Jump to content

The Consequences of Brexit [part 5] Read 1st post before posting


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Lockdoctor said:

You lack an understanding of what is right and what is wrong. There was absolutely no need to for the UK Government to release the full legal advice they had been given because every body already knew the deal on offer meant the UK would be trapped in the customs union unless the EU give permission for the UK to leave. The sole purpose of those demanding the UK Government to release the full legal text was to humiliate the UK Government.  Andrea Leadsom who is far smarter than you explained the reason why the UK Government didn't want to release the full legal text in an interview on BBC breakfast this morning.  You are too arrogant to understand the reasons why the UK Government make certain  decisions.

What I understand, and you oh-so-clearly don't, is that under the principle of Parliamentary sovereignty, confirmed by the highest Court authority in the land, the government reports and answers to MPs, not the other way around.

 

What I am, is not sufficiently informed to understand these reasons. Neither were the MPs, whence their motion, since they could do something about it.

 

Careful not to fall when you step off your soapbox.

Edited by L00b
Link to comment
Share on other sites

An interesting report by Matt Frei on C4 News which says that the reason the EU will not further negotiate the withdrawal agreement or extend Article 50 is because they want this all cleared up before the European Parliament elections of next May when  Britons could technically stand for election as MEP's.

 

As an increase is expected in far-right and populist MEPs, what they don't want is a bunch of UKIP MEPs joining the European Parliament for another term.

 

So with every day that passes it looks more likely that this will eventually boil down to a choice between 'no deal' and 'no Brexit'. I wonder what odds the bookies have on 'no Brexit' now. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/2/2018 at 6:01 PM, apelike said:

A few quotes from that link:

 

"But a referendum can only be held if the government legislates for one and a majority of MPs vote for it."

 

"Michael Gove claimed the Leave campaign would probably win a fresh referendum by an even larger margin but holding one would "damage faith in democracy and rip apart the social fabric" of the country. Many Leave voters would see it is a "condescending" move by the political establishment, who would effectively be saying people were "too thick to make a decision" the first time around, he told Andrew Marr."

 

Project fact

Post deleted. 

Wrong post quoted. 

Edited by janie48
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, L00b said:

What I understand, and you oh-so-clearly don't, is that under the principle of Parliamentary sovereignty, confirmed by the highest Court authority in the land, the government reports and answers to MPs, not the other way around.

 

What I am, is not sufficiently informed to understand these reasons. Neither were the MPs, whence their motion, since they could do something about it.

 

Careful not to fall when you step off your soapbox.

A  predictable reply from an arrogant deluded person who thinks they know everything.  I don't pretend to be an expert but I know Andrea Leasome has more credibility than a French person who has chips on both of his shoulders.  Vive la france !

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Lockdoctor said:

but I know Andrea Leasome has more credibility than a French person who has chips on both of his shoulders.  Vive la france !

 

Would this be the same Andrea Leadsom who lied about her experience as a senior investment manager during her bid to become party leader?

 

Yep, definitely more credibility! 😂😂😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Lockdoctor said:

A  predictable reply from an arrogant deluded person who thinks they know everything.  I don't pretend to be an expert but I know Andrea Leasome has more credibility than a French person who has chips on both of his shoulders.  Vive la france !

 

Was it not you who proclaimed that it was wrong for remainers to make things personal? Good job in preaching your own practice...

As an aside, Andrea Leadsom is only where she is because nobody else wants to be there right now. She'll be gone in a year due to the next faux-pas. (That's French, Vive la France)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.