On 24/09/2019 12:49, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
8

I suppose Leave supporters do have difficulty with literacy.

If you missed Lady Hale's speech this morning here it is.

I heard her speech.

The reconvening of parliament is in Bercow's hands
The introduction of legislation is in Bercow's hands, and parliaments.
The government has no majority.
But Parliament will not hold an election.
The full horror of Blairs attack on democracy and its institutions is
now apparent

Its democracy Jim, but not as brexiteers want.

TNP was saying parliamentary democracy was the reason he voted leave so
now what does he want to vote for?

Will he tell us his real reason for voting leave... not a chance!!!

On 24/09/2019 14:02, dennis@home wrote:
On 24/09/2019 12:49, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
8

I suppose Leave supporters do have difficulty with literacy.

If you missed Lady Hale's speech this morning here it is.

I heard her speech.

The reconvening of parliament is in Bercow's hands
The introduction of legislation is in Bercow's hands, and parliaments.
The government has no majority.
But Parliament will not hold an election.
The full horror of Blairs attack on democracy and its institutions is
now apparent

Its democracy Jim, but not as brexiteers want.

TNP was saying parliamentary democracy was the reason he voted leave so
now what does he want to vote for?

There is a huge difference between wanting to repatriate control to the
UK and MPs ignoring the result of a domestic referendum. Returning
sovereignty to parliament was never intended to overrule a democratic
vote by the people.

SteveW

On 2019-09-24, Steve Walker wrote:
On 24/09/2019 14:02, dennis@home wrote:
On 24/09/2019 12:49, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
8

I suppose Leave supporters do have difficulty with literacy.

If you missed Lady Hale's speech this morning here it is.

I heard her speech.

The reconvening of parliament is in Bercow's hands
The introduction of legislation is in Bercow's hands, and parliaments.
The government has no majority.
But Parliament will not hold an election.
The full horror of Blairs attack on democracy and its institutions is
now apparent

Its democracy Jim, but not as brexiteers want.

TNP was saying parliamentary democracy was the reason he voted leave so
now what does he want to vote for?

There is a huge difference between wanting to repatriate control to the
UK and MPs ignoring the result of a domestic referendum. Returning
sovereignty to parliament was never intended to overrule a democratic
vote by the people.

Dishonest Romoaners have seized upon such an idea by saying that this is what
we actually voted for. Of course, if you look at a number of campaign items,
it should be rather clear that it was about Britain being sovereign, not
Parliament per se, which also includes our courts, an end to freedom of
movement etc. Being told which weights and measures we can use, enforced by
law, has long been a sticking point and one example of how EU legislation
affects people directly.

"Incubus" wrote in message ...

Being told which weights and measures we can use, enforced
by law, has long been a sticking point and one example of
how EU legislation affects people directly.

Indeed.

Why would anyone want to use the same weights and measures as
their major trading partners ?

Its political correctness gone mad,


michael adams

....

In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
There is a huge difference between wanting to repatriate control to the
UK and MPs ignoring the result of a domestic referendum. Returning
sovereignty to parliament was never intended to overrule a democratic
vote by the people.

Really? You want to redefine sovereignty too now?

--
*Never test the depth of the water with both feet.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Tue, 24 Sep 2019 18:30:51 +0100, Brian Morrison
wrote:

On Tue, 24 Sep 2019 18:23:49 +0100
"michael adams" wrote:

Why would anyone want to use the same weights and measures as
their major trading partners ?

The issue is that in cases where people are more comfortable with
pounds and ounces that it is illegal to use them alone. I find it
incomprehensible why it should be, provided that customer and vendor
are happy with what is being weighed and bought.

socialism is scientism...it likes you to be tidy...

and if you are not, why, it wants to cancel you

--
www.abelard.org

"Brian Morrison" wrote in message
k...
On Tue, 24 Sep 2019 18:23:49 +0100
"michael adams" wrote:

Why would anyone want to use the same weights and measures as
their major trading partners ?

The issue is that in cases where people are more comfortable with
pounds and ounces that it is illegal to use them alone. I find it
incomprehensible why it should be, provided that customer and vendor
are happy with what is being weighed and bought.

While campaigners for imperial are undoubtedly honest
people who have no intention of diddling anyone, that's
not to say that there may not be more unscrupulous
individuals who wouldn't take advanatge of the situation.

After all, if customers and vendors weere always happy
with what was being weighed and bought, there'd be no
need for trading standards in the first place. Which are
as much for the protection of customers as anything
else.

And again while its possibly still much easier for people
over a certain age to visulaise a pint of beer or a pound
of apples, that's not really much help when trying to work
out, either in your head or with a calculator the price of
say 2lb 5oz of apples priced at say £1.45p per lb.


michael adams

....

On 24/09/2019 16:44, Steve Walker wrote:
On 24/09/2019 14:02, dennis@home wrote:
On 24/09/2019 12:49, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
8

I suppose Leave supporters do have difficulty with literacy.

If you missed Lady Hale's speech this morning here it is.

I heard her speech.

The reconvening of parliament is in Bercow's hands
The introduction of legislation is in Bercow's hands, and parliaments.
The government has no majority.
But Parliament will not hold an election.
The full horror of Blairs attack on democracy and its institutions is
now apparent

Its democracy Jim, but not as brexiteers want.

TNP was saying parliamentary democracy was the reason he voted leave
so now what does he want to vote for?

There is a huge difference between wanting to repatriate control to the
UK and MPs ignoring the result of a domestic referendum. Returning
sovereignty to parliament was never intended to overrule a democratic
vote by the people.

SteveW

but that's how our democracy works, mps do what's best for the country.
unlike boris,

On 24/09/2019 18:34, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
There is a huge difference between wanting to repatriate control to the
UK and MPs ignoring the result of a domestic referendum. Returning
sovereignty to parliament was never intended to overrule a democratic
vote by the people.

Really? You want to redefine sovereignty too now?

When parliament has specifically asked the question of the people, yes.
We normally elect MPs to take make most decisions on our behalf, but
when those MPs ask us in a referendum, that they have stated that they
will abide by, then the people's decision should be final.

SteveW

On 24/09/2019 21:39, dennis@home wrote:
On 24/09/2019 16:44, Steve Walker wrote:
On 24/09/2019 14:02, dennis@home wrote:
On 24/09/2019 12:49, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
8

I suppose Leave supporters do have difficulty with literacy.

If you missed Lady Hale's speech this morning here it is.

I heard her speech.

The reconvening of parliament is in Bercow's hands
The introduction of legislation is in Bercow's hands, and parliaments.
The government has no majority.
But Parliament will not hold an election.
The full horror of Blairs attack on democracy and its institutions
is now apparent

Its democracy Jim, but not as brexiteers want.

TNP was saying parliamentary democracy was the reason he voted leave
so now what does he want to vote for?

There is a huge difference between wanting to repatriate control to
the UK and MPs ignoring the result of a domestic referendum. Returning
sovereignty to parliament was never intended to overrule a democratic
vote by the people.

SteveW

but that's how our democracy works, mps do what's best for the country.
unlike boris,

If MPs agree to ask the people and to abide by the result, deciding not
to honour it afterwards should not be an option.

SteveW

On 24/09/2019 21:39, dennis@home wrote:
On 24/09/2019 16:44, Steve Walker wrote:

There is a huge difference between wanting to repatriate control to
the UK and MPs ignoring the result of a domestic referendum. Returning
sovereignty to parliament was never intended to overrule a democratic
vote by the people.

but that's how our democracy works, mps do what's best for the country.
unlike boris,

Then why won't they vote for a general election? We have a government
in office but not in power. It's stymied at every turn. It is being
prevented from governing. The best for the country is to have a general
election. Why are they so reluctant to have one?

"michael adams" wrote in message
...

"Incubus" wrote in message
...

Being told which weights and measures we can use, enforced
by law, has long been a sticking point and one example of
how EU legislation affects people directly.

Indeed.

Why would anyone want to use the same weights and measures as
their major trading partners ?

Because **** all is involved with trade. The USA clearly does fine.

"Norman Wells" wrote in message
...
On 24/09/2019 21:39, dennis@home wrote:
On 24/09/2019 16:44, Steve Walker wrote:

There is a huge difference between wanting to repatriate control to the
UK and MPs ignoring the result of a domestic referendum. Returning
sovereignty to parliament was never intended to overrule a democratic
vote by the people.

but that's how our democracy works, mps do what's best for the country.
unlike boris,

Then why won't they vote for a general election?

Because they know that boris would be free to have
it after 29-Oct and given the purdur rule, would be
free to let Article 50 expire and have a no deal brexit.

We have a government in office but not in power. It's stymied at every
turn.

Thats not accurate with other than brexit law.
The parliament hasnt even stopped boris from
taking precautions in case a no deal brexit happens.

It is being prevented from governing.

Nope, just from not asking for an extension.

The best for the country is to have a general election.

Thats very arguable.

Why are they so reluctant to have one?

Because Labour knows they would do very badly an that
Corbyn could well get the bums rush as labour leader.

In message , Steve Walker
writes
On 24/09/2019 18:34, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
There is a huge difference between wanting to repatriate control to the
UK and MPs ignoring the result of a domestic referendum. Returning
sovereignty to parliament was never intended to overrule a democratic
vote by the people.
Really? You want to redefine sovereignty too now?

When parliament has specifically asked the question of the people, yes.
We normally elect MPs to take make most decisions on our behalf, but
when those MPs ask us in a referendum, that they have stated that they
will abide by, then the people's decision should be final.

But at the risk of being boring.......

When so much of the information that The People were given - and on
which they based their decision - was wrong (either because it was
speculative over-pessimism or over-optimism, or deliberate lies intended
to deceive), who in their right mind would insist on ploughing ahead and
implementing that decision without referring the matter back to The
People for reconsideration?
--
Ian

On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 13:48:11 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


Indeed.

Why would anyone want to use the same weights and measures as
their major trading partners ?

Because **** all is involved with trade. The USA clearly does fine.

That's what YOU say, you pathological, auto-contradicting, senile asshole!

--
Kerr-Mudd,John addressing senile Rot:
"Auto-contradictor Rod is back! (in the KF)"
MID:

On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 15:07:38 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH troll****

....and much better air in here again!

--
Sqwertz to Rot Speed:
"This is just a hunch, but I'm betting you're kinda an argumentative
asshole.
MID:

On 24/09/2019 22:56, Norman Wells wrote:
On 24/09/2019 21:39, dennis@home wrote:
On 24/09/2019 16:44, Steve Walker wrote:

There is a huge difference between wanting to repatriate control to
the UK and MPs ignoring the result of a domestic referendum.
Returning sovereignty to parliament was never intended to overrule a
democratic vote by the people.

but that's how our democracy works, mps do what's best for the country.
unlike boris,

Then why won't they vote for a general election?Â* We have a government
in office but not in power.Â* It's stymied at every turn.Â* It is being
prevented from governing.Â* The best for the country is to have a general
election.Â* Why are they so reluctant to have one?




Please explain why an election would help to solve the Brexit crisis.
Are you hoping that by shuffling the pack and dealing the cards again
you'll end up with a Royal Flush? A majority of MPs in favour of any
particular course of action?

On 24/09/2019 16:55, Incubus wrote:
On 2019-09-24, Steve Walker wrote:
On 24/09/2019 14:02, dennis@home wrote:
On 24/09/2019 12:49, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
8

I suppose Leave supporters do have difficulty with literacy.

If you missed Lady Hale's speech this morning here it is.

I heard her speech.

The reconvening of parliament is in Bercow's hands
The introduction of legislation is in Bercow's hands, and parliaments.
The government has no majority.
But Parliament will not hold an election.
The full horror of Blairs attack on democracy and its institutions is
now apparent

Its democracy Jim, but not as brexiteers want.

TNP was saying parliamentary democracy was the reason he voted leave so
now what does he want to vote for?

There is a huge difference between wanting to repatriate control to the
UK and MPs ignoring the result of a domestic referendum. Returning
sovereignty to parliament was never intended to overrule a democratic
vote by the people.

Dishonest Romoaners have seized upon such an idea by saying that this is what
we actually voted for. Of course, if you look at a number of campaign items,
it should be rather clear that it was about Britain being sovereign, not
Parliament per se, which also includes our courts, an end to freedom of
movement etc.


In the minds of many Leave supporters, it's about ordinary citizens
being sovereign, not Parliament. Would you agree? To them, the debates
in Parliament are incomprehensible, a sort of white noise, a meeting of
posh folk who don't represent us. We want the man in the street, and all
his neighbours, to be the real decision makers now!




Being told which weights and measures we can use, enforced by
law, has long been a sticking point and one example of how EU legislation
affects people directly.



Give me an ounce of civet, good apothecary.

I think the rot set in with decimalisation. When children were able to
subtract one pound seven and sixpence from four pounds one and three,
they were given the mental skills to enable them to invent bouncing
bombs and jet engines. Since decimalisation, education has been dumbed
down. Ask a child what ten percent of fifty quid is, and they won't have
a clue.

And Australia was once run by posh English folk, as seen in this video.

Be prepared, folks, when the coins begin to mix
On the fourteenth of February, 1966.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtyNLwqljzI

The Todal wrote:
On 24/09/2019 16:55, Incubus wrote:
On 2019-09-24, Steve Walker wrote:
On 24/09/2019 14:02, dennis@home wrote:
On 24/09/2019 12:49, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
8

I suppose Leave supporters do have difficulty with literacy.

If you missed Lady Hale's speech this morning here it is.

I heard her speech.

The reconvening of parliament is in Bercow's hands
The introduction of legislation is in Bercow's hands, and parliaments.
The government has no majority.
But Parliament will not hold an election.
The full horror of Blairs attack on democracy and its institutions is
now apparent

Its democracy Jim, but not as brexiteers want.

TNP was saying parliamentary democracy was the reason he voted leave so
now what does he want to vote for?

There is a huge difference between wanting to repatriate control to the
UK and MPs ignoring the result of a domestic referendum. Returning
sovereignty to parliament was never intended to overrule a democratic
vote by the people.

Dishonest Romoaners have seized upon such an idea by saying that this is what
we actually voted for. Of course, if you look at a number of campaign items,
it should be rather clear that it was about Britain being sovereign, not
Parliament per se, which also includes our courts, an end to freedom of
movement etc.


In the minds of many Leave supporters, it's about ordinary citizens
being sovereign, not Parliament. Would you agree? To them, the debates
in Parliament are incomprehensible, a sort of white noise, a meeting of
posh folk who don't represent us. We want the man in the street, and all
his neighbours, to be the real decision makers now!



The numbers speak for themselves:

Leave 17.4m | Remain 16.1m
By Constituency:
Leave 406 | Remain 242
By Constituency Party:
Labour - Leave 148 | Remain 84
Conservatives - Leave 247 | Remain 80
By Region:
Leave 9 | Remain 3
By MP:
Leave 160 | Remain 486

The Remainers are trying to usurp the democratic decision.

On 24/09/2019 22:26, Steve Walker wrote:
On 24/09/2019 18:34, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Â*Â*Â* Steve Walker wrote:
There is a huge difference between wanting to repatriate control to the
UK and MPs ignoring the result of a domestic referendum. Returning
sovereignty to parliament was never intended to overrule a democratic
vote by the people.

Really? You want to redefine sovereignty too now?

When parliament has specifically asked the question of the people, yes.
We normally elect MPs to take make most decisions on our behalf, but
when those MPs ask us in a referendum, that they have stated that they
will abide by, then the people's decision should be final.

SteveW



But things haven't gone as the leave campaign said it would so there
should be the opportunity for the people to decide if they still want to
continue even though those that voted leave can't even agree amongst
themselves.

In message , The Todal
writes
On 24/09/2019 16:55, Incubus wrote:
On 2019-09-24, Steve Walker wrote:
On 24/09/2019 14:02, dennis@home wrote:
On 24/09/2019 12:49, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
8

I suppose Leave supporters do have difficulty with literacy.

If you missed Lady Hale's speech this morning here it is.

I heard her speech.

The reconvening of parliament is in Bercow's hands
The introduction of legislation is in Bercow's hands, and parliaments.
The government has no majority.
But Parliament will not hold an election.
The full horror of Blairs attack on democracy and its institutions is
now apparent

Its democracy Jim, but not as brexiteers want.

TNP was saying parliamentary democracy was the reason he voted leave so
now what does he want to vote for?

There is a huge difference between wanting to repatriate control to the
UK and MPs ignoring the result of a domestic referendum. Returning
sovereignty to parliament was never intended to overrule a democratic
vote by the people.
Dishonest Romoaners have seized upon such an idea by saying that
this is what
we actually voted for. Of course, if you look at a number of campaign items,
it should be rather clear that it was about Britain being sovereign, not
Parliament per se, which also includes our courts, an end to freedom of
movement etc.


In the minds of many Leave supporters, it's about ordinary citizens
being sovereign, not Parliament. Would you agree? To them, the debates
in Parliament are incomprehensible, a sort of white noise, a meeting of
posh folk who don't represent us. We want the man in the street, and
all his neighbours, to be the real decision makers now!




Being told which weights and measures we can use, enforced by
law, has long been a sticking point and one example of how EU legislation
affects people directly.



Give me an ounce of civet, good apothecary.

I think the rot set in with decimalisation. When children were able to
subtract one pound seven and sixpence from four pounds one and three,
they were given the mental skills to enable them to invent bouncing
bombs and jet engines. Since decimalisation, education has been dumbed
down. Ask a child what ten percent of fifty quid is, and they won't
have a clue.

And Australia was once run by posh English folk, as seen in this video.

Be prepared, folks, when the coins begin to mix
On the fourteenth of February, 1966.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtyNLwqljzI

This film shows how much easier it would have been for the UK to adopt
10/- as the New Pound.
--
Ian

On 24/09/2019 22:56, Norman Wells wrote:
On 24/09/2019 21:39, dennis@home wrote:
On 24/09/2019 16:44, Steve Walker wrote:

There is a huge difference between wanting to repatriate control to
the UK and MPs ignoring the result of a domestic referendum.
Returning sovereignty to parliament was never intended to overrule a
democratic vote by the people.

but that's how our democracy works, mps do what's best for the country.
unlike boris,

Then why won't they vote for a general election?Â* We have a government
in office but not in power.Â* It's stymied at every turn.Â* It is being
prevented from governing.Â* The best for the country is to have a general
election.Â* Why are they so reluctant to have one?




We have been through this, if they call a general election then boris
gets to decide when and he will abuse it to his advantage.

They said they will support a GE after a suitable extension to brexit is
agreed so boris can't just dissolve parliament for however long he
decides to take on an election.

I have no doubt that if an extension is agreed boris will not be calling
for an election. Neither will the brexiteers.

On 2019-09-24, michael adams wrote:

"Incubus" wrote in message ...

Being told which weights and measures we can use, enforced
by law, has long been a sticking point and one example of
how EU legislation affects people directly.

Indeed.

Why would anyone want to use the same weights and measures as
their major trading partners ?

Its political correctness gone mad,

If I go to the shop to buy a pound of cheese having my whole life used imperial
measures, and my trading partner at the counter having his whole life used
imperial measures is happy to weigh out a pound of cheese, why should the EU
tell us we have to use metric weights?

On 25/09/2019 08:50, dennis@home wrote:

But things haven't gone as the leave campaign said it would so there
should be the opportunity for the people to decide if they still want to
continue even though those that voted leave can't even agree amongst
themselves.

What a brilliant idea - we could do that after every General, local, and
by- Election too!

--
Spike

On 25/09/2019 07:49, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Steve Walker
writes
On 24/09/2019 18:34, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Â*Â*Â* Steve Walker wrote:
There is a huge difference between wanting to repatriate control to the
UK and MPs ignoring the result of a domestic referendum. Returning
sovereignty to parliament was never intended to overrule a democratic
vote by the people.
Â*Really? You want to redefine sovereignty too now?

When parliament has specifically asked the question of the people,
yes. We normally elect MPs to take make most decisions on our behalf,
but when those MPs ask us in a referendum, that they have stated that
they will abide by, then the people's decision should be final.

But at the risk of being boring.......

When so much of the information that The People were given - and on
which they based their decision - was wrong (either because it was
speculative over-pessimism or over-optimism, or deliberate lies intended
to deceive), who in their right mind would insist on ploughing ahead and
implementing that decision without referring the matter back to The
People for reconsideration?

There was plenty of time during the pre-referendum campaign for anything
anyone disagreed with to be challenged and refuted. It is my
understanding, though, that the courts decided that nothing illegal had
occurred when they considered Boris's 'misconduct in public office'
case, which they readily dismissed.

Most complaints are from sore losers who assume that any minor
inaccuracy in anything anyone said was hugely influential when it wasn't.

On 25/09/2019 07:49, Ian Jackson wrote:
But at the risk of being boring.......

When so much of the information that The People were given - and on
which they based their decision - was wrong (either because it was
speculative over-pessimism or over-optimism, or deliberate lies intended
to deceive), who in their right mind would insist on ploughing ahead and
implementing that decision without referring the matter back to The
People for reconsideration?

Anyone who believes in democracy

I would have said at the time exactly the same about Tony Bliars
election with a far smaller perecentage of the electorate.

Democracy means going with what people decide no matter if your
propaganda didn't stick and the other lots did.

Democracy is there for conflict resolution, not arriving at the 'right'
answer.




--
Truth welcomes investigation because truth knows investigation will lead
to converts. It is deception that uses all the other techniques.

On 25/09/2019 09:08, The Todal wrote:
On 24/09/2019 22:56, Norman Wells wrote:
On 24/09/2019 21:39, dennis@home wrote:
On 24/09/2019 16:44, Steve Walker wrote:

There is a huge difference between wanting to repatriate control to
the UK and MPs ignoring the result of a domestic referendum.
Returning sovereignty to parliament was never intended to overrule a
democratic vote by the people.

but that's how our democracy works, mps do what's best for the country.
unlike boris,

Then why won't they vote for a general election?Â* We have a government
in office but not in power.Â* It's stymied at every turn.Â* It is being
prevented from governing.Â* The best for the country is to have a
general election.Â* Why are they so reluctant to have one?




Please explain why an election would help to solve the Brexit crisis.
Are you hoping that by shuffling the pack and dealing the cards again
you'll end up with a Royal Flush? A majority of MPs in favour of any
particular course of action?


Yes. there would be a majority government or coalition in favour of leaving.

Which is why remainers have refused to have one.

--
Canada is all right really, though not for the whole weekend.

"Saki"

On 25/09/2019 09:08, The Todal wrote:
On 24/09/2019 22:56, Norman Wells wrote:
On 24/09/2019 21:39, dennis@home wrote:
On 24/09/2019 16:44, Steve Walker wrote:

There is a huge difference between wanting to repatriate control to
the UK and MPs ignoring the result of a domestic referendum.
Returning sovereignty to parliament was never intended to overrule a
democratic vote by the people.

but that's how our democracy works, mps do what's best for the country.
unlike boris,

Then why won't they vote for a general election?Â* We have a government
in office but not in power.Â* It's stymied at every turn.Â* It is being
prevented from governing.Â* The best for the country is to have a
general election.Â* Why are they so reluctant to have one?

Please explain why an election would help to solve the Brexit crisis.

The Brexit crisis as you call it is a simple result of Parliament not
being representative of the people's views, and being determined to go
against the free choice of the people expressed in a single issue
referendum.

The way to resolve that, if it's possible, is to have a general election
where, hopefully, Parliament will become rather more properly
representative.

Are you hoping that by shuffling the pack and dealing the cards again
you'll end up with a Royal Flush? A majority of MPs in favour of any
particular course of action?

Who knows? What is clear, though, is that we need a functioning
government, which we do not have at present. It needs to deal with more
than just a single issue.

Labour is acting purely out of self-interest in preventing an election
when the national interest is crying out for one. It is the first
opposition in history that seems unwilling to face the electorate to get
itself elected.

And what sort of opposition is that? It needs to be replaced too.

On 25/09/2019 09:24, The Todal wrote:
On 24/09/2019 16:55, Incubus wrote:
On 2019-09-24, Steve Walker wrote:
On 24/09/2019 14:02, dennis@home wrote:
On 24/09/2019 12:49, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
8

I suppose Leave supporters do have difficulty with literacy.

If you missed Lady Hale's speech this morning here it is.

I heard her speech.

The reconvening of parliament is in Bercow's hands
The introduction of legislation is in Bercow's hands, and parliaments.
The government has no majority.
But Parliament will not hold an election.
The full horror of Blairs attack on democracy and its institutions is
now apparent

Its democracy Jim, but not as brexiteers want.

TNP was saying parliamentary democracy was the reason he voted leave so
now what does he want to vote for?


I never said that. I said sovereignty.

There is a huge difference between wanting to repatriate control to the
UK and MPs ignoring the result of a domestic referendum. Returning
sovereignty to parliament was never intended to overrule a democratic
vote by the people.

Dishonest Romoaners have seized upon such an idea by saying that this
is what
we actually voted for.Â* Of course, if you look at a number of campaign
items,
it should be rather clear that it was about Britain being sovereign, not
Parliament per se, which also includes our courts, an end to freedom of
movement etc.


In the minds of many Leave supporters, it's about ordinary citizens
being sovereign, not Parliament. Would you agree?

No.

To them, the debates
in Parliament are incomprehensible, a sort of white noise, a meeting of
posh folk who don't represent us. We want the man in the street, and all
his neighbours, to be the real decision makers now!


No, the man in the street thinks that when he is asked to make a choice
on the absolute understanding that if he does it will be honoured, and
is told that this is the single biggest political choice of his
lifetime, and he makes it, and it isn't honoured, why the **** the ****s
that asked him to make a choice actually bothered to ask if they
weren't going to listen



--
Canada is all right really, though not for the whole weekend.

"Saki"

On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 09:16:28 +0100, Tim Streater
wrote:

snip

When so much of the information that The People were given - and on
which they based their decision - was wrong (either because it was
speculative over-pessimism or over-optimism, or deliberate lies intended
to deceive), who in their right mind would insist on ploughing ahead and
implementing that decision without referring the matter back to The
People for reconsideration?

Do try to avoid talking cock.

I'd like you to try to counter even one of those points with fact not
your highly biased and bigoted opinion.

What you outline is true at all elections.

If true (and it's not) that makes it right does it?

And is going to haunt us for 'a lifetime'?

And is going to impact the very people who are destined to spend more
of their lifetimes dealing with your crusade, long after you are dead
and buried?

Is rarely just between once choice (Leave) or continuing to do what we
were doing.

We have control of the outcome ourselves with a G/LE and can typically
get back to where we were if we change our minds.

Isn't as empty re the mandate. Leave, with or without a deal? With
consideration to NI or not?

All part of the bigger picture you completely ignore with your 'We
won' mentality (when we are all likely to loose).

Cheers, T i m

On Tue, 24 Sep 2019 22:27:12 +0100, Steve Walker
wrote:

snip

but that's how our democracy works, mps do what's best for the country.
unlike boris,

If MPs agree to ask the people and to abide by the result, deciding not
to honour it afterwards should not be an option.

Were we asked if it would be ok to *******ise an advisory referendum /
poll into something else and for no good reason?

Cheers, T i m

In article , Incubus
wrote:
On 2019-09-24, michael adams wrote:

"Incubus" wrote in message
...

Being told which weights and measures we can use, enforced by law, has
long been a sticking point and one example of how EU legislation
affects people directly.

Indeed.

Why would anyone want to use the same weights and measures as their
major trading partners ?

Its political correctness gone mad,

If I go to the shop to buy a pound of cheese having my whole life used
imperial measures, and my trading partner at the counter having his whole
life used imperial measures is happy to weigh out a pound of cheese, why
should the EU tell us we have to use metric weights?

Did the EU tell us - or was it DEFRA (or its previous incarnation) that
added this little bit?

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

In message , Tim Streater
writes
In article , Ian Jackson
wrote:

In message , Steve Walker
writes
On 24/09/2019 18:34, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
There is a huge difference between wanting to repatriate control to the
UK and MPs ignoring the result of a domestic referendum. Returning
sovereignty to parliament was never intended to overrule a democratic
vote by the people.
Really? You want to redefine sovereignty too now?

When parliament has specifically asked the question of the people,
yes. We normally elect MPs to take make most decisions on our behalf,
but when those MPs ask us in a referendum, that they have stated that
they will abide by, then the people's decision should be final.

But at the risk of being boring.......

When so much of the information that The People were given - and on
which they based their decision - was wrong (either because it was
speculative over-pessimism or over-optimism, or deliberate lies
intended to deceive), who in their right mind would insist on
ploughing ahead and implementing that decision without referring the
matter back to The People for reconsideration?

Do try to avoid talking cock.

But which bits do you disagree with? How much of the pre-referendum
propaganda was factually accurate - and, in the light of the events of
the last three years, how much are you prepared to concede was
inaccurate?

What you outline is true at all elections.

Which we have ('no ifs, buts') every five years (and occasionally
sooner) - and the outcome of which usually doesn't have the possibility
of having serious and immediate consequences for the UK.
--
Ian

On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 10:56:25 +0100
Ian Jackson wrote:



But which bits do you disagree with? How much of the pre-referendum
propaganda was factually accurate - and, in the light of the events
of the last three years, how much are you prepared to concede was
inaccurate?



None of it. But what kind of idiot has to be told how to vote?

As I've posted before, the only facts on offer were in the past, as all
facts are. We had more than forty years of the behaviour of the EU to
study.

Hands up all the idiots who *didn't* base their vote on that record.

--
Joe

"Norman Wells" wrote in message
...
On 25/09/2019 09:08, The Todal wrote:
On 24/09/2019 22:56, Norman Wells wrote:
On 24/09/2019 21:39, dennis@home wrote:
On 24/09/2019 16:44, Steve Walker wrote:

There is a huge difference between wanting to repatriate control to
the UK and MPs ignoring the result of a domestic referendum. Returning
sovereignty to parliament was never intended to overrule a democratic
vote by the people.

but that's how our democracy works, mps do what's best for the country.
unlike boris,

Then why won't they vote for a general election? We have a government
in office but not in power. It's stymied at every turn. It is being
prevented from governing. The best for the country is to have a general
election. Why are they so reluctant to have one?

Please explain why an election would help to solve the Brexit crisis.

The Brexit crisis as you call it is a simple result of Parliament not
being representative of the people's views, and being determined to go
against the free choice of the people expressed in a single issue
referendum.

The way to resolve that, if it's possible, is to have a general election
where, hopefully, Parliament will become rather more properly
representative.

That clearly didnt happen with the general election May called.

Are you hoping that by shuffling the pack and dealing the cards again
you'll end up with a Royal Flush? A majority of MPs in favour of any
particular course of action?

Who knows? What is clear, though, is that we need a functioning
government, which we do not have at present. It needs to deal with more
than just a single issue.

It does, most obviously with the budget.

Labour is acting purely out of self-interest in preventing an election
when the national interest is crying out for one. It is the first
opposition in history that seems unwilling to face the electorate to get
itself elected.

Thats a lie.

And what sort of opposition is that? It needs to be replaced too.

Taint even possible given the FPP system.

On 25/09/2019 09:59, Incubus wrote:
On 2019-09-24, michael adams wrote:

"Incubus" wrote in message ...

Being told which weights and measures we can use, enforced
by law, has long been a sticking point and one example of
how EU legislation affects people directly.

Indeed.

Why would anyone want to use the same weights and measures as
their major trading partners ?

Its political correctness gone mad,

If I go to the shop to buy a pound of cheese having my whole life used imperial
measures, and my trading partner at the counter having his whole life used
imperial measures is happy to weigh out a pound of cheese, why should the EU
tell us we have to use metric weights?


The EU didn't the UK chose too.
If the EU had said we were going metric why do will still use miles?


Something else to blame the EU for as far as brexiteers are concerned.

Do you blame them for not being able to get fish 'n chips in dirty news
print too?

On 25/09/2019 09:56, dennis@home wrote:
On 24/09/2019 22:56, Norman Wells wrote:
On 24/09/2019 21:39, dennis@home wrote:
On 24/09/2019 16:44, Steve Walker wrote:

There is a huge difference between wanting to repatriate control to
the UK and MPs ignoring the result of a domestic referendum.
Returning sovereignty to parliament was never intended to overrule a
democratic vote by the people.

but that's how our democracy works, mps do what's best for the country.
unlike boris,

Then why won't they vote for a general election?Â* We have a government
in office but not in power.Â* It's stymied at every turn.Â* It is being
prevented from governing.Â* The best for the country is to have a
general election.Â* Why are they so reluctant to have one?

We have been through this, if they call a general election then boris
gets to decide when and he will abuse it to his advantage.

And of course Labour are doing no such thing, are they? Oh no, not at
all. They wouldn't dream oplaying such political games, would they?

They said they will support a GE after a suitable extension to brexit is
agreed so boris can't just dissolve parliament for however long he
decides to take on an election.

I have no doubt that if an extension is agreed boris will not be calling
for an election. Neither will the brexiteers.

Can you tell us how it is in the national interest to have a government
that is not allowed to function to be maintained in office any longer
than is absolutely necessary?

On 2019-09-24, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
There is a huge difference between wanting to repatriate control to the
UK and MPs ignoring the result of a domestic referendum. Returning
sovereignty to parliament was never intended to overrule a democratic
vote by the people.

Really? You want to redefine sovereignty too now?

Remainers have already redefined it to mean "Parliamentary sovereignty" and
patronisingly told us that is what we voted for. In fact, sovereignty means
far more than that. We certainly didn't vote on a particular issue because we
wanted it to be ignored.

On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 20:13:51 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


The way to resolve that, if it's possible, is to have a general election
where, hopefully, Parliament will become rather more properly
representative.

That clearly didn¢t happen with the general election May called.

In auto-contradicting mode again, you trolling senile pest from Oz? LOL

--
Website (from 2007) dedicated to the 85-year-old trolling senile
cretin from Oz:
https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/r...d-faq.2973853/

In message , "dennis@home"
writes
On 25/09/2019 09:59, Incubus wrote:
On 2019-09-24, michael adams wrote:

"Incubus" wrote in message
...

Being told which weights and measures we can use, enforced
by law, has long been a sticking point and one example of
how EU legislation affects people directly.

Indeed.

Why would anyone want to use the same weights and measures as
their major trading partners ?

Its political correctness gone mad,
If I go to the shop to buy a pound of cheese having my whole life
used imperial
measures, and my trading partner at the counter having his whole life used
imperial measures is happy to weigh out a pound of cheese, why should the EU
tell us we have to use metric weights?


The EU didn't the UK chose too.
If the EU had said we were going metric why do will still use miles?

The GLC use km. Last week, there was a spokesman telling Nick Ferrari
how wonderful it was going be having a vehicle-free Sunday at the
weekend. Nick took him to task when he said that 27km of road would be
closed. This flummoxed the spokesman, who initially had great difficulty
giving the length in miles.


Something else to blame the EU for as far as brexiteers are concerned.

Do you blame them for not being able to get fish 'n chips in dirty news
print too?

Already done (either on the Nick Ferrari of James o'Brien show)!
--
Ian