It's been a long time since I looked at constitutional law, but my understanding is that if there is any doubt in what Parliament intended, then courts should look at the parliamentary record (i.e. Hansard) to determine intent and make its judgement accordingly.
I haven't dug through the details, but my understanding was the Referendum Act doesn't say that the referendum is advisory - it merely doesn't say that it is binding.
The judges have interpreted an absence of a statement that it is binding as meaning that it is not binding.
However if the Government said during the Parliamentary debate as well as in the various public communications (and I don't know if they did) that they intended to implement the result of the referendum, then surely you can construe that Parliament *intended* the referendum to be binding, even if the actual legislation is silent on the matter.
The fact that something so important is open to interpretation is a weapons grade screw up.
Well it isn't. The government didn't argue the point in court, accepting that the referendum was not legally binding. See paragraph 105 (the keen reader can also read 106-108, which explains why the High Court firmly agreed with the government's concession):
I don't think I've ever seen so many people arguing for the right of the Government to do whatever they like without worrying about such technicalities as the law and Parliament, because they're currently proposing to do something with which said people agree.
No, because they're currently proposing to do something which the people have explicitly instructed them to do.
Then there should be no problem getting it through Parliament, should there?
Of course not. It would sail through the Commons and Mrs May could create 100 peers if necessary.
How does creating 100 peers to ram this through, make this constitutional crisis any better?
If the peers attempted to circumvent the democratically expressed will of the people then - as in 1906 - the government would be well within its rights to ask the monarch.
Hoops, however inconvenient, must be jumped through.
There would be a significant time delay doing that. And I believe it was the time delay that the court case was trying to create not a different result...
Tosh. It could be done this year.
Agreed - if the PM is sufficiently ruthless.
Given that May has up until now taken upon herself the decision when A50 is going to be invoked (as opposed to doing so automatically, as a result of the referendum decision), I cannot see what great principle is sacrificed by required the rubber stamp of parliamentary approval.
I can quite understand the frustration of those who think that, for the first time ever, they have managed to get their voice heard on an issue they care about, but that has nothing whatever to do with the legal correctness (or otherwise) of the court decision.
Mr. Charles, depends whether you consider the advisory status to be a feature or a bug.
The whole exercise was intended as an elaborate piece of theatre in which the Tory party would have its cathartic date with the people and then we'd all come together having endorsed the status quo and marginalised UKIP. That anyone ever thought an in-out referendum on EU membership was the way to do this was a grotesque failure of judgement.
One completely unscientific point I'd like to put to PB is the demeanor of Obama over the past several days. It might be he's somewhat demob happy and he's certainly a man who's always enjoyed campaigning but I get the distinct impression that he feels the election is won and his legacy (whether you agree with it or not) is secure.
Others may have a different take but PBers might like to note this matter over the coming days.
The newspapers are shocking this morning. These judges were simply doing their job. And they are not blocking Brexit. As of this moment, it's Mrs T May who is blocking Brexit.
@PaulBrandITV: BREAKING: I understand Tory MP Stephen Philips is to resign today over govt approach to Brexit. 'Resign' meaning won't contest next election
''Idiotic of Mook to goad white Americans by gloating about their demographic dispossession. ''
But true. Economics don't matter any more. Its all about identity. If the electorate won't vote for you, import people who will. That is why immigration is a completely key power, and why even here the elite are fighting to the end to keep it.
@PaulBrandITV: BREAKING: I understand Tory MP Stephen Philips is to resign today over govt approach to Brexit. 'Resign' meaning won't contest next election
So not resigning at all then...kinda of like a Labour Party suspension for Antisemitic remarks.
As I've been arguing all morning, holding a further vote in Parliament is intrinsically anti-democratic as doing so accepts that Parliament has the right to veto the people's decision. At best, this is storing up trouble for the future.
Yes, Parliament has the right to veto a referendum. That's representative democracy. Removing that right creates a direct democracy. I'm not necessarily against it, as I said. Do you favour it? Either way, it really can't reasonably be implemented retrospectively and without discussion.
The safeguard is of course that MPs will be scared to defy a referendum because they'd expect to be voted out. So they are unlikely to do so, though they might add conditions for the content and process of the withdrawal negotiations, which is arguably just the sort of detailed stuff that representatives are better at than direct democracy.
@SVPhillimore: Little quiz for the Brexiteers. Name me three countries without functioning judiciary that you would like to live in. Somalia maybe? twitter.com/Barristerblog/…
One completely unscientific point I'd like to put to PB is the demeanor of Obama over the past several days. It might be he's somewhat demob happy and he's certainly a man who's always enjoyed campaigning but I get the distinct impression that he feels the election is won and his legacy (whether you agree with it or not) is secure.
Others may have a different take but PBers might like to note this matter over the coming days.
Gives No Fucks Obama is the most entertaining Obama.
JackW....I've been hunting for your ARSE through today's posts.
Do you know how many Jack's I came across until I found your cheeks...55. And then as I was losing heart, there they were, the most glorious sight. Calling Florida....that's one big ASS call; intuitively I think you're right.
I wonder though on the night we might see a surprise in a Wisconsin, Michigan Penn or New Hampshire, or Georgia for that matter?
It's been a long time since I looked at constitutional law, but my understanding is that if there is any doubt in what Parliament intended, then courts should look at the parliamentary record (i.e. Hansard) to determine intent and make its judgement accordingly.
I haven't dug through the details, but my understanding was the Referendum Act doesn't say that the referendum is advisory - it merely doesn't say that it is binding.
The judges have interpreted an absence of a statement that it is binding as meaning that it is not binding.
However if the Government said during the Parliamentary debate as well as in the various public communications (and I don't know if they did) that they intended to implement the result of the referendum, then surely you can construe that Parliament *intended* the referendum to be binding, even if the actual legislation is silent on the matter.
The fact that something so important is open to interpretation is a weapons grade screw up.
Well it isn't. The government didn't argue the point in court, accepting that the referendum was not legally binding. See paragraph 105 (the keen reader can also read 106-108, which explains why the High Court firmly agreed with the government's concession):
I noted earlier that this would probably need to be repeated throughout the thread. I expect it will need to be repeated later as well.
That certainly does make it clear. So the real target of ire should be the Remoaner MPs who may use the vote to frustrate the will of the people, and hope to get away with it by the time the GE comes around. Or the Lords who don't care as they are not voted in.
Mr. Charles, depends whether you consider the advisory status to be a feature or a bug.
The whole exercise was intended as an elaborate piece of theatre in which the Tory party would have its cathartic date with the people and then we'd all come together having endorsed the status quo and marginalised UKIP. That anyone ever thought an in-out referendum on EU membership was the way to do this was a grotesque failure of judgement.
It was supposed to be scrapped as item 1 in the coalition 2 negotiations - then someone accidently destroyed the lib dems....
@PaulBrandITV: BREAKING: I understand Tory MP Stephen Philips is to resign today over govt approach to Brexit. 'Resign' meaning won't contest next election
I am confused as to what he is objecting to. He was one of those who campaigned for Brexit so unless he feels it is not proceeding quickly enough I can't see what he has to complain about.
@PaulBrandITV: BREAKING: I understand Tory MP Stephen Philips is to resign today over govt approach to Brexit. 'Resign' meaning won't contest next election
Going to focus on his main job?
He attracted criticism from some for spending around 1,700 hours annually working as a barrister whilst serving as an MP. Phillips described his own parliamentary attendance record as "excellent", asserting his outside work "doesn’t affect the way in which I perform as an MP", and accused his critics of "envy" over his yearly £750,000 second job earnings
I am confused as to what he is objecting to. He was one of those who campaigned for Brexit so unless he feels it is not proceeding quickly enough I can't see what he has to complain about.
@PaulBrandITV: Stephen Philips campaigned for leave but has complained govt is pushing for hard Brexit without mandate. Understand he's exasperated.
As is known through my Twitter profile I often read selected fantasy books for relaxation. One of them, and of the very best, is the "Wheel of Time" series. One of the hero's in these books is fond of singing a song called "I'm at the bottom of the well and the rain is pouring through" when he gets into trouble or difficulties.
Well the British governments for the last four decades have been taking us deeper and deeper into the mud at the bottom of an alien well -the EU - and have only themselves to blame for the current mess.
Despite a barrage of negative and hate propaganda from the 95% of the MSM and government of the time, the British people voted 52% - 48% (in round figures) to leave the the EU, and this should be enough on any constitutional basis for the people to have their way.
Britain is on the verge of being a non-country thanks to the blindness and greed of our so called betters; our so called elite has led us to the bottom of the well.
@PaulBrandITV: BREAKING: I understand Tory MP Stephen Philips is to resign today over govt approach to Brexit. 'Resign' meaning won't contest next election
I am confused as to what he is objecting to. He was one of those who campaigned for Brexit so unless he feels it is not proceeding quickly enough I can't see what he has to complain about.
The following tweet says
Stephen Philips campaigned for leave but has complained govt is pushing for hard Brexit without mandate. Understand he's exasperated.
Jack are you sure Fox are updating their map? Further up the page it refers to a poll conducted Oct 22-25. RCP has a very different picture: Clinton 226 .. Trump 180 .. Toss-Up 132
Why don't the government have a 2 line bill with a 12 month sunset clause which gives it permission to trigger Art 50 ?
Is it really that difficult ?
Because it would establish the principle that the people are inferior to Parliament.
Parliament voted for the referendum to be advisory. Hence the need for an Article 50 Act which may be voted down by the House of Lords.
Cameron should have made the referendum result definitive. Some civil servant probably ensured it was advisory as a fall back just in case the vote was for Leave.
The referendum's job was to advise the government to enact it, which TMay tried to do by using A50.
It was not for parliament to have another look at it and consider our 'advice', which is how it is being misconstrued now.
Yeah, but the govt didn't have the power to enact it. It could have been granted that power. But it wasn't, down to poor legislation. In short Cameron screwed it up.
It might have well had been a referendum on implementing time travel. Which given the mess we're in, might not be such a bad idea.
It's been a long time since I looked at constitutional law, but my understanding is that if there is any doubt in what Parliament intended, then courts should look at the parliamentary record (i.e. Hansard) to determine intent and make its judgement accordingly.
I haven't dug through the details, but my understanding was the Referendum Act doesn't say that the referendum is advisory - it merely doesn't say that it is binding.
The judges have interpreted an absence of a statement that it is binding as meaning that it is not binding.
However if the Government said during the Parliamentary debate as well as in the various public communications (and I don't know if they did) that they intended to implement the result of the referendum, then surely you can construe that Parliament *intended* the referendum to be binding, even if the actual legislation is silent on the matter.
The fact that something so important is open to interpretation is a weapons grade screw up.
Cameron really wasn't good at the details, was he!
Don't go there. I've just been chatting to a friend (employment lawyer for a trade union). HMRC have been getting a lot of paperwork in line ready for some IR35 changes they want to do in April... all fine and good until Uber last week and something in the Equality Act 2010 that absolutely no one has noticed until this week.
A rather anodyne article but the one interesting titbit is that the Dems (in Iowa at least) are focused on turning out low propensity voters for early voting.
I am confused as to what he is objecting to. He was one of those who campaigned for Brexit so unless he feels it is not proceeding quickly enough I can't see what he has to complain about.
@PaulBrandITV: Stephen Philips campaigned for leave but has complained govt is pushing for hard Brexit without mandate. Understand he's exasperated.
So the Government should bloody get on with it and put the Bill down. You've got loads of people here saying "Just put a one paragraph Bill through, do it today, and job bloody done" Without needing to shred the law. May tells her Party it's going to be a matter leading to dissolution and withdrawal of the whip if they refuse to vote Aye. And dares Labour to vote it down. And then dares the Lords to vote it down.
If it somehow gets voted down, getting a new election isn't difficult, despite the FTPA, and an election with a majority based explicitly around Brexit WILL get such a Bill through, reinforce her authority on the subject, AND ensure that the Lords comply (the Crossbenchers and Tories should be relied upon at the very least - directly after an election based on the subject!)
Do it. But do it right.
It's only the media whipping up Brexiteer panic ('cos outrage sells (for most; the Express are probably genuinely that dim) and the Brexiteers obediently following along that's making it even remotely controversial at all.
It's interesting that in among all those words you didn't actually answer the question...
As I've been arguing all morning, holding a further vote in Parliament is intrinsically anti-democratic as doing so accepts that Parliament has the right to veto the people's decision. At best, this is storing up trouble for the future.
But parliament does have that right. Not necessarily in every case, but in this case definitely, thanks to the way DC framed the referendum. What, or actually who, has stored up trouble, is TM, who has been either pig-headed or badly advised. The legal case presented in court was and is incontrovertible. Going to the Supreme Court just prolongs the agony, and that's quite serious because the rabble-rousers are having a field day.
@PaulBrandITV: BREAKING: I understand Tory MP Stephen Philips is to resign today over govt approach to Brexit. 'Resign' meaning won't contest next election
Going to focus on his main job?
He attracted criticism from some for spending around 1,700 hours annually working as a barrister whilst serving as an MP. Phillips described his own parliamentary attendance record as "excellent", asserting his outside work "doesn’t affect the way in which I perform as an MP", and accused his critics of "envy" over his yearly £750,000 second job earnings
It's been a long time since I looked at constitutional law, but my understanding is that if there is any doubt in what Parliament intended, then courts should look at the parliamentary record (i.e. Hansard) to determine intent and make its judgement accordingly.
I haven't dug through the details, but my understanding was the Referendum Act doesn't say that the referendum is advisory - it merely doesn't say that it is binding.
The judges have interpreted an absence of a statement that it is binding as meaning that it is not binding.
However if the Government said during the Parliamentary debate as well as in the various public communications (and I don't know if they did) that they intended to implement the result of the referendum, then surely you can construe that Parliament *intended* the referendum to be binding, even if the actual legislation is silent on the matter.
The fact that something so important is open to interpretation is a weapons grade screw up.
Well it isn't. The government didn't argue the point in court, accepting that the referendum was not legally binding. See paragraph 105 (the keen reader can also read 106-108, which explains why the High Court firmly agreed with the government's concession):
Mr. Charles, depends whether you consider the advisory status to be a feature or a bug.
The whole exercise was intended as an elaborate piece of theatre in which the Tory party would have its cathartic date with the people and then we'd all come together having endorsed the status quo and marginalised UKIP. That anyone ever thought an in-out referendum on EU membership was the way to do this was a grotesque failure of judgement.
Mr. Charles, depends whether you consider the advisory status to be a feature or a bug.
The whole exercise was intended as an elaborate piece of theatre in which the Tory party would have its cathartic date with the people and then we'd all come together having endorsed the status quo and marginalised UKIP. That anyone ever thought an in-out referendum on EU membership was the way to do this was a grotesque failure of judgement.
It was supposed to be scrapped as item 1 in the coalition 2 negotiations - then someone accidently destroyed the lib dems....
I doubt it, would have seen upto 100 serial rebel backbench MPs in the Tories (if not mass defections) if it had been scrapped.
I am confused as to what he is objecting to. He was one of those who campaigned for Brexit so unless he feels it is not proceeding quickly enough I can't see what he has to complain about.
@PaulBrandITV: Stephen Philips campaigned for leave but has complained govt is pushing for hard Brexit without mandate. Understand he's exasperated.
At lack of advancement? Posh boys out of favour?
He went to Oxford, clear sense of entitlement that place fosters.
Stephen Philips campaigned for leave but has complained govt is pushing for hard Brexit without mandate. Understand he's exasperated.
I agree entirely with his desire for a reasonable Brexit rather than throwing toys out of prams but maybe he should practice what he preaches. There is everything to play for in the negotiations and to throw it in now seems daft.
@PaulBrandITV: BREAKING: I understand Tory MP Stephen Philips is to resign today over govt approach to Brexit. 'Resign' meaning won't contest next election
I am confused as to what he is objecting to. He was one of those who campaigned for Brexit so unless he feels it is not proceeding quickly enough I can't see what he has to complain about.
Stephen Phillips, who voted to leave in the referendum, said the government appeared intent on negotiating “without any regard to the House of Commons” in a way that was “fundamentally undemocratic, unconstitutional and cuts across the rights and privileges of the legislature”.
Phillips said: “I and many others did not exercise our vote in the referendum so as to restore the sovereignty of this parliament only to see what we regarded as the tyranny of the European Union replaced by that of a government that apparently wishes to ignore the views of the house on the most important issue facing the nation.”
I am confused as to what he is objecting to. He was one of those who campaigned for Brexit so unless he feels it is not proceeding quickly enough I can't see what he has to complain about.
@PaulBrandITV: Stephen Philips campaigned for leave but has complained govt is pushing for hard Brexit without mandate. Understand he's exasperated.
At lack of advancement? Posh boys out of favour?
He went to Oxford, clear sense of entitlement that place fosters.
@PaulBrandITV: BREAKING: I understand Tory MP Stephen Philips is to resign today over govt approach to Brexit. 'Resign' meaning won't contest next election
I am confused as to what he is objecting to. He was one of those who campaigned for Brexit so unless he feels it is not proceeding quickly enough I can't see what he has to complain about.
His constituency is mostly coterminous with North Kesteven in Lincs which voted 62% leave. Maybe he was afraid of being deselected if he pushed for soft brexit
Mr. Charles, depends whether you consider the advisory status to be a feature or a bug.
The whole exercise was intended as an elaborate piece of theatre in which the Tory party would have its cathartic date with the people and then we'd all come together having endorsed the status quo and marginalised UKIP. That anyone ever thought an in-out referendum on EU membership was the way to do this was a grotesque failure of judgement.
Cameron was crap.
Yes. The sad thing is he'd have been an extremely competent minister, but ultimately he wasn't PM material despite his conviction that he'd be very good at it.
@PaulBrandITV: BREAKING: I understand Tory MP Stephen Philips is to resign today over govt approach to Brexit. 'Resign' meaning won't contest next election
I am confused as to what he is objecting to. He was one of those who campaigned for Brexit so unless he feels it is not proceeding quickly enough I can't see what he has to complain about.
He seems to be backing the judiciary over the executive.
As is known through my Twitter profile I often read selected fantasy books for relaxation. One of them, and of the very best, is the "Wheel of Time" series. One of the hero's in these books is fond of singing a song called "I'm at the bottom of the well and the rain is pouring through" when he gets into trouble or difficulties.
Well the British governments for the last four decades have been taking us deeper and deeper into the mud at the bottom of an alien well -the EU - and have only themselves to blame for the current mess.
Despite a barrage of negative and hate propaganda from the 95% of the MSM and government of the time, the British people voted 52% - 48% (in round figures) to leave the the EU, and this should be enough on any constitutional basis for the people to have their way.
Britain is on the verge of being a non-country thanks to the blindness and greed of our so called betters; our so called elite has led us to the bottom of the well.
I'm afraid I found the Wheel of Time series far too turgid to persevere with and gave up around book 8
Have you tried the Magician series by Raymond Feist? I found the whole thing immensely enjoyable
Stephen Philips campaigned for leave but has complained govt is pushing for hard Brexit without mandate. Understand he's exasperated.
I agree entirely with his desire for a reasonable Brexit rather than throwing toys out of prams but maybe he should practice what he preaches. There is everything to play for in the negotiations and to throw it in now seems daft.
I posted on here that at conference I spoke to a lot of Leavers who were horrified at the direction of Brexit, call them the Free Traders not bothered by immigration, and they are worried Hard Brexit means an increase in the barriers to trade.
I reckon Mr Phillips is in that camp.
Though being an MP for a Lincolnshire seat might have seen him realise the importance of immigration to Brexit.
@RichardTyndall I take your point earlier that the hedge fund manager's motivations were hardly to champion our Parliamentary democracy.
I was going to reply that the rationale for the plebiscite in the first place was hardly based on Cameron's belief in democracy.
We are where we are. I think though, knowing a little bit about how you think from your posts, you will be just as appalled and more than a little worried about the popular responses to the Judges ruling. In the future we may find ourselves on the same page entirely...
I am confused as to what he is objecting to. He was one of those who campaigned for Brexit so unless he feels it is not proceeding quickly enough I can't see what he has to complain about.
@PaulBrandITV: Stephen Philips campaigned for leave but has complained govt is pushing for hard Brexit without mandate. Understand he's exasperated.
At lack of advancement? Posh boys out of favour?
He went to Oxford, clear sense of entitlement that place fosters.
Something TSE mentioned yesterday that needs real consideration. It is time for the nation to have a real written constitution and a constitutional court which sits separately to the Supreme Court. Our current system of a nod here and a wink there with a side dose of unwritten rules is clearly not going to cut it any longer.
@PaulBrandITV: BREAKING: I understand Tory MP Stephen Philips is to resign today over govt approach to Brexit. 'Resign' meaning won't contest next election
I am confused as to what he is objecting to. He was one of those who campaigned for Brexit so unless he feels it is not proceeding quickly enough I can't see what he has to complain about.
His constituency is mostly coterminous with North Kesteven in Lincs which voted 62% leave. Maybe he was afraid of being deselected if he pushed for soft brexit
I have no idea. I do know that I am one of his constituents and campaigned for Brexit alongside him. He has always been clear about the kind of post Brexit relationship he wanted and I very much doubt he would ever have been under threat.
It's been a long time since I looked at constitutional law, but my understanding is that if there is any doubt in what Parliament intended, then courts should look at the parliamentary record (i.e. Hansard) to determine intent and make its judgement accordingly.
I haven't dug through the details, but my understanding was the Referendum Act doesn't say that the referendum is advisory - it merely doesn't say that it is binding.
The judges have interpreted an absence of a statement that it is binding as meaning that it is not binding.
However if the Government said during the Parliamentary debate as well as in the various public communications (and I don't know if they did) that they intended to implement the result of the referendum, then surely you can construe that Parliament *intended* the referendum to be binding, even if the actual legislation is silent on the matter.
The fact that something so important is open to interpretation is a weapons grade screw up.
Well it isn't. The government didn't argue the point in court, accepting that the referendum was not legally binding. See paragraph 105 (the keen reader can also read 106-108, which explains why the High Court firmly agreed with the government's concession):
I noted earlier that this would probably need to be repeated throughout the thread. I expect it will need to be repeated later as well.
Para 107 addresses my point quite effectively.
As one would expect of three such senior judges, it is a well-reasoned judgment based on principle rather than pedantry. Sadly it is written in lawyerese, so will be read by very few.
If and when the Supreme Court hear this case, I hope that we get a well-written and well-argued judgment in clear everyday English, whichever way the Supreme Court jumps. Given the importance of the case, the public deserve to be able to understand the court's rationale.
Lord Sumption and Lord Neuberger are each more than up to this job, if either of them choose to take the challenge on.
Something TSE mentioned yesterday that needs real consideration. It is time for the nation to have a real written constitution and a constitutional court which sits separately to the Supreme Court. Our current system of a nod here and a wink there with a side dose of unwritten rules is clearly not going to cut it any longer.
We need a written constitution, we've codified bits here and there, but not all of it, so it leads to situations like the Article 50 court case.
I'm happy for the Supreme Court to as the Constitutional Court too
Stephen Philips campaigned for leave but has complained govt is pushing for hard Brexit without mandate. Understand he's exasperated.
I agree entirely with his desire for a reasonable Brexit rather than throwing toys out of prams but maybe he should practice what he preaches. There is everything to play for in the negotiations and to throw it in now seems daft.
I posted on here that at conference I spoke to a lot of Leavers who were horrified at the direction of Brexit, call them the Free Traders not bothered by immigration, and they are worried Hard Brexit means an increase in the barriers to trade.
I reckon Mr Phillips is in that camp.
Though being an MP for a Lincolnshire seat might have seen him realise the importance of immigration to Brexit.
You have to go into negotiations visibly open to hard Brexit, precisely in order to get a more advantageous softer Brexit. And negotiations are properly a matter for the executive. Tory MPs should certainly be lobbying their Government colleagues as they see fit, but they need to park their egos on this.
@PaulBrandITV: BREAKING: I understand Tory MP Stephen Philips is to resign today over govt approach to Brexit. 'Resign' meaning won't contest next election
I am confused as to what he is objecting to. He was one of those who campaigned for Brexit so unless he feels it is not proceeding quickly enough I can't see what he has to complain about.
Stephen Phillips, who voted to leave in the referendum, said the government appeared intent on negotiating “without any regard to the House of Commons” in a way that was “fundamentally undemocratic, unconstitutional and cuts across the rights and privileges of the legislature”.
Phillips said: “I and many others did not exercise our vote in the referendum so as to restore the sovereignty of this parliament only to see what we regarded as the tyranny of the European Union replaced by that of a government that apparently wishes to ignore the views of the house on the most important issue facing the nation.”
Jack are you sure Fox are updating their map? Further up the page it refers to a poll conducted Oct 22-25. RCP has a very different picture: Clinton 226 .. Trump 180 .. Toss-Up 132
RCP have every state with an average of a 5 lead or below as a toss up. Clinton has a few 5% leads which I would argue are not toss ups
Perhaps May should have spent less time playing at the Spectator awards and more time working out a response to the court case or maybe keeping her MPs in the party.
As is known through my Twitter profile I often read selected fantasy books for relaxation. One of them, and of the very best, is the "Wheel of Time" series. One of the hero's in these books is fond of singing a song called "I'm at the bottom of the well and the rain is pouring through" when he gets into trouble or difficulties.
Well the British governments for the last four decades have been taking us deeper and deeper into the mud at the bottom of an alien well -the EU - and have only themselves to blame for the current mess.
Despite a barrage of negative and hate propaganda from the 95% of the MSM and government of the time, the British people voted 52% - 48% (in round figures) to leave the the EU, and this should be enough on any constitutional basis for the people to have their way.
Britain is on the verge of being a non-country thanks to the blindness and greed of our so called betters; our so called elite has led us to the bottom of the well.
I'm afraid I found the Wheel of Time series far too turgid to persevere with and gave up around book 8
Have you tried the Magician series by Raymond Feist? I found the whole thing immensely enjoyable
Yes, read it and enjoyed the first half dozen books immensely.
The Wheel does lag around book 8 but bucks up with book 9 and to a very well written end by Sanderson.
It actually looks like The Times have boosted the white levels and brightness.
I doubt any of its deliberate (and the HuffPo & Independent pictures are closer to the Sun than the Times) buts its indicative of the febrile atmosphere that people are spotting plots and conspiracies where there are probably none.....
We've got a by election in Sleaford & North Hykeham.
General Election 2015: Sleaford and North Hykeham Conservative Stephen Phillips 34,805 56.2 +4.6 Labour Jason Pandya-Wood 10,690 17.3 +0.4 UKIP Steven Hopkins 9,716 15.7 +12.1 Liberal Democrat Matthew Holden 3,500 5.7 -12.5 Lincolnshire Independents Marianne Overton 3,233 5.2 -1.2 Majority 24,115 38.9
Not as bad as when I re-tipped/backed James Purnell as next Labour leader one morning, and within an hour he announced his intention to stand down as an MP.
Stephen Philips campaigned for leave but has complained govt is pushing for hard Brexit without mandate. Understand he's exasperated.
I agree entirely with his desire for a reasonable Brexit rather than throwing toys out of prams but maybe he should practice what he preaches. There is everything to play for in the negotiations and to throw it in now seems daft.
I posted on here that at conference I spoke to a lot of Leavers who were horrified at the direction of Brexit, call them the Free Traders not bothered by immigration, and they are worried Hard Brexit means an increase in the barriers to trade.
I reckon Mr Phillips is in that camp.
Though being an MP for a Lincolnshire seat might have seen him realise the importance of immigration to Brexit.
You have to go into negotiations visibly open to hard Brexit, precisely in order to get a more advantageous softer Brexit. And negotiations are properly a matter for the executive. Tory MPs should certainly be lobbying their Government colleagues as they see fit, but they need to park their egos on this.
@RichardTyndall I take your point earlier that the hedge fund manager's motivations were hardly to champion our Parliamentary democracy.
I was going to reply that the rationale for the plebiscite in the first place was hardly based on Cameron's belief in democracy.
We are where we are. I think though, knowing a little bit about how you think from your posts, you will be just as appalled and more than a little worried about the popular responses to the Judges ruling. In the future we may find ourselves on the same page entirely...
It actually looks like The Times have boosted the white levels and brightness.
I doubt any of its deliberate (and the HuffPo & Independent pictures are closer to the Sun than the Times) buts its indicative of the febrile atmosphere that people are spotting plots and conspiracies where there are probably none.....
Perhaps not pure chance though that the Times picture shows the poppy she's wearing, while the Sun picture doesn't.
Comments
Given that May has up until now taken upon herself the decision when A50 is going to be invoked (as opposed to doing so automatically, as a result of the referendum decision), I cannot see what great principle is sacrificed by required the rubber stamp of parliamentary approval.
I can quite understand the frustration of those who think that, for the first time ever, they have managed to get their voice heard on an issue they care about, but that has nothing whatever to do with the legal correctness (or otherwise) of the court decision.
Others may have a different take but PBers might like to note this matter over the coming days.
But true. Economics don't matter any more. Its all about identity. If the electorate won't vote for you, import people who will. That is why immigration is a completely key power, and why even here the elite are fighting to the end to keep it.
IF and when Clinton wins, it will get much worse.
The safeguard is of course that MPs will be scared to defy a referendum because they'd expect to be voted out. So they are unlikely to do so, though they might add conditions for the content and process of the withdrawal negotiations, which is arguably just the sort of detailed stuff that representatives are better at than direct democracy.
Do you know how many Jack's I came across until I found your cheeks...55. And then as I was losing heart, there they were, the most glorious sight. Calling Florida....that's one big ASS call; intuitively I think you're right.
I wonder though on the night we might see a surprise in a Wisconsin, Michigan Penn or New Hampshire, or Georgia for that matter?
I'll get my cloak .....
That certainly does make it clear. So the real target of ire should be the Remoaner MPs who may use the vote to frustrate the will of the people, and hope to get away with it by the time the GE comes around. Or the Lords who don't care as they are not voted in.
He attracted criticism from some for spending around 1,700 hours annually working as a barrister whilst serving as an MP. Phillips described his own parliamentary attendance record as "excellent", asserting his outside work "doesn’t affect the way in which I perform as an MP", and accused his critics of "envy" over his yearly £750,000 second job earnings
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Phillips_(politician)
As is known through my Twitter profile I often read selected fantasy books for relaxation. One of them, and of the very best, is the "Wheel of Time" series. One of the hero's in these books is fond of singing a song called "I'm at the bottom of the well and the rain is pouring through" when he gets into trouble or difficulties.
Well the British governments for the last four decades have been taking us deeper and deeper into the mud at the bottom of an alien well -the EU - and have only themselves to blame for the current mess.
Despite a barrage of negative and hate propaganda from the 95% of the MSM and government of the time, the British people voted 52% - 48% (in round figures) to leave the the EU, and this should be enough on any constitutional basis for the people to have their way.
Britain is on the verge of being a non-country thanks to the blindness and greed of our so called betters; our so called elite has led us to the bottom of the well.
Stephen Philips campaigned for leave but has complained govt is pushing for hard Brexit without mandate. Understand he's exasperated.
Clinton 226 .. Trump 180 .. Toss-Up 132
Oops may be a very very slight understatement....
I heard an intv on O'Reilly Factor with Cuban news lady - worth watching - 20mins in. She covers the Dade County area of Miami.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cfPfZMm8lY
Phillips said: “I and many others did not exercise our vote in the referendum so as to restore the sovereignty of this parliament only to see what we regarded as the tyranny of the European Union replaced by that of a government that apparently wishes to ignore the views of the house on the most important issue facing the nation.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/10/tory-mp-anna-soubry-concerned-rush-hard-brexit
Have you tried the Magician series by Raymond Feist? I found the whole thing immensely enjoyable
When parliament periodically cedes sovereign power to the EU, the latter's decisions are never questioned in the house.
It cedes power to the electorate once....
tells you all you need to know about the 'sovereignty' of parliament right now.
I reckon Mr Phillips is in that camp.
Though being an MP for a Lincolnshire seat might have seen him realise the importance of immigration to Brexit.
I take your point earlier that the hedge fund manager's motivations were hardly to champion our Parliamentary democracy.
I was going to reply that the rationale for the plebiscite in the first place was hardly based on Cameron's belief in democracy.
We are where we are. I think though, knowing a little bit about how you think from your posts, you will be just as appalled and more than a little worried about the popular responses to the Judges ruling. In the future we may find ourselves on the same page entirely...
http://66.media.tumblr.com/1b2ad1cc5d273aeac9ec2c1a12beb90e/tumblr_og38a07QNR1u5f06vo1_1280.jpg
http://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/scalefit_630_noupscale/581baf75190000a502c30cfb.jpeg?cache=f8te09yhsq
They are called firewall states for a reason. In 2012 Obama spent some of his final days in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.
Their campaign objective is to choke off all routes to 270 for Trump and leave him with no options and not even a sliver of a chance.
If and when the Supreme Court hear this case, I hope that we get a well-written and well-argued judgment in clear everyday English, whichever way the Supreme Court jumps. Given the importance of the case, the public deserve to be able to understand the court's rationale.
Lord Sumption and Lord Neuberger are each more than up to this job, if either of them choose to take the challenge on.
LOL. I wish remainers the very best of luck with that image. I really do.
https://hillaryspeeches.com/scheduled-events/
It's Cleveland, Ohio which is right up close to PA. Not sure if they share telly with PA people.
I'm happy for the Supreme Court to as the Constitutional Court too
Sun picture looks a lot more like the woman I saw on TV last night. Times pic looks overexposed and shiny.
You cannot argue with that logic...or maybe you can, but I cannot see it....
Disappointing if they felt the need to do that.
Her government is a total basket case.
The Wheel does lag around book 8 but bucks up with book 9 and to a very well written end by Sanderson.
Conservative Stephen Phillips 34,805 56.2 +4.6
Labour Jason Pandya-Wood 10,690 17.3 +0.4
UKIP Steven Hopkins 9,716 15.7 +12.1
Liberal Democrat Matthew Holden 3,500 5.7 -12.5
Lincolnshire Independents Marianne Overton 3,233 5.2 -1.2
Majority 24,115 38.9
That was only his view after supporting her to the hilt against Leadsom.
Who knows what it will be next week?
Another entitled public school boy stalks off in a huff....