26-01-2017, 12:05 PM
101
Re: Supreme Court Brexit Ruling: Government Must Consult MPs Over Article 50
Originally Posted by Twink55
->
I would agree with that on a criminal case, but on this topic there should be no grey areas... the PM either can or cannot start Article 50. There should be no emotions involved because it is either black or white, which therefore justifies JBR's comment on why 3 judges thought differently.If this law is written to allow different interpretations, then it should not be considered a valid law and should be rewritten.
26-01-2017, 12:11 PM
102
Re: Supreme Court Brexit Ruling: Government Must Consult MPs Over Article 50
Originally Posted by Rainmaker
->
I wasn't saying JBRs comments were not justified just that i thought he was being a little harsh.
26-01-2017, 01:05 PM
103
Re: Supreme Court Brexit Ruling: Government Must Consult MPs Over Article 50
Originally Posted by Rainmaker
->
Except there are grey areas. Since we don't have a written constitution, written down in, shall we say Black and white. it is open to interpretation, There is nothing which defines clearly and concisely who gets to trigger article 50, just that it has to be done..The Judges have made the ruling based on their own experience and preferences, Therefore as I said previously what decides things is your/their own judgement which may or may not agree with your neighbour's.
Its more to do with the constitution or lack of a written on which is the problem not the law.
As I remember, there were no referenda and no objections leading to legal cases. PMs and their ministers happily gave away of our sovereignty bit by bit. That seemed to be legally acceptable, didn't it?
So what's the difference today? Trendy lefty-liberal do-gooders trying to get their own way because they are not happy with a democratic decision. A relatively recent phenomenon.
26-01-2017, 01:17 PM
104
Re: Supreme Court Brexit Ruling: Government Must Consult MPs Over Article 50
Originally Posted by JBR
->
So why was there no such arguing and court cases in the years when we were happily handing over more and more rights to the EU?As I remember, there were no referenda and no objections leading to legal cases. PMs and their ministers happily gave away of our sovereignty bit by bit. That seemed to be legally acceptable, didn't it?
So what's the difference today? Trendy lefty-liberal do-gooders trying to get their own way because they are not happy with a democratic decision. A relatively recent phenomenon.
No, not at all, it was equally open for anyone who thought that the Government were acting outside their powers to go to Court.
Nobody bothered.
26-01-2017, 01:22 PM
106
Re: Supreme Court Brexit Ruling: Government Must Consult MPs Over Article 50
Originally Posted by Julie1962
->
No body bothered or perhaps most of us couldn't afford it ! I'm still unsure who is funding these cases. All very secretive it seems.
Some of the richest people in the Country funded the leave campaign.
My own MP leads a Brexit outfit with £20 million in funding and he is extremely anti EU and extremely right wing.
26-01-2017, 01:24 PM
107
Re: Supreme Court Brexit Ruling: Government Must Consult MPs Over Article 50
Originally Posted by Rainmaker
->
Except there are grey areas. Since we don't have a written constitution, written down in, shall we say Black and white. it is open to interpretation, There is nothing which defines clearly and concisely who gets to trigger article 50, just that it has to be done..The Judges have made the ruling based on their own experience and preferences, Therefore as I said previously what decides things is your/their own judgement which may or may not agree with your neighbour's.
Its more to do with the constitution or lack of a written on which is the problem not the law.
I think their ruling on this issue is based largely on the precedent set circa 1649 following the Civil War when it was being determined whether the crown or parliament held sway.
26-01-2017, 01:27 PM
108
Re: Supreme Court Brexit Ruling: Government Must Consult MPs Over Article 50
Originally Posted by swimfeeders
->
HiNo, not at all, it was equally open for anyone who thought that the Government were acting outside their powers to go to Court.
Nobody bothered.
26-01-2017, 02:09 PM
110
Re: Supreme Court Brexit Ruling: Government Must Consult MPs Over Article 50
Originally Posted by Rainmaker
->
Except there are grey areas. Since we don't have a written constitution, written down in, shall we say Black and white. it is open to interpretation, There is nothing which defines clearly and concisely who gets to trigger article 50, just that it has to be done..The Judges have made the ruling based on their own experience and preferences, Therefore as I said previously what decides things is your/their own judgement which may or may not agree with your neighbour's.
Its more to do with the constitution or lack of a written on which is the problem not the law.
Cameron, a democratically elected prime minister, allowed a referendum, which resulted in a democratic vote to leave the EU. What is the point of having a referendum if the government cannot act on it's result?
If it is just that the new PM cannot act on it, then that means she would not have the ability that Cameron had, so there should have been a general election to establish that she was an democratically elected leader of the party the people had voted for..... and Cameron should have had to stay till that had been decided. If Corbyn had become PM would he have been able to use Article 50?
What you are saying is that, either Cameron did not have the authority to use Article 50, or Mrs May didn't because she had not been democratically elected as leader by the public. Surely this means that a group of judges, who were not democratically elected ( and may have personal reasons to try and change the referendum vote) have the power to overrule decisions made by the government, which was democratically elected, and the people of this country.
Does that sound like a democratic country to you?
To me it sounds like a way of making sure that we remain in the EU, and that is not what the democratic referendum vote said the people wanted!
The judges are saying that the procedures for this referendum's result were not done correctly, so the British people want to know what was done wrong, and by who. We would also like to know why 3 judges saw it differently
|
|
