I said all along that we probably won’t leave, too many people in high places don’t want us to leave and will see to it that we don’t, and this court ruling is the start of the process of backsliding on the referendum result.
If referendums are only advisory then what’s the point of holding them? What if Scotland has another go at it and votes to leave the UK, will that result be ignored as well?
GORDON 50:
I said all along that we probably won’t leave, too many people in high places don’t want us to leave and will see to it that we don’t, and this court ruling is the start of the process of backsliding on the referendum result.
If referendums are only advisory then what’s the point of holding them? What if Scotland has another go at it and votes to leave the UK, will that result be ignored as well?
The referendum is not being ignored, it just has to be debated on and voted for by parliament. Nobody is saying anything about it being ignored, it just has to be approved by due process and not by the PM on her own.
Parliament is now in charge unless the Supreme Court says anything differently.
Then what’s the point of holding a referendum?
GORDON 50:
Then what’s the point of holding a referendum?
+1. Irish referendum anybody? If you don’t get the result you want simply keep going until the one time that you do. 
wheelnutt:
wheelnutt:
Bluey Circles:
Today’s decision is far from final, It is going to the supreme court next and then, surely to god not, could it potentially go the the European Court of Justice for a final ruling - how galling would that be, the EU deciding if the british public have any say in their own country, the EU may decide it is our own best interests to stay.I really think that the government will take it to the supreme court and see if they agree to halt democracy and abolish parliament for this one item, very unlikely.
I don’t see the government taking this to the ECJ.
The supreme court is scheduled for December 7th, no appeal has been filed yet. I can’t see them agreeing to abolish parliament and put the Queen back in power of our laws in our country so the government can ignore parliament.
Events are moving quickly, Government will go to the Supreme Court but not to the ECJ. They will have parliament vote on an act if (more likely when) they lose the Supreme courts’ case.
The gov wouldn’t, but if the supreme court over rule today’s decision, then the proponents of the bill may very well try to
Did I misunderstand something here?
Harry Monk:
Did I misunderstand something here?
No, not at all, act of parliament is required. That is how we amend and make our laws in the UK. May tried to do it on her own, the courts spoke, that is now illegal so parliament is back in charge just as it always has been.
Nothing changed today.
wheelnutt:
OVLOV JAY:
Well that’s it, mp’s to get a vote. Stuck in the poxy EU forever. I hate this country sometimesThe Parliament act defining Parliamentary sovereignty clearly states that only Parliament can change the law, not the PM by herself. The PM tried to pull a fast one and the High Court just reminded her of what the law says.
This is not the time to play fast and loose with our democracy and sovereignty.
We cannot cut corners and ignore our laws just because some like it and others don’t. Both sides of the referendum should applaud the court’s decision today, it makes our government follow our laws, what could be wrong with that.
This is not over yet, but I don’t see the Supreme court giving the PM power over Parliament, that is a dictatorship, not a democracy.
We have a parliamentary democracy, the referendum didn’t change that.
This court ruling does not mean that Brexit is stopped, it just means that Parliament has to debate it and has to make the final decision. I don’t see why we still couldn’t leave the EU, we just won’t do it on the terms of a few ■■■■■■■■ Brexiteers in the Cabinet, we will do it on the terms and schedule that Parliament sets out. That’s how we have always been governed ever since Parliament was created and that’s how we will continue to be governed.
I don’t see this as either a win or a loss for the remainers nor the leavers, this is a win for democracy.
Maybe we can all get together now and make the best of it, isn’t that in everybody’s interest?
You’re avin a larf.You support Federal rule by EU commissioners and foreign majority vote then you shout about Democracy and sovereignty.Not to mention the fact that we’re only in the zb EU zb pile because of a so called referendum vote to remain when the majority Labour government was for out.No surprise the remainers seemed happy enough then when the vote went their way in 1975.
As for Farage and UKIP thinking that a referendum was going to fix the problem.A bunch of naive muppets.
wheelnutt:
Harry Monk:
Did I misunderstand something here?No, not at all, act of parliament is required. That is how we amend and make our laws in the UK. May tried to do it on her own, the courts spoke, that is now illegal so parliament is back in charge just as it always has been.
Nothing changed today.
Perhaps the leaflet should have said “terms and conditions apply” then. 
Carryfast:
wheelnutt:
OVLOV JAY:
Well that’s it, mp’s to get a vote. Stuck in the poxy EU forever. I hate this country sometimesThe Parliament act defining Parliamentary sovereignty clearly states that only Parliament can change the law, not the PM by herself. The PM tried to pull a fast one and the High Court just reminded her of what the law says.
This is not the time to play fast and loose with our democracy and sovereignty.
We cannot cut corners and ignore our laws just because some like it and others don’t. Both sides of the referendum should applaud the court’s decision today, it makes our government follow our laws, what could be wrong with that.
This is not over yet, but I don’t see the Supreme court giving the PM power over Parliament, that is a dictatorship, not a democracy.
We have a parliamentary democracy, the referendum didn’t change that.
This court ruling does not mean that Brexit is stopped, it just means that Parliament has to debate it and has to make the final decision. I don’t see why we still couldn’t leave the EU, we just won’t do it on the terms of a few ■■■■■■■■ Brexiteers in the Cabinet, we will do it on the terms and schedule that Parliament sets out. That’s how we have always been governed ever since Parliament was created and that’s how we will continue to be governed.
I don’t see this as either a win or a loss for the remainers nor the leavers, this is a win for democracy.
Maybe we can all get together now and make the best of it, isn’t that in everybody’s interest?
You’re avin a larf.You support Federal rule by EU commissioners and foreign majority vote then you shout about Democracy and sovereignty.Not to mention the fact that we’re only in the zb EU zb pile because of a so called referendum vote to remain when the majority Labour government was for out.No surprise the remainers seemed happy enough then when the vote went their way in 1975.
As for Farage and UKIP thinking that a referendum was going to fix the problem.A bunch of naive muppets.
You are in the wrong thread dude, we are not discussing the EU. Far from it, we are discussing what you should actually want to champion, UK parliamentary supremacy. Just what you voted for in the referendum.
wheelnutt:
Harry Monk:
Did I misunderstand something here?No, not at all, act of parliament is required. That is how we amend and make our laws in the UK. Simples.
So are you saying a referendum vote trumps a parliamentary one or not.If not how do you justify staying in on the basis of the referendum vote of 1975 when parliament had a majority for leave.
Harry Monk:
wheelnutt:
Harry Monk:
Did I misunderstand something here?No, not at all, act of parliament is required. That is how we amend and make our laws in the UK. May tried to do it on her own, the courts spoke, that is now illegal so parliament is back in charge just as it always has been.
Nothing changed today.
Perhaps the leaflet should have said “terms and conditions apply” then.
Why? That’s how we have always made our laws in this country, why should this be any different?
Carryfast:
wheelnutt:
Harry Monk:
Did I misunderstand something here?No, not at all, act of parliament is required. That is how we amend and make our laws in the UK. Simples.
So are you saying a referendum vote trumps a parliamentary one or not.If not how do you justify staying in on the basis of the referendum vote of 1975 when parliament had a majority for leave.
Dude, parliament is supreme. Nothing to add. Don’t like it? Tough. That is the law of the land as it has been for 1,000 years.
wheelnutt:
Carryfast:
wheelnutt:
OVLOV JAY:
Well that’s it, mp’s to get a vote. Stuck in the poxy EU forever. I hate this country sometimesThe Parliament act defining Parliamentary sovereignty clearly states that only Parliament can change the law, not the PM by herself. The PM tried to pull a fast one and the High Court just reminded her of what the law says.
This is not the time to play fast and loose with our democracy and sovereignty.
We cannot cut corners and ignore our laws just because some like it and others don’t. Both sides of the referendum should applaud the court’s decision today, it makes our government follow our laws, what could be wrong with that.
This is not over yet, but I don’t see the Supreme court giving the PM power over Parliament, that is a dictatorship, not a democracy.
We have a parliamentary democracy, the referendum didn’t change that.
This court ruling does not mean that Brexit is stopped, it just means that Parliament has to debate it and has to make the final decision. I don’t see why we still couldn’t leave the EU, we just won’t do it on the terms of a few ■■■■■■■■ Brexiteers in the Cabinet, we will do it on the terms and schedule that Parliament sets out. That’s how we have always been governed ever since Parliament was created and that’s how we will continue to be governed.
I don’t see this as either a win or a loss for the remainers nor the leavers, this is a win for democracy.
Maybe we can all get together now and make the best of it, isn’t that in everybody’s interest?
You’re avin a larf.You support Federal rule by EU commissioners and foreign majority vote then you shout about Democracy and sovereignty.Not to mention the fact that we’re only in the zb EU zb pile because of a so called referendum vote to remain when the majority Labour government was for out.No surprise the remainers seemed happy enough then when the vote went their way in 1975.
As for Farage and UKIP thinking that a referendum was going to fix the problem.A bunch of naive muppets.
You are in the wrong thread dude, we are not discussing the EU. Far from it, we are discussing what you should actually want to champion, UK parliamentary supremacy. Just what you voted for in the referendum.
No in typical Federalist style you’re championing so called parliamentary sovereignty when it suits you.To firstly trump a referendum vote that you were happy with when it went your way in 1975.Not to mention that the parliamentary supremacy that you’re shouting about is all about handing that sovereignty over to the zb EU.
Carryfast:
No in typical Federalist style you’re championing so called parliamentary sovereignty when it suits you.To firstly trump a referendum vote that you were happy with when it went your way in 1975.Not to mention that the parliamentary supremacy that you’re shouting about is all about handing that sovereignty over to the zb EU.
Dude, you are in the wrong thread, this has nothing to do with the EU. Parliament is in charge. End of.
The title of the thread is Brexit, we live in the UK, laws here are made and amended by our Parliament.
Not sue how you shoehorn the EU and your Federalist BS in there.
Wrong thread dude, move on.
wheelnutt:
Carryfast:
wheelnutt:
Harry Monk:
Did I misunderstand something here?No, not at all, act of parliament is required. That is how we amend and make our laws in the UK. Simples.
So are you saying a referendum vote trumps a parliamentary one or not.If not how do you justify staying in on the basis of the referendum vote of 1975 when parliament had a majority for leave.
Dude, parliament is supreme. Nothing to add. Don’t like it? Tough. That is the law of the land as it has been for 1,000 years.
Fine then we leave the EU on the basis that the referendum decision of 1975 was illegal and parliament never voted on us remaining at that time.
Carryfast:
Fine then we leave the EU on the basis that the referendum decision of 1975 was illegal and parliament never voted on us remaining at that time.
Dude, take your meds.
This thread is about BREXIT, the here and now. not 1975 and not the EU.
Our country, our parliament, they decide how and when we leave.
Capiche?
wheelnutt:
Carryfast:
wheelnutt:
Harry Monk:
Did I misunderstand something here?No, not at all, act of parliament is required. That is how we amend and make our laws in the UK. Simples.
So are you saying a referendum vote trumps a parliamentary one or not.If not how do you justify staying in on the basis of the referendum vote of 1975 when parliament had a majority for leave.
Dude, parliament is supreme. Nothing to add. Don’t like it? Tough. That is the law of the land as it has been for 1,000 years.
For the second time then, why have a referendum in the first place?
What’s with all this “Dude” business? 
wheelnutt:
Carryfast:
Fine then we leave the EU on the basis that the referendum decision of 1975 was illegal and parliament never voted on us remaining at that time.Dude, take your meds.
This thread is about BREXIT, the here and now. not 1975 and not the EU.
Our country, our parliament, they decide how and when we leave.
Capiche?
No Parliament and the Courts were happy to keep us in based solely on a referendum vote in 1975.Which obviously set the precedent that an EU referendum vote is Supreme over parliament’s wishes on that issue.IE In this case what happened in 1975 is key.Although I wouldn’t expect a Federalist to do or want to understand democracy and legal precedent when it doesn’t suit.