Post-Brexit Thread

Originally Posted by nomadking

The point is that the same people who thought it ok to have a "blank cheque" and are happy with what it brought, would still be happy with a "blank cheque" as long as things were done THEIR way.

So it's upto us to make sure a blank cheque isn't issued .It does look like it's going to be the remainers that are prepared too step up to the plate because from their prospective they have more to lose

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

That doesn't mean that we need to accept such lower standards does it?

The point is, who is the "we". It is only one side. The English and Leave voters don't seem to have a say. If the vote had been to stay, then the Remain side would be more than happy with a "blank cheque" to continue, because they are the only ones allowed to fill it out.

Originally Posted by nomadking

The point is, who is the "we". It is only one side. The English and Leave voters don't seem to have a say. If the vote had been to stay, then the Remain side would be more than happy with a "blank cheque" to continue, because they are the only ones allowed to fill it out.

How can you possibly know that ? I think it highly likely that if the vote result was reversed then serious questions would be asked about our relationship with the EU because the leavers would certainly not have been satisfied with the status quo

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by martyh

How can you possibly know that ? I think it highly likely that if the vote result was reversed then serious questions would be asked about our relationship with the EU because the leavers would certainly not have been satisfied with the status quo

Indeed and Nigel Farage confirmed he would carry on fighting if he lost 48%-52%. http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/24/rememb...endum-5963900/

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Indeed and Nigel Farage confirmed he would carry on fighting if he lost 48%-52%. http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/24/rememb...endum-5963900/

But by the backdoor in the Law courts? Or just by persuading more people? Which is democratic and which is authoritarian in nature? When the Left and Liberals don't get to impose that ways, they have a big hissy fit over it. People are not allowed to have views that they don't agree with. It's a gradual brainwashing. Unauthorised thoughts are not allowed.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by nomadking

But by the backdoor in the Law courts? Or just by persuading more people? Which is democratic and which is authoritarian in nature? When the Left and Liberals don't get to impose that ways, they have a big hissy fit over it. People are not allowed to have views that they don't agree with. It's a gradual brainwashing. Unauthorised thoughts are not allowed.

Your argument is based on incorrect information. These are points of fact, not opinion.
1. The Article 50 court case is not about challenging the decision to leave the EU, it's about the process of involving Parliament.
2. The Article 50 court case is supported by remainers and leavers alike. Deir Dos Santos for example is a leave supporter.
3. How do you presume to know the voting intentions of the people involved? Hedge fund managers like Gina Miller aren't usually left-wing voters.

So, you're seeing a court decision, misbelieveing that it's about stopping Brexit, assuming that the challengers are all left wing remainers in the face of evidence to the contrary and getting annoyed about it. Good news is that that is not the case on any account so you can relax and as martyh suggests, step up and support the democratic process.

Originally Posted by nomadking

But by the backdoor in the Law courts? Or just by persuading more people? Which is democratic and which is authoritarian in nature? When the Left and Liberals don't get to impose that ways, they have a big hissy fit over it. People are not allowed to have views that they don't agree with. It's a gradual brainwashing. Unauthorised thoughts are not allowed.

How on earth is going through the law courts 'the backdoor' Our law courts are fundamental to our democracy .The very fact that a question is being allowed to be asked via the law courts is extremely democratic ,the other option is dictatorial .

[nomadking]

The Law courts are not democratic by any means. If the Judges based things purely on Law there would be no overturning of decisions, unanimous decisions where more than one Judge is used, eg Supreme Court, no arguments over "which side" a Judge is on when they are appointed. The list goes on.

If invoking Article 50 is invalid, then a whole host of other things connected to the EU are also invalid. What other things were agreed and approved by Parliament before the Treaties, Directives etc were signed?

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by nomadking

The Law courts are not democratic by any means. If the Judges based things purely on Law there would be no overturning of decisions, unanimous decisions where more than one Judge is used, eg Supreme Court, no arguments over "which side" a Judge is on when they are appointed. The list goes on.

If invoking Article 50 is invalid, then a whole host of other things connected to the EU are also invalid. What other things were agreed and approved by Parliament before the Treaties, Directives etc were signed?

Judges are not on any particular side and base all their decisions on their interpretation of law. Are you seriously suggesting otherwise?

Originally Posted by nomadking

The Law courts are not democratic by any means. If the Judges based things purely on Law there would be no overturning of decisions, unanimous decisions where more than one Judge is used, eg Supreme Court, no arguments over "which side" a Judge is on when they are appointed. The list goes on.

If invoking Article 50 is invalid, then a whole host of other things connected to the EU are also invalid. What other things were agreed and approved by Parliament before the Treaties, Directives etc were signed?

The law courts are democratic they uphold the laws set by parliament ,the two are permanently linked

Overturning decisions made in law courts is based on new evidence/arguments not available previously, not based on 'whatever side the judge is on'

Nobody has ever suggested that invoking A50 is invalid ,the only argument is who invokes it ,does the PM have the authority? or is it solely in the domain of Parliament ?,the courts have ruled that Parliament is responsible because Parliament is the supreme authority.The reason why is because legislation will have to be removed from the statute books and new legislation introduced as a direct result of invoking A50 ,certainly not because of how the judges felt towards the EU

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Judges are not on any particular side and base all their decisions on their interpretation of law. Are you seriously suggesting otherwise?

so what happens if the supreme court returns a split decision ie some think the law is X and some think its Y

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

so what happens if the supreme court returns a split decision ie some think the law is X and some think its Y

That's why it is made up of an odd number of judges. There will always be a decision.

Originally Posted by papa smurf

so what happens if the supreme court returns a split decision ie some think the law is X and some think its Y

There's 11 judges ,the most votes either way wins ,further proof that our courts are a democratic process

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by pip08456

That's why it is made up of an odd number of judges. There will always be a decision.

But if the decisions are purely based on Law they all decisions must be unanimous, mustn't they? If Judges X & Y have differing judgements, then in a case with a single Judge deciding, the decision could go either way depending on whether it was Judge X or Judge Y that was presiding.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by martyh

There's 11 judges ,the most votes either way wins ,further proof that our courts are a democratic process

i thought the law had to be clear not a matter of divided opinion - we already have a divided opinion .