EU Withdrawal bill. Hard Brexit fulfills the result of the referendum which was to Leave the EU, and the people voted by majority to Leave, no ifs, no buts, just Leave. "Parliament also voted to allow the Grieve motion. That makes the Government's motion amendable....no deal won't be allowed to happen as there isnt a majority for that either | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We, the petitioners, demand the Government STOPS spending our money on biased campaigning to keep Britain inside the European Union. The Great British Public have waited since 1975 for a vote on our relationship with Brussels. No taxpayers’ money should be spent on campaign literature to keep Britain inside the EU. This petition is closed This petition ran for 6 months 221,866 signatures
that's almost as big a waste of time as the righties for racism fiasco in london last sunday
The Brexit betrayal rally to give it its proper name, which was conducted peacefully, while far left loons predicted widespread violence but were proved wrong.
Interesting diversion.
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread:
Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means.
Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences.
Parliament and therefore the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed.
How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum?"
Hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences? You say that as if it's somehow anti democratic? Hard Brexit is the default legal position if a deal can't be passed in Parliament. It's the default legal position because that is what parliament voted for and legislated for in the EU Withdrawal bill. Hard Brexit fulfills the result of the referendum which was to Leave the EU, and the people voted by majority to Leave, no ifs, no buts, just Leave. "Ah. So you are quoting legal positions now. Hard Brexit on a technicality. Could you just point me to where this was defined as the outcome of this process by the Leave campaign? Forget what Remain said because according to you it was "Project fear" and nobody believed it anyway. Where did either of the completely trustworthy leave campaigns set it out? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We, the petitioners, demand the Government STOPS spending our money on biased campaigning to keep Britain inside the European Union. The Great British Public have waited since 1975 for a vote on our relationship with Brussels. No taxpayers’ money should be spent on campaign literature to keep Britain inside the EU. This petition is closed This petition ran for 6 months 221,866 signatures
that's almost as big a waste of time as the righties for racism fiasco in london last sunday
The Brexit betrayal rally to give it its proper name, which was conducted peacefully, while far left loons predicted widespread violence but were proved wrong.
Interesting diversion.
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread:
Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means.
Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences.
Parliament and therefore the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed.
How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum?"
Hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences? You say that as if it's somehow anti democratic? Hard Brexit is the default legal position if a deal can't be passed in Parliament. It's the default legal position because that is what parliament voted for and legislated for in the EU Withdrawal bill. Hard Brexit fulfills the result of the referendum which was to Leave the EU, and the people voted by majority to Leave, no ifs, no buts, just Leave.
Parliament also voted to allow the Grieve motion. That makes the Government's motion amendable....no deal won't be allowed to happen as there isnt a majority for that either"We'll see and will know who's correct by the end of March. To stop no deal happening as the default then Parliament would have to pass legislation to stop it, either by voting for another referendum (which there is no majority for and Theresa May is dead set against it), or Parliament would have to vote for an alternative deal like Norway, (which there is no majority for and it would have to be negotiated with the EU, which there isn't time for as we leave in March). That again leaves us leaving on the default legal position which is leaving on No Deal WTO terms in March. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We, the petitioners, demand the Government STOPS spending our money on biased campaigning to keep Britain inside the European Union. The Great British Public have waited since 1975 for a vote on our relationship with Brussels. No taxpayers’ money should be spent on campaign literature to keep Britain inside the EU. This petition is closed This petition ran for 6 months 221,866 signatures
that's almost as big a waste of time as the righties for racism fiasco in london last sunday
The Brexit betrayal rally to give it its proper name, which was conducted peacefully, while far left loons predicted widespread violence but were proved wrong.
Interesting diversion.
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread:
Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means.
Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences.
Parliament and therefore the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed.
How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum?"
Hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences? You say that as if it's somehow anti democratic? Hard Brexit is the default legal position if a deal can't be passed in Parliament. It's the default legal position because that is what parliament voted for and legislated for in the EU Withdrawal bill. Hard Brexit fulfills the result of the referendum which was to Leave the EU, and the people voted by majority to Leave, no ifs, no buts, just Leave.
Ah. So you are quoting legal positions now.
Hard Brexit on a technicality.
Could you just point me to where this was defined as the outcome of this process by the Leave campaign?
Forget what Remain said because according to you it was "Project fear" and nobody believed it anyway.
Where did either of the completely trustworthy leave campaigns set it out?"Doesn't matter, it's leaving the EU and the question on the ballot paper was remain or Leave. The people chose leave. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If we have a general election. And the governments tell us their manifesto. If they don't deliver after 2 years . Can we have a people's vote to get them out ? . No I did not think so What a decisive argument
5 years.
We already know that they can't deliver what anybody wants because there was no manifesto.
Brexit was everything to everyone.
No tax and lavishly funded public services. Who wouldn't vote for that?"And how many times have governments promised everything and delivered nothing . Get real | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We, the petitioners, demand the Government STOPS spending our money on biased campaigning to keep Britain inside the European Union. The Great British Public have waited since 1975 for a vote on our relationship with Brussels. No taxpayers’ money should be spent on campaign literature to keep Britain inside the EU. This petition is closed This petition ran for 6 months 221,866 signatures
that's almost as big a waste of time as the righties for racism fiasco in london last sunday
The Brexit betrayal rally to give it its proper name, which was conducted peacefully, while far left loons predicted widespread violence but were proved wrong.
Interesting diversion.
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread:
Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means.
Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences.
Parliament and therefore the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed.
How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum?"
Hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences? You say that as if it's somehow anti democratic? Hard Brexit is the default legal position if a deal can't be passed in Parliament. It's the default legal position because that is what parliament voted for and legislated for in the EU Withdrawal bill. Hard Brexit fulfills the result of the referendum which was to Leave the EU, and the people voted by majority to Leave, no ifs, no buts, just Leave.
Ah. So you are quoting legal positions now.
Hard Brexit on a technicality.
Could you just point me to where this was defined as the outcome of this process by the Leave campaign?
Forget what Remain said because according to you it was "Project fear" and nobody believed it anyway.
Where did either of the completely trustworthy leave campaigns set it out?
Doesn't matter, it's leaving the EU and the question on the ballot paper was remain or Leave. The people chose leave. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"An interesting point was made by Michael Portilo on this weeks 'This week' program on reference to the term 'Tory brexiteers' etc and it was that both the Conservative AND Labour manifestos at the 2017 general election supported the brexit process, that is that they would proceed to deliver on the referendum, so surely all Tory and Labour MP's are brexiteers as this was the basis on which they stood for election in 2017." exactly . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We, the petitioners, demand the Government STOPS spending our money on biased campaigning to keep Britain inside the European Union. The Great British Public have waited since 1975 for a vote on our relationship with Brussels. No taxpayers’ money should be spent on campaign literature to keep Britain inside the EU. This petition is closed This petition ran for 6 months 221,866 signatures
that's almost as big a waste of time as the righties for racism fiasco in london last sunday
The Brexit betrayal rally to give it its proper name, which was conducted peacefully, while far left loons predicted widespread violence but were proved wrong.
Interesting diversion.
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread:
Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means.
Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences.
Parliament and therefore the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed.
How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum?"
Hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences? You say that as if it's somehow anti democratic? Hard Brexit is the default legal position if a deal can't be passed in Parliament. It's the default legal position because that is what parliament voted for and legislated for in the EU Withdrawal bill. Hard Brexit fulfills the result of the referendum which was to Leave the EU, and the people voted by majority to Leave, no ifs, no buts, just Leave.
Parliament also voted to allow the Grieve motion. That makes the Government's motion amendable....no deal won't be allowed to happen as there isnt a majority for that either
We'll see and will know who's correct by the end of March. To stop no deal happening as the default then Parliament would have to pass legislation to stop it, either by voting for another referendum (which there is no majority for and Theresa May is dead set against it), or Parliament would have to vote for an alternative deal like Norway, (which there is no majority for and it would have to be negotiated with the EU, which there isn't time for as we leave in March). That again leaves us leaving on the default legal position which is leaving on No Deal WTO terms in March. "If nothing could be voted for by parliament then May will most certainly just scrap BREXIT by suspension of A50. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We, the petitioners, demand the Government STOPS spending our money on biased campaigning to keep Britain inside the European Union. The Great British Public have waited since 1975 for a vote on our relationship with Brussels. No taxpayers’ money should be spent on campaign literature to keep Britain inside the EU. This petition is closed This petition ran for 6 months 221,866 signatures
that's almost as big a waste of time as the righties for racism fiasco in london last sunday
The Brexit betrayal rally to give it its proper name, which was conducted peacefully, while far left loons predicted widespread violence but were proved wrong.
Interesting diversion.
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread:
Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means.
Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences.
Parliament and therefore the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed.
How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum?"
Hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences? You say that as if it's somehow anti democratic? Hard Brexit is the default legal position if a deal can't be passed in Parliament. It's the default legal position because that is what parliament voted for and legislated for in the EU Withdrawal bill. Hard Brexit fulfills the result of the referendum which was to Leave the EU, and the people voted by majority to Leave, no ifs, no buts, just Leave.
Ah. So you are quoting legal positions now.
Hard Brexit on a technicality.
Could you just point me to where this was defined as the outcome of this process by the Leave campaign?
Forget what Remain said because according to you it was "Project fear" and nobody believed it anyway.
Where did either of the completely trustworthy leave campaigns set it out?
Doesn't matter, it's leaving the EU and the question on the ballot paper was remain or Leave. The people chose leave. "So the answer is know. So you are delighting in the conning of the British people whilst accusing those wanting to ask their opinion of hard Brexit as undemocratic. No surprise of course | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If we have a general election. And the governments tell us their manifesto. If they don't deliver after 2 years . Can we have a people's vote to get them out ? . No I did not think so What a decisive argument
5 years.
We already know that they can't deliver what anybody wants because there was no manifesto.
Brexit was everything to everyone.
No tax and lavishly funded public services. Who wouldn't vote for that? And how many times have governments promised everything and delivered nothing . Get real "So the Brexit dream is a lie, but as it was voted for it can't be reversed? Why did the Conservative MPs get to vote again after they'd made their choice then? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"An interesting point was made by Michael Portilo on this weeks 'This week' program on reference to the term 'Tory brexiteers' etc and it was that both the Conservative AND Labour manifestos at the 2017 general election supported the brexit process, that is that they would proceed to deliver on the referendum, so surely all Tory and Labour MP's are brexiteers as this was the basis on which they stood for election in 2017. exactly . "The Brexit process is not the Brexit deal. If the deal is bad why should anyone be compelled to accept it? If the final negotiation results in the sacrifice of all first born children in return for free trade and no immigration would that be OK? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We, the petitioners, demand the Government STOPS spending our money on biased campaigning to keep Britain inside the European Union. The Great British Public have waited since 1975 for a vote on our relationship with Brussels. No taxpayers’ money should be spent on campaign literature to keep Britain inside the EU. This petition is closed This petition ran for 6 months 221,866 signatures
that's almost as big a waste of time as the righties for racism fiasco in london last sunday
The Brexit betrayal rally to give it its proper name, which was conducted peacefully, while far left loons predicted widespread violence but were proved wrong.
Interesting diversion.
"Echoing a point made by a poster in another thread:
Conservative Brexiteers have timed the attempted removal of the Prime Minister to attempt to obtain Brexit by any means.
Whilst the country is without government the hope would be that a hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences.
Parliament and therefore the democratic will of the people and the process that holds government to account will be bypassed.
How does this compare with giving everyone in the country a vote in another referendum?"
Hard Brexit occurs regardless of the consequences? You say that as if it's somehow anti democratic? Hard Brexit is the default legal position if a deal can't be passed in Parliament. It's the default legal position because that is what parliament voted for and legislated for in the EU Withdrawal bill. Hard Brexit fulfills the result of the referendum which was to Leave the EU, and the people voted by majority to Leave, no ifs, no buts, just Leave.
Ah. So you are quoting legal positions now.
Hard Brexit on a technicality.
Could you just point me to where this was defined as the outcome of this process by the Leave campaign?
Forget what Remain said because according to you it was "Project fear" and nobody believed it anyway.
Where did either of the completely trustworthy leave campaigns set it out?
Doesn't matter, it's leaving the EU and the question on the ballot paper was remain or Leave. The people chose leave.
So the answer is know. So you are delighting in the conning of the British people whilst accusing those wanting to ask their opinion of hard Brexit as undemocratic.
No surprise of course "Do you remoaners really think that the prime minister of this country would want to do something that would bring down this country? . Why would she benefit from that ???? . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If we have a general election. And the governments tell us their manifesto. If they don't deliver after 2 years . Can we have a people's vote to get them out ? . No I did not think so What a decisive argument
5 years.
We already know that they can't deliver what anybody wants because there was no manifesto.
Brexit was everything to everyone.
No tax and lavishly funded public services. Who wouldn't vote for that? And how many times have governments promised everything and delivered nothing . Get real
So the Brexit dream is a lie, but as it was voted for it can't be reversed?
Why did the Conservative MPs get to vote again after they'd made their choice then?"So we will never ever have a democratic vote again ? Because if people don't like the fact they lost . We do it again . Remoaners the gift that keeps giving | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"An interesting point was made by Michael Portilo on this weeks 'This week' program on reference to the term 'Tory brexiteers' etc and it was that both the Conservative AND Labour manifestos at the 2017 general election supported the brexit process, that is that they would proceed to deliver on the referendum, so surely all Tory and Labour MP's are brexiteers as this was the basis on which they stood for election in 2017. exactly .
The Brexit process is not the Brexit deal. If the deal is bad why should anyone be compelled to accept it?
If the final negotiation results in the sacrifice of all first born children in return for free trade and no immigration would that be OK?"because we had the chance to vote . And 52% of the country voted leave . Suck it up buttercup | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" because we had the chance to vote . And 52% of the country voted leave . Suck it up buttercup " The Government has arranged BREXIT for the 52% but Parliament don't like it and currently won't give you your BREXIT. The 52% need to be lobbying their MP's to vote for their BREXIT. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" because we had the chance to vote . And 52% of the country voted leave . Suck it up buttercup The Government has arranged BREXIT for the 52% but Parliament don't like it and currently won't give you your BREXIT. The 52% need to be lobbying their MP's to vote for their BREXIT." Brexit may not happen. But it does change the fact that the country voted to leave . So democracy is a farce | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"An interesting point was made by Michael Portilo on this weeks 'This week' program on reference to the term 'Tory brexiteers' etc and it was that both the Conservative AND Labour manifestos at the 2017 general election supported the brexit process, that is that they would proceed to deliver on the referendum, so surely all Tory and Labour MP's are brexiteers as this was the basis on which they stood for election in 2017. exactly .
The Brexit process is not the Brexit deal. If the deal is bad why should anyone be compelled to accept it?
If the final negotiation results in the sacrifice of all first born children in return for free trade and no immigration would that be OK? because we had the chance to vote . And 52% of the country voted leave . Suck it up buttercup "What an excellent and well reasoned argument sunshine
So another vote by the same people but with more information is not democracy? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"An interesting point was made by Michael Portilo on this weeks 'This week' program on reference to the term 'Tory brexiteers' etc and it was that both the Conservative AND Labour manifestos at the 2017 general election supported the brexit process, that is that they would proceed to deliver on the referendum, so surely all Tory and Labour MP's are brexiteers as this was the basis on which they stood for election in 2017. exactly .
The Brexit process is not the Brexit deal. If the deal is bad why should anyone be compelled to accept it?
If the final negotiation results in the sacrifice of all first born children in return for free trade and no immigration would that be OK? because we had the chance to vote . And 52% of the country voted leave . Suck it up buttercup
What an excellent and well reasoned argument sunshine
So another vote by the same people but with more information is not democracy? "are we going to do that on every vote from now on ? We vote. We wait 2 years . We vote again ??? Just think about what your saying | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" because we had the chance to vote . And 52% of the country voted leave . Suck it up buttercup The Government has arranged BREXIT for the 52% but Parliament don't like it and currently won't give you your BREXIT. The 52% need to be lobbying their MP's to vote for their BREXIT. Brexit may not happen. But it does change the fact that the country voted to leave . So democracy is a farce " I agree, Parliament should back the BREXIT agreement so the Government can fulfill the will of the people. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" because we had the chance to vote . And 52% of the country voted leave . Suck it up buttercup The Government has arranged BREXIT for the 52% but Parliament don't like it and currently won't give you your BREXIT. The 52% need to be lobbying their MP's to vote for their BREXIT. Brexit may not happen. But it does change the fact that the country voted to leave . So democracy is a farce I agree, Parliament should back the BREXIT agreement so the Government can fulfill the will of the people." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I love how people, particularly SNP MP's, quote percentages rather than actual numbers. 62% of Scots voted to remain, blah blah. Yes, 62% of the 2.5 million Scots who voted - which amounts to 1.5 million votes. Somehow, the SNP are of the view that bandying around this '62%' figure somehow makes 1.5 million votes count more than the 17.4 million in the whole of the UK who voted to leave. The 3.9% difference between leave and remain doesn't sound like a lot, but actually amounts to over a million votes. If you really look at it, if all the Scots who voted to leave had stayed at home, Leave would still have won! " It's making the point that as a nation they don't want Brexit. They are underlining the difference in attitude in the context of a pro-independence party. Not difficult to comprehend really is it? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"An interesting point was made by Michael Portilo on this weeks 'This week' program on reference to the term 'Tory brexiteers' etc and it was that both the Conservative AND Labour manifestos at the 2017 general election supported the brexit process, that is that they would proceed to deliver on the referendum, so surely all Tory and Labour MP's are brexiteers as this was the basis on which they stood for election in 2017. exactly .
The Brexit process is not the Brexit deal. If the deal is bad why should anyone be compelled to accept it?
If the final negotiation results in the sacrifice of all first born children in return for free trade and no immigration would that be OK? because we had the chance to vote . And 52% of the country voted leave . Suck it up buttercup
What an excellent and well reasoned argument sunshine
So another vote by the same people but with more information is not democracy? are we going to do that on every vote from now on ? We vote. We wait 2 years . We vote again ??? Just think about what your saying "It's nothing to do with time. It's to do with information. I understand though. One vote is democratic. Two votes with more information is undemocratic under all circumstances. Got it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I love how people, particularly SNP MP's, quote percentages rather than actual numbers. 62% of Scots voted to remain, blah blah. Yes, 62% of the 2.5 million Scots who voted - which amounts to 1.5 million votes. Somehow, the SNP are of the view that bandying around this '62%' figure somehow makes 1.5 million votes count more than the 17.4 million in the whole of the UK who voted to leave. The 3.9% difference between leave and remain doesn't sound like a lot, but actually amounts to over a million votes. If you really look at it, if all the Scots who voted to leave had stayed at home, Leave would still have won! " Wasn’t the Scottish % in the context of snp losing ground in Scotland after brexit ? Rather than the wider uk? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I love how people, particularly SNP MP's, quote percentages rather than actual numbers. 62% of Scots voted to remain, blah blah. Yes, 62% of the 2.5 million Scots who voted - which amounts to 1.5 million votes. Somehow, the SNP are of the view that bandying around this '62%' figure somehow makes 1.5 million votes count more than the 17.4 million in the whole of the UK who voted to leave. The 3.9% difference between leave and remain doesn't sound like a lot, but actually amounts to over a million votes. If you really look at it, if all the Scots who voted to leave had stayed at home, Leave would still have won! " But 27% couldn't be arsed to vote over 8m - Just saying and showing what context 3.9% or 1m really is - insignificant! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" because we had the chance to vote . And 52% of the country voted leave . Suck it up buttercup The Government has arranged BREXIT for the 52% but Parliament don't like it and currently won't give you your BREXIT. The 52% need to be lobbying their MP's to vote for their BREXIT." If Parliament can't agree on anything the default legal position is to leave without a deal on WTO terms in March. So either Parliament votes for the deal and we get Brexit or Parliament can't agree and we leave on the default legal position and we still get Brexit. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" because we had the chance to vote . And 52% of the country voted leave . Suck it up buttercup The Government has arranged BREXIT for the 52% but Parliament don't like it and currently won't give you your BREXIT. The 52% need to be lobbying their MP's to vote for their BREXIT. If Parliament can't agree on anything the default legal position is to leave without a deal on WTO terms in March. So either Parliament votes for the deal and we get Brexit or Parliament can't agree and we leave on the default legal position and we still get Brexit. " Not if May revokes A50, she doesn't need Parliament's approved for that, only for an exit strategy. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" because we had the chance to vote . And 52% of the country voted leave . Suck it up buttercup The Government has arranged BREXIT for the 52% but Parliament don't like it and currently won't give you your BREXIT. The 52% need to be lobbying their MP's to vote for their BREXIT. If Parliament can't agree on anything the default legal position is to leave without a deal on WTO terms in March. So either Parliament votes for the deal and we get Brexit or Parliament can't agree and we leave on the default legal position and we still get Brexit. " Not quite. By law, if there is no agreement by January 21, Ministers must come to Parliament within five days to set out the way forward. That must be approved by Parliament. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I love how people, particularly SNP MP's, quote percentages rather than actual numbers. 62% of Scots voted to remain, blah blah. Yes, 62% of the 2.5 million Scots who voted - which amounts to 1.5 million votes. Somehow, the SNP are of the view that bandying around this '62%' figure somehow makes 1.5 million votes count more than the 17.4 million in the whole of the UK who voted to leave. The 3.9% difference between leave and remain doesn't sound like a lot, but actually amounts to over a million votes. If you really look at it, if all the Scots who voted to leave had stayed at home, Leave would still have won! " In a UK context, that is correct. But you miss the point about the purpose of the SNP. The equivalent would be to assert that UKIP won 0.2 % of the vote at the European election by counting their share of the vote in a Europe context. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"An interesting point was made by Michael Portilo on this weeks 'This week' program on reference to the term 'Tory brexiteers' etc and it was that both the Conservative AND Labour manifestos at the 2017 general election supported the brexit process, that is that they would proceed to deliver on the referendum, so surely all Tory and Labour MP's are brexiteers as this was the basis on which they stood for election in 2017." Labour were very clear about the nature of the Brexit in their manifesto. This shitstorm is nothing like the Brexit supported in that document. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" because we had the chance to vote . And 52% of the country voted leave . Suck it up buttercup The Government has arranged BREXIT for the 52% but Parliament don't like it and currently won't give you your BREXIT. The 52% need to be lobbying their MP's to vote for their BREXIT. If Parliament can't agree on anything the default legal position is to leave without a deal on WTO terms in March. So either Parliament votes for the deal and we get Brexit or Parliament can't agree and we leave on the default legal position and we still get Brexit. " Even if your streamlining of the political process was correct you still are not addressing the fact that we don’t have trade agreements prepared for that unlikely eventuality of crashing out under wto rules. It’s a fantasy! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes she does. Parliament has passed the European Withdrawal Bill into law, which states the UK ceases to be a member of the EU from March 29, 2019." https://www.google.com/amp/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/government-could-bypass-parliament-to-revoke-article-50-11571873 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes she does. Parliament has passed the European Withdrawal Bill into law, which states the UK ceases to be a member of the EU from March 29, 2019. https://www.google.com/amp/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/government-could-bypass-parliament-to-revoke-article-50-11571873 " Yes, that article confirms the UK can unilaterally withdraw Article 50 under EU law. It also requires that action to follow the democratic process of the member state. In UK law, the executive cannot act unilaterally - it would require the consent of Parliament and, arguably, the referendum to be overturned, before the UK, as a member state, could withdraw Article 50. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Government lawyers said: "For the issue of revocability to become live, parliament must first have directed the government, against the government's settled policy . . and against the popular answer provided by the referendum, unilaterally to revoke the notice."" Right, so May sends her deal to Parliament unamended, Parliament votes no, so that covers the first part. Second sounds like they have to vote against just the idea of BREXIT ? given it's say just a choice of May's deal, crash out with no deal which would ultimately be Parliament's decision in this scenario or vote to stop BREXIT if May options were Deal or no BREXIT ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"a) parliament votes down deal b) by law, ministers must submit the alternative within five working days of January 21 What are the options left? 1) no deal exit - almost certain to be voted down 2) withdrawal of Art 50 - that would cause uproar in the country 3) a request to the EU27 to allow article 50 to be suspended to allow time for either: a) a new referendum b) a general election The EU has indicated a willingness to put art 50 on hold for a matter of substance, e.g. either of the above. A tory beauty contest would not fall into that category." Would the amendments that are being talked about by MP's if allowed by the speaker also be a possible out for them..? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The public won the leave vote once , shall we just keep voting till stay wins , would you really trust a honest count up from them this time round , I wouldn’t " I agree with you. But if you follow the process, it is about Parliament eliminating the options one by one until they run out of road. All they are left with after that is to kick the decision over to the people. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Grieve amendment, I think, would allow Parliament to amend and vote on the alternative brought forward by Ministers. In that sense, Parliament really is in control. Whatever proposal can command a majority in the House will be the outcome." Blessed be the sensible, pragmatic ones who are thinking not just of themselves..
Compromise will avail one hopes.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The public won the leave vote once , shall we just keep voting till stay wins , would you really trust a honest count up from them this time round , I wouldn’t " That's down to the tellers and the speaker.. Last I heard we do have some points of reference to go with on that, doesn't mean one agrees with the motion but if the numbers are in a majority then that is democracy.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"She can’t get her exit through Parliament and Parliament won’t allow an exit without an agreement. It’s stalemate." And the EU will not change anything either, but then again they never have 
The backstop is a joke because until it’s sorted “it never will be” the UK cannot implement any deals they may make while the backstop is in force so another stalemate.
I blame all governments both past and present, they were the ones who just sat back collecting huge salaries and just let the EU rewrite the rules over a long time to make sure it would be near on impossible for anyone to leave easily.
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The remainers want a second referendum, but they evidently don’t take any notice of referendums hence wanting another one in the hope the outcome will be more favourable to them " I am a remainer and I don't want a second referendum, but if parliament can't do what it gets paid to do, then they will pass the book and a second vote. This time, no cheating and greater scrutiny will be required - although, we are all, a little wiser to the tricks, and Aron Banks is in enough trouble to get involved! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"She can’t get her exit through Parliament and Parliament won’t allow an exit without an agreement. It’s stalemate. And the EU will not change anything either, but then again they never have
The backstop is a joke because until it’s sorted “it never will be” the UK cannot implement any deals they may make while the backstop is in force so another stalemate.
I blame all governments both past and present, they were the ones who just sat back collecting huge salaries and just let the EU rewrite the rules over a long time to make sure it would be near on impossible for anyone to leave easily.
"I really can't believe people still blame the EU over our Government's incompetence. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"She can’t get her exit through Parliament and Parliament won’t allow an exit without an agreement. It’s stalemate. And the EU will not change anything either, but then again they never have
The backstop is a joke because until it’s sorted “it never will be” the UK cannot implement any deals they may make while the backstop is in force so another stalemate.
I blame all governments both past and present, they were the ones who just sat back collecting huge salaries and just let the EU rewrite the rules over a long time to make sure it would be near on impossible for anyone to leave easily.
I really can't believe people still blame the EU over our Government's incompetence."They have to,it's all people have now..easier than admitting a cold hard truth! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"She can’t get her exit through Parliament and Parliament won’t allow an exit without an agreement. It’s stalemate. And the EU will not change anything either, but then again they never have
The backstop is a joke because until it’s sorted “it never will be” the UK cannot implement any deals they may make while the backstop is in force so another stalemate.
I blame all governments both past and present, they were the ones who just sat back collecting huge salaries and just let the EU rewrite the rules over a long time to make sure it would be near on impossible for anyone to leave easily.
I really can't believe people still blame the EU over our Government's incompetence."Don’t tell anyone,but the “rules” which are causing all the pain had no direct EU involvement. Just the British and Irish governments | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
