Judges rule Boris Proroguing Parliament is unlawful

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin


So, did I misunderstand or, the process of proroguing is not suspect, but the motive for it is on trial...right ?

Kind of.

So officially Boris said that the reason behind this was to end the current session because its been the longest parliamentary session in decades and that he wanted a new Queens speech. There is nothing wrong with that it is entirely proper.

However the court have seen papers that are on publi c record that prove Boris was planning this weeks before that and that the courts judgement is that this was done for the "improper purpose of stymying Parliament". They are saying this was done to stop parliament scrutinising government at a politically advantageous for the government.

Basically they are saying that it was the advice that Boris gave to the queen was misleading and therefore unlawful, thus the act of prorogation was unlawful in itself and as a result is void.

a reply to: eletheia

The moment a second referendum is announced without enacting the first referendum it immediately discredits and invalidates the whole referendum process.....unless the question asked is whether to accept a Parliamentary endorsed Deal or No Deal or even another Deal.

In/Out can no longer be an option.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Where is the democracy in unlawfully proroguing parliament to silence a democratically elected sovereign parliament?

None.
But where is the democracy in ignoring and seeking to overturn the result of a democratically held referendum?

It would be nice for a little consistency.

Lets keep this on topic eh

Its very hard when many of the people criticising Johnson for proroguing Parliament and calling it undemocratic have for the last three years done nothing but try everything possible to overturn, dilute and/or ignore the result of a democratically held referendum.

a reply to: Freeborn

But where is the democracy in ignoring and seeking to overturn the result of a democratically held referendum?

This was all about blocking no-deal, not overturning the result of the referendum.

Now yes it does seem like further down the road we could be heading back to vote on a referendum but whats went on the last few weeks is more about blocking no deal.

a reply to: eletheia

Even as a Remainer i have always been against a second referendum but i am actually coming round to the idea as our politicians from all sides have roundly failed at every stage of the Brexit process.

Where i disagree with some pushing for a 2nd referendum (like Tom Watson) is that i don't believe stay should be an option if it goes ahead - that vote has already been lost. Instead, it should be used to give our MP's an indication of the type of deal most favoured - if a huge amount don't want a no deal Brexit then that should not be in the negotiating process. Equally though, if it turns out that there isn't much public opposition to No Deal then MP's should drop there resistance to it.

It has got to the stage though where i don't really see any alternative to another referendum. Which is a sad indictment of our political class.

originally posted by: and14263
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin
You're repeating more propaganda:

we will just rip the UK right out of the EU?

There's no ripping or tearing or blasting or booming.

There are jobs going at the BBC I hear... ... ...

Oh!! the "Drama"

These remainers can be very dramatic.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

But Parliament has arrogantly tried to make No Deal not an option.....many people would actually vote for a No Deal departure from the EU especially considering the bullying and uncompromising nature of the EU during the so called negotiations and the antics of many Remainers.

How can someone who has consistently and passionately argued to ignore democracy use 'the interests of demcracy' as an excuse for anything?

Its hypocrisy of the highest order.

People who advocate support for democracy must surely respect the result of a democratically held referendum, shouldn't they?

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

but whats went on the last few weeks is more about blocking no deal.

That's an appearance they like to stick to. Blocking a "no deal" is essentially saying "we will do as EU asks". I'm not saying whether you should go with no deal or not, but removing it as an option for your nation was not really a smart move. The opponents of Brexit are so fixated on stopping it that they arent thinking clearly...or are hoping that in the long run they will overturn the referendum or possibly nullify it. No deal was a strong card for the UK if there was ever to be any true negotiations.

a reply to: Flavian

Thank you, a great post.

A friend of mine said more or less the exact same thing to me the other day.

It just goes to show how out of touch and up their own arse those incompetents who infest Westminster really are.

a reply to: eletheia

To put it politely.

One thing that has come of this, is that since 2016 the media, especially the BBC, are blatantly misrepresenting, misreporting, misquoting, peddling propaganda, on such a huge scale that it has become obvious to all but the most blinkered of people.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

This nonsense of taking no deal of the table is a bad idea though is nonsense.

No deal has always been on the table and its pretty much is the bloody table at this point.

It always remains a possibility.

The Benn Bill that was passed lass week only kicks the can down the road for a few months, it does not take no-deal off the table. It the EU wanted to they could say nope, bye bye, your out, no deal comes the the 31st of October. No-deal is the default.

Parliament are trying to block no-deal happening, because they want a deal, the will of parliament is a deal, currently though we don't have a decent deal. Its like I keep saying there are lots of flavours of Brexit, personally I believe remaining in the single market would be the best choice.

It is my expectation is that in November a General Election will be called, Labour have said that they will campaign on a manifesto that guarantees a second referendum. I think we need to wait until we see the outcome of this general election and take it all from there.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

It the EU wanted to they could say nope, bye bye, your out, no deal comes the the 31st of October. No-deal is the default.

The EU does not want a no deal. They are just better at high stakes poker than your parliament.

Options:

1. Britain remains
2. Britain leaves with deal
3. Britain leaves - no deal

of the three, no deal options is least favorable for the EU. But they are devious enough not to state it loudly. They went all-in and are pretending to be holding a strong hand..while it really isnt.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Where is the democracy in unlawfully proroguing parliament to silence a democratically elected sovereign parliament?

Lets keep this on topic eh

Where is the democracy in them not fulfilling the jobs they were elected

to do?

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: MarioOnTheFly



It is my expectation is that in November a General Election will be called, Labour have said that they will campaign on a manifesto that guarantees a second referendum. I think we need to wait until we see the outcome of this general election and take it all from there.

Hang on there's been a few minutes since Labour last gave an indication of what it wanted, I'd expect that indication to change with the wind.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

Nobody wants no-deal other than a handful of hard line Brexit supporters.

I think though thats getting further away from the topic of the current ruling in the courts.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

Hehe I just typed up a poker analogy and deleted it because he who does not want to learn about negotiating techniques will remain blind to them, even in the face of obviousness.

a reply to: eletheia

Avoiding the question I see.

originally posted by: and14263
a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

Hehe I just typed up a poker analogy and deleted it because he who does not want to learn about negotiating techniques will remain blind to them, even in the face of obviousness.

Poker is life in a nutshell

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

Correct. I completely agree. It's remarkable how much it reflects life. I learned a lot from playing poker. Off topic, sorry.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Aye but the English courts have a difference of opinion, and Boris is in Westminster.

Same old our opinion doesn't count for crap, quite simple.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

This nonsense of taking no deal of the table is a bad idea though is nonsense.

No deal has always been on the table and its pretty much is the bloody table at this point.

It always remains a possibility.

The Benn Bill that was passed lass week only kicks the can down the road for a few months, it does not take no-deal off the table. It the EU wanted to they could say nope, bye bye, your out, no deal comes the the 31st of October. No-deal is the default.

Parliament are trying to block no-deal happening, because they want a deal, the will of parliament is a deal, currently though we don't have a decent deal. Its like I keep saying there are lots of flavours of Brexit, personally I believe remaining in the single market would be the best choice.

It is my expectation is that in November a General Election will be called, Labour have said that they will campaign on a manifesto that guarantees a second referendum. I think we need to wait until we see the outcome of this general election and take it all from there.

The problem is though that Parliament have kicked out at least 10 variations of proposed deals (including at least 8 on one night). And whilst doing this, they have offered no sensible alternatives to the deals kicked out. As such, it is hard to argue that Parliament is attempting to ignore the referendum.

They are essentially trying to argue for their position whilst kicking out all possibilities - it is a totally untenable position and it actually worries me that our political class fail to see that. They are literally shredding any levels of decency within Parliament by consistently lying to the Public about this.

If they don't want no deal, then frankly they need to get off their arses and realise that for any deal to be possible, compromise is needed all round.