Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
You are legally incorrect, and based on the contents of the very thorough public debate prior to the vote you are not correct in the spirit of the law either.
The referendum was advisory because it only ever can be so in our constitution. Its mandate lies only in the precedent that what is voted for, is done. This was established in the first referendum ever held in the U.K., on our EU membership in 1974, in three devolution referendums, a Westminster election voting system referendum and one on Scottish independence.
Of these, only the Welsh and Scottish devolution referendums of 1998 have changed the status quo; in both cases, the way in which the referendum result was implemented was by consultation, forming government policy, and finally by whipped votes in Parliament. Ultimately the devolution bills presented by Blair’s government were passed. The nationalists continued to blow hard over it but that’s what happened then, and it’s what needs to happen now. Government policy must be implemented as stated in the manifestos we voted on in 2016.
And the Commons fully realises nothing - it is split as never before, because when push comes to shove MPs know that the power to legislate is theirs, not ours; because both main party leaders are the weakest in living memory; because we have now had a hung parliament for 7 of the last 9 years and the Commons has become a place where horse trading and personal preferences have begun to take precedence over the party manifestos MPs pledge to support in return for the major advantage of running as an official candidate.
|
You misunderstand. When i said "underwrite", I was not referring to the legal aspect. Rather, I was talking about the mandate that the vote delivered. The vote was based on a campaign where Leave only promised a positive outcome. The Leavers did not detail or articulate that if you voted Leave there was a significant chance that we would leave the EU with No Deal and that you, personally and the country as a whole, would be worse off as measured by a variety of metrics.
To suggest that the vote delivered a democratic mandate for No Deal, with various negative scenarios, would be disingenuous.
---------- Post added at 18:58 ---------- Previous post was at 18:58 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf
It's news for the gullible i'm afraid.
|
or facts for the open minded
---------- Post added at 19:08 ---------- Previous post was at 18:58 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick
Here we go again with the 37% figure rubbish.
Also is the rubbish that the country will be poorer but we've been over this many times with this negative fantasy.
I will say it again and keep on saying it when you keep bringing up this nonsensical and misleading rubbish.
The people ineligible to vote, could not be arsed to vote, do not come in to final % calculations, it wasn't 37% of the electorate anyway, as not every single person in the UK is eligible to vote and therefore not part of the Electorate.
I am not sorry to be pedantic but it was actually 72.2% of the Electorate who turned out to vote in 2016. That is the one of the biggest turn out to any Democratic event in political history.
Way more people voted in this referendum than the one in the 70's to join the Common Market, more people voted to leave in 2016, than they did Remain in 1975.
So it is more staggering that you're advocating the 2016 figures as invalid when the figures in 1975 were much less.
UK Population in 1975 was 56 Million, compared to 66 Million in 2016/2018.
17.3 Million said yes in 1975 Referendum, based on your erroneous calculations and thought process regarding the figures, only 31% of entire UK opted to stay in Commons Market in 1975, so based off your Modus Operandi and other Remainers demanding a second vote, the vote in 1975, should have been held again.  |
Your pedantry does not make you right I am afraid but facts, however, do make you wrong:
https://www.electoralcommission.org....nt-information
Leave: 17,410,742 / Total Electorate: 46,500,001 = 37%
I do agree with you re: the 1975 vote. It was invalid as it was not run as a Supermajority-based referendum where a meaningful quorum e.g. 60% is required to enact a structurally significant national change.