ChatterBank6 mins ago
Mishcon Del Reya
23 Answers
I`m curious who is paying this company to mount the challenge reported today http:// www.bbc .co.uk/ news/uk -politi cs-3670 0350 - they should be obliged to name the person / company so we can know where we stand in relationship to their partiality. Parliament is elected by, and works for, the public so trying to overturn the most honest vote in terms of all votes counting is subverting democracy in its truest sense.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by CrapAtCryptics. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.This seems pointless, or had better be. Given all spokespersons have agreed to abide by the result of the referendum then all major parties should issue a three line whip to get it through 'on the nod', and then we can get on with deciding when to actually do it. Probably straight after the new PM has 'bedded in'.
Who are these morons causing this irrelevant fuss though ? I think that the public has a right to know.
Who are these morons causing this irrelevant fuss though ? I think that the public has a right to know.
It’s just another example of the jiggery-pokery that those supporting remain will resort to in an attempt to subvert the decision of the electorate. I have no objection to it being debated in parliament the only MPs that I expect to vote against invoking article 50 are the SNP as OG has stated “all spokespersons have agreed to abide by the result of the referendum”
Isn't a sign of democracy that our legal processes allow a legal challenge where the constitution/laws have not been followed, and even if the legal challenge fails it does no harm to keep the government on its toes in legal compliance matters
If a vote has to be held then so be it. The major parties (plus UKIP) but maybe excluding SNP and some Northern Ireland MPs would be foolish to overrule the public in my opinion- maybe strategic abstentions could be negotiated if necessary
If a vote has to be held then so be it. The major parties (plus UKIP) but maybe excluding SNP and some Northern Ireland MPs would be foolish to overrule the public in my opinion- maybe strategic abstentions could be negotiated if necessary
Just some info for the market and currency panickers - the FTSE is 1200 points up on the lowest figure in the last year. Both the dollar and the Euro, if you look at the last year are where they would have been anyway - the majority of currencies are suffering a downward trend in the long term even the ones not involved in the EU.
With over 75% of all MPs in favour of remaining in the EU and the entire SNP already pledged to vote as a block against it, there could be a problem getting a vote to trigger A50 through parliament! This is an attempt to make sure it is not slipped in without a vote. It has NOTHING to do with overturning the referendum but about making sure the action to start the formal exit process is debated.
This is not news. Full Fact said that this needed to be a part of the process in their information long before the referendum happened....I don’t mean Mishcon Del Reya's being involved, I mean the requirement for parliament to debate and vote....I will find the link if I can.
As for “voter apathy being no good to anyone"....If I wanted to get my own way and voter apathy drastically reduced the number of people I needed to convince, I would say its a very good thing for me!
As for “voter apathy being no good to anyone"....If I wanted to get my own way and voter apathy drastically reduced the number of people I needed to convince, I would say its a very good thing for me!
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.