Join for free
shropshiregirl's Avatar
shropshiregirl
Chatterbox
shropshiregirl is offline
Shropshire
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 6,919
shropshiregirl is female  shropshiregirl has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
07-08-2020, 12:55 PM
1

Were We Ever A Member Of The EU ?? Part Two

Does any of this really matter to politicians?

Is there any hope that Parliament will repeal the 1972 European Communities Act and restore sovereignty to the people? Not in the immediate future.

But the errors made by Heath and Wilson mean that when we want to leave the EU, it will be very easy.
An independent British Parliament would simply have to pass one short Act of Parliament and give notice to the EU and we would be out of this accursed club.

Copyright Vernon Coleman 2011

UNQUOTE

Well, there we have it! One thing puzzles me however? If the British Courts cannot go against our Parliament regarding Acts of Parliament, How was the Supreme Court allowed to rule against Boris over Prorogation?? Wasn’t that an act of Parliament?

The other thing that puzzles me, if this is the case and we never joined, Why wasn’t this ever used by Boris in Brexit?

Anyone know? Or have any idea?
Bread's Avatar
Bread
Chatterbox
Bread is offline
Sudbury, United Kingdom
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 10,656
Bread is male  Bread has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
07-08-2020, 01:32 PM
2

Re: Were We Ever A Member Of The EU ?? Part Two

Great post SG (as usual).

Heath also lied about UK territorial waters becoming part of the CFP. This was another big fat lie by Heath when he at the last minute sold us out without our knowledge (or even his) because (I think it was) De Gaulle who said those famous words "not enough progress has been made" and wrote it into the CFP through the back door.

Utter shambles
Bread's Avatar
Bread
Chatterbox
Bread is offline
Sudbury, United Kingdom
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 10,656
Bread is male  Bread has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
07-08-2020, 01:45 PM
3

Re: Were We Ever A Member Of The EU ?? Part Two

Originally Posted by shropshiregirl ->
Does any of this really matter to politicians?

Is there any hope that Parliament will repeal the 1972 European Communities Act and restore sovereignty to the people? Not in the immediate future.

But the errors made by Heath and Wilson mean that when we want to leave the EU, it will be very easy.
An independent British Parliament would simply have to pass one short Act of Parliament and give notice to the EU and we would be out of this accursed club.

Copyright Vernon Coleman 2011

UNQUOTE

Well, there we have it! One thing puzzles me however? If the British Courts cannot go against our Parliament regarding Acts of Parliament, How was the Supreme Court allowed to rule against Boris over Prorogation?? Wasn’t that an act of Parliament?

The other thing that puzzles me, if this is the case and we never joined, Why wasn’t this ever used by Boris in Brexit?

Anyone know? Or have any idea?
The Supreme Court didn't exist at the time in 1972.

Parliament makes laws, the courts uphold the law and in the case last year about proroguing Parliament, the Supreme Court ruled "unlawful" which is not the same as "illegal". Bearing in mind the Supreme Court is as bent as the EU Commission and all ex-members of the ECJ (or mostly) I'm surprised they didn't just revoke A50 and have done with it, saying that was unlawful too (but that's just my 2cents and thinking about it, they could have actually done this as a back door way to revoke A50.... hey ho !)

I'm no legal expert, but I would say this was more a political decision to go with the ruling of the Supreme Court (which worked in our favour in the long run anyway) than anything else. I think it would mean a bill would be put through the Parliament enforcing the Supreme Court ruling (unlawful) into law as part of an amendment to the Withdrawal Act and it would be law anyway because Parliament at the time was a bunch of remainers who would vote it through anyway.

(Sorry for the rambling response)
Solasch's Avatar
Solasch
Chatterbox
Solasch is offline
Netherlands
Joined: Sep 2018
Posts: 8,963
Solasch is male  Solasch has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
07-08-2020, 02:31 PM
4

Re: Were We Ever A Member Of The EU ?? Part Two

Originally Posted by Bread ->
(Sorry for the rambling response)
No worries. The answer is simple. The central issue inCherry and Miller (No 2) is whether the advice tendered by the UK Government to the Queen concerning the prorogation of Parliament for five weeks is lawful or unlawful. Prorogation is accomplished through the exercise of a legal power in the form of a prerogative power, and advice tendered to the Queen concerning its use amounts to an exercise by the Government of prerogative power ancillary to the prorogation power itself. It is well-established that the mere fact that a power falls under the prerogative rather than taking a statutory form does not in and of itself render it non-justiciable or otherwise immune from judicial review. The default position is therefore that the normal principles of judicial review apply to the exercise of any given prerogative power.
shropshiregirl's Avatar
shropshiregirl
Chatterbox
shropshiregirl is offline
Shropshire
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 6,919
shropshiregirl is female  shropshiregirl has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
07-08-2020, 05:08 PM
5

Re: Were We Ever A Member Of The EU ?? Part Two

So basically, the difference is that if it had been 'An Act of Parliament'which prorogation alreadywas, the Supreme Court could not have ruled on it, but because Boris's extended period of prorogation was not an act of Parliament as such, so they were able to make a ruling on it? Sorry, but this is the only way I seem to understand it. Is that correct in my cack-handed way of taking it in?
Bread's Avatar
Bread
Chatterbox
Bread is offline
Sudbury, United Kingdom
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 10,656
Bread is male  Bread has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
07-08-2020, 07:00 PM
6

Re: Were We Ever A Member Of The EU ?? Part Two

Originally Posted by shropshiregirl ->
So basically, the difference is that if it had been 'An Act of Parliament'which prorogation alreadywas, the Supreme Court could not have ruled on it, but because Boris's extended period of prorogation was not an act of Parliament as such, so they were able to make a ruling on it? Sorry, but this is the only way I seem to understand it. Is that correct in my cack-handed way of taking it in?
That's basically it, as I understand it.

Prorogation is the "prerogative" of the Prime Minister, at the time it was done, the Supreme Court ruled it "unlawful" so then if Boris hadn't have recalled Parliament, a law would be passed through Parliament forcing him to and the next time he did it under the same circumstances, he would be doing something illegal.
Solasch's Avatar
Solasch
Chatterbox
Solasch is offline
Netherlands
Joined: Sep 2018
Posts: 8,963
Solasch is male  Solasch has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
07-08-2020, 08:13 PM
7

Re: Were We Ever A Member Of The EU ?? Part Two

Originally Posted by shropshiregirl ->
So basically, the difference is that if it had been 'An Act of Parliament'which prorogation alreadywas, the Supreme Court could not have ruled on it, but because Boris's extended period of prorogation was not an act of Parliament as such, so they were able to make a ruling on it? Sorry, but this is the only way I seem to understand it. Is that correct in my cack-handed way of taking it in?
The court distinguished between questions that are themselves political in nature (and thus not for courts) and questions that are legal in nature but which may have political ramifications. The issue in this case, said the court, fell into the latter category, on the ground that the court was being called upon to rule only upon the scope of the prorogation power. Questions about the scope of legal powers are, self-evidently, legal questions that are justiciable before courts of law. That the answer to that question might have political implications is beside that point.

The the court made the point that the government is accountable to parliament. Plainly, parliament’s core constitutional function of holding the government to account cannot be performed while parliament is prorogued. Parliament cannot hold the executive to account if the government could prorogue parliament whenever, and for whatever, they like.

The ruling of the court was that when the effect of prorogation is to frustrate or prevent parliament from carrying out its constitutional functions (i.e. compromising the principles of parliamentary sovereignty and/or executive accountability) prorogation is unlawful.

Boris acted like a tyrant, a despot if you like, and was put in his place by the court. Democratic rule was still strong enough to protect the representative of the people, your government.
 

Thread Tools


© Copyright 2009, Over50sForum   Contact Us | Over 50s Forum! | Archive | Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | Top

Powered by vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.