Discussing UK law. Links: swarb.co.uk | law-index | Acts | Members Image galleries

Put simply

For discussion of all matters relating to the UK's departure from the European Union

Re: Put simply

Postby dls » Wed Jul 12, 2017 12:04 pm

Returning to teh question, Jack Domey was just asked this question on the Daily Politics. Having said that we would not under any circumstances accept being required to pay £100 bill to stay in the market, he was asked whether if that was what was demanded, he wouldwalk away.

he walked away from the question. He was quite unable to answer.
David Swarbrick (Admin) dswarb@gmail.com - 0795 457 9992
User avatar
dls
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12088
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:35 pm
Location: Brighouse, West Yorkshire

Re: Put simply

Postby atticus » Wed Jul 12, 2017 12:17 pm

Surely the first statement answered that question. If he was unwilling to answer the question then that casts doubt on his being unwilling under any circumstances etc.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19434
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Put simply

Postby dls » Thu Jul 13, 2017 5:10 am

Then he demonstrates the truth of the only thing they complain of of Mrs M - saying that a no deal result can be better than a bad deal result.
The inference drawn is that this implies a desire for such a result. It does not.

There are several loonies in the Tory party, just as there are in Labour and the LDs. The only difference, perhaps, is that in Labour they have risen right to the top.
David Swarbrick (Admin) dswarb@gmail.com - 0795 457 9992
User avatar
dls
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12088
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:35 pm
Location: Brighouse, West Yorkshire

Re: Put simply

Postby diy » Thu Jul 13, 2017 8:32 am

I'm rapidly concluding we need to bring an end to these talks while we still haven't paid next years 15bn. Nothing will come other than the EU wasting time and souring potential non EU G20 trade deals. I read an article in the FT saying that Britain was facing humiliation as its trucks queued up at dover unable to cross in to France. Nothing of the problems the would face, with their goods also stuck.
My suggestions are not legal advice
User avatar
diy
 
Posts: 2530
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:06 pm

Re: Put simply

Postby Hairyloon » Thu Jul 13, 2017 8:41 am

I happened upon this this morning. Not quite on topic, but I didn't think it worth a new thread. Easily sorted if I prove to be wrong.

We desperately await the emergence in Westminster of someone prepared to grasp the nettle. Blindly implementing the outcome of thereferendum is an utter dereliction of duty. If mere implementaion of plebiscites was all that the job of government entailed, we could dispense with MPs altogether and rely exclusively on unelected Civil Service Bureaucrats. Edmund Burke must be shuddering in his grave as we recall his directive: “Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays instead of serving you if he sacrifices it to your opinion.”


http://lottsathoughts.blogspot.co.uk/20 ... three.html
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 9884
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Put simply

Postby dls » Thu Jul 13, 2017 9:22 am

Thank you - and three cheers for

Edmund Burke must be shuddering in his grave as we recall his directive: “Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays instead of serving you if he sacrifices it to your opinion.”


No more referenda
David Swarbrick (Admin) dswarb@gmail.com - 0795 457 9992
User avatar
dls
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12088
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:35 pm
Location: Brighouse, West Yorkshire

Re: Put simply

Postby Hairyloon » Thu Jul 13, 2017 12:29 pm

dls wrote:Thank you - and three cheers for

Edmund Burke must be shuddering in his grave as we recall his directive: “Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays instead of serving you if he sacrifices it to your opinion.”


No more referenda

In principle I agree, but as we have discussed (give or take a distraction), what is your alternative proposal to get us out of this mess?

All of our present troubles are the result of a fundamental breakdown of our democratic system. The parliamentarians are not going to change it by themselves: they need a proper push.
If you have a better answer than a vote (or few), then I'd like to hear it.
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 9884
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Put simply

Postby dls » Thu Jul 13, 2017 1:28 pm

“Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays instead of serving you if he sacrifices it to your opinion.”


The mess for you appears to be that we voted to leave. We did. I didn't but we simply get on with it as best we can. The consequences have not accorded with the direst of predictions, and the benefits will equally be rather less. I simply believe that you just get on with it.
It will all be rather worse for some people and industries, and it will be rather better for some others.

Since the referendum, there appears to have been a 20% move towards leaving (British Attitudes Survey). That may be accurate or inaccurate, but it is with absolute certainty that expecting a reversal of the 2016 decision is at best very unwise.

The answer always is that given by Burke.

Referenda are always wrong. They persuade nobody, are necessarily taken in ignorance of the result (I do emphasise this), and are vastly over simplified questions to situations whose uncertainty and complexity will always be well beyond the capacity of any of us to understand.

To call for another in a desperate hope that some miracle might take place reversing the vote is just daft.

Even if we did, there is no mechanism for withdrawing an Article 50 notice. Yes I can see that the EU might welcome it, but, again, it would be on terms they agree (whether they are good deal or bad) at their choice. I can for example suggest they might require we come within Schengen and within the Euro, and I am sure they would want to take the opportunity to 'tweak' the budget in their favour.

Of course some people might then say that when the second referendum was passed, we couldn't know the terms on which the EU might insist, and others would no doubt suggest that once the terms were known, another (third) referendum would be required.

You cannot cure a broken leg by breaking the other leg.
David Swarbrick (Admin) dswarb@gmail.com - 0795 457 9992
User avatar
dls
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12088
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:35 pm
Location: Brighouse, West Yorkshire

Re: Put simply

Postby shootist » Thu Jul 13, 2017 2:54 pm

If it were done when ’tis done, then ’twere well
It were done quickly: if Brexit
Could trammel up the consequence, and catch
With his surcease success; that but this blow
Might be the be-all and the end-all here,
But here, upon this bank and shoal of time,
We’ld jump the life to come. But in these cases
We still have judgment here; that we but teach
Bloody instructions, which, being taught, return
To plague the inventor: this even-handed justice
Commends the ingredients of our poison’d chalice
To our own lips.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death my right to be offended by it."
User avatar
shootist
 
Posts: 3464
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 9:40 pm

Re: Put simply

Postby Hairyloon » Thu Jul 13, 2017 3:19 pm

dls wrote:The mess for you appears to be that we voted to leave...

Not at all. The mess is more related to why we voted leave, or in fact why we were given a vote on leaving in the first place.
I still hold that the electorate made the right vote, but the government took the wrong interpretation.

The answer always is that given by Burke.

It is, but it only works when the representatives are fit for the task. I imagine they were in his day, but this lot... words fail.

Referenda are always wrong.

Absolutes are always wrong. Referenda have their place.

They persuade nobody, are necessarily taken in ignorance of the result...

Don't they say the golden rule of referenda is to never hold one unless you are certain of the result?

(I do emphasise this), and are vastly over simplified questions to situations whose uncertainty and complexity will always be well beyond the capacity of any of us to understand.

They have been, but they need not be and sometimes the question is one that fundamentally boils down to opinion.

To call for another in a desperate hope that some miracle might take place reversing the vote is just daft.


You misunderstand what I seek a vote on. I want to see a Vote of No Confidence in the whole -ing administration.
In that event, it would not be the vote that mattered so much as the discussions leading up to the vote.
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 9884
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

PreviousNext

Return to Brexit

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest