** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

[pete75]

I know in the same way that many bitter Remainers

The only person who appears to be bitter in this debate is yourself.

[Psamathe]

[

Straight forward question, how do you know that our preferred system is now "including the House of Lords, Prime Ministers elected by the ruling political party and full sovereignty for our own elected parliament." and how do you know people "see no reason to have a load of bureaucrats, unelected commissioners and a noddy, rubber stamp parliament full of foreigners in Brussels overseeing and overruling an emasculated and diminished parliament at Westminster".

Because that was not the question on the referendum ballot paper.

Ian

I know in the same way that many bitter Remainers seem to know that the result was due to the stupidity, racism and gullibility of Leave voters, and that there should be a second referendum because people voted the wrong way.

And just like them I'm not shy about voicing my opinions.

So basically you guess that ...

I just wondered because the question on my ballot was about leaving the EU. Since the referendum, many have declared what the referendum decided and it is often very different from the question actually asked and answered.

Ian

[pete75]

So much for Brexit leading to sovereignty of the UK Parliament

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 38971.html

[bikepacker]

Would imagine if MPs were told, the media would know, the whole world would know our negotiating tactics and position, so make them easy to undermine. The only sensible thing to do in this circumstances is the play cards close to chest and only allow such information to filter out as would benefit the UK position.

[Psamathe]

Would imagine if MPs were told, the media would know, the whole world would know our negotiating tactics and position, so make them easy to undermine. The only sensible thing to do in this circumstances is the play cards close to chest and only allow such information to filter out as would benefit the UK position.

So what happens when the UK negotiators tell the EU negotiators ? Then they will know and can undermine our position ? So maybe we should not tell the EU negotiators what we are seeking ...

And secrecy can actually be counter productive. The extreme secrecy over TTIP undoubtedly contributed to public concerns - after all, why keep everything from the public if it was such a good deal? Not saying TTIP would have gone anywhere anyway, but the secrecy certainly contributed to public unease over the deal (and thus politicians began to reflect those concerns, particularly in countries with elections coming soon).

Ian

[kwackers]

Would imagine if MPs were told, the media would know, the whole world would know our negotiating tactics and position, so make them easy to undermine. The only sensible thing to do in this circumstances is the play cards close to chest and only allow such information to filter out as would benefit the UK position.

So what happens when the UK negotiators tell the EU negotiators ? Then they will know and can undermine our position ? So maybe we should not tell the EU negotiators what we are seeking ...

And secrecy can actually be counter productive. The extreme secrecy over TTIP undoubtedly contributed to public concerns - after all, why keep everything from the public if it was such a good deal? Not saying TTIP would have gone anywhere anyway, but the secrecy certainly contributed to public unease over the deal (and thus politicians began to reflect those concerns, particularly in countries with elections coming soon).

Ian

I think people attribute far too much 'intelligence' to our politicians.

Two things are happening.
1. They're running around like headless chickens.
2. They're throwing every idea 'out there' to see what the response is.

After they've done 2 for a bit and have some ideas of what they might get away with then they slowly stop doing 1.

Then we'll get the Brexit equivalent of the 'Dangerous Dogs Act' & the 'Psychoactive Substances Bill' and lots of time to wonder where it all went wrong...

[blackbike]

The EU has kindly let us decide what to do about deporting someone.

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2016/se ... court-says

Not long before we'll be able to decide such things for ourselves without permission from the EU or its courts.

Isn't Brexit great?

[thirdcrank]

Within the last couple of days I've read something saying that although the Tory manifesto commitments to repeal the Human Rights Act and replace it with a Bill of Rights will go ahead, there are no plans to quit (I'm not sure of the correct term) the European Convention on Human Rights, which seems pretty good because We British played a big part in setting it up.

I read so much spin my head spins but I'm pretty sure that this was from No 10.

[reohn2]

I read so much spin my head spins but I'm pretty sure that this was from No 10.

But are you really sure?

[meic]

Isn't Brexit great?

We dont know yet.

Yet, once more, this is irrelevant as we are leaving the EU (sometime in the distant future) but havent had any referendum about the European Court of Justice, so far.

Not the first time these two have been mixed up to try and portray the EU in a bad light. For those who consider human rights a bad thing that is.

[pete75]

Would imagine if MPs were told, the media would know, the whole world would know our negotiating tactics and position, so make them easy to undermine. The only sensible thing to do in this circumstances is the play cards close to chest and only allow such information to filter out as would benefit the UK position.

The people we are negotiating with will, of course, know both the negotiating tactics and position. They may decide not to be secretive about the negotiations so we and parliament may find out anyway.

[pete75]

Within the last couple of days I've read something saying that although the Tory manifesto commitments to repeal the Human Rights Act and replace it with a Bill of Rights will go ahead, there are no plans to quit (I'm not sure of the correct term) the European Convention on Human Rights, which seems pretty good because We British played a big part in setting it up.

I read so much spin my head spins but I'm pretty sure that this was from No 10.

The whole point of having the Human Rights Act is to protect us against actions of the government. It's good that the highest court supervising this is supra national and so is independent of the government. A British Bill of Rights could be alter at any time by the government if they were losing cases which, in any case, would be unlikely as decisions will be made by judges appointed by the Lord Chancellor, currently Liz Truss, and beholden to her both in that office and her other role as minister of justice.

[blackbike]

The whole point of having the Human Rights Act is to protect us against actions of the government. It's good that the highest court supervising this is supra national and so is independent of the government. A British Bill of Rights could be alter at any time by the government if they were losing cases which, in any case, would be unlikely as decisions will be made by judges appointed by the Lord Chancellor, currently Liz Truss, and beholden to her both in that office and her other role as minister of justice.

A curious argument.

Acts of Parliament are made by the people we elect, and we can get rid of them if they do things we don't like concerning human rights or anything else. We can elect people to make new laws we do like. An elected UK parliament altering laws is no problem whatsoever as long as we have free and fair democratic elections.

Having an international body to oversee things is no safeguard at all as its laws are made by people we cannot elect or get rid of directly. For example, if the Germans decide to have a fascist government again, and to elect fascist MEPs who have a say in making European laws including those on human rights, we Brits cannot get rid of those MEPs at any election at all. This is something to think about as much of the EU lurches to the right and the possibility of far right governments in the EU is not entirely improbable.

To highlight the dangers of foreign interference in our domestic affairs consider another international organisation which pontificates on human rights. That is the United Nations. It main human rights body is the United Nations Human Rights Council, That council is currently chaired by a representative from Saudi Arabia, a country with an appalling record on human rights, including suppression of free speech, np free press or elections and persecution of women and minorities like gays.

Foreign intervention in our affairs is needless and possibly dangerous.

[meic]

Foreign intervention in our affairs is needless and possibly dangerous.

I've always said that too. Yet my people voted for it

[Psamathe]

...
Acts of Parliament are made by the people we elect, and we can get rid of them if they do things we don't like ....

Excellent point. And thus Parliament can repeal the European Communities Act 1972. And that is for Parliament to do, NOT for the PM to use a prerogative power. Lords seem to agree as well (agree that it is for Parliament to act on NOT for the PM alone, particularly as the referendum was only advisory).

Ian