Guest Foxin_mad Posted 20 June 2018 Posted 20 June 2018 This is a pretty dumb move by the EU. This is the kind of nonsense they quite rightly take stick for: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-44546620
leicsmac Posted 20 June 2018 Posted 20 June 2018 (edited) 34 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said: This is a pretty dumb move by the EU. This is the kind of nonsense they quite rightly take stick for: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-44546620 Learning from the Americans when it comes to ridiculous digital legislation, it would seem - net neutrality springs to mind. Such daftness should really be left just to them. Edited 20 June 2018 by leicsmac
Buce Posted 20 June 2018 Posted 20 June 2018 6 minutes ago, toddybad said: Party before country every time. Fvcking scum.
Webbo Posted 20 June 2018 Posted 20 June 2018 14 minutes ago, toddybad said: When said take back control, we didn't mean ignore what the voters want and hand it back to the EU. 1
Guest MattP Posted 20 June 2018 Posted 20 June 2018 14 minutes ago, toddybad said: 7 minutes ago, Buce said: Party before country every time. Fvcking scum. Scum for basically upholding the result of the referendum and exactly what the government leaflet said? Crazy. The idea we would totally hamstring ourselves into getting a terrible deal with this option was always ridiculous and that's why people like the ideologue remainers like Lucas, Grieve and Soubry were behind it, the one last chance to stop it, thankfully they haven't succeeded. (Looked like we had the numbers anyway to win the vote with the Labour rebels)
Guest MattP Posted 20 June 2018 Posted 20 June 2018 3 minutes ago, Webbo said: When said take back control, we didn't mean ignore what the voters want and hand it back to the EU. Pretty much nail on head. Very weird some remainers assumed we voted to leave the EU to take back control just so we could then give control back to them. This trade of thought is as weird as the "no one voted to be poorer" line.
Guest Posted 20 June 2018 Posted 20 June 2018 53 minutes ago, Webbo said: When said take back control, we didn't mean ignore what the voters want and hand it back to the EU. How would parliament having a say in the event that no deal was reached anything to do with handing anything back to the EU? We live in a parliamentary democracy and parliament has just voted for the TM to act like a dictator on this issue.
Strokes Posted 20 June 2018 Posted 20 June 2018 3 minutes ago, toddybad said: How would parliament having a say in the event that no deal was reached anything to do with handing anything back to the EU? We live in a parliamentary democracy and parliament has just voted for the TM to act like a dictator on this issue. They still get a choice, it’s just the choices are in favour of leave. Parliament has chosen the path, so what part is not democratic?
Webbo Posted 20 June 2018 Posted 20 June 2018 5 minutes ago, toddybad said: How would parliament having a say in the event that no deal was reached anything to do with handing anything back to the EU? We live in a parliamentary democracy and parliament has just voted for the TM to act like a dictator on this issue. Do you see the contradiction there? Parliament has had a say by rejecting this amendment.
Guest MattP Posted 20 June 2018 Posted 20 June 2018 20 minutes ago, toddybad said: How would parliament having a say in the event that no deal was reached anything to do with handing anything back to the EU? We live in a parliamentary democracy and parliament has just voted for the TM to act like a dictator on this issue. The government leaflet said "We will implement the decision you take". It did not say "we'll try and do a deal and if we don't get a perfect one we'll give your decision to parliament again to reject it" The reason it didn't say that is because everyone would have realised that was going to happen as parliament would want to reverse it.
Webbo Posted 20 June 2018 Posted 20 June 2018 I'll post this before I'm accused of deliberately ignoring it. 1
Sharpe's Fox Posted 20 June 2018 Posted 20 June 2018 Tory “rebels” bottle it again. Now i don’t know who are bigger bottlejobs; the Tory Eurosceptics or the Europhiles. For some on the so called progressives to put their faith in the likes of Grieve and Morgan looks increasingly unhinged. Get behind John McDonnell or shut up.
Strokes Posted 20 June 2018 Posted 20 June 2018 17 minutes ago, Sharpe's Fox said: Tory “rebels” bottle it again. Now i don’t know who are bigger bottlejobs; the Tory Eurosceptics or the Europhiles. For some on the so called progressives to put their faith in the likes of Grieve and Morgan looks increasingly unhinged. Get behind John McDonnell or shut up.
Alf Bentley Posted 20 June 2018 Posted 20 June 2018 1 hour ago, toddybad said: "Truly sickening to see IDS" would almost have been enough, Caroline.... Whoops, mustn't get into personal attacks. I don't mind some Tory Brexiteers on a personal level, but IDS somehow manages to be simultaneously obnoxious yet ridiculous, useless yet damaging. Would all you Brexiteers applauding this vote have been so enthusiastic about the "democratic" nature of the vote if it had been Blair going off to negotiate and possibly facing no proper parliamentary scrutiny on his return? Mind you, there's been some sort of compromise that allows John Bercow to decide whether Parliament has the power to amend the government bill, hasn't there? So, I'm not sure this debate over parliamentary scrutiny is over yet...... Let's see what happens if May comes back with nothing or with something that angers one side or the other. And it might be the Hard Brexiteers who are angered by what she negotiates, not necessarily the Tory/Lab Europhile "Wets".
DANGEROUS TIGER Posted 20 June 2018 Posted 20 June 2018 What we need is another Maggie Thatcher, who would have the European Parliament running for cover! She would not have put up with the bullshit! 1
bovril Posted 20 June 2018 Posted 20 June 2018 43 minutes ago, DANGEROUS TIGER said: What we need is another Maggie Thatcher, who would have the European Parliament running for cover! She would not have put up with the bullshit! I seriously doubt she would have let the country get sidetracked for two years by Brexit, but who knows....
Guest Posted 20 June 2018 Posted 20 June 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, Webbo said: I'll post this before I'm accused of deliberately ignoring it. And it still means nothing. 47 minutes ago, DANGEROUS TIGER said: What we need is another Maggie Thatcher, who would have the European Parliament running for cover! She would not have put up with the bullshit! Great, let's add hundreds of thousands of unemployed to the country's problems like the wicked witch did. The Tories really did behave like scumbags today, refusing to allow sick mps to vote from cars at the doors of parliament as is the convention. Instead they forced them in. Ailing MP wheeled into Commons in pyjamas criticises Tory whips https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/20/ailing-mp-wheeled-into-commons-in-pyjamas-criticises-tory-whips?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard Edited 20 June 2018 by Guest
Strokes Posted 20 June 2018 Posted 20 June 2018 2 hours ago, Alf Bentley said: "Truly sickening to see IDS" would almost have been enough, Caroline.... Whoops, mustn't get into personal attacks. I don't mind some Tory Brexiteers on a personal level, but IDS somehow manages to be simultaneously obnoxious yet ridiculous, useless yet damaging. Would all you Brexiteers applauding this vote have been so enthusiastic about the "democratic" nature of the vote if it had been Blair going off to negotiate and possibly facing no proper parliamentary scrutiny on his return? What like the Lisbon treaty you mean?
Alf Bentley Posted 20 June 2018 Posted 20 June 2018 1 hour ago, Strokes said: What like the Lisbon treaty you mean? In case of confusion, the vote that I was referring to was today's vote defeating Grieve's amendment seeking to give parliament a meaningful vote on the final deal (the right for parliament to amend the govt bill or ask the govt to renegotiate - not just to accept the deal or reject it and crash out of the EU with no deal). I was not referring to the referendum vote. I say that as I'm not sure what comparison you're making to the Lisbon Treaty. The Lisbon Treaty WAS debated in parliament and amendments to the legislation WERE allowed, including one seeking a referendum, it is just that the amendment was defeated: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7461918.stm "The bill finally cleared the Commons in March after 14 days of debate in which 29 Labour rebels backed a Tory referendum bid. That was rejected by a majority of 63 after Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg ordered his MPs to abstain - an order ignored by 13 of his number who voted in support of the Tory measure. A second Tory attempt by peers to force the government to hold a referendum was defeated by 280 votes to 218". I know Eurosceptics wanted a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty at the time. I didn't have a strong view for or against. While I've never seen the EU as perfect, I didn't see more integration as a problem, so it was no big deal to me either way. When the 2016 referendum was called, I naively supported that as I thought the nation needed a proper debate about the EU (unfortunately, it didn't get one - from either side). I know that a case can be made that we should have had a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, but I'm not sure how that's relevant. I'm not calling for another referendum - and don't think we should have one any time soon, unless there's a massive shift in public opinion against Brexit. I DO think that our democratically-elected parliament should have a proper say on any deal that our unelected executive negotiates, or any failure of our unelected executive to negotiate a deal. The Lisbon Treaty was a significant amending treaty. Parliamentary amendments to legislation for the Lisbon Treaty were allowed, they were just defeated. The Brexit Deal (or Non-Deal) will be a much, much bigger change. Yet Parliament has just voted not to be able to amend the relevant legislation - or, at least, to rely on John Bercow to decide whether it's able to do so. Shamefully anti-democratic! Brexit supporters trumpeted their desire for "our democratic parliament to take back control".....but are now delighted that our democratic parliament is ceding control to our unelected executive, purely because you think that unelected executive is more likely to give you what you want: maximum separation from the EU whatever the cost (though I'm not sure that's what May & Davis will deliver). Pretty conclusive proof that Brexit is NOT a democratic cause. If anything it is all about nationalism, hostility to the EU, personal discontent and the anti-democratic centralization of power at a national level. Different Brexiteers clearly have different ideas about what happens after that. Lots of Tories will want some sort of ultra-deregulated Thatcherism providing generous terms to big business. Labour Left Brexiteers believe that Corbyn is Stalin 2.0, the new Uncle Joe who will lead the British working class in a glorious triumph against global capitalism, establishing "socialism in one country" (). All the guff about "taking back democratic control" is just a veil of respectability.....reactions to this defeat for democracy make that clear, just as they did when Brexiteers opposed court action to ensure our elected parliament got to decide on Article 50, not just our unelected executive. 1
Strokes Posted 20 June 2018 Posted 20 June 2018 9 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said: In case of confusion, the vote that I was referring to was today's vote defeating Grieve's amendment seeking to give parliament a meaningful vote on the final deal (the right for parliament to amend the govt bill or ask the govt to renegotiate - not just to accept the deal or reject it and crash out of the EU with no deal). I was not referring to the referendum vote. I say that as I'm not sure what comparison you're making to the Lisbon Treaty. The Lisbon Treaty WAS debated in parliament and amendments to the legislation WERE allowed, including one seeking a referendum, it is just that the amendment was defeated: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7461918.stm "The bill finally cleared the Commons in March after 14 days of debate in which 29 Labour rebels backed a Tory referendum bid. That was rejected by a majority of 63 after Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg ordered his MPs to abstain - an order ignored by 13 of his number who voted in support of the Tory measure. A second Tory attempt by peers to force the government to hold a referendum was defeated by 280 votes to 218". I know Eurosceptics wanted a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty at the time. I didn't have a strong view for or against. While I've never seen the EU as perfect, I didn't see more integration as a problem, so it was no big deal to me either way. When the 2016 referendum was called, I naively supported that as I thought the nation needed a proper debate about the EU (unfortunately, it didn't get one - from either side). I know that a case can be made that we should have had a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, but I'm not sure how that's relevant. I'm not calling for another referendum - and don't think we should have one any time soon, unless there's a massive shift in public opinion against Brexit. I DO think that our democratically-elected parliament should have a proper say on any deal that our unelected executive negotiates, or any failure of our unelected executive to negotiate a deal. The Lisbon Treaty was a significant amending treaty. Parliamentary amendments to legislation for the Lisbon Treaty were allowed, they were just defeated. The Brexit Deal (or Non-Deal) will be a much, much bigger change. Yet Parliament has just voted not to be able to amend the relevant legislation - or, at least, to rely on John Bercow to decide whether it's able to do so. Shamefully anti-democratic! Brexit supporters trumpeted their desire for "our democratic parliament to take back control".....but are now delighted that our democratic parliament is ceding control to our unelected executive, purely because you think that unelected executive is more likely to give you what you want: maximum separation from the EU whatever the cost (though I'm not sure that's what May & Davis will deliver). Pretty conclusive proof that Brexit is NOT a democratic cause. If anything it is all about nationalism, hostility to the EU, personal discontent and the anti-democratic centralization of power at a national level. Different Brexiteers clearly have different ideas about what happens after that. Lots of Tories will want some sort of ultra-deregulated Thatcherism providing generous terms to big business. Labour Left Brexiteers believe that Corbyn is Stalin 2.0, the new Uncle Joe who will lead the British working class in a glorious triumph against global capitalism, establishing "socialism in one country" (). All the guff about "taking back democratic control" is just a veil of respectability.....reactions to this defeat for democracy make that clear, just as they did when Brexiteers opposed court action to ensure our elected parliament got to decide on Article 50, not just our unelected executive. I don’t get how you can say it’s undemocratic, Parliament have voted this path democratically, they have allowed it to be delegated due to the nature of it. If the EU know we cannot leave with no deal, they have no incentive to offer us anything to stay. The people voted for it, the vote is meaningful and no different to any other vote on governmental matters. No deal is better than a bad deal and it is what was voted for. Today is a victory for democracy and to attempt to paint as the opposite is shameful imo. 1
Guest Posted 20 June 2018 Posted 20 June 2018 22 minutes ago, Strokes said: I don’t get how you can say it’s undemocratic, Parliament have voted this path democratically, they have allowed it to be delegated due to the nature of it. If the EU know we cannot leave with no deal, they have no incentive to offer us anything to stay. The people voted for it, the vote is meaningful and no different to any other vote on governmental matters. No deal is better than a bad deal and it is what was voted for. Today is a victory for democracy and to attempt to paint as the opposite is shameful imo. Complete nonsense.
Recommended Posts