Berberis Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 British sovereignty would be Parliament acting according to the wishes of the people instead of ignoring the wishes of the British people. You seem to think that Parliament is there to fulfil the will of the people. Its not, its there to make decisions on behalf of the people, its very different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*_ash_* Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 Conservative communities secretary Sajid Javid MP, Labour's Lisa Nandy MP, editor-in-chief of the Economist Zanny Minton Beddoes, the ken loach take down from the audience was great I don't generally like QT turning into a Pub argument, or online Twitface-type argument, but I did laugh! - If outside people think Britain is embarrassing because of Brexit, then what must they think of our decision making skills? Just build the ****ing thing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 It's all very interesting I'll lay one last question/bet: Will it be Labour or Tory participant to first use the line 'first of all, I'd like to say... we respect the UK public vote...' Labour - deffo labour. Spare a thought for labour MPs in these troubled times - they've a leader most MPs don't like, they don't want to leave the EU but their core voters do want to leave the EU. At national level they're all over the place and if they do vote brexit they might still lose their jobs! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ez8004 Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 (edited) British sovereignty would be Parliament acting according to the wishes of the people instead of ignoring the wishes of the British people. A classic example of a comment from a person who has no idea what parliamentary sovereignty actually means. The will of the people really has nothing to do with it. The will of the people cannot and will not rule any legislation invalid. Edited November 3, 2016 by ez8004 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil752 Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 A classic example of a comment from a person who has no idea what parliamentary sovereignty actually means. The will of the people really has nothing to do with it. The will of the people cannot and will not rule any legislation invalid. maybe but few politicians will vote against this it just a delaying tactic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyofborg Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 maybe but few politicians will vote against this it just a delaying tactic. it's unlikely to delay anything Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil752 Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 it's unlikely to delay anything yep your right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyofborg Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 yep your right i know :banana::banana::banana: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 Calling an early General Election. Anyone read the Fixed Term Parliaments act yet? You can't just call one. That bit of Royal Preogative is no longer about... May has no chance of getting anywhere with that - she can either call a vote of no confidence in her own Govt.... Or she can get 2/3rd of the House to vote for dissolution. I doubt either are likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flanker7 Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 (edited) You seem to think that Parliament is there to fulfil the will of the people. Its not, its there to make decisions on behalf of the people, its very different. You're dead right. We have a representative democracy not a list of delegates who will have to vote the way of their electoral mandates. The death penalty would pass every time if it was the choice of the electorate but its not and the death penalty will never return, hopefully. Many would say this is a bad thing but that's the way it is. The 2016 Brexiters showed how naive they were and bought all the woolly and inaccurate headlines that could not be delivered. They did not have the backing of a major UK party. No Brexiter could speak with any authority about what would happen on day +1 if they won. We are left with a party who were substantially anti-Brexit negotiating the terms of the very thing they campaigned against. The recent referendum overturned the original Europe vote, on the grounds that it was more relevant to the current position. Likewise if we had a 2017 General Election on the terms of the negotiation to leave the EU it would then take precedence over the Referendum vote. After all, no one would argue that a March 2017 vote was less representative of the views of the British public than a 2016 vote. The only sensible solution is for the Conservatives to lay out their (European) red line negotiating positions and challenge the opposition parties to lay out their (European) red line negotiating positions and call a General Election on that basis. That vote would then form the most recent mandate of the British people to a party capable of delivering on their election pledges. Then the Public could hold them to account. At the moment the Brexiters are all hissing infamy!, infamy! but who are they hissing it to? Get real and stop swallowing media headline like children. In response to the thread headline - "The Referendum decision should lead to a General Election" Edited November 4, 2016 by Flanker7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now