blackbike wrote:
I know in the same way that many bitter Remainers
The only person who appears to be bitter in this debate is yourself.
blackbike wrote:
I know in the same way that many bitter Remainers
blackbike wrote:Psamathe wrote:[
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.
bikepacker wrote: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 wrote:bikepacker wrote: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
thirdcrank wrote:I read so much spin my head spins but I'm pretty sure that this was from No 10.
Isn't Brexit great?
bikepacker wrote: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.
thirdcrank wrote: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.
pete75 wrote:
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.
Foreign intervention in our affairs is needless and possibly dangerous.
blackbike wrote:...
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 ....