By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
OUT WITH A DEAL EATING OUR CAKE AND LOVING IT suck it up remoaners
And like a typical anti democracy remoaner he decided the will of the people should be ignored the minute the democratic result was in total fecking hypocrite 😂😂😂😂😂😂
Despite it being voted in to law by the commons the spineless two faced remoaner MPs have totally abandoned any morals and decided to ignore the will of the British people.
It will be remembered and no election or referendum will ever be the same again in this country.
The one thing that will come is a massive surge in the popularity of UKIP or a similar party in the future who stand for the 52%.
Happy Days.
[Post edited 1 Jan 2021 14:13]
OUT AFLI SUCK IT UP REMOANER LOSERS
🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧
Countdown to the end of Democracy in the UK on 16:19 - Sep 11 by londonlisa2001
As I said previously, I used yellowhammer as an example of what parliament may want to do, but as I also said, it matters not whether parliament wants to spend 4 weeks playing cards, it’s the principle that is important.
Separate actions were launched in all three jurisdictions - England (and Wales), Scotland and Northern Ireland.
The reason that the Scottish court has a different opinion (at this stage) to the High court is not ‘surprising because it was based in the same facts’ but unsurprising in that the Scottish court has different precedent. That doesn’t mean it’s an overreach, it means the basis on which they have made a ruling is different. As you well know. That doesn’t make it a court that is any less real than the High Court.
As I have now said twice, I expect the Supreme Court to make a different ruling as they are bound by the precedent in both countries, not just one. That doesn’t make it ‘more correct’ as such, it doesn’t make the Scottish decision ‘wrong’. The UK parliament has done something which, at present, has been ruled lawful in England and unlawful in Scotland. Whether or not it is lawful in the UK has yet to be determined.
And many many prime ministers have not done this. None have. The interesting part of the ruling of the High Court is that they have stated that a government is able to prorogue for ‘political advantage’. That’s extraordinary if upheld by the Supreme Court. What’s to stop a Corbyn type of the future using such a mechanism to enforce renationalisation against the will of parliament?
There’s rather too much of doing things because it ‘annoys’ significant parts of the population at present. In my humble opinion of course. Because it sets a dangerous precedent that one day, will come and bite the people who think it’s fine when it supports their political view point, right on their over entitled arse.
And many many prime ministers have not done this. None have. The interesting part of the ruling of the High Court is that they have stated that a government is able to prorogue for ‘political advantage’. That’s extraordinary if upheld by the Supreme Court. What’s to stop a Corbyn type of the future using such a mechanism to enforce renationalisation against the will of parliament?
This bit, now maybe I read it wrong, maybe the BBC didn't report it properly but, they said the Judges had said that the accusation of proroging for political advantage was obviously wrong because no advantage had been gained. The law preventing no deal had been passed. Actually, they said this, and I quote
"The ability of Parliament to move with speed when it chooses to do so undermines the underlying premise of the case for the claimant that prorogation would deny Parliament the opportunity to do precisely what it has now done"
So they haven't stated that Parliament is able to prorogue for political advantage just that the advantage that was alleged did not happen. That the suspension of Parliament was a purely political move and was therefore not a matter for the courts.
Countdown to the end of Democracy in the UK on 19:03 - Sep 11 by Catullus
And many many prime ministers have not done this. None have. The interesting part of the ruling of the High Court is that they have stated that a government is able to prorogue for ‘political advantage’. That’s extraordinary if upheld by the Supreme Court. What’s to stop a Corbyn type of the future using such a mechanism to enforce renationalisation against the will of parliament?
This bit, now maybe I read it wrong, maybe the BBC didn't report it properly but, they said the Judges had said that the accusation of proroging for political advantage was obviously wrong because no advantage had been gained. The law preventing no deal had been passed. Actually, they said this, and I quote
"The ability of Parliament to move with speed when it chooses to do so undermines the underlying premise of the case for the claimant that prorogation would deny Parliament the opportunity to do precisely what it has now done"
So they haven't stated that Parliament is able to prorogue for political advantage just that the advantage that was alleged did not happen. That the suspension of Parliament was a purely political move and was therefore not a matter for the courts.
This is section 60 of the judgement:
“the purpose of the power of prorogation is not confined to preparations for the Queen’s Speech. It may be used for a number of different reasons, as, on the evidence, it has been in the present case. Such reasons may, depending upon the precise facts and circumstances, extend to obtaining a political advantage.”
I was referring to this earlier.
0
Countdown to the end of Democracy in the UK on 19:30 - Sep 11 with 1607 views
Countdown to the end of Democracy in the UK on 18:50 - Sep 11 by londonlisa2001
You’re conflating two different point I made and attempting to say I have said something different.
I said ‘many, many prime ministers have not done this’.
Separately, I mentioned a point I find interesting about the High Court ruling.
What many many prime ministers have not done is pretended both to the country and, it appears, to the Monarch, to prorogue parliament for one reason while admitting in writing they have done so for a different reason. The length of the prorogation is also extraordinary.
The reason I find the High Court judgement interesting is its explicit reference to the use of prorogation for purely political advantage.
The length of the prorogation is also extraordinary.
Is it much longer than Major's from Friday, 21 March 1997 to May 1st 1997? ie over 40 days?
0
Countdown to the end of Democracy in the UK on 20:15 - Sep 11 with 1528 views
Countdown to the end of Democracy in the UK on 18:54 - Sep 11 by rockinjk
Correct.
It’s not the prorogation it’s the reason for doing so.
Everyone knows that this has been done to shut Parliament down. There is no question that this unprecedented when you consider what we about to do.
You’d think Parliament would be open day and night at the moment. Not shut down.
If leavers could take the blinkers off for once they would agree
The whole purpose of Proroguing is shutting down Parliament, what do you think those ones I quoted were doing. In 1948 Labour did not want the Lords interfering, so they shutdown Parliament. In 1997 Major did not want a damning report to come out before elections and shut down parliament and lost his job anyway.
-1
Countdown to the end of Democracy in the UK on 20:17 - Sep 11 with 1523 views
Countdown to the end of Democracy in the UK on 19:48 - Sep 11 by londonlisa2001
It was only yesterday Cummings urged everyone to get out of London and meet other people. I can only assume he didn’t mean go to Scotland.
Yes, get out of London and stop talking to rich remainers was his advice, as he left his £1.6M London townhouse complete with reading room, formal living room and tapestry room.
I'm not sure what a tapestry room is but I doubt most remainers or leavers have one.
3
Countdown to the end of Democracy in the UK on 20:18 - Sep 11 with 1521 views
Countdown to the end of Democracy in the UK on 20:28 - Sep 11 by exiledclaseboy
Yellowhammer has been released.
Well, a five page summary of it has.
Well, most of a five page summary of it has.
As I understand it, the published document is not the exact same version as the one previously provided. Or at least the headline is different, with the original calling it the base case and now calling it Reasonable Worst Case.
One could only speculate on the reasons for that rebranding.
Plus of course the lack of providing the communications regarding proroguing.
Oh, and that document. Iesu mawr. What level of nutcase would read that and this, yeah, that's fine, no problems, just a little bump in the road.
Countdown to the end of Democracy in the UK on 20:33 - Sep 11 by Uxbridge
As I understand it, the published document is not the exact same version as the one previously provided. Or at least the headline is different, with the original calling it the base case and now calling it Reasonable Worst Case.
One could only speculate on the reasons for that rebranding.
Plus of course the lack of providing the communications regarding proroguing.
Oh, and that document. Iesu mawr. What level of nutcase would read that and this, yeah, that's fine, no problems, just a little bump in the road.
In answer to his question, may I refer my honourable friend to this very thread.
Countdown to the end of Democracy in the UK on 20:36 - Sep 11 by monmouth
In answer to his question, may I refer my honourable friend to this very thread.
Ha. Yeah, probs.
I've had some interesting conversations with some arch Brexiters today. Opinions are changing. This has massively backfired on Johnson and Cummings.
The only way out of this now is a second ref, and quickly. I can quite easily see Johnson resigning, Corbyn forming a Govt on the condition he calls one. A general election solves nothing until this is sorted.
The redacted part of the #Yellowhammer document is about 90 words.
This para about refineries was in the leaked version. It's 91 words and followed the fuel shortage para, so I'd say this is almost certainly it. pic.twitter.com/eQPrdvmXpK