Brexit is a Mess, how do we Fix it.

We originally voted to join a Common Market. Not a political and economic bloated bureaucracy that the EU has turned into, with an EU Parliament, Commission, Court etc. The so-called European dream (dreamed for by the few) became a nightmare for the many.

We had a vote. Remainers lost. Yet now some want another vote and try to dehumanise and ignore those that dared to vote to leave, as evidenced by those on here that call us Leavers ignorant, stupid etc.

Get stuffed.

We had a referendum, we voted, you lost. Your arrogant dismissal of the result shows an utter contempt for democracy.

Keep voting until you get what you want? No thanks. Not here, not now - not ever.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: SprocketUK

I've made that point to them time and time again.

Scotland will have far less influence in the EU than it does in the UK.
And when the EU get's rid of national assemblies they'll be a complete irrelevance to them.

And your accusing remain scaremongering!!!

What did Guy Verhofstadt call his book?

Guy's book

originally posted by: oldcarpy
We originally voted to join a Common Market. Not a political and economic bloated bureaucracy that the EU has turned into, with an EU Parliament, Commission, Court etc. The so-called European dream (dreamed for by the few) became a nightmare for the many.

We had a vote. Remainers lost. Yet now some want another vote and try to dehumanise and ignore those that dared to vote to leave, as evidenced by those on here that call us Leavers ignorant, stupid etc.

Get stuffed.

We had a referendum, we voted, you lost. Your arrogant dismissal of the result shows an utter contempt for democracy.

Keep voting until you get what you want? No thanks. Not here, not now - not ever.

you guys dont do best 2 out of three over there?
are there other laws to be voted on again or just this subject?

a reply to: shooterbrody


No we don't, but there are some who think we should. We don't get to vote on laws as such, that's really down to Parliament.

We have the odd referendum on some issues. Some people don't like it when they lose and throw their toys out of their prams and spit their dummies.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: shooterbrody


No we don't, but there are some who think we should. We don't get to vote on laws as such, that's really down to Parliament.

We have the odd referendum on some issues. Some people don't like it when they lose and throw their toys out of their prams and spit their dummies.

Added to the fact the referendums carry no weight in UK law, therefore there is no point in having them. In some other EU nations, referendums are enshrined in law - meaning you can't really compare.

I said from the off (in Eletheia's massive thread) that this mess would occur as it wasn't clearly defined beforehand. Farage was right by saying there should be clearly defined parameters for what constitutes a "win" (although he has admitted that he thought it would be to the benefit of Leave as he didn't really think they would win). For major constitutional change, a clear mandate should be required rather a close vote.

That said, Leave won, no parameters were set........so just get on with it.

a reply to: shooterbrody

It's the way of the EU, keep voting until you get the 'right' answer

Ireland referendum

a reply to: Flavian


That's true - it is not legally binding as Parliament is sovereign. Disagree that there is no point having them. Farage had a point but here we are so, indeed, let's get on with it.

a reply to: shooterbrody


The EU respects the democratic decisions of member nations unless they give the wrong answer to questions asked , the most notable example of this was when the Republic of Ireland voted against the Lisbon Treaty.

There would be uproar, outrage, widespread disgust at such elite disdain for the democratic process. Well, now you know how the Irish people must feel. In June this year, 53.4% of Irish voters rejected the Lisbon treaty, against 46.6% who supported it (giving the "No" camp a "sweeping victory" similar to Obama's). Yet now the Irish will be asked to vote again. EU officials' behind-doors deal to force a second referendum in Ireland reveals their utter contempt for Irish voters, and for democracy itself. It is an historic sucker punch against the sovereignty of the people.
www.theguardian.com...

The Lisbon Treaty was about the European Constitution , Ireland voted against which in the eyes of the EU was the wrong answer so were asked to vote again , the EU has no jurisdiction over the Brexit vote so they can't ask us to vote again so no two out of three here.
With just six months remaining we are leaving and nothing can stop that now , there just isn't time.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: Flavian


That's true - it is not legally binding as Parliament is sovereign. Disagree that there is no point having them. Farage had a point but here we are so, indeed, let's get on with it.

I don't like referendums purely for practical reasons. It is reactionary politics and unfortunately only bad governments (historically and globally) run on reactionary politics.

Good governence is acheived by clearly setting out your parameters (election manifesto in the UK) and then sticking to your plans. If it hasn't had the desired effect, the public get the chance to change at the next election. But simply asking for help on a variety of issues leads to a complete fudge of policies - it really is unworkable as a political solution.

a reply to: oldcarpy

wait a minute....
the brexit referendum was not legally binding?

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: oldcarpy

wait a minute....
the brexit referendum was not legally binding?

Nope!

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: oldcarpy

wait a minute....
the brexit referendum was not legally binding?

No, referendums carry no weight in UK law. They are not enshrined in law so can be completely ignored. As such, they are completely worthless.

a reply to: Flavian


Reactionary - as in reacting to the views of the electorate? Is that a bad thing?

originally posted by: Flavian

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: oldcarpy

wait a minute....
the brexit referendum was not legally binding?

No, referendums carry no weight in UK law. They are not enshrined in law so can be completely ignored. As such, they are completely worthless.

Although good luck to the government that wants to try that....

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin


You beat me to it!

a reply to: Flavian

There was a referendum held on the Good Friday Agreement...

originally posted by: Flavian

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: oldcarpy

wait a minute....
the brexit referendum was not legally binding?

No, referendums carry no weight in UK law. They are not enshrined in law so can be completely ignored. As such, they are completely worthless.

so then if the sitting government does not want to brexit why would they?

a reply to: shooterbrody


Because ignoring it would be political suicide for that Govt.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: Flavian


Reactionary - as in reacting to the views of the electorate? Is that a bad thing?

Yes, when it comes to acheiving results. Just look back at any major political issue over the last 50 years. Opinions change constantly - if you keep trying to react to every change, nothing gets accomplished.

The whole point of an election is the parties tell you what they propose and then the public gets to vote for which parties ideas they like the sound of. If they keep changing their minds because public opinion has swayed one way or the other, then nothing is actually accomplished.

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Flavian

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: oldcarpy

wait a minute....
the brexit referendum was not legally binding?

No, referendums carry no weight in UK law. They are not enshrined in law so can be completely ignored. As such, they are completely worthless.

so then if the sitting government does not want to brexit why would they?

Really asking that question?

What would happen if a sitting government went against the democratic will of its people?