[Denver]

Originally Posted by reece(:

Cancel Brexit and lock up any rioters

lets let out the rapists and murderers to make space for them

[Kizzy]

Don't be a banana...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/pe...-a7395466.html

[Withano]

I dont know.. If 52% of people voted to exterminate all bees and then the planet started dying, wouldnt we admit we were wrong and let the proffesionals repopulate them instead of hoping for an upcoming miracle.. I know weve had enough of professionals with their logic and science and degrees relevant to the situation.. but wheres the line? sure the people voted but if its clearly the worse of two scenarios should we not just be grown ups and accept we voted unwisely?

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Withano

I dont know.. If 52% of people voted to exterminate all bees and then the planet started dying, wouldnt we admit we were wrong and let the proffesionals repopulate them instead of hoping for an upcoming miracle.. I know weve had enough of professionals with their logic and science and degrees relevant to the situation.. but wheres the line? sure the people voted but if its clearly the worse of two scenarios should we not just be grown ups and accept we voted unwisely?

We're not wrong.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by jaxie

We're not wrong.

You sure about that?...

The High Court’s decision to rule against the Government’s Brexit plans and require Parliament’s approval before Article 50 is triggered is “a resounding defence of parliamentary democracy”, a leading lawyer in the case has told The Independent.

In a surprise verdict that represents a major blow for the Government’s Brexit plans, the Lord Chief Justice backed a legal challenge brought by a coalition of anti-Brexit challengers.

Speaking in court to The Independent following the verdict, John Halford from Bindmans LLP, who represents the People’s Challenge that took the case against the Government, said: “This is a resounding defence of our parliamentary democracy from our unanimous court.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7395191.html

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

You sure about that?...

The High Court’s decision to rule against the Government’s Brexit plans and require Parliament’s approval before Article 50 is triggered is “a resounding defence of parliamentary democracy”, a leading lawyer in the case has told The Independent.

In a surprise verdict that represents a major blow for the Government’s Brexit plans, the Lord Chief Justice backed a legal challenge brought by a coalition of anti-Brexit challengers.

Speaking in court to The Independent following the verdict, John Halford from Bindmans LLP, who represents the People’s Challenge that took the case against the Government, said: “This is a resounding defence of our parliamentary democracy from our unanimous court.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7395191.html

Positive.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Withano

I dont know.. If 52% of people voted to exterminate all bees and then the planet started dying, wouldnt we admit we were wrong and let the proffesionals repopulate them instead of hoping for an upcoming miracle.. I know weve had enough of professionals with their logic and science and degrees relevant to the situation.. but wheres the line? sure the people voted but if its clearly the worse of two scenarios should we not just be grown ups and accept we voted unwisely?

why would that vote take place initially?

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

why would that vote take place initially?

Um.... Have you read The Bill of Rights?

[Withano]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

why would that vote take place initially?

Ukip voters demanded it

[Crimson Dynamo]

If voting actually made any difference

They would not let us do it


Mark Twain

[Kizzy]

How can the govt appeal? This Lord Thomas is as high as it goes... Who are they going to appeal to! God?

[smudgie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

How can the govt appeal? This Lord Thomas is as high as it goes... Who are they going to appeal to! God?

Ermmmmmm, the Supreme Court of course.
The highest in the land

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by smudgie

Ermmmmmm, the Supreme Court of course.
The highest in the land

The man who had the final say is Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd.

As head of the judiciary and President of the Courts, he is the most senior judge in the UK. That honour was previously held by the Lord Chancellor, who is usually an MP or peer, but the legal powers of that role were mostly removed by the Constitutional Reform Act 2005.

But this is the top guy... the big cheese.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7395026.html

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

The man who had the final say is Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd.

As head of the judiciary and President of the Courts, he is the most senior judge in the UK. That honour was previously held by the Lord Chancellor, who is usually an MP or peer, but the legal powers of that role were mostly removed by the Constitutional Reform Act 2005.

But this is the top guy... the big cheese.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7395026.html

Except the appeal is happening. The legal action was taken in the High Court, the appeal will happen in the Supreme Court.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by jaxie

Except the appeal is happening. The legal action was taken in the High Court, the appeal will happen in the Supreme Court.

Yes I get that but if the most senior judge has ruled, then how can someone less senior over rule him?

[Kizzy]

I have a suspicion that many do not really fully understand what it means to be democratic, ...even the PM it would seem that although May says the word 'democratic' she does not understand how the democratic process works.
If she did we wouldn't have people taking her to court to ensure our democratic constitution is upheld.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I have a suspicion that many do not really fully understand what it means to be democratic, ...even the PM it would seem that although May says the word 'democratic' she does not understand how the democratic process works.
If she did we wouldn't have people taking her to court to ensure our democratic constitution is upheld.

I suspect some people don't understand that the EU is morally wrong.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by jaxie

I suspect some people don't understand that the EU is morally wrong.

Excuse me? I don't understand this.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Excuse me? I don't understand this.

Oh dear.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by jaxie

Oh dear.

Explain this moral dilemma, I don't see the inference.

[Maru]

The American interpretation of this news via Twitter

[Maru]

This must be our future when our new president gets elected and that vote becomes highly contested. Then ensues the epic battle to get them impeached, FBI investigations, scandal after scandal and so on... may end up with a stalled system

[Kizzy]

David Davies MP ✔ @DavidTCDavies
Unelected judges calling the shots. This is precisely why we voted out. Power to the people!


Anarchy in the UK? called for by 'mr brexit'.

Unelected judges

[Kizzy]

Theresa May has said she accepts the government will have to pass an act of parliament before it can trigger article 50, the formal process for leaving the European Union.

The government has said it will appeal Thursday’s unexpected high court ruling, which stated that MPs needed to vote on triggering article 50. Downing Street has insisted it will stick to the timetable of invoking article 50 before the end of March 2017.

Asked whether the prime minister agreed with the Brexit secretary, David Davis, that if the judgment is upheld by the supreme court next month the government will have to put a bill before parliament, she said: “What David Davis was setting out is what would be a logical conclusion to draw from the judgment from today.”

Davis had said: “The judges have laid out what we can’t do and not exactly what we can do, but we are presuming it requires an act of parliament, therefore both Commons and Lords.”

A formal bill would grant MPs and peers the opportunity to stage a full debate before article 50 is triggered; to table amendments and, some hope, debate the broad principles on which the government will conduct negotiations with the other 27 EU member states.

Don't you just love democracy in action?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...-of-parliament

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Theresa May has said she accepts the government will have to pass an act of parliament before it can trigger article 50, the formal process for leaving the European Union.

The government has said it will appeal Thursday’s unexpected high court ruling, which stated that MPs needed to vote on triggering article 50. Downing Street has insisted it will stick to the timetable of invoking article 50 before the end of March 2017.

Asked whether the prime minister agreed with the Brexit secretary, David Davis, that if the judgment is upheld by the supreme court next month the government will have to put a bill before parliament, she said: “What David Davis was setting out is what would be a logical conclusion to draw from the judgment from today.”

Davis had said: “The judges have laid out what we can’t do and not exactly what we can do, but we are presuming it requires an act of parliament, therefore both Commons and Lords.”

A formal bill would grant MPs and peers the opportunity to stage a full debate before article 50 is triggered; to table amendments and, some hope, debate the broad principles on which the government will conduct negotiations with the other 27 EU member states.

Don't you just love democracy in action?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...-of-parliament

I do love democracy, that''s why we MUST leave the EU.