UK & EU Agree Post-Brexit Trade Deal

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Mick

Which can be resubmitted at any time - not an issue.

And start from scratch. Parliamentary time lost and wasted, although that’s not new!

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by jfman

And start from scratch. Parliamentary time lost and wasted, although that’s not new!

As as been proven recently Parliament can pass time sensitive legislation in a matter of days.

Bills in the pipeline can also be carried over.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by pip08456

As as been proven recently Parliament can pass time sensitive legislation in a matter of days.

Bills in the pipeline can also be carried over.

And it suits Johnson to reduce the number of days. I don’t really see why these threads are getting bogged down debating the obvious. We could make every point made at the Supreme Court back and forth.

The fact this came up during the Conservative leadership contest made it well known tactic. The Queens Speech is just a device to facilitate it. If it’s legal to do so we will find out soon enough.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

Convenient excuses. No other country on earth would let their politicians go for a jolly by the seaside during a major constitutional crisis.

If the default was we would remain instead of leave I'm sure you'd be suitably outraged.

Convenient, maybe. It's also true. Party conferences happen every year and the conferences were arranged before Brexit day was changed.

We also, very clearly after a two-year Parliament, are in need of setting the agenda of measures for another year with the Queen's Speech.

Prorogation goes hand in hand with both of these things.

You and the remainer opposition are fooling nobody in making this fuss. You'd have thought they would have talked themselves out by now. The public is well fed up with it.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Convenient, maybe. It's also true. Party conferences happen every year and the conferences were arranged before Brexit day was changed.

Nobody is disputing that, only if other countries would do the same in a “constitutional crisis”.

We also, very clearly after a two-year Parliament, are in need of setting the agenda of measures for another year with the Queen's Speech.

Prorogation goes hand in hand with both of these things.

That’s a matter of opinion. Obviously, if true, we will see Boris pursue his bold legislative agenda on that basis, and not pursue a November election.

You and the remainer opposition are fooling nobody in making this fuss. You'd have thought they would have talked themselves out by now. The public is well fed up with it.

You are fooling nobody with your Conservative Party spin. The public can also see that.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

Nobody is disputing that, only if other countries would do the same in a “constitutional crisis”.



That’s a matter of opinion. Obviously, if true, we will see Boris pursue his bold legislative agenda on that basis, and not pursue a November election.



You are fooling nobody with your Conservative Party spin. The public can also see that.

Nothing spinning here. We're just calmly waiting for Brexit.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by jfman

Nobody is disputing that, only if other countries would do the same in a “constitutional crisis”.



That’s a matter of opinion. Obviously, if true, we will see Boris pursue his bold legislative agenda on that basis, and not pursue a November election.



You are fooling nobody with your Conservative Party spin. The public can also see that.

I'm fed up of it and I'm NOT a Conservative.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Nothing spinning here. We're just calmly waiting for Brexit.

It’s obviously spin, if the default was remain you wouldn’t simply accept it. You’d be supporting any legal challenge. I note you’ve ignored my point about a November election.

---------- Post added at 18:30 ---------- Previous post was at 18:29 ----------

Originally Posted by pip08456

I'm fed up of it and I'm NOT a Conservative.

I didn’t say anyone was. I said the spin was. That holds true.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by jfman

It’s obviously spin, if the default was remain you wouldn’t simply accept it. You’d be supporting any legal challenge. I note you’ve ignored my point about a November election.

---------- Post added at 18:30 ---------- Previous post was at 18:29 ----------



I didn’t say anyone was. I said the spin was. That holds true.

We'd be having one before then if Corbin had the balls.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by pip08456

We'd be having one before then if Corbin had the balls.

Which as we all know would have allowed Johnson to set the date after October 31st.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by pip08456

As as been proven recently Parliament can pass time sensitive legislation in a matter of days.

Bills in the pipeline can also be carried over.

You mean avoiding proper scrutiny? That apparently would be illegal.
Link

Lord Drummond Young said that the UK government had failed to show a valid reason for the prorogation, adding: "The circumstances, particularly the length of the prorogation, showed that the purpose was to prevent such scrutiny.

Surely that would also make any law passed containing time restrictions illegal?
European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 2) Act 2019

(b)a motion for the House of Lords to take note of the agreement has been tabled in the House of Lords by a Minister of the Crown and—
(i)the House of Lords has debated the motion, or
(ii)the House of Lords has not concluded a debate on the motion before the end of the period of two Lords sitting days beginning with the first Lords sitting day after the day on which the House of Commons passes the resolution mentioned in paragraph (a).

Unless the ruling of the Scottish Judges was purely Political.


Although scrutiny of what is a bit of a mystery, because there isn't anything to scrutinise, and what there has been, has been turned down 3 times by Parliament.

[jfman]

The danger there in your example the judiciary are telling Parliament what "proper scrutiny" is. Parliament being sovereign.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

It’s obviously spin, if the default was remain you wouldn’t simply accept it. You’d be supporting any legal challenge. I note you’ve ignored my point about a November election.

If the result of the referendum was remain, I would have accepted it. That is because I believe in democratic principles.

This was a democratic country, renowned the world over, until this totally undemocratic lot tried to undermine it any way they could.

A November election may or may not be necessary, depending on whether Boris is actually allowed to govern. No point in soldiering on if everything you try to put through gets opposed and voted down, is there? If he cannot get a majority to push legislation through, he will have to call an election. But that is not his preferred choice.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jfman

I don't really think it's "shameful" that I tolerate "disgusting" behaviour to be honest. I just think you are perceiving events drastically differently from reality to be honest.

The UK was/is far from a colony, even when working alongside it's European partners.

While they are our partners, we are/were far from being a colony. Obviously. However the WA would make us a vassal state.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

If the result of the referendum was remain, I would have accepted it. That is because I believe in democratic principles.

This was a democratic country, renowned the world over, until this totally undemocratic lot tried to undermine it any way they could.

A November election may or may not be necessary, depending on whether Boris is actually allowed to govern. No point in soldiering on if everything you try to put through gets opposed and voted down, is there? If he cannot get a majority to push legislation through, he will have to call an election. But that is not his preferred choice.

The only problem there is the FTPA, he will have to get 2/3 agreement.

The FTPA needs scrapping IMHO.