As predicted, the prospect of a vote on Article 50 has Labour in a flat spin.

[Burney]

They won't block it, but will 'fight for a Brexit that works for Britain'. So, in other words, they aren't going to vote counter to many of their constituents' wishes and thereby commit electoral suicide and will just leave it up to the Lords to obstruct progress. :shakehead:

[Ash]

They won't block it, but will 'fight for a Brexit that works for Britain'. So, in other words, they aren't going to vote counter to many of their constituents' wishes and thereby commit electoral suicide and will just leave it up to the Lords to obstruct progress. :shakehead:

When the unelected House of Lords blocks it, thanks to the unelected High Court Judges, the people who voted against being ruled by the unelected European Commision will be dusting off the old Chartist placards and getting out on the streets imo.

[Sir C]

When the unelected House of Lords blocks it, thanks to the unelected High Court Judges, the people who voted against being ruled by the unelected European Commision will be dusting off the old Chartist placards and getting out on the streets imo.

If the press and social media are to be believed, the atmosphere in this country is so febrile that civil unrest is but a moment away.

Oddly, everyone I know is going about their lives in an entirely non-angry fashion.

Someone is yanking our chain.

[Pat Vegas]

If the press and social media are to be believed, the atmosphere in this country is so febrile that civil unrest is but a moment away.

Oddly, everyone I know is going about their lives in an entirely non-angry fashion.

Someone is yanking our chain.

Hmm half of Arsenal fans seem Angry.
All Tottenham fans are angry.

I am always angry. Loads of angry people around.

[Sir C]

Hmm half of Arsenal fans seem Angry.
All Tottenham fans are angry.

I am always angry. Loads of angry people around.

I'm going to see if I can start a civil war. I shall commence by encouraging these hashtags on twitter:

#lynchaleaver
#burnabrexiter
#riparemainer

[Burney]

When the unelected House of Lords blocks it, thanks to the unelected High Court Judges, the people who voted against being ruled by the unelected European Commision will be dusting off the old Chartist placards and getting out on the streets imo.

The Lords must know that to do so would be to create an existential threat to their House, so how far they'll dare push it is an interesting one.

[Burney]

I'm going to see if I can start a civil war. I shall commence by encouraging these hashtags on twitter:

#lynchaleaver
#burnabrexiter
#riparemainer

The irony being that those who say this are who are the ones chiefly responsible for creating this atmosphere by petulantly refusing to accept the outcome of the referendum.

[Sir C]

The irony being that those who say this are who are the ones chiefly responsible for creating this atmosphere by petulantly refusing to accept the outcome of the referendum.

I confess that I am puzzled at the outrage which greeted the High Court decision; surely if there was a question about the validity of Royal Perogative in this issue, it simply had to be clarified by the brainy legal types? Even if one is 'openly gay'. :rolleyes:

[Ash]

I confess that I am puzzled at the outrage which greeted the High Court decision; surely if there was a question about the validity of Royal Perogative in this issue, it simply had to be clarified by the brainy legal types? Even if one is 'openly gay'. :rolleyes:

They shouldn't need to use the so-called Royal wossname imo. We were told in the leaflet that "The Government will implement your decision". Not that parliament, who had already voted to surrender its sovereignty on this issue to the electorate, would have a veto over the decision of the electorate and every stage of the process.

Anyway, if they go against the wishes of their constituents it they'll be voted out and replaced.

[Sir C]

They shouldn't need to use the so-called Royal wossname imo. We were told in the leaflet that "The Government will implement your decision". Not that parliament, who had already voted to surrender its sovereignty on this issue to the electorate, would have a veto over the decision of the electorate and every stage of the process.

Anyway, if they go against the wishes of their constituents it they'll be voted out and replaced.

It seems to me that the government made a psectacular balls up in failing to prepare properly for the result of this referendum; they really should have established beforehand whether they would be legally entitled to 'implement your decision'.

[Burney]

I confess that I am puzzled at the outrage which greeted the High Court decision; surely if there was a question about the validity of Royal Perogative in this issue, it simply had to be clarified by the brainy legal types? Even if one is 'openly gay'. :rolleyes:

I have no issue with the judgment per se. My issue is that the law is being used not to test the rights and wrongs of the issue, but with the pretty much explicit intention of delaying, obstructing and - if they could possibly get away with it - reversing the outcome voted on by the population as a whole. That should not be what the law is used for. The sudden insistence on proper procedure is being opportunistically employed for a purely political rather than a constitutional purpose by people whose true agenda is to derail a legitimate national vote. There is also a question of whether this sort of wilful obstructiveness eventually comes to constitute an explicit act against the wider national interest.

Equally (although the legal profession doesn't like it because they are almost all in my experience brainwashed into a rather charming belief in their own disinterest), there is a legitimate question to be answered as to whether a judge's political affiliations mean he or she can truly give an unbiased judgment.

But ultimately as I say, I have no issue with a vote. It will, if anything, legitimise Brexit further. I think MPs know that voting against the explicit wishes of their constituents is suicide, while the spectacle of the unelected Lords blocking the outcome of a public vote would pretty much confirm in the public mind that the continuity Remain argument is simply the conspiracy of a remote and anti-democratic elite against the people's will.

[Ash]

It seems to me that the government made a psectacular balls up in failing to prepare properly for the result of this referendum; they really should have established beforehand whether they would be legally entitled to 'implement your decision'.

Yes, it is very clear that they hadn't given much, if any, thought to what might happen if sufficient people actually voted to leave. Arrogant, it could be said.

[Burney]

It seems to me that the government made a psectacular balls up in failing to prepare properly for the result of this referendum; they really should have established beforehand whether they would be legally entitled to 'implement your decision'.

True enough, but the whole thing was done with the frankly monumental hubris that assumed that would never be an issue, since the British people would be frightened into submission. This is why you have frankly absurd goings on such as this MP in Lincolnshire who's resigning because - although he voted Leave as a protest - he never expected Leave to win and now finds himself unable honestly to represent his constituents's views on the matter, since they were massively Leave.

The truth is that the political class simply had no idea how out of touch it was with public opinion and arrogantly assumed it would win because the public does what it's told. They have found out different.

[Burney]

Yes, it is very clear that they hadn't given much, if any, thought to what might happen if sufficient people actually voted to leave. Arrogant, it could be said.

It is by some distance the biggest smack in the face the establishment (a word I use in a modern rather than a traditional sense) has received in my lifetime. This is one reason why it's so funny to see so many people who would usually style themselves as 'anti-establishment' wetting themselves about it - not least because they are being forced to confront the fact that, far from being the iconoclastic rebels they've posed as for so long, they are in fact cosy insiders.

[Ash]

It is by some distance the biggest smack in the face the establishment (a word I use in a modern rather than a traditional sense) has received in my lifetime. This is one reason why it's so funny to see so many people who would usually style themselves as 'anti-establishment' wetting themselves about it - not least because they are being forced to confront the fact that, far from being the iconoclastic rebels they've posed as for so long, they are in fact cosy insiders.

:nod: I look forward to all the facebook posts praising the heroic stand of the Lords in trying to save them from the ghastly proles.

[Burney]

:nod: I look forward to all the facebook posts praising the heroic stand of the Lords in trying to save them from the ghastly proles.

:hehe: Well that, of course, is the absolutely fùcking ginormous great pachyderm in the room: the naked fear, loathing and contempt held by supposedly left-leaning middle-class 'liberals' for the white working classes has come rocketing to the surface in all this. It's not even snobbery, it's much deeper and more visceral than that.
I mean we all knew that the white working classes were a bit of an annoying embarrassment as far as these people were concerned, but the explicit hatred has shocked even me. As you know, I've never been averse to a bit of snobbery myself (albeit partly for effect), but the last few months have shown me I'm a veritable man of the people compared to some of these fùckers. :hehe:

[Tony C]

Honestly....I think what's needed now is another Referendum but this time to establish whether or not referendums should be legally binding.

[Ash]

Honestly....I think what's needed now is another Referendum but this time to establish whether or not referendums should be legally binding.

It's interesting to see the sudden burst of enthusiasm for parliamentary sovereignty from people who are otherwise content to hand that sovereignty over to a supra-state.

[Alberto Balsam Rodriguez]

Honestly....I think what's needed now is another Referendum but this time to establish whether or not referendums should be legally binding.

But that would need an act of parliament to bring about the referendum which will decide if referendum is legally binding but, that referendum cannot be legally binding until parliament have voted on it.