Article 50 Discussion

[honeybee13]

You are wrong about most of people cast there vote for the Tories or any other party,the last time a government was elected with more than 50% of the vote was in 1931

 

That's why I've never agreed with the first past the post system. I think we'll find that Uncle Bulgaria feels the same way.

 

HB

[honeybee13]

barns66, who won in 1931 btw?

 

HB

[barns66]

barns66, who won in 1931 btw?

 

HB

 

Conservatives

[fletch70]

King

 

How many times do you need to be told, apart from the coalition government ,no government has been voted in with a majority of the votes. In the 2015 the Tories got 36.9% of the votes cast , which was the same % that labour lost with in the Thatcher win of 1979. No post war government has received a majority of votes cast. Not one. Yet you are happy for that to be democratic are you?

 

To say again, not one government, apart from the coalition in 80 years has had a majority of votes cast.

Edited November 6, 2016 by fletch70

[fletch70]

Sorry barns you beat me to it

 

 

http://www.ukpolitical.info/1997.htm

[honeybee13]

Conservatives

 

Thank you, good info.

 

HB

[fletch70]

HB

I am 100% in agreement. FPTP is just wrong. In my opinion something akin to what is often called the German system and is also used for MSPs gives a good balance between stability and democracy

 

Much as it goes against the grain, it is wrong that ukip got twice the votes of the SNP yet got 50 seats less

[honeybee13]

That's the anomaly, isn't it, fletch?

 

HB

[king12345]

King

 

How many times do you need to be told, apart from the coalition government ,no government has been voted in with a majority of the votes. In the 2015 the Tories got 36.9% of the votes cast , which was the same % that labour lost with in the Thatcher win of 1979. No post war government has received a majority of votes cast. Not one. Yet you are happy for that to be democratic are you?

 

To say again, not one government, apart from the coalition in 80 years has had a majority of votes cast.

 

Majority doesn't mean 50%+1 when there are more than 2 parties.

Simple maths.

[tobyjugg2]

Tory government was voted in by the majority of people, May represents that majority.

 

Nobody voted for a party led by May, or for May's stated policies let alone all her unstated ones.

 

She is conspicuously avoiding going to the country to ratify her stances and policies (what policies) DESPITE Cameron; who's leadership/party people DID vote for; throwing himself on his sword and resigning when it became clear the country did not support his leadership/party.

... despite the Tories getting a 'majority under his leadership not long before.

 

 

Its a simple fact that although the majority who voted did vote leave, it was undoubtedly for a number of very different and incompatible reasons,

That does not give a mandate for some Theresa or Jeremy come lately to do anything they like based on some word which could be interpreted as 'leave' and the two letters 'EU' being a couple of words somewhere in a 50,000 word unpublished 'policy' document,

... whatever a few people claim people meant by the peoples vote.

 

 

The only thing that vote could conceivably be interpreted as meeting the peoples voice in the referendum (in/out) is simply (LOL) and immediately revoking all EU agreements which in any way bind us to the EU and starting from scratch negotiating with the rest of the world under WTO status.

... other than that, the people need to continue having their say, not even just their MP representatives (of which there is only ever a very limited choice for most) - the people need to continue to have their say.

 

 

Not that there was much doubt, but the word is that there is no backing out once triggered.

So once triggered, we may end up at WTO status anyway.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-article-idUKKBN12H144

 

I'm not even sure how a second referendum or even a general election could resolve anything given the splits in all the parties MP's on these issues (which matches the countries splits)

 

It needs a completely fresh viewpoint to prevent the break-up of the UK and even then an increasingly divided and dissatisfied populace

and I cant think of a good one.

[unclebulgaria67]

Government wants Parliament to agree to article 50 with no conditions attached. This means after 2 years, unless the EU agrees to extend or revoke article 50, the UK will be out of the EU and subject to WTO rules. All of the current law that relates to the EU would continue to apply, until Parliament has repealed or amended legislation. This presumably means that the borders will not suddenly be closed to EU mainland nationals coming to the UK to work, as the law will continue to allow them to come to the UK until it is changed. Also European Court of Justice will continue hearing UK claims, until the law is changed.

 

It will end up in a very messy situation which would not be resolved for years. It would be mad for Parliament to allow the government a free hand to do what they wanted. The implications for the country are huge and Parliament is responsible on behalf of the country in holding the government to account.

 

What happens if the government does not deliver a Brexit that either leave or remain supporters are happy with ? The government might agree a Brexit where the UK is still a member of the free trade area paying into the EU, where there is only a very limited change in rights of free movement. Leave supporters are not going to be happy with that, as it is little better than the deal Norway obtained.

[fletch70]

Majority doesn't mean 50%+1 when there are more than 2 parties.

Simple maths.

King

 

You said that the conservatives were voted in by the majority of people - that is a lie or at best shows your lack of understanding.

 

In an earlier post you said that it is a dictatorship if the majority does not rule, well by your own definition we must be living in a dictatorship

 

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/majority

 

 

In any event, as there are several possible forms of brexit , just as there could be several possibilities of remain the question should not have been binary

[king12345]

King

 

You said that the conservatives were voted in by the majority of people - that is a lie or at best shows your lack of understanding.

 

In an earlier post you said that it is a dictatorship if the majority does not rule, well by your own definition we must be living in a dictatorship

 

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/majority

 

 

In any event, as there are several possible forms of brexit , just as there could be several possibilities of remain the question should not have been binary

 

I would prefer if the voters were called for a second run with the first two candidates/parties when there's no 50%+1 majority in government election, but unfortunately it doesn't work like that.

So a majority of 34.1% can get a government voted in.

This doesn't apply to referendums whatever way you try to twist it.

It's either yes or no, no grey area.

[citizenB]

Depending on what happens, you could have leavers going to court as well, trying to hold the government to account, if the type of Brexit was not the flavour they wanted or they believe there is a constituitional issue.

 

You can guarantee that there will be loads of court cases over the next few years.

 

Brexit will be very difficult and may never happen.

 

Theresa May might be tempted by an early election, but many pro EU Tories would not be very happy. Under the fixed term Parliament arrangements, they might stop this happening.

 

 

I think a vote of no confidence in the government of the day can cause a general election outside of the fixed term.

 

Are you referring to May insisting that she herself decides everything regarding Brexit without approval of a majority of our democratically elected members of parliament?

 

One - the ultimate minority.

 

 

No one seemed to moan about Tony Blair taking us into war without the approval of a majority of democratically elected members of Parliament ?

[WarrenBuffet]

......Boris will be Culture Sec ....

[legalistic]

Warrenbuffet, I am puzzled about what point you are making when you say the UK has no written constitution.

You seem to be saying that a written constitution is superior to an unwritten one.

That is surely not the case. It is only young countries (e.g. USA) and countries liberating themselves from some sort of oppression or occupation (e.g. Eastern European countries that threw off communism) that have written constitutions.

Our constitution is partly written and partly unwritten. It works amazingly well it seems to me.

The only anomaly, is our constitutional monarchy, which does not fit well with our being in the EU. We would need to become a proper Scandinavian-style "bicycle monarchy" in order to become more compatible with EU norms I would say.

Rumour has it that the Queen is a Brexiter. I can believe that. The whole point of being a monarch is to be the only one, i.e. the only Queen on the scene. But there are (six) other monarchies in the EU.

[WarrenBuffet]

I was just (Trying)being sarcastic Legalistic and implying that Brexiter's show where in the constitution they could demonstrate their argument.

[cjcregg]

 

No one seemed to moan about Tony Blair taking us into war without the approval of a majority of democratically elected members of Parliament ?

 

 

He did have the approval of Parliament, who vote 412/149 in favour of war, even though Governments don't actually need Parliamentary approval to go to war.

[WarrenBuffet]

He did have the approval of Parliament, who vote 412/149 in favour of war, even though Governments don't actually need Parliamentary approval to go to war.

 

Yeah, they needed to find "Weapons of mass destruction" which is/was another lie.

[honeybee13]

Could we keep to topic about article 50 please guys?

 

If you want to discuss the Iraq war or related matters, you could start another thread in the BG.

 

HB

[unclebulgaria67]

If the UK economy starts to suffer over the next two years, which some are predicting, how does the government deal with a country that has changed its mind about Brexit ?

 

Do they have to wait 40 years for a referendum to join the EU ?

 

There is a possibility that government is unable to gain a Brexit deal that Parliament supports. There is no point in a general election because it might not settle the issue. The only way would be another referendum to either accept the Brexit deal or remain in the EU under existing terms. Government would then use the referendum to ram through Brexit using the Parliament Act, if there is a majority in favour of their Brexit deal. Or if the vote is remain, they ask to withdraw Articlle 50.

 

Brexit is not a certainty, whatever the Government might claim. Their majority in the HOC is very small and most MP's are against Brexit.

[fletch70]

Cit B

 

Trust me I was no fan of Blair either , he was just a Thatcher lite although he did do some good things.

 

As for a general election, yes there needs to be a vote of no,confidence and a week later the situation remains. I suppose she could link the no confidence vote to the article 50 vote, now that would be interesting as if every other party voted against the government it would not take many Tories to bring her down.

 

King

Nothing would give me greater pleasure than to see the Tories sink into a stinking hole but I accept that in spite of my best efforts we are stuck with them.

My point was, the referendum was not binding, the courts did the only thing they could imho .

The democracy we have is representative not direct but as we know there are people who did not necessarily vote on the real issues .

 

I am sure that if asked why they voted the way they did there will be many people who could not really answer. That is why we have representation.

 

It is my belief that many who voted out will not live to see the new dawn they think will come , in fact I suspect no one will although I am confident it will be ok in the end just st as the disaster that was postbwar Britain worked out ok, just not as ok as it could have been

[fletch70]

If the UK economy starts to suffer over the next two years, which some are predicting, how does the government deal with a country that has changed its mind about Brexit ?

 

Do they have to wait 40 years for a referendum to join the EU ?

 

There is a possibility that government is unable to gain a Brexit deal that Parliament supports. There is no point in a general election because it might not settle the issue. The only way would be another referendum to either accept the Brexit deal or remain in the EU under existing terms. Government would then use the referendum to ram through Brexit using the Parliament Act, if there is a majority in favour of their Brexit deal. Or if the vote is remain, they ask to withdraw Articlle 50.

 

Brexit is not a certainty, whatever the Government might claim. Their majority in the HOC is very small and most MP's are against Brexit.

 

 

Once article 50 is triggered can it be stopped without all 27 states agreeing to it? And if they did I imagine it would come with strings such as eurozone , no rebate etc

[snowdragon]

so who do you suggest be in Government then, Fletch?

 

Maybe should have a poll, If there was a general election tomorrow who would you vote for?

 

I do not support any party but deff would not vote for Labour!

 

There is no one good enough in my opinion

[WarrenBuffet]

Just like America, could we see a new party?