This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Visit the current forum | Forum Rules
|
Originally posted by cpfc_chap
EU law over UK law means we leave no deal according to this article. Has Boris played a blinder here!! I would have expected such things have already been considered and prepared for. As it is not just the wording of a law which matters, but the intent which underlies it, any attempt to circumvent it by chicanery would quickly attract the attention of the Supreme Court. The EU would also not wish to see a legal trip wire being used to thwart the intentions of the UK Parliament so would find a way to overcome anything like this. Nothing is certain at the moment but that looks like straw clutching to me.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
|
Looks like the Irish don't like the Boris plan So come on Leo what's your brilliant solution, oh the UK shouldn't leave.
One more point |
|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
I would have expected such things have already been considered and prepared for. As it is not just the wording of a law which matters, but the intent which underlies it, any attempt to circumvent it by chicanery would quickly attract the attention of the Supreme Court. The EU would also not wish to see a legal trip wire being used to thwart the intentions of the UK Parliament so would find a way to overcome anything like this. Nothing is certain at the moment but that looks like straw clutching to me. It's clearly a legal matter but as the article pointed out if the UK parliament tried to end freedom of movement the UK courts would strike down that law as EU law supersedes it. This is the problem when Parliament rushes through laws in a matter of days. Wiser and cooler heads might point out that their are implications that parliament has not considered. I have no idea if any of this is true but it would be delicious if it was.
One more point |
|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
How people reach their decision on who to vote for is entirely their personal choice. What it doesn't do is change the responsibilities of an MP whose job is to represent everyone in their constituency to the best of their abilities and not to look after the interests of only those who voted for them. People do vote for a party rather than an individual almost every time. The idea being that the selected candidate will endorse the policies of that party. They don’t vote for maverick MPs who then do whatever they want because they think it’s best.
|
|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Perhaps the EU is trying to fulfil the will of the majority of the UK population instead
|
|
|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
People do vote for a party rather than an individual almost every time. The idea being that the selected candidate will endorse the policies of that party. They don’t vote for maverick MPs who then do whatever they want because they think it’s best. I totally agree that this applies in a General Election. In local elections there is an element of voting for a local person who is well known in the community irrespective of party.In fact at 'Parish Council' level one can witness candidates standing as 'Independents' rather than attaching themselves to any party.
|
|
|
Originally posted by Willo
I totally agree that this applies in a General Election. In local elections there is an element of voting for a local person who is well known in the community irrespective of party.In fact at 'Parish Council' level one can witness candidates standing as 'Independents' rather than attaching themselves to any party. Yes, you’re right. Local elections are a different animal. As are some of the candidates.
|
|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
It includes every aspect of life, some of which are more important than others. I'm not buying that answer.
|
|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
Looks like the Irish don't like the Boris plan So come on Leo what's your brilliant solution, oh the UK shouldn't leave. I think you have just identified a basic misconception that exists in many minds at the moment. Certainly in those of some posters here but also in government. It's not for the Irish or the EU as a whole to suggest a solution. They have laid out their requirements and we have to find a way to meet them. The UK is leaving the EU and not the EU leaving the UK. The EU wants the UK to leave in a way which causes them, and us, the least harm so have tried hard to assist and negotiated an arrangement which they could accept. It wasn't their fault we rejected it and it is very much now our responsibility to find a way that we can accept, but within their already agreed limits. So expecting the Irish or the EU to do anything more than evaluate the proposals, comment on them and do their best to see if they can be made to work is unrealistic. It's all down to us, and so far it doesn't look promising does it?
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
|
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle
Perhaps the EU is trying to fulfil the will of the majority of the UK population instead Not their responsibility is it? Their job is to fulfil the wishes of the 27 other members.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
So Boris Johnson is taken to court over the 350m. What about those MPS who change parties or fail to act on their promises? They should be prosecuted for misrepresentation. If they have no duty or obligation to their party they should stop using those labels. MPs should always act on their convictions. They are entitled to change their minds in the light of new knowledge or greater experience. Parties can leave MPs just as much as MPs can leave parties. Promises made yesterday can become inappropriate tomorrow. Events change things and MPs need not to wear boots of clay. They should be prosecuted if they don't act according to their consciences.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
MPs should always act on their convictions. They are entitled to change their minds in the light of new knowledge or greater experience. Parties can leave MPs just as much as MPs can leave parties. Promises made yesterday can become inappropriate tomorrow. Events change things and MPs need not to wear boots of clay. They should be prosecuted if they don't act according to their consciences. Or prosecuted when their consciences allowed them to fiddle their expenses.
|
|
|
Originally posted by cryrst
I'm not buying that answer. Look up the meaning of "every".
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
MPs should always act on their convictions. They are entitled to change their minds in the light of new knowledge or greater experience. Parties can leave MPs just as much as MPs can leave parties. Promises made yesterday can become inappropriate tomorrow. Events change things and MPs need not to wear boots of clay. They should be prosecuted if they don't act according to their consciences. Sounds like a movie idea.
|
|
|
Originally posted by cryrst
Sounds like a movie idea. Insolence in class.
COYP |
|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
It's clearly a legal matter but as the article pointed out if the UK parliament tried to end freedom of movement the UK courts would strike down that law as EU law supersedes it. This is the problem when Parliament rushes through laws in a matter of days. Wiser and cooler heads might point out that their are implications that parliament has not considered. I have no idea if any of this is true but it would be delicious if it was. Let's see. If this possibility exists then the counter to it does as well and is no doubt being looked at. Never forget that the courts always consider the intention of a law along with it's strict terms. I see nothing delicious involved in anyone trying to find a devious way to thwart the will of Parliament. I cannot think of a better way to undermine our democracy.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
|
Originally posted by cryrst
Sounds like a movie idea. Francis Urquhartish?
|
|
|
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman
I don’t know if thread title changing has reduced your need to repeat yourself over what might be true, but isn’t how it’s always been understood and communicated by MP’s over a long time, and they know it, but this post gets more of an audience. Trouble is that what I’ve highlighted is exactly the problem with the EU and why many people won’t point the finger at Boris. The EU deserve it and so obviously they will try and trap us inside the EU. (Start getting memories of fools telling us to remain to reform the EU) I can assure you that I will continue to post in exactly the same way whatever the title is. I tend to regard the childishness as a backhanded compliment because that's the kind of thing that people do when they have run out of arguments. It happens quite often here. AS I have just said elsewhere I think this is a misunderstanding of the EU's position. We are leaving them and not them leaving us. So the ball is entirely in our court to find the solution. They already have and it wasn't their fault we rejected it. We know what they can and cannot accept and it's up to us to find ways to meet their requirements that we can get through Parliament.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
I can assure you that I will continue to post in exactly the same way whatever the title is. I tend to regard the childishness as a backhanded compliment because that's the kind of thing that people do when they have run out of arguments. It happens quite often here. AS I have just said elsewhere I think this is a misunderstanding of the EU's position. We are leaving them and not them leaving us. So the ball is entirely in our court to find the solution. They already have and it wasn't their fault we rejected it. We know what they can and cannot accept and it's up to us to find ways to meet their requirements that we can get through Parliament. Do you not think they’re trying to make it difficult or even impossible?
COYP |
|
|
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman
Do you not think they’re trying to make it difficult or even impossible? Why does that even matter?
Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons. |
|
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2025 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.